Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-02-15-Speech-3-240"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20060215.15.3-240"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
". Mr President, I wish to begin by thanking all those who have contributed to this debate. Many of the points mentioned in the report are covered by the ongoing studies that the Commission has initiated, for example, proposals 2, 5, 7, 19 and 23. With the political agreement on the CAP reform and the implementation that has now taken place in all the Member States, we want European farmers to try and seize the market opportunities. There is a strong responsibility for the farmer, but there is also a need for solidarity when crises arise. Listening to the discussions in the European Parliament as well as in the Council, it seems to me that the approaches are fairly different. My conclusion is, therefore, that we need to study the options carefully and discuss them before taking a final decision on the instruments to be used. I agree completely with Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf that prevention is usually better than cure and my personal view is that the conference on coexistence to be held in April is necessary in order to avoid GMOs being mixed with organic production. I am therefore particularly looking forward to that discussion. As for your views on fossil fuels, I do not think that we should wait until we have used up those fuels; we should start now to look at what can be done on renewable energy. I am thinking specifically about our recent discussions on bioethanol and the possibility of taking full advantage of agriculture’s contribution to this future way of reducing our carbon dioxide emissions. This has been an interesting discussion and I thank the rapporteur for what I consider to be a balanced approach to this very important issue. Regarding the safety-net provision – proposal 8 – the discussion in the Council has not produced a clear mandate for introducing a general safety clause in all COMs or for trying to finance this insurance out of the modulated money. However, I am ready to examine the introduction of targeted risk and crisis management provisions in other COMs and, as mentioned by Mr Gklavakis, in the fruit and vegetable sector, which we will also discuss here in Parliament at the end of this year. I completely agree with your rapporteur, Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf, that basic coverage against income reduction is not a solution. It is quite clear that, if or when we face structural problems, they must be solved through policy changes. That is obvious and I am very happy about Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf’s clear support for it. As a safety-net for income, I consider the CAP reform’s decoupled direct payment to the farmer to be essential. I am positive about the content of proposals 18, 24 and 26. I also take this opportunity to draw your attention to the review of the state aid guidelines adopted by the Commission on 8 February. The Commission proposes to include compensation for bad weather and animal and plant diseases in the present exemption regulation for state aid within the agricultural sector. This is hopefully a simplification. It would also speed up the implementation of state aid in such situations, so that we can react extremely quickly. The Commission has looked into a number of options for encouraging the development of risk crisis management tools and providing an improved response in the event of a crisis. My intention for the communication was, firstly, to have a comprehensive orientation debate in the Council and here in Parliament before tabling any legislative proposal. The discussions we have had so far in the Council have not, as I said, produced a clear mandate to introduce a general safety clause. However, the Commission is ready to proceed further if there should at any stage be a clear mandate from the Council. Since I consider crisis and risk management an important issue for the future as well, even in the situation of an absence of a clear mandate from the Council I am prepared to examine the introduction of a crisis management provision, as I said previously, on a case-by-case basis. There was a question about the position of the new Member States. It is quite clear that the new Member States will not be excluded from risk management measures. As we have pointed out in the communication, we could envisage identifying a comparable envelope in rural development, just as we do for the old Member States – a clear signal to the ten new Member States."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph