Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2016-12-13-Speech-2-592-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20161213.29.2-592-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I would like to thank the Commissioner for being with us. I have been in this Parliament since 2009. Not so long, compared to some of you, but it seems longer sometimes and I cannot remember any point during this time when we have not been talking about at least one sector of agriculture being in crisis. Price volatility has a big impact on agriculture, and it can lend itself to exacerbating these crises. As an industry, it is very difficult to take collective action to hedge or insure against the effects of volatility. The agricultural industry is made up of a myriad of players. Unlike many other strategic industries, it does not have the structure to act together.
Traditionally, the CAP has attempted to deal with this problem by market intervention measures and, as CAP has been reformed, more emphasis and more budget has been given to direct payments to support farmers’ decoupled incomes, in some way trying to use that as a mechanism for riding volatility. But has this worked? I suggest not, as we have these continuing crises. This report lays out a number of tools that can be used, but frankly, I do not see that any of them are new. Price intervention – not new; crisis reserve – not new; risk management tools and mutual funds in pillar 2 – that is not new, and the encouragement of producer organisations is not new either. That is not because we are all very dull people who cannot think of new things; it is because we really have tried most of the options available to us. These already exist. The report calls on further development of these tools and this is welcome, but what else can we do? There is no level playing field as Member States have huge flexibility in how they apply pillar 2 support, but I do not think we should take that flexibility away. They also have huge differences in how much pillar 2 support they actually get.
In order to redress these imbalances, the answer is not necessarily more money as suggested in a number of places in this report, but perhaps a complete review and reallocation of the CAP funding based on today’s data and designed to tackle today’s problems, including price volatility. If we continue to work on a historic basis, we will be doing European agriculture a disservice, giving no incentive to move forward. My group believes that the best way to help farmers ride the rollercoaster of price volatility is to increase their efficiency and encourage their profitability."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples