Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-13-Speech-2-242"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010313.16.2-242"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I am sorry that we always have a bit of a delay, but translations take a little longer than speakers’ speeches. Let me say the following in answer to the questions from Mr Varela Suanzes-Carpegna: first of all, we are already spending all available funds on the points in our proposal. In the 2001 budget we have no additional funds available for use as direct aid to farmers, for example. This is also quite a different situation to the first BSE crisis, because at the time of the first crisis the old agricultural guidelines were still in force, and they were far more liberal. Expenditure is now governed by the considerably tighter limits that were adopted in Berlin and reaffirmed at the summit in Nice. In other words, the Commission is not at liberty to exceed the prescribed limit.
As far as the Objective 1 areas are concerned, operational support is not an option here; the most that can be done is to provide support in connection with investments, agri-environmental schemes and suchlike. For that reason, I cannot see any possibility of paying special income-support grants to farmers from Objective 1 resources.
Thirdly, I should like to point out that, in view of these circumstances, one option does, of course, remain available, but only within the framework of the rules on state aid. Within that framework, national support may be provided by the Member States. However, the provision of such support is subject to the proviso that aid awards must be notified and must not exceed the limits laid down in the rules governing state aid."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples