Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-15-Speech-1-068"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000515.4.1-068"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, first and foremost I would like to thank Mrs Schierhuber for the work she has done, the main merit of which is the fact that it introduces some sensible elements into a proposal which makes no sense whatsoever.
It is true that the regulation in force is deficient in terms of control, and some people have taken advantage of these deficiencies in order to obtain aid which stretches the bounds of legality. These situations obviously required modifications which logically should have concentrated on strengthening controls. Nevertheless, we have seen another example of the unique way in which the Commission fulfils its function of producing legislative proposals.
The Commission’s proposal takes an extraordinary approach: instead of strengthening the control mechanisms, it abolishes aid for short-fibre flax. To be honest, the Commission is behaving here like the doctor who proposes decapitation as a cure for a headache.
Furthermore, the Commission’s proposal, if put into practice, would lead to the disappearance of the crop in some Member States, which would have a negative affect on many farmers who had found an alternative crop which did not produce surpluses and which was destined for non-food use.
In Spain, for example, practically all flax grown is short-fibre flax, since the heat and the lack of rainfall restrict the growth of the plant. Furthermore, the dryness of the ground in summer makes it practically impossible to pull up the plant together with its roots in order to obtain long fibre. Furthermore, short-fibre flax is perfectly suited to dry conditions, there is a certain market for it and, at least in theory, it is the type of production which we are intending to promote.
The elimination of aid for short-fibre flax would hinder the innovative non-food use of agricultural products, fundamentally affecting regions with low rainfall and more difficult conditions. The Commission is therefore proposing to concentrate aid in the areas with the best conditions and deny it to the least-favoured ones.
I would like to remind the Commission of Article 158 (ex Article 130A) of the Treaty, which lays down that social and economic cohesion must be strengthened, and the differences in levels of development between the different regions and the underdevelopment of the least-favoured regions, including the rural areas, should be reduced.
Lastly, I think it is essential that the Commission’s proposals are not accepted; however, in any event, the inclusion in the regulations on herbaceous crops would lead to unfair situations as a result of the use of yields conditioned by drought.
Mrs Rodríguez Ramos’ amendments therefore seem to me to be a good solution to the problem."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples