Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-04-23-Speech-1-212"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech⁶
dcterms:Date	"2007-04-23"^^xsd:date⁶
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Regimul de contingentare pentru producţia de amidon din cartofi (dezbatere)⁶
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language⁶
lpv:document identification number	"en.20070423.22.1-212"⁶
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2007-04-23-Speech-1-213⁶
lpv:speaker	lp:Mariann Fischer Boel⁶
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, I should like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Wojciechowski, and members of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development for the work that has been carried out on this report. I shall start by placing this proposal in its context. Since the potato starch production quotas were introduced back in 1995, we have been trying to define a strategy that could secure, enhance and promote the development of this important sector. However, over the last decade the European Union’s agricultural policies have changed dramatically, becoming more market-oriented with the decoupling of most aid payments, and reforms of the market organisations in almost all sectors. In spite of the existence of quotas, potato starch production exceeds demand on the European market with the result that we have to export about 40% of our production into the world market, usually with the benefit of export refunds. Concerning the proposals that we are discussing today, it is of vital importance to preserve the stability of this very fragile sector while at the same time taking the fundamental changes due to the reform of the common agricultural policy into account. The main objectives of the proposals are firstly to roll over the quotas for another two years, which will allow us to review the potato starch system in the framework of the health check. An extension of four years, as you propose in your report, would not allow us to take the opportunity to go into details with this important sector in the health check, and therefore you will understand that we cannot accept this amendment. The second main objective is to roll over the existing quotas, which have actually provided a relatively stable market for potato starch in the European Union. I am aware that there have been repeated requests from some Member States for an increase in their quotas, and I have not forgotten the declaration made by the Council. However, an analysis of the current market situation has shown that an increase of the potato starch production quotas should be avoided at the moment. If we increase the quotas in a situation where we have over-production within the European Union, this would put even heavier pressure on the prices. We should take the opportunity to take another two years as suggested, and then, in the health check, go into details to see what a viable future for our potato starch production could look like."@en⁴
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I should like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Wojciechowski, and members of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development for the work that has been carried out on this report. I shall start by placing this proposal in its context. Since the potato starch production quotas were introduced back in 1995, we have been trying to define a strategy that could secure, enhance and promote the development of this important sector. However, over the last decade the European Union’s agricultural policies have changed dramatically, becoming more market-oriented with the decoupling of most aid payments, and reforms of the market organisations in almost all sectors. In spite of the existence of quotas, potato starch production exceeds demand on the European market with the result that we have to export about 40% of our production into the world market, usually with the benefit of export refunds. Concerning the proposals that we are discussing today, it is of vital importance to preserve the stability of this very fragile sector while at the same time taking the fundamental changes due to the reform of the common agricultural policy into account. The main objectives of the proposals are firstly to roll over the quotas for another two years, which will allow us to review the potato starch system in the framework of the health check. An extension of four years, as you propose in your report, would not allow us to take the opportunity to go into details with this important sector in the health check, and therefore you will understand that we cannot accept this amendment. The second main objective is to roll over the existing quotas, which have actually provided a relatively stable market for potato starch in the European Union. I am aware that there have been repeated requests from some Member States for an increase in their quotas, and I have not forgotten the declaration made by the Council. However, an analysis of the current market situation has shown that an increase of the potato starch production quotas should be avoided at the moment. If we increase the quotas in a situation where we have over-production within the European Union, this would put even heavier pressure on the prices. We should take the opportunity to take another two years as suggested, and then, in the health check, go into details to see what a viable future for our potato starch production could look like."@cs¹ "Hr. formand! Jeg vil gerne takke ordføreren, hr. Wojciechowski, og medlemmerne af Udvalget om Landbrug og Udvikling af Landdistrikter for udarbejdelsen af denne betænkning. Jeg vil gerne indledningsvis redegøre for baggrunden for dette forslag. Siden indførelsen af kvoteordningen for produktion af kartoffelstivelse i 1995 har vi forsøgt at definere en strategi, der kan sikre, forbedre og fremme udviklingen af denne vigtige sektor. I løbet af de sidste 10 år har EU's landbrugspolitikker imidlertid ændret sig dramatisk, idet de er blevet mere markedsorienterede, de fleste støtteudbetalinger er blevet afkoblet, og der er gennemført reformer af markedsordningerne i næsten alle sektorer. På trods af kvoterne overstiger produktionen af kartoffelstivelse efterspørgslen på det europæiske marked, hvilket betyder, at vi er nødt til at eksportere ca. 40 % af vores produktion til verdensmarkedet, og der ydes normalt eksportrestitutioner i denne forbindelse. Med hensyn til de forslag, som vi drøfter i dag, er det af afgørende betydning at fastholde stabiliteten i denne meget følsomme sektor og samtidig tage højde for de grundlæggende ændringer som følge af reformen af den fælles landbrugspolitik. Det vigtigste formål med forslagene er for det første at videreføre kvoteordningen i yderligere to år, hvilket vil give os mulighed for at gennemgå kartoffelstivelsessystemet i forbindelse med sundhedskontrollen. En forlængelse på fire år som foreslået i betænkningen vil ikke give os mulighed for at benytte lejligheden til at undersøge denne sektor i detaljer i forbindelse med sundhedskontrollen, og De forstår derfor, hvorfor vi ikke kan acceptere dette ændringsforslag. Det andet vigtige formål er at videreføre den eksisterende kvoteordning, som rent faktisk har sikret et relativt stabilt marked for kartoffelstivelse i EU. Jeg ved godt, at visse medlemsstater gentagne gang har anmodet om en forhøjelse af deres kvoter, og jeg har ikke glemt Rådets erklæring. En analyse af den nuværende markedssituation har imidlertid vist, at vi ikke bør forhøje kvoterne for produktion af kartoffelstivelse for indeværende. Hvis vi øger kvoterne på et tidspunkt, hvor der er overproduktion i Europa, vil priserne komme under yderligere pres. Vi bør udnytte muligheden for en forlængelse på to år som foreslået og herefter undersøge spørgsmålet i detaljer i forbindelse med sundhedskontrollen for at finde ud af, hvordan vi kan sikre en bæredygtig produktion af kartoffelstivelse fremover."@da² ". Herr Präsident! Ich möchte dem Berichterstatter, Herrn Wojciechowski, und den Mitgliedern des Ausschusses für Landwirtschaft und ländliche Entwicklung für die zu diesem Bericht geleistete Arbeit danken. Zu Beginn möchte ich diesen Vorschlag in seinen Gesamtzusammenhang stellen. Seit 1995 die Kontingente für die Kartoffelstärkeerzeugung eingeführt wurden, haben wir versucht, eine Strategie zu finden, um die Entwicklung dieses wichtigen Sektors zu sichern, zu verbessern und zu fördern. Doch die Agrarpolitik der Europäischen Union hat sich in den letzten zehn Jahren drastisch verändert und ist jetzt mit einer Entkoppelung der meisten Beihilfezahlungen und Reformen der Marktorganisationen in fast allen Marktsegmenten marktorientierter geworden. Trotz des Bestehens von Kontingenten übersteigt die Kartoffelstärkeerzeugung die Nachfrage auf dem europäischen Markt, mit dem Ergebnis, dass wir etwa 40 % unserer Produktion auf den Weltmarkt exportieren müssen, in der Regel mit dem Vorteil von Ausfuhrerstattungen. Bei den Vorschlägen, über die wir heute beraten, geht es jetzt vor allem darum, die Stabilität dieses sehr anfälligen Sektors zu sichern und gleichzeitig die grundlegenden Änderungen infolge der Reform der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik zu berücksichtigen. Die Hauptziele der Vorschläge bestehen darin, erstens die Kontingente für weitere zwei Jahre fortzuschreiben, was uns ermöglichen wird, die Kartoffelstärkeregelung im Rahmen des „Gesundheitschecks“ zu überprüfen. Eine Verlängerung um vier Jahre, wie Sie in Ihrem Bericht vorschlagen, würde uns nicht die Gelegenheit geben, beim „Gesundheitscheck“ in diesem wichtigen Sektor detailliert vorzugehen, und deshalb verstehen Sie sicher, dass wir diesen Änderungsantrag nicht akzeptieren können. Das zweite Hauptziel ist die Fortschreibung der bestehenden Kontingente, die eigentlich für einen relativ stabilen Markt bei Kartoffelstärke in der Europäischen Union gesorgt haben. Mir ist bekannt, dass einige Mitgliedstaaten wiederholt um eine Anhebung ihrer Kontingente ersucht haben, und ich habe die Erklärung des Rates nicht vergessen. Aber eine Analyse der aktuellen Marktlage hat gezeigt, dass eine Anhebung der Kontingente bei der Kartoffelstärkeerzeugung im Moment vermieden werden sollte. Wenn wir die Kontingente jetzt anheben, wenn wir in der Europäischen Union eine Überproduktion haben, dann würden dadurch die Preise noch stärker unter Druck geraten. Wir sollten die Gelegenheit nutzen und noch zwei Jahre warten, wie vorgeschlagen wurde, und uns dann beim „Gesundheitscheck“ im Einzelnen anschauen, wie eine tragfähige Zukunft für unsere Kartoffelstärkeerzeugung aussehen könnte."@de⁹ "Κύριε Πρόεδρε, θέλω να ευχαριστήσω τον εισηγητή, κ. Wojciechowski, και τα μέλη της Επιτροπής Γεωργίας και Ανάπτυξης της Υπαίθρου για το έργο που επιτέλεσαν σχετικά με αυτήν την έκθεση. Θα ξεκινήσω τοποθετώντας αυτήν την πρόταση στο πλαίσιό της. Από τη θέσπιση των ποσοστώσεων παραγωγής αμύλου γεωμήλων το 1995, προσπαθούμε να καθορίσουμε μια στρατηγική η οποία θα μπορούσε να διασφαλίσει, να ενισχύσει και να προωθήσει την ανάπτυξη αυτού του σημαντικού τομέα. Εντούτοις, την τελευταία δεκαετία οι γεωργικές πολιτικές της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης έχουν αλλάξει δραστικά, προσανατολιζόμενες περισσότερο προς την αγορά με την αποσύνδεση των περισσότερων ενισχύσεων και με μεταρρυθμίσεις των οργανώσεων της αγοράς σε όλους σχεδόν τους τομείς. Παρά την ύπαρξη ποσοστώσεων, η παραγωγή αμύλου γεωμήλων υπερβαίνει τη ζήτηση στην ευρωπαϊκή αγορά, με αποτέλεσμα να είμαστε υποχρεωμένοι να εξάγουμε περίπου το 40% της παραγωγής μας στην παγκόσμια αγορά, συνήθως με το όφελος των επιστροφών κατά την εξαγωγή. Σχετικά με τις προτάσεις που συζητούμε σήμερα, είναι ζωτικής σημασίας να διατηρήσουμε τη σταθερότητα αυτού του πολύ ευάλωτου τομέα, λαμβάνοντας παράλληλα υπόψη τις θεμελιώδεις αλλαγές που οφείλονται στη μεταρρύθμιση της κοινής γεωργικής πολιτικής. Οι κύριοι στόχοι των προτάσεων είναι, πρώτον, η ανανέωση των ποσοστώσεων για άλλα δύο χρόνια, κάτι που θα μας επιτρέψει να αναθεωρήσουμε το σύστημα αμύλου γεωμήλων στο πλαίσιο του υγειονομικού ελέγχου. Μια παράταση τεσσάρων ετών, όπως προτείνετε στην έκθεσή σας, δεν θα μας επέτρεπε να εκμεταλλευτούμε την ευκαιρία για να υπεισέλθουμε σε λεπτομέρειες όσον αφορά τον σημαντικό αυτόν τομέα κατά τον υγειονομικό έλεγχο, και συνεπώς όπως κατανοείτε δεν μπορούμε να δεχτούμε αυτήν την τροπολογία. Ο δεύτερος κύριος στόχος είναι η ανανέωση των υφιστάμενων ποσοστώσεων, οι οποίες έχουν όντως δημιουργήσει μια σχετικά σταθερή αγορά για το άμυλο γεωμήλων στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση. Γνωρίζω ότι υπήρξαν επανειλημμένα αιτήματα από ορισμένα κράτη μέλη για αύξηση των ποσοστώσεών τους, και δεν έχω λησμονήσει τη σχετική δήλωση του Συμβουλίου. Εντούτοις, η ανάλυση της τρέχουσας κατάστασης της αγοράς έδειξε ότι πρέπει να αποφευχθεί επί του παρόντος οιαδήποτε αύξηση των ποσοστώσεων παραγωγής αμύλου γεωμήλων. Εάν αυξήσουμε τις ποσοστώσεις σε μία περίοδο κατά την οποία παρατηρείται υπερπαραγωγή στο εσωτερικό της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, αυτό θα ασκήσει ακόμη μεγαλύτερη πίεση στις τιμές. Πρέπει να επωφεληθούμε από την ευκαιρία που προσφέρει η παράταση για δύο ακόμη χρόνια, όπως προτάθηκε, και στη συνέχεια, κατά τον υγειονομικό έλεγχο, να υπεισέλθουμε σε λεπτομέρειες προκειμένου να αναζητήσουμε τρόπους εξασφάλισης ενός βιώσιμου μέλλοντος για την ευρωπαϊκή παραγωγή αμύλου γεωμήλων."@el^10,10 ". Señor Presidente, quisiera dar las gracias al ponente, el señor Wojciechowski, así como a los miembros de la Comisión de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural, por el trabajo realizado en torno a este informe. Para empezar quisiera situar esta propuesta en su contexto. Desde que se introdujeron los contingentes para la producción de fécula de patata, ya en 1995, hemos tratado de definir una estrategia que permitiera garantizar, impulsar y promover el desarrollo de este importante sector. Sin embargo, durante la última década, las políticas agrícolas de la Unión Europea han cambiado radicalmente, pasando a estar más orientadas al mercado con el desacoplamiento de la mayoría de los pagos de ayuda y con reformas de las organizaciones de mercado en casi todos los sectores. Pese a la existencia de contingentes, la producción de fécula de patata supera la demanda del mercado europeo, con el resultado de que tenemos que exportar alrededor del 40 % de nuestra producción al mercado mundial, normalmente con la concesión de restituciones a la exportación. Con respecto a las propuestas que estamos tratando hoy, es esencial conservar la estabilidad de un sector tan frágil como este, teniendo en cuenta al mismo tiempo los cambios fundamentales que requiere la reforma de la Política Agrícola Común. Los principales objetivos de las propuestas consisten en primer lugar en prorrogar las cuotas durante otros dos años más, lo que nos permitiría revisar el sistema de la fécula de patata en el marco del control de salud. Una ampliación de cuatro años como la que usted propone en su informe, no nos permitiría aprovechar la oportunidad de entrar en detalles con respecto a este importante sector en el control de salud, y por lo tanto entenderá que no podamos aceptar esta enmienda. El segundo objetivo principal consiste en refinanciar los contingentes existentes, que verdaderamente han proporcionado un marco relativamente estable para la fécula de patata en la Unión Europea. Soy consciente de que algunos Estados miembros han solicitado un incremento de sus cuotas y no he olvidado la declaración del Consejo. Sin embargo, el análisis de la situación actual del mercado ha demostrado que por el momento debería evitarse un aumento de los contingentes de producción de fécula de patata. Si aumentamos los contingentes en una situación en la que existe un exceso de producción dentro de la Unión Europea, se generaría una presión aún mayor sobre los precios. Deberíamos aprovechar la oportunidad de disponer de dos años más, tal como se sugiere, y posteriormente, en el control de salud, entrar en detalles para ver cuál podría ser un futuro viable para nuestra producción de fécula de patata."@es²¹ "Mr President, I should like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Wojciechowski, and members of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development for the work that has been carried out on this report. I shall start by placing this proposal in its context. Since the potato starch production quotas were introduced back in 1995, we have been trying to define a strategy that could secure, enhance and promote the development of this important sector. However, over the last decade the European Union’s agricultural policies have changed dramatically, becoming more market-oriented with the decoupling of most aid payments, and reforms of the market organisations in almost all sectors. In spite of the existence of quotas, potato starch production exceeds demand on the European market with the result that we have to export about 40% of our production into the world market, usually with the benefit of export refunds. Concerning the proposals that we are discussing today, it is of vital importance to preserve the stability of this very fragile sector while at the same time taking the fundamental changes due to the reform of the common agricultural policy into account. The main objectives of the proposals are firstly to roll over the quotas for another two years, which will allow us to review the potato starch system in the framework of the health check. An extension of four years, as you propose in your report, would not allow us to take the opportunity to go into details with this important sector in the health check, and therefore you will understand that we cannot accept this amendment. The second main objective is to roll over the existing quotas, which have actually provided a relatively stable market for potato starch in the European Union. I am aware that there have been repeated requests from some Member States for an increase in their quotas, and I have not forgotten the declaration made by the Council. However, an analysis of the current market situation has shown that an increase of the potato starch production quotas should be avoided at the moment. If we increase the quotas in a situation where we have over-production within the European Union, this would put even heavier pressure on the prices. We should take the opportunity to take another two years as suggested, and then, in the health check, go into details to see what a viable future for our potato starch production could look like."@et⁵ "Arvoisa puhemies, haluan kiittää esittelijä Wojciechowskia sekä maatalouden ja maaseudun kehittämisen valiokuntaa mietinnön laatimiseksi tehdystä työstä. Kerron aluksi hieman taustatietoja mietinnössä käsiteltävästä asiasta. Siitä lähtien, kun perunatärkkelyskiintiöt otettiin käyttöön vuonna 1995, olemme pyrkineet määrittelemään strategian, jolla tämän tärkeän alan kehittäminen voitaisiin varmistaa ja sitä voitaisiin tukea ja edistää. Viime vuosikymmenen aikana EU:n maatalouspolitiikka on kuitenkin muuttunut huomattavan paljon, ja siitä on tullut aiempaa markkinajohtoisempi, kun suurin osa tuista on irrotettu tuotantomääristä ja lähes kaikkien alojen markkinajärjestelyjä on uudistettu. Kiintiöistä huolimatta perunatärkkelystuotanto on EU:n markkinoilla kysyntää suurempaa. Tämä tarkoittaa sitä, että joudumme viemään noin 40 prosenttia tuotannosta maailmanmarkkinoille, yleensä vientitukien avulla. Tänään käsiteltävänä olevista ehdotuksista totean, että on erittäin tärkeää säilyttää tämän herkän alan vakaus samalla, kun mukaudutaan yhteisen maatalouspolitiikan uudistuksesta johtuviin perustaviin muutoksiin. Ehdotusten päätavoitteena on ensinnäkin jatkaa kiintiöjärjestelmää vielä kahdella vuodella, jotta voimme tarkastella perunatärkkelysjärjestelmää YMP:n yleisen tarkastelun yhteydessä. Mietinnössä ehdottamanne neljän vuoden jatko ei antaisi mahdollisuutta käsitellä tätä tärkeää alaa yksityiskohtaisesti tässä yhteydessä. Ymmärtänette siis, ettei komissio voi hyväksyä kyseistä tarkistusta. Toisena päätavoitteena on nykyisten kiintiöiden käytön jatkaminen, sillä niillä on itse asiassa saatu aikaan melko vakaat perunatärkkelysmarkkinat EU:ssa. Olen tietoinen siitä, että jotkin jäsenvaltiot ovat toistuvasti pyytäneet kiintiöidensä lisäämistä, enkä ole unohtanut neuvoston julistusta asiasta. Tämänhetkisen markkinatilanteen tarkastelu on kuitenkin osoittanut, että perunatärkkelystuotannon kiintiöiden lisäämistä olisi tällä hetkellä vältettävä. Jos kiintiöitä lisätään tilanteessa, jossa EU:ssa on perunatärkkelyksen ylituotantoa, hintoihin kohdistuisi yhä kovempia paineita. Meidän olisi nyt seurattava tilannetta vielä kahden vuoden ajan, kuten on ehdotettu, ja pohdittava sitten yksityiskohtaisesti YMP:n yleisen tarkastelun yhteydessä, miten perunatärkkelystuotannon tulevaisuus taataan parhaalla mahdollisella tavalla."@fi⁷ ". Monsieur le Président, je remercie le rapporteur, M. Wojciechowski, et les membres de la commission de l’agriculture et du développement rural pour le travail effectué dans le cadre de ce rapport. Je commencerai par replacer cette proposition dans son contexte. Depuis l’introduction d’un régime de contingentement pour la fécule de pomme de terre en 1995, nous avons tenté de définir une stratégie capable d’assurer, d’accroître et de promouvoir le développement de ce secteur important. Cependant, au cours de la dernière décennie, les politiques agricoles de l’Union européenne ont changé de façon spectaculaire. Elles sont davantage axées sur le marché depuis le découplage de la plupart des paiements directs et les réformes des organisations communes de marché dans pratiquement tous les secteurs. Malgré l’existence de quotas, la production de fécule de pomme de terre est supérieure à la demande sur le marché européen, de sorte que nous devons exporter environ 40% de notre production sur le marché mondial, généralement en bénéficiant de restitutions à l’exportation. S’agissant des propositions dont nous débattons aujourd’hui, il est capital de préserver la stabilité de ce secteur très fragile tout en tenant compte des changements fondamentaux issus de la réforme de la politique agricole commune. Les principaux objectifs des propositions sont, premièrement, de proroger les quotas pour une nouvelle période de deux ans, ce qui nous permettra de réviser le régime dans le cadre du «bilan de santé» de la PAC. Une prorogation de quatre ans, telle que proposée dans le rapport, ne nous permettrait pas d’examiner en profondeur cet important secteur lors du «bilan de santé» et vous comprendrez donc que je ne puis soutenir cet amendement. Le deuxième grand objectif est de proroger les quotas existants, qui ont assuré un marché relativement stable pour la fécule de pomme de terre dans l’Union européenne. Je sais qu’il y a eu des demandes répétées de la part de certains États membres pour une augmentation de leurs quotas et je n’ai pas oublié la déclaration faite par le Conseil. Cependant, une analyse de la situation actuelle du marché a montré qu’il vaut mieux éviter pour l’instant une augmentation des quotas de production de fécule de pomme de terre. Augmenter les quotas alors que nous sommes en situation de surproduction dans l’Union européenne mettrait une pression encore plus lourde sur les prix. Nous devons saisir cette occasion d’attendre encore deux ans, comme suggéré, puis, lors du «bilan de santé» de la PAC, d’examiner en détail quel pourrait être un avenir viable pour notre production de fécule de pomme de terre."@fr⁸ "Mr President, I should like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Wojciechowski, and members of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development for the work that has been carried out on this report. I shall start by placing this proposal in its context. Since the potato starch production quotas were introduced back in 1995, we have been trying to define a strategy that could secure, enhance and promote the development of this important sector. However, over the last decade the European Union’s agricultural policies have changed dramatically, becoming more market-oriented with the decoupling of most aid payments, and reforms of the market organisations in almost all sectors. In spite of the existence of quotas, potato starch production exceeds demand on the European market with the result that we have to export about 40% of our production into the world market, usually with the benefit of export refunds. Concerning the proposals that we are discussing today, it is of vital importance to preserve the stability of this very fragile sector while at the same time taking the fundamental changes due to the reform of the common agricultural policy into account. The main objectives of the proposals are firstly to roll over the quotas for another two years, which will allow us to review the potato starch system in the framework of the health check. An extension of four years, as you propose in your report, would not allow us to take the opportunity to go into details with this important sector in the health check, and therefore you will understand that we cannot accept this amendment. The second main objective is to roll over the existing quotas, which have actually provided a relatively stable market for potato starch in the European Union. I am aware that there have been repeated requests from some Member States for an increase in their quotas, and I have not forgotten the declaration made by the Council. However, an analysis of the current market situation has shown that an increase of the potato starch production quotas should be avoided at the moment. If we increase the quotas in a situation where we have over-production within the European Union, this would put even heavier pressure on the prices. We should take the opportunity to take another two years as suggested, and then, in the health check, go into details to see what a viable future for our potato starch production could look like."@hu¹¹ ". Signor Presidente, desidero ringraziare il relatore, onorevole Wojciechowski, insieme ai membri della commissione per l’agricoltura e lo sviluppo rurale, per il lavoro che è stato svolto su questa relazione. In primo luogo vorrei collocare questa proposta nel suo contesto. Sin dal 1995, allorché fu introdotto il regime di contingentamento per la produzione di fecola di patate, ci siamo sforzati di definire una strategia che fosse in grado di garantire, stimolare e promuovere lo sviluppo di questo importante settore. Nell’ultimo decennio, però, le politiche agricole dell’Unione europea hanno subito un drastico cambiamento: insieme a un più netto orientamento verso il mercato è stato introdotto il disaccoppiamento di gran parte degli aiuti, oltre alla riforma delle organizzazioni di mercato in quasi tutti i settori. Nonostante la presenza dei contingenti, sul mercato europeo la produzione di fecola di patate supera la domanda, per cui dobbiamo esportare circa il 40 per cento della nostra produzione sul mercato mondiale, di solito con il beneficio delle restituzioni all’esportazione. Per quanto riguarda le proposte di cui discutiamo oggi, è di fondamentale importanza conservare la stabilità di questo settore fragilissimo, tenendo però conto, contemporaneamente, delle essenziali modifiche imposte dalla riforma della politica agricola comune. Le proposte mirano in primo luogo a prorogare i contingenti per altri due anni, consentendoci in tal modo di riesaminare il sistema di produzione della fecola di patate nel quadro del controllo sulla buona salute del sistema. Il rinnovo di quattro anni, che si propone nella relazione, non offrirebbe l’opportunità di esaminare dettagliatamente questo importante settore nell’ambito di tale controllo; comprenderete quindi che non possiamo accettare questo emendamento. Il secondo obiettivo principale è quello di prorogare i contingenti attualmente in vigore, che hanno fornito una relativa stabilità al mercato della fecola di patate nell’Unione europea. So bene che alcuni Stati membri hanno ripetutamente chiesto un aumento dei propri contingenti, e non dimentico certo la dichiarazione resa dal Consiglio. Tuttavia, un’analisi dell’odierna situazione di mercato suggerisce di evitare, in questo momento, un incremento dei contingenti di produzione di fecola di patate; incrementare i contingenti in una situazione di sovrapproduzione nell’ambito dell’Unione europea significherebbe imporre ai prezzi una pressione ancora più forte. Dobbiamo cogliere l’opportunità di introdurre un’estensione di due anni, com’è stato proposto, e poi, in occasione del controllo sulla buona salute del sistema, esaminare nei dettagli la possibile configurazione di un futuro sostenibile per la nostra produzione di fecola di patate."@it¹² "Mr President, I should like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Wojciechowski, and members of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development for the work that has been carried out on this report. I shall start by placing this proposal in its context. Since the potato starch production quotas were introduced back in 1995, we have been trying to define a strategy that could secure, enhance and promote the development of this important sector. However, over the last decade the European Union’s agricultural policies have changed dramatically, becoming more market-oriented with the decoupling of most aid payments, and reforms of the market organisations in almost all sectors. In spite of the existence of quotas, potato starch production exceeds demand on the European market with the result that we have to export about 40% of our production into the world market, usually with the benefit of export refunds. Concerning the proposals that we are discussing today, it is of vital importance to preserve the stability of this very fragile sector while at the same time taking the fundamental changes due to the reform of the common agricultural policy into account. The main objectives of the proposals are firstly to roll over the quotas for another two years, which will allow us to review the potato starch system in the framework of the health check. An extension of four years, as you propose in your report, would not allow us to take the opportunity to go into details with this important sector in the health check, and therefore you will understand that we cannot accept this amendment. The second main objective is to roll over the existing quotas, which have actually provided a relatively stable market for potato starch in the European Union. I am aware that there have been repeated requests from some Member States for an increase in their quotas, and I have not forgotten the declaration made by the Council. However, an analysis of the current market situation has shown that an increase of the potato starch production quotas should be avoided at the moment. If we increase the quotas in a situation where we have over-production within the European Union, this would put even heavier pressure on the prices. We should take the opportunity to take another two years as suggested, and then, in the health check, go into details to see what a viable future for our potato starch production could look like."@lt¹⁴ "Mr President, I should like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Wojciechowski, and members of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development for the work that has been carried out on this report. I shall start by placing this proposal in its context. Since the potato starch production quotas were introduced back in 1995, we have been trying to define a strategy that could secure, enhance and promote the development of this important sector. However, over the last decade the European Union’s agricultural policies have changed dramatically, becoming more market-oriented with the decoupling of most aid payments, and reforms of the market organisations in almost all sectors. In spite of the existence of quotas, potato starch production exceeds demand on the European market with the result that we have to export about 40% of our production into the world market, usually with the benefit of export refunds. Concerning the proposals that we are discussing today, it is of vital importance to preserve the stability of this very fragile sector while at the same time taking the fundamental changes due to the reform of the common agricultural policy into account. The main objectives of the proposals are firstly to roll over the quotas for another two years, which will allow us to review the potato starch system in the framework of the health check. An extension of four years, as you propose in your report, would not allow us to take the opportunity to go into details with this important sector in the health check, and therefore you will understand that we cannot accept this amendment. The second main objective is to roll over the existing quotas, which have actually provided a relatively stable market for potato starch in the European Union. I am aware that there have been repeated requests from some Member States for an increase in their quotas, and I have not forgotten the declaration made by the Council. However, an analysis of the current market situation has shown that an increase of the potato starch production quotas should be avoided at the moment. If we increase the quotas in a situation where we have over-production within the European Union, this would put even heavier pressure on the prices. We should take the opportunity to take another two years as suggested, and then, in the health check, go into details to see what a viable future for our potato starch production could look like."@lv¹³ "Mr President, I should like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Wojciechowski, and members of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development for the work that has been carried out on this report. I shall start by placing this proposal in its context. Since the potato starch production quotas were introduced back in 1995, we have been trying to define a strategy that could secure, enhance and promote the development of this important sector. However, over the last decade the European Union’s agricultural policies have changed dramatically, becoming more market-oriented with the decoupling of most aid payments, and reforms of the market organisations in almost all sectors. In spite of the existence of quotas, potato starch production exceeds demand on the European market with the result that we have to export about 40% of our production into the world market, usually with the benefit of export refunds. Concerning the proposals that we are discussing today, it is of vital importance to preserve the stability of this very fragile sector while at the same time taking the fundamental changes due to the reform of the common agricultural policy into account. The main objectives of the proposals are firstly to roll over the quotas for another two years, which will allow us to review the potato starch system in the framework of the health check. An extension of four years, as you propose in your report, would not allow us to take the opportunity to go into details with this important sector in the health check, and therefore you will understand that we cannot accept this amendment. The second main objective is to roll over the existing quotas, which have actually provided a relatively stable market for potato starch in the European Union. I am aware that there have been repeated requests from some Member States for an increase in their quotas, and I have not forgotten the declaration made by the Council. However, an analysis of the current market situation has shown that an increase of the potato starch production quotas should be avoided at the moment. If we increase the quotas in a situation where we have over-production within the European Union, this would put even heavier pressure on the prices. We should take the opportunity to take another two years as suggested, and then, in the health check, go into details to see what a viable future for our potato starch production could look like."@mt¹⁵ ". Mijnheer de Voorzitter, ik wil graag de rapporteur, de heer Wojciechowski, en de leden van de Commissie landbouw en plattelandsontwikkeling bedanken voor hun inspanningen ten behoeve van dit verslag. Ik zal eerst dit voorstel nader toelichten. Sinds in 1995 de aardappelzetmeelcontingenten werden ingevoerd hebben we geprobeerd een strategie te bepalen die de ontwikkeling van deze belangrijke sector kon garanderen, verbeteren en stimuleren. In de afgelopen tien jaar is het landbouwbeleid van de Europese Unie drastisch veranderd. Het is marktgerichter geworden, waarbij de meeste steunbetalingen zijn ontkoppeld en de marktordening in bijna alle sectoren is hervormd. Ondanks het bestaan van contingenten wordt er meer aardappelzetmeel geproduceerd dan waaraan de Europese markt behoefte heeft, met als gevolg dat we ongeveer 40 procent van onze productie moeten afzetten op de wereldmarkt, meestal met het voordeel van uitvoerrestituties. Voor wat betreft de voorstellen waarover we vandaag praten: het is van cruciaal belang om de stabiliteit van deze zeer kwetsbare sector te behouden en tegelijkertijd rekening te houden met de fundamentele veranderingen die het gevolg zijn van de hervorming van het gemeenschappelijke landbouwbeleid. Het eerste belangrijke doel van het voorstel is om de contingenten met nog twee jaar te verlengen, waardoor we de contingenteringsregeling voor aardappelzetmeel kunnen beoordelen in het kader van de evaluatie van het landbouwbeleid, de zogenaamde ‘health check’. Met een verlenging tot vier jaar, die u in uw verslag voorstelt, zou ons de kans worden ontnomen om in het kader van deze evaluatie diepgaand op deze belangrijke sector in te gaan. Daarom zult u wel begrijpen dat we dit amendement niet kunnen aanvaarden. Het tweede belangrijke doel is verlenging van de bestaande contingenten, die eigenlijk tot een betrekkelijk stabiele markt voor aardappelzetmeel in de Europese Unie hebben geleid. Ik ben mij ervan bewust dat er herhaalde verzoeken van bepaalde lidstaten zijn geweest om hun contingenten te vergroten, en ik ben de verklaring van de Raad niet vergeten. Uit een analyse van de huidige marktsituatie is echter gebleken dat de contingenten voor de productie van aardappelzetmeel op het moment beter niet kunnen worden vergroot. Als we de contingenten vergroten op een moment dat er sprake is van overproductie in de Europese Unie, zouden de prijzen nog meer onder druk komen te staan. We moeten de kans aangrijpen om de voorgestelde verlenging met twee jaar door te voeren en dan tijdens de evaluatie nader in te gaan op de vraag hoe de aardappelzetmeelsector een levensvatbare toekomst tegemoet kan gaan."@nl³ "Mr President, I should like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Wojciechowski, and members of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development for the work that has been carried out on this report. I shall start by placing this proposal in its context. Since the potato starch production quotas were introduced back in 1995, we have been trying to define a strategy that could secure, enhance and promote the development of this important sector. However, over the last decade the European Union’s agricultural policies have changed dramatically, becoming more market-oriented with the decoupling of most aid payments, and reforms of the market organisations in almost all sectors. In spite of the existence of quotas, potato starch production exceeds demand on the European market with the result that we have to export about 40% of our production into the world market, usually with the benefit of export refunds. Concerning the proposals that we are discussing today, it is of vital importance to preserve the stability of this very fragile sector while at the same time taking the fundamental changes due to the reform of the common agricultural policy into account. The main objectives of the proposals are firstly to roll over the quotas for another two years, which will allow us to review the potato starch system in the framework of the health check. An extension of four years, as you propose in your report, would not allow us to take the opportunity to go into details with this important sector in the health check, and therefore you will understand that we cannot accept this amendment. The second main objective is to roll over the existing quotas, which have actually provided a relatively stable market for potato starch in the European Union. I am aware that there have been repeated requests from some Member States for an increase in their quotas, and I have not forgotten the declaration made by the Council. However, an analysis of the current market situation has shown that an increase of the potato starch production quotas should be avoided at the moment. If we increase the quotas in a situation where we have over-production within the European Union, this would put even heavier pressure on the prices. We should take the opportunity to take another two years as suggested, and then, in the health check, go into details to see what a viable future for our potato starch production could look like."@pl¹⁶ "Senhor Presidente, os meus agradecimentos ao senhor deputado Wojciechowski e aos membros da Comissão da Agricultura e do Desenvolvimento Rural pelo trabalho realizado em relação a este relatório. Vou começar por colocar a proposta no seu contexto. Desde a introdução, em 1995, do regime de contingentes para a produção de fécula de batata, temos tentado definir uma estratégia que pudesse proteger, melhorar e promover o desenvolvimento deste importante sector. No entanto, ao longo da última década, as políticas agrícolas da União Europeia mudaram radicalmente, tendo-se tornado mais orientadas para o mercado com a dissociação da maior parte dos pagamentos de ajudas, e com reformas das organizações de mercado em praticamente todos os sectores. Apesar da existência de contingentes, a produção de fécula de batata supera a procura no mercado europeu, daí resultando a necessidade de exportarmos cerca de 40% da nossa produção, normalmente usufruindo do benefício de restituições à exportação. Relativamente às propostas hoje em apreço, é da maior importância preservar a estabilidade deste sector tão frágil, embora tendo ao mesmo tempo em conta as alterações fundamentais devido à reforma da política agrícola comum. Os principais objectivos das propostas são, em primeiro lugar, a repartição dos contingentes por mais dois anos, permitindo-nos rever o sistema relativo à fécula de batata no quadro do “exame médico”. Uma extensão de quatro anos, tal como propõem no vosso relatório, não nos permitiria aproveitar a oportunidade de avaliar pormenorizadamente este sector no referido “exame médico”. Nesta perspectiva, compreenderão que não podemos aceitar esta alteração. O segundo objectivo principal é repartir os contingentes existentes e que proporcionaram um mercado relativamente estável para a fécula de batata na União Europeia. Estou ciente de que houve repetidas solicitações de alguns Estados-Membros no sentido de um aumento dos seus contingentes, e não estou esquecida da declaração do Conselho. No entanto, uma análise da situação actual do mercado demonstrou que, neste momento, deveria ser evitado um aumento dos contingentes de produção de fécula de batata. Se aumentamos os contingentes numa situação em que existe excesso de produção no seio da União Europeia, este facto iria exercer uma ainda maior produção sobre os preços. Deveríamos aproveitar a oportunidade de repartição por dois anos, tal como foi sugerido, e seguidamente, no “exame médico”, analisar mais pormenorizadamente a viabilidade do futuro da nossa produção de fécula de batata."@pt¹⁷ "Mr President, I should like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Wojciechowski, and members of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development for the work that has been carried out on this report. I shall start by placing this proposal in its context. Since the potato starch production quotas were introduced back in 1995, we have been trying to define a strategy that could secure, enhance and promote the development of this important sector. However, over the last decade the European Union’s agricultural policies have changed dramatically, becoming more market-oriented with the decoupling of most aid payments, and reforms of the market organisations in almost all sectors. In spite of the existence of quotas, potato starch production exceeds demand on the European market with the result that we have to export about 40% of our production into the world market, usually with the benefit of export refunds. Concerning the proposals that we are discussing today, it is of vital importance to preserve the stability of this very fragile sector while at the same time taking the fundamental changes due to the reform of the common agricultural policy into account. The main objectives of the proposals are firstly to roll over the quotas for another two years, which will allow us to review the potato starch system in the framework of the health check. An extension of four years, as you propose in your report, would not allow us to take the opportunity to go into details with this important sector in the health check, and therefore you will understand that we cannot accept this amendment. The second main objective is to roll over the existing quotas, which have actually provided a relatively stable market for potato starch in the European Union. I am aware that there have been repeated requests from some Member States for an increase in their quotas, and I have not forgotten the declaration made by the Council. However, an analysis of the current market situation has shown that an increase of the potato starch production quotas should be avoided at the moment. If we increase the quotas in a situation where we have over-production within the European Union, this would put even heavier pressure on the prices. We should take the opportunity to take another two years as suggested, and then, in the health check, go into details to see what a viable future for our potato starch production could look like."@ro¹⁸ "Mr President, I should like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Wojciechowski, and members of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development for the work that has been carried out on this report. I shall start by placing this proposal in its context. Since the potato starch production quotas were introduced back in 1995, we have been trying to define a strategy that could secure, enhance and promote the development of this important sector. However, over the last decade the European Union’s agricultural policies have changed dramatically, becoming more market-oriented with the decoupling of most aid payments, and reforms of the market organisations in almost all sectors. In spite of the existence of quotas, potato starch production exceeds demand on the European market with the result that we have to export about 40% of our production into the world market, usually with the benefit of export refunds. Concerning the proposals that we are discussing today, it is of vital importance to preserve the stability of this very fragile sector while at the same time taking the fundamental changes due to the reform of the common agricultural policy into account. The main objectives of the proposals are firstly to roll over the quotas for another two years, which will allow us to review the potato starch system in the framework of the health check. An extension of four years, as you propose in your report, would not allow us to take the opportunity to go into details with this important sector in the health check, and therefore you will understand that we cannot accept this amendment. The second main objective is to roll over the existing quotas, which have actually provided a relatively stable market for potato starch in the European Union. I am aware that there have been repeated requests from some Member States for an increase in their quotas, and I have not forgotten the declaration made by the Council. However, an analysis of the current market situation has shown that an increase of the potato starch production quotas should be avoided at the moment. If we increase the quotas in a situation where we have over-production within the European Union, this would put even heavier pressure on the prices. We should take the opportunity to take another two years as suggested, and then, in the health check, go into details to see what a viable future for our potato starch production could look like."@sk¹⁹ "Mr President, I should like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Wojciechowski, and members of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development for the work that has been carried out on this report. I shall start by placing this proposal in its context. Since the potato starch production quotas were introduced back in 1995, we have been trying to define a strategy that could secure, enhance and promote the development of this important sector. However, over the last decade the European Union’s agricultural policies have changed dramatically, becoming more market-oriented with the decoupling of most aid payments, and reforms of the market organisations in almost all sectors. In spite of the existence of quotas, potato starch production exceeds demand on the European market with the result that we have to export about 40% of our production into the world market, usually with the benefit of export refunds. Concerning the proposals that we are discussing today, it is of vital importance to preserve the stability of this very fragile sector while at the same time taking the fundamental changes due to the reform of the common agricultural policy into account. The main objectives of the proposals are firstly to roll over the quotas for another two years, which will allow us to review the potato starch system in the framework of the health check. An extension of four years, as you propose in your report, would not allow us to take the opportunity to go into details with this important sector in the health check, and therefore you will understand that we cannot accept this amendment. The second main objective is to roll over the existing quotas, which have actually provided a relatively stable market for potato starch in the European Union. I am aware that there have been repeated requests from some Member States for an increase in their quotas, and I have not forgotten the declaration made by the Council. However, an analysis of the current market situation has shown that an increase of the potato starch production quotas should be avoided at the moment. If we increase the quotas in a situation where we have over-production within the European Union, this would put even heavier pressure on the prices. We should take the opportunity to take another two years as suggested, and then, in the health check, go into details to see what a viable future for our potato starch production could look like."@sl²⁰ "Herr talman! Jag tackar föredraganden Janusz Wojciechowski och ledamöterna i utskottet för jordbruk och landsbygdens utveckling för det arbete som de lagt ned på betänkandet. Jag inleder med att placera förslaget i sitt sammanhang. Alltsedan produktionskvoterna för potatisstärkelse infördes 1995 har vi försökt fastställa en handlingsplan som skulle kunna bidra till att säkra, öka och främja utvecklingen av denna viktiga sektor. Men under det senaste årtiondet har EU:s jordbrukspolitik förändrats dramatiskt och blivit mer marknadsorienterad genom att man frikopplat de flesta stödutbetalningarna och reformerat marknadsorganisationerna inom nästan alla sektorer. Trots att det finns kvoter är produktionen av potatisstärkelse större än efterfrågan på EU-marknaden, vilket leder till att vi måste exportera omkring 40 procent av vår produktion till världsmarknaden, oftast med stöd av exportbidrag. Angående de förslag som vi diskuterar i dag är det ytterst viktigt att bevara stabiliteten inom denna mycket känsliga sektor medan vi samtidigt tar hänsyn till de grundläggande förändringarna till följd av reformen av den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken. Ett av huvudsyftena med förslagen är först och främst att förlänga kvoterna i ytterligare två år vilket ger oss möjlighet att ompröva systemet för potatisstärkelse inom ramen för utvärderingen. En förlängning på fyra år som ni föreslår i betänkandet skulle inte ge oss tillfälle att detaljgranska denna viktiga sektor i utvärderingen och därför förstår ni säkert att vi inte kan godta ändringsförslaget. Det andra huvudsyftet är att förlänga de befintliga kvoterna som faktiskt har gett en relativt stabil marknad för potatisstärkelse inom EU. Jag är medveten om att några medlemsstater upprepade gånger har krävt att deras kvoter ska ökas och jag har inte glömt rådets uttalande. En analys av den aktuella marknadssituationen har emellertid visat att en ökning av produktionskvoterna för potatisstärkelse bör undvikas för närvarande. Om vi ökar kvoterna i ett läge där vi har överproduktion inom EU skulle det pressa priserna ännu mer. Vi borde utnyttja möjligheten till ytterligare två års förlängning enligt förslaget, och under utvärderingen kan vi sedan detaljgranska hur en livskraftig framtid för vår produktion av potatisstärkelse skulle kunna se ut."@sv²²
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Mariann Fischer Boel,"^{18,5,20,15,1,19,14,16,11,13,4} "Member of the Commission"^{18,5,20,15,1,19,14,16,11,11,13,4}