Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-12-11-Speech-2-066"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071211.8.2-066"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I first wish to thank and congratulate Mr Mulder for his work, and also for his methodology and the various consultations he carried out.
On the other hand, even though I support the introduction of a threshold above which the Member States may decide not to apply any reduction of direct aid, the
threshold, I am totally opposed to raising this threshold to EUR 250, as proposed in Amendment 16. If this were the case, most infringements leading to a reduction in aid would not be sanctioned and the cross-compliance system for aid would make no sense. I therefore ask you to support Mr Mulder’s Amendment 31 proposing a threshold of EUR 100, a compromise I feel could be acceptable to all.
His report on implementation of cross-compliance for agricultural aid has acknowledged a start-up phase in the application of this rather complicated system. The aim is to increase acceptance by all the main players. It recommends a distinction be made between matters arising from Community frameworks and those subject to national implementation. It stresses the importance of the principle of subsidiarity, the regulations and demands adapted to risks and local requirements, but also the importance of a common framework guaranteeing European farmers equal treatment.
This dual level of rules has made it extremely difficult to implement the system. Insufficient information has been provided for farmers; risk criteria have been used very infrequently; the management, control and reduction system is too complicated; insufficient consideration has been given to cases of minor non-compliance; control rates are not harmonised; prior notification of controls poses a problem.
Personally, I do not wish to question the spirit of cross-compliance, which provides a response to the legitimate expectations of our society: respect for the environment, traceability, food safety and transparency. On the other hand, I do wish to highlight the heavy burden of regulations, the difficulties involved in applying them on the ground and the negative perception some farmers have of them, in the belief that their professionalism and know-how are being questioned. I therefore wish to point out the need for simplification.
I was disappointed with the Commission proposals, which were very limited, and I hope that Parliament’s proposals will be taken over and that the Commission will come up with more ambitious suggestions during the Health Check.
I wish to emphasise that I do not agree at all with the compensation logic that since European farmers are subject to strict production conditions (animal welfare, environmental concerns, veterinary practices) they should receive agricultural aid. Aid for agriculture would to a certain extent establish a fair playing field as regards competition with farmers in third countries who are not subject to the same production conditions. However, I feel that it is because farmers receive public aid that they should, in return, respect a number of production rules. There should be a genuine contract between farmers and the EU. We must somehow move from constraint to contract.
I am therefore pleased that my amendment on this matter was adopted and that, when the farmer makes his single application and declares the area used for agricultural purposes, he must also agree to comply with criteria relating to public health, animal welfare and respect for the environment.
The reductions in payments must differ depending on whether non-compliance is deemed an intentional act or the result of negligence. I was also keen for the sanction to be proportionate to the importance of the sphere of activity affected by the non-compliance at the farm, particularly where this is a mixed crop and stock farming holding.
Farmers in the different Member States must also be obliged to observe the same rules, and therefore it is important to ensure harmonious transposition of the management requirements set out in the Directives. I also welcome the adaptation measures for the new Member States."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples