Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2013-03-12-Speech-2-538-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20130312.49.2-538-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development has carried out a tremendous amount of work on these four reports and I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the rapporteurs and the chair of the Committee for their work so far.
On the many issues, I believe that the Committee has formulated a better text than the original Commission proposals, especially on greening, where we have requirements for farmers that are more workable and realistic. However, I still maintain my position, and I believe I am right, that greening is best delivered through the Pillar Two schemes which can be easily targeted at local specific needs and represent more of a carrot and stick approach than we see at present.
As we are all aware, the budget for Pillar Two took a tremendous hit during the MFF negotiations, and this is very unfortunate. Can I just say about double funding – because this is the in word – that it is to some extent a distraction away from supporting, in my opinion, existing agri-environmental schemes, and this we must resolve during the trilogues. This has got to be resolved and we cannot get away from it.
On direct payments, we have also achieved a more realistic approach to both internal and external convergence. I hope the Council and the Member States can agree with us on the regions moving towards a flat-rate payment. They deserve an adequate transition period so that farmers and industry can make the necessary adjustments for the future.
We have come to solid agreements on rural development and the horizontal proposals and I will just take the opportunity to register once more that I will be voting against the risk management measures in Pillar Two, as I do not believe that this is the best use of rural development money.
Regarding the Single CMO, I do appreciate Mr Dantin’s hard work on this but I do not feel I can support this report tomorrow. This is, I believe, a distraction and will take Europe’s agricultural sector back to the 1980s of butter mountains and milk lakes and this we cannot accept. Quite simply, the money is no longer there to support it. I want to see a framework which allows farming to respond effectively to the market and have that support from the market.
I also believe the concerns and other elements in the report which will give producer organisations the ability to regulate the supply for certain products and the extension of the sugar regime. Despite these problems and our internal differences, this is the first time Parliament will have a voice in the forum on one of Europe’s most important policies, and I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues in the Agriculture Committee as we enter into negotiations in the Council."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples