Mr President, this proposal concerns fruits in shells or pods: that is, nuts and locust beans. We are therefore dealing with walnuts, hazelnuts, almonds, pistachios and chestnuts. These products are generally found alongside other fruits on the table and in supermarkets. However, when it comes to decision making, they are not treated fairly and reasonably in relation to other fruits and vegetables. Through this proposal, the European Parliament is being consistent with itself. On two previous occasions, 16 June 2000 and 26 October 2000, Parliament already came out in favour of maintaining support and proposing an extension until the introduction of a new aid system. On both these occasions the vote was carried by unanimity. Furthermore, in my view, Mr President, this aid is justified because it benefits the agricultural workers who need it as it helps to compensate for a reduction in their income. I do believe that granting over-generous aid in favourable market situations should be avoided. Cereals are a case in point. Both the Commission and the Court of Auditors have stressed that undue compensation was awarded. In fact, in the period between 1993 and 1997, the Commission estimates that excess compensation worth EUR 8 500 million was granted to the cereal sector. The Court of Auditors puts the figure for excess compensation awarded at EUR 13 100 million. I am not in favour of granting aid as if it were a lottery. The aid we are proposing now really is necessary. In addition, this proposal is in line with the provisions in Agenda 2000. When the latter was adopted Commissioner Fischler himself stated repeatedly that the intention was to maintain all aid. The Council agreed with the European Parliament’s position. Hence, on 17 July 2000, it invited the Commission to extend the aid. The Commission’s proposal is on the right lines, because it redresses the earlier error of attempting to cut off aid. It is right to do so. However, that alone is not enough to ensure a future for the sector. It does not even cover the cost of projects under way this year. The budget has to be ready in June, and programmes relating to plantations in the first part of this year would not be included. There is an obvious shortage of these products within the European Union. Walnuts are imported from the United States. I have to tell you, Commissioner, that last Christmas, El Corte Inglés, a major department store in my country, strongly promoted Californian walnuts, but walnuts from Extremadura and other European walnuts were sidelined. We import products of this nature to the detriment of the agricultural workers I am speaking for. Commissioner, you ought to be taking note of what I am saying because this constitutes a precedent. We are in favour of opening up markets and coming to multilateral agreements and to bilateral agreements, with Turkey for instance. We are happy to show solidarity. Nevertheless, the Commission cannot condone European agriculture abandoning these crops as a result of commercial agreements which have caused the collapse of such an important sector. Will the Commission allow European aid to the agricultural sector to be cut off? And does this mean that European agriculture will no longer receive preferential treatment? Mr President, I speak for a sector which diversifies agriculture and which truly has great potential for economic development. Mr Fischler is not well acquainted with the Mediterranean area. He ought however to make it his business to become acquainted with the benefits of this sector. It is important for the processing industry, has a most favourable impact on the environment and arrests desertification. Commissioner, I call on you to amend your position and come into line with the spirit of the Council’s agreement. (The President cut the speaker off)

Political group: PSE