Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-05-23-Speech-3-438"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070523.28.3-438"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I should like to thank Members very much for their contributions to this debate. I have listened very carefully to what they have said and should like to reply to some of the specific issues that were raised.
An important point concerns the question of whether legitimate expectations of growth were respected. The Commission is convinced that they were and that they are still. The maize-sowing season is in March and April. Farmers deciding to plant maize in the spring of 2007 are aware that there might not be any intervention for the 2007 harvest. In this regard, a communication to maize producers was published in the Official Journal in December 2006.
It was mentioned that we have not seen major offers of maize intervention in the current market year. This is true. However, the current high prices for cereals are not driven by the internal market but by the situation in the international market. The boom in the bioethanol industry, particularly in the USA, has also played a role in keeping cereal prices high. Situations change from one year to the next. It is possible that the 2007-2008 marketing year might be similar to the last two marketing years, with massive intervention offers.
Another issue that was raised is that this proposal moves the problem from maize to other cereals. As I have explained, this proposal is aimed at solving the current maize problem. It is true that the removal of maize intervention could lead to a relative loss of competitiveness for barley and possibly soft wheat, triggering the risk of increasing public stocks for cereals. A full examination of the cereal intervention system is certainly necessary. This will be done in the framework of the health check.
Although the discussion has clarified some points, it has also confirmed that the fundamentals of the Commission’s proposals are right. As I made clear in my opening statement, the maize sector needs this proposal. The Commission is prepared to be flexible in finding options to provide operators with a soft landing but it cannot simply agree to maintain the status quo. As already stated, the Commission is also ready to accept a phasing-out over two years, as many have requested. If the Glattfelder report is adopted in its present form as a rejection of the Commission proposal, Mrs Fischer Boel will certainly go back to the College, but her position on this issue remains quite clear."@en1
|
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples