Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2013-11-20-Speech-3-483-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20131120.58.3-483-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"I did not support this proposal, as I believe it neither makes the CAP greener, fairer or fully legitimate, nor does it represent a significant step towards the delivery of public benefits. Successive reforms have set a direction of travel moving away from production-linked support towards greater competitiveness and a greater focus on the delivery of public benefits. I want to see this process continued. CAP funds should be geared to the benefit of society at large, meeting the social, economic and environmental concerns facing rural communities. Such a payment system is currently supported via the Rural Development Pillar (Pillar 2) and for me shifting Pillar 1 funds to Pillar 2 is the way forward. Although this proposal allows for such a transfer, it does not make it compulsory for all Member States. Moreover, it moves away from previous reforms by e.g. reintroducing coupled payments, and allowing for transfer of funds away from Pillar 2. Instead of delivering a greener CAP that would represent a real shift towards greener farming in Europe, this reform offers only a ‘green washʼ, which will exempt more farmers from applying the green measures than it will deliver in benefits for the environment."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples