Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-02-13-Speech-2-286"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2007-02-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Voluntary modulation of direct payments under the CAP (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20070213.20.2-286"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2007-02-13-Speech-2-2872
lpv:speaker	lp:Neil Parish2
lpv:spoken text	"Madam President, I think the Commissioner now finds herself between a rock and a hard place. Commissioner, you know very well you do not like the Council proposal, and you know that, under the institutional agreements, you have to put it forward. Now, we are listening to what you are saying, but we dislike the voluntary modulation intensely, so we are waiting for a new proposal to come forward. I think the best way we can deal with this is to get on with it, to reject it again and for you to come forward with a proposal very quickly, because we are all interested in rural development but we are also interested in a level playing field. On the point that Mr Allister made, this is not voluntary modulation to all those farmers that lose their payments. Perhaps we should actually offer it to them and say ‘will you voluntarily lose 20 % of your payment?’ I suspect not many of them would come forward and say ‘yes’. So this is very much compulsory modulation, but probably only done to two Member States, the United Kingdom and Portugal. Not only will it not be voluntary, but it will not even be uniformly applied across the UK, because our present Government wants to have different levels of modulation throughout the UK. So, in the area that I represent, South-West England, which borders Wales, there is a good chance that there will be a totally different modulation on one side of the border to the other. Probably English farmers will be at least 20 or 25 % worse off than their Welsh counterparts. As you quite rightly say, we need an impact assessment; we actually want that on the table. That should have been brought forward by the Council and perhaps we would have looked at this more sympathetically. Therefore, as I said, we are ready to negotiate. It is also good to see Brian Simpson here tonight, because last time we debated it there was nobody from the Labour Party here to defend the Council’s position. At least, perhaps, they are listening to us. I look forward to the new Commission proposals."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Conservative and Unionist Party (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Conference of Committee Chairs (2007-02-01--2009-07-13)3 chair; AGRI (2007-02-01--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Switzerland, Iceland and Norway and to the European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2008-04-06)3 substitute; PECH (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 member; Committee of Inquiry into the crisis of the Equitable Life Assurance Society (2006-02-01--2007-06-19)3 member; Conference of Delegation Chairs (2004-09-22--2007-02-14)3 chair; Delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand (2004-09-22--2007-02-14)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Gulf States, including Yemen (2004-09-28--2007-03-13)3 member; EPP-ED (2004-07-20--2007-02-14)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Neil Parish (PPE-DE ). –"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph