Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-03-10-Speech-4-014"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050310.3.4-014"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, nobody in this Parliament questions the need for reform in the sugar sector. You explained the reasons why it is necessary very well in your speech.
What we do question, however, is the proposal presented by the Commission and, from my point of view, there are two fundamental reasons for this: firstly, because it creates an unbalanced distribution of reductions within the European Union, placing the burden on the least-favoured regions; and, secondly, because it does not guarantee that the income of producers of beet will be maintained. In fact, in my country, Spain, its application would mean, in practice, the disappearance of much of the 118 000 hectares of crops in Castilla y León, in Andalucía and in Castilla-La Mancha, and would affect 23 000 producers.
The problem, once again, Commissioner, is that the Commission is presenting proposals despite the fact that the impact study has not taken account either of the effects of these reductions in prices and quotas on the incomes of family farms, or of the loss of jobs in the industry and its affect on the rural life of the States in question.
Commissioner, we believe that the reduction in prices should be smaller and more gradual, and should remain coupled to a significant proportion of the aid in order not to unravel the economic and social fabric of the producing areas, which, in my country, are located in the least prosperous regions. Furthermore, the reduction in quotas should begin with surplus quantities and those intended for export, which do most damage to the international market in this product.
We are completely against - and I would put it that strongly – the transfer of quotas between Member States. We believe that this method would produce, or could produce, a relocation of jobs and economic activity within the European Union, which would create the greatest imbalance in the least competitive States, and would create a dangerous precedent within the CAP.
With regard to the external element of the proposal, the ‘Everything but Arms’ (EBA) initiative should include quantitative instruments for controlling imports similar to those that already exist for ACP countries. That is what the representatives of the ACP countries and of the LDCs are asking for, and this is fully reflected in our resolution.
I would like to end, Commissioner, by asking you to take account of something that both Mr Daul and Mr Fruteau, my two fellow rapporteurs for this proposal, have said: this resolution has been approved with a broad consensus in the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development; so please present suitable legislative proposals that reflect the observations made in it."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples