Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-02-10-Speech-1-113"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030210.9.1-113"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Commissioner, the subject of this evening’s debate is certainly the basis for a tapestry of some of the major themes of world and European politics. For example, the first theme is without a doubt that world agricultural trade and the talks which are outlining and will define the aspects and modalities thereof represent the point of confrontation between market liberalisation and governments’ desires to pursue protectionist agricultural policies which go beyond production itself and affect what are known as non-commercial aspects too, such as environmental protection, food safety, the safeguarding and promotion of quality and the preservation of rural areas.
We have listened to you carefully this evening, Commissioner, and it is clear from what you have said that the European Union has expressed a strong desire to negotiate an agreement for the further liberalisation of the trade in agricultural products. In our opinion, however, the agreement must be well balanced and must be an agreement which benefits everybody. It would appear that this is also the position which Commissioner Fischler has upheld on a number of occasions with regard to Community agricultural policies. Not more than a week ago, in the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, he pointed out that the rules which emerge from the new rounds of talks next autumn must be fair and apply equally to all. Thus, the idea which emerges of cutting export subsidies is an idea which is certainly attractive and which I certainly support, but only on condition that other subsidies causing the distortion of the international trade market are also regulated.
Then there is another major political theme which is connected with the subject of this evening’s debate. We need an overall perspective on the matter. The current economic situation, whose development will interact with and be affected by the future development of the agricultural sector, cannot be viewed purely in terms of international trade, for international trade is directly dependent upon the proposal to reform the common agricultural policy. What was to be a mid-term assessment review has become a veritable transformation of European agriculture. The Community policy guidelines in this sector, in addition to seeing the market as a means of economic development, are intended in Europe to ensure consumer protection – consider the recent creation of the European Food Safety Authority. This principle of food safety has been expressed and accepted at WTO level too, but it has only been accepted as an ideal. Much progress will be needed before quality equal to that of our own produce is guaranteed. The production costs sustained by the European agricultural economy differ substantially from those sustained by the developing countries, for the standards of quality, safety and health and hygiene are different. It is as desirable that clear international rules for the protection of agrifoods should be established at the forthcoming negotiating rounds as it is for the
to be duly valued and respected in the protection of recognised typical European products.
European farms operating in a globalised context must invest in the quality of their produce to acquire specific market shares which are sensitive to new consumer demands. Production standards are now oriented towards ensuring the traceability of production from stable to table. In this sense, the possibility of marketing European agrifoods produce at world level must go hand in hand with the economic development of the less wealthy countries, with mutual respect for local agrifoods production in a global context of balanced growth regulated by both the economy and well-defined rules, but, above all, by the clear need for growth which benefits all to the detriment of none.
Therefore, the basic issue before us now is that the proposal you have outlined to us this evening, Commissioner, contains a principle. We need a common agricultural policy which preserves the conventions we are used to. Your speech and the documents available to us uphold a principle which we find it very hard to accept, to the effect that the proposal for mid-term review, which provides
for decoupling and the non-fulfilment of
blue box commitments, should take precedence over the WTO negotiating modalities, which provide for an endeavour to preserve the blue box aid instigated with the McSharry reform. There is therefore a need to redefine the negotiating modalities, removing the Blue Box chapter altogether and thus irretrievably eliminating the possibility of safeguarding direct payments in a multilateral context. If this should happen, we believe that it would be the beginning of the liberalisation of the European agricultural sector, which is essential not just for the sector as such but for the whole of the European economy as well."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples