Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-09-Speech-2-399"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-03-09"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Agriculture2
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20040309.14.2-399"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-03-09-Speech-2-4002
lpv:speaker	lp:Kyösti Virrankoski2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Suomen Keskusta (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Romania Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; CONT (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Estonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 member; BUDG (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; ELDR (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the reports under discussion concern extending agricultural reform to olive, cotton and tobacco production. The key issue is the same as with the other reforms: the de-coupling of support and production. The de-coupling of support and production will probably appeal in particular to those opposed to tobacco cultivation. Under the single payment scheme, over EUR 6 000 per hectare would be paid; in other words, the aid would be received even if no tobacco were produced at all. In this way the EU would be vigorously supporting the abandonment of its cultivation and a switch to some other form of production or set-aside measures. This is part of the agricultural reform. It is the biggest of its kind in the history of the EU. As the reform is to begin next year, it is important that its implementation does not jeopardise the levels of income of private farmers. The reform will be very difficult to apply in practice as farms vary in different parts of the EU, as do the conditions of their management. If the period 2000-2002 is to be regarded as the reference period, five years will see changes in ownership, as well as the area farms cover, lines of production and investment. That is why there is the danger that there will be drastic and unjust changes in aid to farms. Commissioner Fischler, it was not for nothing that you pointed this out in your letters to the Ministers for Agriculture. The other problem is the approval of society. Agricultural subsidies have long been seen as compensation for farmers producing at less than the costs of production. Will the taxpayer agree to aid being paid even if nothing is produced?"@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph