Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-02-11-Speech-3-174"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-02-11"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Question Time (Council)2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20040211.7.3-174"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-02-11-Speech-3-1752
lpv:speaker	lp:Roche2
lpv:spoken text	". I take the point made by the Member. I am not sure whether one could attach the term 'provisional'. The presidency is aware that these proposals could have an impact on the social fabric, particularly in regions such as Andalusia. We are very concerned about that. The presidency is aware of the concerns of producer Member States that, if alternative enterprises are not available for farmers who are in receipt of decoupled or partly-decoupled payments, they could opt out of production altogether and that would leave the area with resulting damage to the rural fabric. I believe that is the point of the Member's question. The Commission has taken this into consideration in formulating its proposals. It proposes that a percentage of the producers' support expenditure be retained as national envelopes to address such problems. So there is an element of contingency built into the proposals. The Council will look closely at those elements of the Commission's proposals and will try to find a compromise solution that will be acceptable to producer Member States. As I have said, the Irish presidency is particularly aware of this type of potentially negative regional impact. We are very concerned that it should be minimised."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Council"1 "Roche,"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph