Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-23-Speech-2-190"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030923.5.2-190"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, honourable Members, ladies and gentlemen, as Mr Maat has already mentioned – amendments adopted by the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development are restoring the estimates for various Budget lines under heading 1a to the levels envisaged by the preliminary draft Budget. Although the Commission welcomes these amendments, I would like to remind you that, at the end of October, the Commission will be approving a letter of amendment to the preliminary draft Budget in respect of the European Agriculture Guidance and Guarantee Fund, in order to update the resources required. It would certainly be premature to give precise figures for the amendments that we will be proposing, but I am already able to tell you something about the important factors that make these changes necessary. These include, first, the depreciation of the US dollar against the euro, which has had consequent effects on certain export refunds or on aid; then, the decision to grant, as early as 2003 – that is to say, in the Budget year 2003 – certain advances against animal premiums for those regions that suffered particularly from the summer drought; and, finally, an agreement on the reform of the common agricultural policy, which, however, is expected to have little effect on the Budget for 2004.
Let me turn now – very briefly – to fisheries and to the report by Mrs Langenhagen, Mr Mulder and Mr Färm, the motion for a resolution in which I can very largely endorse, so that I would now like simply to pick up on only a few of its aspects. As long ago as March, when we had the resolution on the white fish sector, Parliament called on the budgetary authority to draw up a plan for allocating EUR 150 million to compensate for the losses sustained by coastal communities as a consequence of the crisis in white fish stocks. On several occasions, I asked the Member States to tell us how much additional funding they required. With the exception of the United Kingdom and Denmark, though, not one Member State reported itself to be in any need. The Commission is therefore unable to put before Parliament any proposal for additional funds.
The same is true of the attempt to have scrapping funds funded to the tune of an additional EUR 32 million. That, too, proved unsuccessful, as the Member States did not provide the necessary data. Mr Färm asked why funds could not be reallocated to provide the EUR 32 million, and so I would like to remind him that there is no longer any margin in heading 2, quite apart from which, all funding commitments were finalised right at the beginning of the programme planning period in the national and regional programme planning documents for all four of the Structural Funds. There can therefore be no reallocation before next year’s mid-term review.
I can confirm that we will, in the coming weeks, be submitting a proposal on the Regional Advisory Councils. I agree with the statement in Mrs Langenhagen’s report that fisheries agreements should be endowed with appropriate funding and that their budgets should be as transparent as possible.
On fisheries inspections, I am able to inform you that we will, in the weeks to come, propose that the current Regulation on the Member States’ expenditure on inspection work be extended to run until 2005, and provision is made for this in the draft of the 2004 Budget.
Let me now return to the amendments that the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development adopted. The amendment relating to subheading 1b on rural development increases the estimates to such an extent that they would exceed the upper limit in the Financial Perspective by some EUR 100 million. Whilst the Commission shares your view that there is an absolute need to strengthen the second pillar – after all, this is also the general tendency of the modulation agreed on as part of the reform of the common agricultural policy, and, moreover, funds will be reallocated from subheading 1a to subheading 1b with effect from 2006 – you will understand that, where the 2004 Budget is concerned, the Commission is unable to go beyond the upper limit in the Financial Perspective.
Turning to SAPARD and to the introduction of a new Budget line for the funding of a sort of ‘Leader East’, I would like to say that, in the short time available, I see it as neither feasible nor desirable to provide, in the 2004 Budget, for ‘Leader’-type measures in a new preparatory instrument. We are, however, currently examining how SAPARD’s basic rules can be altered in such a way as to do justice to your concerns.
Finally, I would like to discuss some of the priorities set by the general rapporteur. Firstly, the resolution on the Budget for 2004 states that funds are to be made available for the further development of opportunities for the use of environmental indicators. In this context, the rapporteur demands that a study be drawn up on how these indicators are worked out. I take a favourable view of this. The second point has to do with the implementation of a preparatory measure to promote the introduction of insurance schemes to cover economic losses resulting from epizootics. As the Commission is very much in favour of a public debate on this issue, to involve all the stakeholders, we are planning for next year a series of consultations and seminars, which will involve all the services and parties affected.
As regards the development of marker vaccines and discriminatory tests for pathogens such as those causing foot and mouth disease or classical swine fever, let me say on behalf of my fellow-Commissioner Mr Byrne, that the Commission is working on a directive in this area, which is to create the legal basis for funding to be made available for the development of standard serums.
Once the Commission has approved this directive, there will be an invitation to tender for the manufacture of these standard serums. After evaluation, a decision will then be taken on the manufacture of other serums and the funding that this will require.
Turning to the proposal for the examination of systems for the quality assurance and certification of what is termed integrated supply chain management, I am able to assure Mr Mulder that the Commission is in favour of budgeting half a million euros for the purpose of funding new studies and a conference.
I would also like to respond to the accusation that we are continuing to fund the tobacco sector. Let me draw your attention to the fact that the Commission has today decided that we will carry out a reform of the tobacco sector, which will result in these financial resources being completely decoupled. As regards non-compliance, in certain situations, with the nitrates directive, let me point out to you that the Commission has for some time already been taking legal action on this, but this is primarily to do with the way in which the Member States have only partly complied with the requirements of the nitrates directive and have therefore not implemented it. It follows that this cannot be laid at the door of individual farmers.
I would, finally, like to point out to you that the Council has reduced the number of posts for expenditure connected with enlargement. As you will all be aware, the common agricultural policy will be applicable in the new Member States from the day of their accession, with nothing left out. This makes it absolutely necessary that the Commission should have enough in the way of personnel resources to be able to effectively implement the common agricultural policy."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples