Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-02-13-Speech-2-300"
|Predicate||Value (sorted: default)|
|dcterms:Is Part Of|
|lpv:document identification number||
"Madam President, tomorrow, the Dutch Social Democrats will be voting against the Goepel report and against a continuing blockade of fresh agricultural policy. We must break the impasse between the Council and Parliament. New projects for European rural areas should not be put at risk. I would urge you to give the Member States an opportunity to make more funds available for this purpose within a European strategy for rural areas, landscape and nature. The future of European agricultural policy lies in phasing out income support, initially of the largest farmers, but at the same time in investing in the rural areas. If Parliament once again opts for a barrier, with the lever of blocking 20% of the rural budget, it would be opting for a repeat scenario, while more than anything, it is fresh policy we need for all countryside dwellers. By blocking EUR 2.48 billion, many sound projects would be at risk of derailing. In the case of the Netherlands, EUR 14 million would be involved, a trifling sum, but amounting to a great deal for those concerned. All these plans for a vital countryside should not fall prey to a Brussels conflict. We must look for different weapons, and the Council must also make a move. The compromise may well involve more compulsory modulation for all Member States. This would amount to creaming off more funds from the subsidies for the largest farmers, for the benefit of investing in rural areas. No 5%, as is now the case, but 15%, if 20% proves too high for the Council. The bigger the farmer, the more modulation. That too only seems fair. This is something to which the Commission should turn its attention. The European rural areas cannot make plans now and farmers do not know where they stand. This is irresponsible."@en1
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples