Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-17-Speech-2-296"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-01-17"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Common organisation of the market in sugar – Support schemes for farmers (sugar) – Restructuring the sugar industry (continuation)2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060117.22.2-296"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-01-17-Speech-2-2972
lpv:speaker	lp:David Martin2
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, I welcome Mr Fruteau's reports and I would also pay tribute to the way he has gone about his work. It would be fair to say that we do not have identical views on the reform of the sugar regime, but I would like to think that we are now much closer at the end of the process than we were at the beginning. Like the rapporteur and previous speakers, I think it is a pity that the Council chose to reach a political agreement in advance of the debate in this Parliament. I think it shows a lack of respect for this House. Nevertheless, I welcome the fact that the Council has recognised and supported the need to end the artificial support for the sugar sector and to make the European sugar regime more competitive in the world market, and I believe that the 36% reduction will make us WTO-compatible. It is not as radical as the 39% that the Commission proposes, but I think it brings us into line with WTO rules. The four-year implementation that the Council also recommends gives our producers a chance to adjust to the new realities. Where I would like to see more action is in two specific areas. Firstly, in relation to C sugar. We should have a clear commitment to abolish C sugar, which clearly distorts world trade and could still be a subject of dispute at the WTO level. So I shall support Amendment 80 on Thursday, as I hope will the House. I warmly welcome the EUR 7 billion compensation that has been given to European producers and I recognise that they need that support. However, like other speakers in this debate, I regret that we are not being as generous to ACP producers. The 18 ACP producers currently have stable earnings of around EUR 250 million a year from the sugar regime. The Commission proposal was for EUR 190 million a year between 2007 and 2013, which was good but not generous enough. The problem is that the Council agreement of 16 and 17 December does not meet the EUR 190 million that the Commission proposed, and as the budgetary authority in this, along with the Council, Parliament must press for EUR 190 million a year, if we are to be seen as genuine about our Millennium Development Goals objectives. Finally, I would like to add my voice to those who say that using sugar as a biofuel is a potential way forward and a potential new market for sugar. The technology exists; it needs to be improved and adapted; that needs research and technical support, and I hope the Commission will look again more generously at that aspect of reform and do more to assist the wider use of sugar, both as an environmental measure and as a way of compensating European sugar producers for the loss of revenue they face from these proposals."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2006-12-31)3 member; PES (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; PETI (2004-10-13--2007-01-14)3 unknown; Labour Party (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; AGRI (2004-07-21--2006-03-15)3 member; Delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 member; INTA (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"David Martin (PSE ). –"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph