Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-03-11-Speech-2-214"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080311.30.2-214"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I think it is a very good signal from the Presidency that the Minister for Agriculture is present here today to participate in this very important discussion.
Thirdly, in my view, this also goes against the idea of simplifying the common agricultural policy. I fear that implementing rules in this area would be extremely complex, and I am not in favour of making our system more complicated in a situation where there are only seven years left of the lifetime of this quota system.
All in all, I note with pleasure that we all agree on the necessity for increasing the possibilities for the dairy sector in Europe to increase its production. It is an extremely important political signal to me and to all the Member States that the Agriculture Committee unanimously chose this line after the very divided opinions at the beginning of this discussion. I therefore send my biggest congratulations to the rapporteur for that achievement. I hope I will have the same rate of success in the Council.
I shall start my speech in the traditional way, by thanking the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and especially the rapporteur for the very constructive report on the proposal to increase the milk quota system by 2%, as was stated by the Minister, for the coming milk year starting on 1 April 2008.
Many people have pushed the Commission to alleviate the very tight dairy situation. In the Council, a large majority of Member States invited the Commission to put a proposal on the table on increasing quotas. A resolution here in the European Parliament, adopted in October 2007, on rising food prices also called on the Commission, as a matter of urgency, to propose a temporary increase in milk quotas. In December 2007 the Commission presented a market outlook report that showed that there clearly is, and will be in the future, a growing demand for dairy products.
Your report also confirms that we should increase the possibilities for producing more milk. I think everybody would agree that the Commission’s proposal is fairly prudent and clear, with a predictable and equal outcome for all the Member States. May I respectfully suggest that your amendments seem not to pay full attention to the need for predictability and equal treatment for farmers?
The amendment to make the increase of 2% voluntary for Member States, if applied, would be likely to create some difficulties. Firstly, I think we would all agree that we are looking for more market orientation and higher productivity. Therefore, I personally feel that the producer should be given the choice of whether or not to produce more milk. I think we would also agree that dairy farmers need predictability – certainty about their production possibilities within the quota system – and I do not think that a voluntary system would contribute to this.
As a solution, Member States have the opportunity to decide not to distribute the quota but to keep it in the national reserve. This is a possibility, although I would push the Member States and I would be happy to see the quota distributed, because I think it is the most proper way.
The amendment to use balancing-out of the quota at the end of the quota year is not a new idea. In fact, it is something that the Commission has been looking closely into, since such a theory could facilitate the use in some Member States of the unused quota in other Member States. But I think we would also agree that theory is one thing and practice is another.
Firstly, I think it clearly introduces uncertainty for milk producers. They would then have to make their best guess of how the situation would look at the end of the production year and, on that basis, try to make a choice for their production, and only the following year would they know whether that production was levy free or not. I think, with all respect, this is not to the advantage of the decision taken on the dairy farm. It is obvious that milk production implies heavy investment, and we owe it to our farmers to have a predictable system until the quotas disappear in 2015.
Secondly, who would benefit from this? I do not have to point out that it would largely benefit only a small group of Member States. This already makes it politically difficult. The most important thing is that it will benefit those producers who have already exceeded their quotas – those who have produced too much – and not those who have tried to keep within the limits of the quota system. So there is no certainty that this would lead to more milk being available on the market."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples