Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-23-Speech-3-306"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-10-23"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Agricultural development for self-reliance2
dcterms:Language	"es"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20021023.7.3-306"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-10-23-Speech-3-3072
lpv:speaker	lp:Miguel Angel Martínez Martínez2
lpv:spokenAs	member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Partido Socialista Obrero Español (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Poland Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-06--2004-04-30)3 vice-president; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (2002-02-06--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Development and Cooperation (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, in this year 2002 during which the international community has met successively in Monterrey, Rome and Johannesburg, setting as a priority the challenge of leading two-thirds of humanity out of the situation of hunger, poverty and under-development that affects them, it seemed that the European Parliament was obliged to consider and adopt a position on how the European Union can support agricultural and rural development policies that contribute to the development of the countries of the South. The numerous amendments, which the rapporteur has shown flexibility in accepting, mean that we are faced with an acceptable and balanced motion for a resolution. But there are principles that we should take more account of when assessing the different policies of the European Union and also, of course, Community agricultural policies. In fact, for many years the Socialists, when judging any Community policy, have used the yardstick of what that policy offered in terms of social cohesion. To this end a particular policy was considered by us to be positive insofar as it offered added value in terms of the cohesion of our societies and negative insofar as it increased inequalities between the Europeans. Well, in the global world we are becoming involved in it is clear that solidarity cannot be an exclusively internal, or intra-European, value. And therefore, every Community policy deserves our support insofar as they contribute not only to social cohesion within our borders but also to reducing inequalities at world level. For us, the common agricultural policy was something to be welcomed, since it supported our farmers, so that they would not be left behind in a process of prosperity which was benefiting other sectors of society. But, later on, when it comes to evaluating the Community’s agricultural policies, it will not be sufficient to measure whether they contribute to maintaining or improving the situation of our farmers and breeders. Furthermore, we should consider whether subsidies to our producers also contribute to improving the situation in the Third World, or whether they actually devastate it, increasing the chasm separating it from our developed world. In this case, those policies will not be acceptable and, however difficult the exercise will be, others will have to be found which are good, fair and provide a balance for the North, while being good and fair for the South, and providing a balance in terms of relations between the South and the North. From this viewpoint we will vote in favour of the Resolution proposed by the Committee on Development and Cooperation as a conclusion to the report presented by Mr Khanbhai."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph