Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-10-20-Speech-2-331"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091020.35.2-331"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I, too, would like to start by thanking Mr Surján and Mr Maňka for their cooperative efforts, and I would then like to move on to Mr Surján’s statement, in which he said that the Council wants, above all, to pass a small budget. In our view, that is precisely the wrong direction to take in times of crisis. In times of crisis, you have to have the political courage to act and you have to spend more money on the right, sustainable investments for the future. We have, after all, an environmental and an economic crisis, and we have a crisis of hunger and poverty in the world.
If we Europeans want to act correctly, we need to change our political goals. We need a transformation to a sustainable society, we need a Green New Deal, and specifically in relation to the Lisbon strategy, we need more sustainable technologies, efficient green technologies, new propulsion systems and, of course, also new materials that are truly environmentally friendly. That also means that we need to invest more money in research and development. As I have already emphasised on behalf of the Committee on Culture and Education, we in the European Union need to invest more money in training and education and to educate our young people, our talents, well and better, because we could then be sure that that money would not be misspent but would pay off in the future, both for the individuals in question and also in terms of the success of our economy.
We must also, however – and this is what makes the Green New Deal a truly all-round challenge – change structural funds policy and make it an environmental tool when it comes to retrofitting buildings and to new and sustainable concepts of mobility. We need to change our agricultural policy, which must become more environmental in nature. Yet energy generation, too, can play a major role in the rural economy and can take place in an environmentally friendly and ecological way. At the moment, I see far too few plans here – but we must push forward with this.
I will now turn to the arguments about the dairy farmers. We Greens take the view that the dairy farmers must be helped at this point. It is not enough, however, to just spend the cash – the money must be spent on the right policy in this field. We need quotas, and we need good rules, frameworks and regulation. If we are to spend this money now – the EUR 280 million that we are debating – it must go direct to the producers and their organisations.
We also want to redistribute money. We do not believe that we should spend EUR 449 million on export subsidies in the dairy sector because what this does is to ruin markets elsewhere, primarily in Africa. We propose that the EUR 300 million plus that we are spending on tobacco production should be reallocated and then truly made available to small dairy farmers. That would be more ecological and would be much more beneficial to the dairy farmers than what we are doing at present.
My final comment is on the recovery plan. Ultimately, we will only support it at second reading if it is clear that a green and sustainable approach really is being pursued here. We want an ecological energy policy, we want broadband in rural areas and we want pan-European electricity networks. These things would really be a step towards a future-oriented policy. That is what we expect from the negotiations over the coming weeks."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples