Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-05-Speech-4-115"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030605.3.4-115"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
We have voted in favour of rejecting this report because it accepts, albeit in a somewhat watered-down form, the principle of decoupling aid from production, because it does not contain any real proposal for reducing and setting a limit for CAP aid and because, in certain aspects, it makes the original proposal worse. Furthermore, what it proposes is not a partial decoupling; it is actually a total decoupling of aid for arable crops and for male bovines. It reiterates the need for obligatory national co-financing for rural development measures and makes what is known as modulation optional, which calls into question not only the principle but also the Community redistribution of savings, and this would damage Portugal.
This proposal for modulation differentiates between cuts to be made for the less-favoured regions and raises the exemption threshold by EUR 2 500, but ignores differences between producers, and mainly penalises the medium-sized rather than the largest producers.
We regret the fact that our proposals have not been adopted, specifically those concerning modulation; doubling the additional amount of aid for farmers who receive less than EUR 5 000 and exempting farmers who receive less than EUR 10 000 from cuts, which would be funded to a limit of EUR 100 000 per farmer."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples