Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-02-11-Speech-3-081"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040211.4.3-081"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
I voted in favour of the Garot report in recognition of the merits of an initiative which for once has enabled us to debate one of the fundamental questions affecting the preservation of our agricultural model: our farmers’ incomes. This debate has enabled us to break with the fragmentary and technical approaches normally forced on us when examining the flood of legislative proposals emanating from the Commission.
I also wanted to mark my full agreement with the review of the fundamental aims of the CAP, the relevance of which the report reaffirms: ‘to promote a territorial approach to agriculture capable of preserving as many farms and jobs as possible throughout the EU’ and ‘to ensure a fair standard of living for the agricultural community and stabilise incomes with a view to maintaining farming activity throughout the European Union’.
I can only express my amazement, however, at the contradictory reasoning which, on the one hand, always approves the Commission’s proposals, be they for decoupling or for lowering external protection, while on the other denouncing the risks of total adulteration of the European agricultural model that those same proposals entail.
My approval therefore clearly does not apply to the references to decoupling and to rural development contained in the Garot report."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples