Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-06-22-Speech-3-100-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110622.15.3-100-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, Mr Dess, Mr Dantin was cut off, but he was going to explain that the global food challenge is important, and it is important. As has already been said, this report, together with previous reports and the Commission’s communication, seeks to demonstrate that Europe’s aim is to have a common agricultural policy that guarantees food security in Europe and contributes to global food security. That entails political commitments on market regulation, which is what is under discussion today. We too will have to push for this in our debates at EU level. At a time when there are plans to eliminate Europe’s food security programme, we need to remember that food security is still a matter of solidarity and is still extremely topical in Europe: almost 30 million Europeans are currently suffering from malnutrition. Let us not lose sight of that fact.
Essentially, this report sets out the broad thrust: the greening of agricultural policy. Of course farming needs to take a positive approach to environmental issues. In particular, it needs to focus on the European element and ensure that it is factored in by incorporating environmental issues into the first pillar.
Another important point is that this compromise is the result of lengthy negotiations, in which I have always been involved, on the question of graduated support. At long last, support will be allocated in accordance with two criteria: employment – I believe that agricultural policy needs to allow for the notion of providing employment – and, of course, the production of public goods. This approach is better than continuing the debate on aid ceilings and never coming up with any solutions. I am making the point this afternoon because it is my honest opinion.
Let me conclude by saying that this report and Parliament’s commitment are pointless unless the agriculture budget remains at its current level. That is my response to the comments made by the Commissioner and the President of the Commission on the second pillar. We cannot accept a budget cut."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples