Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-12-12-Speech-2-029"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001212.3.2-029"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I would like to thank the rapporteur, Mrs Haug, for the outstanding cooperation, and also the chairman of the Committee on Budgets, Mr Wynn. I have two comments to make in connection with the document now on the table, and these are directed at the Council and the Commission.
To start with, I want to talk about the overall agricultural budget. Of course we know that it comprises almost 45% of the EU budget, but if you add up what the EU Member States contribute and what the European Union contributes to the agricultural budget, you arrive at 1.9%, and a substantial amount of that is spent on the development of rural areas and environmental development. That is a mere pittance compared with what other trade blocks in the world spend. If you consider that American companies receive the equivalent of three times as much aid and a capricious country such as Turkey spends in excess of 10% of government money on agriculture and horticulture, then it is Europe that wants something for nothing.
My second point concerns BSE. I think you should know that on the night of 23 and 24 November, when we sat round the table with Mrs Parly, we fought like lions to get more money for BSE. The Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development told us to use the financial leeway between the financial perspective and the final budget, which amounted to upwards of generous EUR 900 million at the time, EUR 600 million of which was to be used for BSE. We fought tooth and nail to add a few extra million euro. A week further down the line and two cases of BSE have come to light in Germany. This means that in actual fact we already need a supplementary budget of EUR 900 million. This would suggest that the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development in this House was keenly aware of what needed to be done and was also fiercely critical of the Council and the Commission in this respect, for their handling of BSE policy. Swifter decision-making based on tests as opposed to draconian measures after the event would have cost considerably less and it would be too stupid for words, regarding this political policy, also on the part of the Council and the Commission, to say that from now on we will include the bill in the agricultural budget. That is impossible because we have an agreement with the Council and the Commission for the remainder of the agricultural budget, for all the necessary allocations, and that means supplementary budgets. It also means that this extra money must come from the Member States, and not be plundered from the existing agricultural budget, because – and I am addressing this comment to both the Council and the Commission – I assume you have given your word on this, regarding the agreement we reached."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples