Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-16-Speech-3-143"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010516.4.3-143"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The beef and veal sector has been doubly hit by disaster. ‘Mad cow disease’ was followed by foot-and-mouth disease; the fall in domestic consumption as a result of much exaggerated consumer fears is now joined by a serious decline in our exports to third countries. While millions of animals have gone up in smoke, the slaughterhouses are running idle and the stock-farmers are suffering severely, both from the loss of outlets and from the falls in prices and morale in face of this crisis that has turned their world upside down and given rise to unjustified consumer distrust.
Two types of measures can be identified in the ‘seven point plan’ presented by the Commission to deal with this crisis.
First, there are the emergency measures to manage the markets and to try and restore the balance between supply and demand. One example is the proposal to set up a special purchase scheme and not to apply the ceiling for buying into intervention. We approve of these measures, while recommending avoidance of buying into intervention for storage purposes, which would merely defer the problem to a later date. It would be better to provide food aid whenever this can be done without destabilising the beneficiary countries' markets.
Secondly, there are long-term measures to rather radically amend the COM or even to change the nature of the CAP. These measures are not all bad, but they should not be decided too hastily. Some of them, however, are quite frankly bad, such as the introduction of a system of individual rights for the special premium for male bovine animals, which would introduce a cumbersome and bureaucratic quota system, or reducing the density factor, which would probably not produce the desired extensification but would certainly reduce the income of farmers, something they certainly do not need.
We endorse most of the amendments tabled by our Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, which fortunately rectified the Commission’s regrettable tendency to amalgamate emergency measures to deal with the turmoil in the beef sector with the surreptitious reform of the COM, contrary to the Berlin agreement. We do not deny the need for reform, but this reform must not be improvised in this way or brought in on the sly."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples