Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-09-20-Speech-3-142"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-09-20"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Trade in goods resulting from the processing of agricultural products2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000920.12.3-142"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-09-20-Speech-3-1432
lpv:speaker	lp:Xaver Mayer2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Christlich-Soziale Union in Bayern e.V. (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; AGRI (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; EMPL (1999-07-28--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with Switzerland, Iceland and Norway (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the European Economic Area Joint Parliamentary Committee (EEA) (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, you really have to rub your eyes two or three times when you read what kind of proposal the Commission has come up with by way of a solution to these problems, which have been discussed time and again. It is absolutely true what Mr Souchet, as rapporteur, and Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf, as chairman of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development have had to say on the subject. They have my unequivocal support. On the other hand, however, there can be no doubt that the bottleneck in the budget and also the special WTO agreements represent a completely new challenge at the end of the day, particularly where export refunds are concerned. Who would have thought, even as little as a year ago, that we would be facing this conundrum, and having to weigh up the interests of agricultural product processors against those of the farmers who produce the products. If the Commission is now looking for a way to resolve this export bottleneck in products that are not covered by Annex I, then it is certainly responding to a need. Yet there is not the slightest suggestion in the Commission proposal that the problems facing the raw materials producers, i.e. the farmers, have been registered. I am in complete agreement with Mr Souchet. Thank you very much for all the work you have put into the report. He rightly complains that the Commission is offering no alternative courses of action. One thing is for sure though, there must be no restriction in the availability of raw materials at competitive prices, and at the end of the day, agricultural policy cannot be devoted exclusively to the protection of the raw materials producers. But then nor should the burden fall on one side alone in agriculture, or have to be borne by individual products. There are agricultural products that almost pay for the export refunds themselves, at the end of the day, owing to contributions from the producers, i.e. the farmers. Sugar is a case in point. The farmers’ contributions go into the general melting pot of the EU budget on the revenue side, and if export refunds are cut then these contributions will decline too. As I said, sugar is a particular case in point. I feel we must give special consideration to this issue, and give it priority where export refunds are concerned."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph