Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-06-Speech-3-144"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20021106.9.3-144"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, when Mr Fischler, the Commissioner for agriculture, tried to sell his reform proposals to professional associations and politicians in Luxembourg in September, he showed a great deal of understanding for the Grand Duchy's situation, which he classed as a special case, and stated, amongst other things, that if such special situations were to be reflected in the policy, which he wished to see, then it would be necessary to draw up tailor-made plans for Luxembourg, and his proposals made this perfectly feasible. Commissioner Fischler also assured Luxembourg on that occasion that he considered we had implemented the concept of rural development in an exemplary fashion, and in this respect he even said that nowhere else had EU resources been better invested. That is all very well and good. Of course, once the legislative proposals reflecting these ideas for reform are on the table, we will find out just how much we can rely on those statements. In Luxembourg, 70% of farms would be affected by the modulation proposed, that is to say by the progressive reduction in compensation payments by one-fifth, in addition to the expected drop in income because of cuts in producer prices and because of the mandatory 10% ‘environmental set-aside’. This is unacceptable and would lead to the socially and environmentally unacceptable demise of family farms. Proposals that would achieve eastward enlargement by wiping out farmers belong in one place – the rubbish bin. I am able to vote for the compromise resolution that Joseph Daul has invested so much time and understanding in, even if it is with a heavy heart, Joseph! The summit on 25 October agreed, thank goodness, that the common agricultural policy agreed in 2000 in Berlin up to 2006 would not be undermined by any radical changes before then. So we and the Commission have time to reflect. In any case, less favoured regions should be exempt both from the modulation and also from mandatory environmental set-aside. In conclusion, I would like to …"@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph