Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-17-Speech-5-024"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000317.3.5-024"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, this is a very specific instrument which is of major importance for all citizens. However, it is the farmers who have to be its protagonists. Our position on the proposal for a regulation on information measures relating to the common agricultural policy can be summarised as follows: after the period of DG VI management and dependence on EAGGF-Guidance, a window of further transparency has at last been opened, and it must not be allowed to close. The common agricultural policy is an instrument for farmers: it is a basis from which to provide farmers with a broader understanding of their overall role, both in respect of the consumer and in terms of the major environmental issues. It is also the means of increasing awareness, among farmers, of current situations and, in particular, of the requirements of European society as a whole.
All too often, we have heard speeches extolling the virtues of the CAP’s role in production, the environment and consumer and agricultural protection. On many occasions, these words proved to be an end unto themselves and did not provide specific occasions for taking up the opportunities offered. This regulation is our chance to send a clear message to the farming world. This is why we do not understand why the CAP should be extended to include all the consumer and environmental associations, which can claim no rights and have no responsibilities as regards measures of this type. Should we pass up this opportunity, we will miss another chance to target the objectives of growth, shared responsibility, multifunctionality and quality improvements, which are the basis of the European measures envisaged for the agricultural sector. We are also concerned at the poor level of funding available to implement the programme.
This is all the more reason why the policy should not be broadened to include as many potential tenderers as possible, but rather, in the light of what has just been said regarding determining who represents agriculture, this extension must lead to the judicious, appropriate allocation of funding to the destination indicated in the very title of the programme, the common agricultural policy, where the term “agricultural” is a decidedly operative word. If we were to take a different path, we would only be contributing to highlighting the existence of a tangle of roles, which would be of no benefit to either farmers or consumers.
On the other hand, this major programme is an opportunity for responsibilities to be defined and recognised, in order to provide the farming world with a genuine opportunity to take the lead in the changes taking place. However, in all this, we must not forget or overlook the merits of the other organisations
which have
taken up parallels with the world of agriculture production and interpreted them to best advantage, without mentioning the fact that this broadening out to embrace other activities in itself represents a development of areas of potential recognised by the Union. The transfer from EAGGF-Guidance to EAGGF-Guarantee is another consoling aspect, in terms of attaining the objectives already outlined, providing both the possibility of tracking funds to their destination and, in particular, to the objectives which we want to achieve.
Alongside all this, in consolidation of the positions expressed, the true focus of the programme must not be forgotten: the involvement of the farmers themselves in adopting a more resolute stance on the validity of the instruments introduced under the reform of the common agricultural policy. Today, this instrument appears to be fully understood by most of the farming world, but not all. It is probably this element which is most attached to conventional schemes that are difficult to reconcile with the rapid, revolutionary changes which we are witnessing. But it is an element which the Union itself intends to adapt more closely to current conditions and manoeuvre towards the euro, globalisation and the open market, and also towards those market niches which are characteristic of economically sound areas which must be developed still further.
In line with this rationale, a parallel with the development of rural tourism springs to mind. Rural tourism is a source of income and, at the same time, a means of protecting a citizen’s land. It is proposed as a driving force that will speed up the passage to a European agriculture which encompasses as wide a range of production possibilities and sources of income as possible. Rural tourism not only meshes well with organic production, but also complies with the highest of product quality standards recognised by the European Union. Factors such as these confirm the integration of agricultural policy with the other forms of economic and social development of the European Union."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples