Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-11-13-Speech-1-165"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-11-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Support for rural development by the EAFRD – Voluntary modulation of direct payments under the CAP (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20061113.20.1-165"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-11-13-Speech-1-1662
lpv:speaker	lp:Herbert Bösch2
lpv:spokenAs	member; PES (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; BUDG (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Chile Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; AGRI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 vice-chair; CONT (2004-07-23--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I have not been in this House long, but I have been here long enough to realise that solid agreement between the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development and the Committee on Budgets, such as we have here with the rejection of this draft, is not that frequent an occurrence. The opinion of the Committee on Budgets does, of course, concentrate on the issues of relevance to the budget, and there are with regard to these sufficient arguments available to justify the firm repudiation of the Commission’s proposal. The Member States can, by way of voluntary modulation, unilaterally and without consultation with Parliament, increase non-mandatory expenditure on rural development by many billions of euros, contrary to the wording and spirit of the interinstitutional agreement. Nor has the Commission adequately thought through the budgetary consequences of a voluntary transfer of this kind. It is irresponsible of the Commissioner to declare herself once more to be taking down dictation from the Council and not to have carried out an impact assessment before the proposal was adopted. What will be this proposal’s effects on the common agricultural policy? We do not know that any more than she does, and yet we are supposed to agree to it; well, we are not going to. Perhaps then exactly the same thing will happen as did with the European aid arrangements for cotton, which the ECJ declared null and void at the beginning of September this year; there, too, the considerable economic effects of the reform had been underestimated or insufficiently examined. Moreover, the proposal contradicts everything previously laid down concerning modulation, since it makes no provision for cofinancing on the part of the Member States. What our Heads of Government have come up with in order to fill the hole in the rural budget, for which they were responsible, is a cheap solution; if the Council were really interested in topping up the funds for the second pillar, they could quite simply have complied with this House’s demands in respect of the 2007-2013 Financial Perspective. What we should do with this proposal is reject it, and firmly."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph