natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Af den grund bestemtes det, at optællingen af det fornødne anul medlemmer skal foregå fysisk, på den ganske vist arkaiske men meget effektive måde, De lige nævnte.
For this reason, it was decided that the counting must be done physically in the perhaps oldfashioned but particularly effective way in which you have just done it.
Woltjer. — (NL) Hr. formand, jeg håber at jeg nu får chancen til at begynde forfra; på denne- måde kan man dårligt nok komme til orde her i salen, og hvis vi skal omgås hinanden på den vis, synes jeg, det er en beklagelig affære, det vil jeg i alt fald gerne sige.
Mr Woltjer. — (NL) Mr President, I hope this means that I can start afresh, since it is barely possible to speak in this chamber with things like this happening, and if this is the way we have to conduct our dealings with each other I think this is a very sad state of affairs. I should like to make at least that point clear.
Man kommer rendende ind i salen for at stemme for en afslutning på demokratiet, men er ikke rede til at tie stille, når en anden har ordet.
People may well come rushing in to vote for an end to democracy, but they are not prepared to keep quiet while someone else is talking in this chamber.
Det er at træde demokratiet under fode, og jeg vil gerne give klart udtryk for min forargelse.
This is trampling on democracy and something which I find disgraceful.
Israël. — (FR) Hr. formand, man'kunne meget nemt sabotere beslutningsdygtigheden ved at undlade at trykke på knappen, men hvis man er til stede, er det svært at sige det modsatte.
Mr Israël. — (FR) Mr President, it would be very easy to sabotage the quorum by not pressing the but ton, but if someone is here it is difficult to say the opposite.
Derfor, hr. formand, tillader jeg mig, uden at ville misbruge Deres tid eller Deres tålmodighed, at foreslå, at vi tæller de tilstedeværende medlemmer ved, at medlemmerne rejser sig.
Consequently, Mr President, and with no desire to waste your time or to try your patience, may I suggest that the Members be counted using the standing-and-sitting method?
Måske ville det ligeledes være klogt, om De anmodede tjenestemændene om venligst at forlade salen.
Mx Gautier. — (DE) According to our Rules of Pro cedure, Mr President, the matter is over once the count has been made.
Hr. formand, jeg begyndte for lidt siden med at udtale min forbavselse over det skete.
Mr President, I had started to explain that I was amazed at what has just happened.
Hvad var meningen?
What was the ori ginal intention?
Landbrugsudvalgets formand, der har uget initiativet til udarbejdelsen af den foreliggende betænkning, sagde i sin to minutters indledende ule, at meningen med forhandlingen var at gøre det klart for Kommissionen, hvilke følelser, der rører sig i Parlamentet med hensyn til dette spørgsmål, og hvilke
The chairman of the Committee on Agriculture responsible for the initiative of drawing up this report just explained in his two-minute speech prior to the debate, that his intention was to inform the Commission, before it decided on its price proposals, of this Parliament's thoughts on the subject and what arguments and points they felt to be of relevance.
Woltjer dermed deres indtægter.
Woltjer farmers' prices down and hence threatens their incomes.
Da landbrugeren forventer, at den kommende pris vil nå op på et rimeligt niveau, vil han, for at redde livet, i første omgang producere mere for derved at sikre sin indkomst og eksistens.
Since the farmer now expects future prices as they have been fixed to come up to the mark again, he will in the meantime, in order to survive, attempt to protect his income and his existence by increasing his production.
Det fremgår selvfølgelig også af betænkningen.
In brief, the report is stating the obvious on this point.
Det kan jo ikke nægtes, at produktionen stiger, når priserne forhøjes, m.a.o. mængden, man er rede til at producere for denne pris, stiger.
Obviously, it cannot be denied that when prices increase production also increases or in other words, the amount people are prepared to produce for that price increases.
Det er en helt elementær økonomisk lov.
This is a basic law of economics which we all learn right at the beginning in school.
På den anden side er det lige- så uomtvisteligt, at landbrugernes indtægter kommer i fare, hvis priserne falder. Nogle landbrugere vil komme ud for en drastisk sanering, små land brugere vil være nødt til at forlade landbruget, og beskæftigelsen i landbruget kommer i fare.
On the other hand, there is also a law of Medes and Persians to the effect that if prices are allowed to fall, agricul tural incomes are jeopardized, an unofficial restructuring process gets underway — at least in the case of certain farmers — smaller farmers are obliged to leave agriculture and employment in the agricultural sector is threatened.
Hr. formand, med hensyn til medansvarsafgiften er den generelle tendens i betænkningen tydelig. Men så svigter betænkningen.
As regards the general aims of the coresponsibility levy, the report is quite clear.
Den vil ændre den generelle medansvarsafgift til et indkomstinstrument til at hjælpe de små landbrugere gennem en fritagelse m.h.t. de første 60 000 kg leveret mælk.
However, the shortcoming in this report is that it advocates turning the general coresponsibility levy into an incomes instrument aimed at helping the smaller producers by means of exemption for the first 60 000 1 milk.
Den generelle medansvarsafgift må ombygges til et instrument, der gør produktionen lidt mere jordnær ved at foreslå en afgift, der lægger sanktioner på en produktion over 15 000 kg mælk pr. hektar areal med foderafgrøder.
It is proposed to turn the general coresponsibility levy into an instrument whereby production will go back to depending to a greater extent on factors connected with the land itself by the introduction of a levy designed to discourage production of over 15 000 1 per hectare.
Man går ikke nærmere ind på instrumentets oprindelige formål, som var at begrænse overskudsproduktionen. Hér kommer betænkningen til kort.
However, the original aim of this instrument, i.e. coping with the problem of surplus production, is not dealt with and this is a shortcoming in this report.
Landbrugs udvalget har ikke nogen mening derom.
The Committee on Agriculture has no opinions on this subject.
På det punkt skal der træffes en række valg, og dér er landbrugs udvalget kommet til kort.
However, choices must be made in this field too and the Committee on Agriculture would certainly appear to be at a loss in this respect.
Jeg mener, at Parlamentet på det område klart må udule sig til fordel for ændringer, fordi betænkningen, jeg genuger det, på det punkt ikke når til konklusioner, men kommer til kort.
I think therefore, that we as Parliament should make our amendments very clear on this point particularly as, I repeat, the report fails to reach any conclusions on this question.
Der er to muligheder for at klare overskudspn > duktionen. Der er den mulighed, Kommissionen nu har foreslået, nemlig en nedsættelse af interventionspriserne. I den forbindelse vil jeg gerne spørge Kommissionen, hvorfor den nu kommer med et forslag om nedsættelse af interventionspriserne, medens den sidste år accepterede en enorm forhøjelse af disse. Vidste Kommissionen ikke, at en sådan pris forhøjelse ville resultere i en tilsvarende forøgelse af overskudsproduktionen? Det er jo en normal økonomisk lov. Hvad det angår må jeg sige, at Kommissionens politik fra tid til anden er inkonsekvent. Der er en anden mulighed.
This is the criticism I myself would make of this agricultural policy and we are evading the issue if we refuse to discuss this point with each other, since it is central to my view of this question that the instruments currently available to the Commission, i.e. mar keting and price policy, are no longer equal to the two tasks they are intended to perform.
Den er indeholdt i en beslutning af Rådet, der blev uget, da hr. Gundelach var kommissionsmedlem, og som gik ud på at pålægge merproduktionen en afgift, således at land mænd, der producerer mere, selv bærer risikoen og må acceptere, at de får en lavere pris.
Incomes are under pressure, the market balance is out of joint, there are surpluses and the budget is coming under pressure. One may well speak of new additional resources, but this is no way of solving the problem.
Det er netop den kritik af landbrugspolitikken, jeg gerne vil fremhæve, og vi ignorerer den, hvis vi ikke sammen deluger i drøftelserne.
There are two possibilities for dealing with overproduction.
Mit udgangspunkt er nemlig, at de nuværende politiske foransultninger, som Kommissionen råder over, dvs. markeds- og pris politikken, ikke mere kan tilgodese begge målsætninger.
On the one hand, there is the option proposed by the Commission, i.e. to reduce the intervention prices, and I should like to ask the Commission in this connection why it has now come up with a proposal to reduce intervention prices after accepting the enormous increase in intervention prices a year ago.
Indtægterne kommer under pres, markedsbalancen forvrides, der opstår overskud, budgettet geråder under pres, og så kan man godt ule om supplerende midler, meri det løser ikke problemet.
Was the Commission unaware that if a price increase of this kind was introduced we could also expect a similar increase in surplus production? This, after all, is a basic principle of economics and I must say, in this connection, that the Commission's policy is frequently inconsistent.
Vi har derfor stillet ændringsforslag, der indeholder den nye løsning, at der ved siden af prisinstrument et også kommer et instrument til kontrol med produktionen, vel og mærke på en sådan måde, at den drastiske sanering ophører, og der igen kommer bedre tider for landbrugeren og hans kone.
We have, therefore, tabled amendments proposing a new solution involving a further instrument in addition to the existing price instrument, the function of which will be to control the volume of production in such a way that this unofficial restructuring will be halted and the farmers and their wives can look forward to a brighter future.
Hr. formand, jeg tror, at jeg må udtrykke mig ganske klart: Min gruppe har udtalt sig meget tydeligt med hensyn til Eyraud-betænkningen.
There is also another possibility, i.e. to introduce a levy on production over a certain limit, as decided in a Council decision taken some time ago under Commissioner Gundelach.
Budgettet drøftedes for Cn måned siden, og Parlamentet udulte ved forhandlingen, at det ikke ønsker, at landbrugsbudgettet forøges mere end den gennemsnidige forøgelse af EØFs generelle udgifter.
In this way, farmers who produce more would have to take the consequences themselves and would therefore be prepared to accept lower prices.
(Bifald) rir. formand, jeg vil gerne gå lidt nærmere ind på betænkningen af Eyraud. Betænkningen omhandler medansvarsafgiften.
Mr President, I would like to go even more deeply into the Eyraud report which is basically concerned with the coresponsibility levy.
Det hævdes i betænkningen, at medansvarsafgiften, som vi kender den nu, ikke har svaret til forventningerne. Vi må indrømme, at det, overfladisk set, er sandt; vi har jo voksende overskud, og det er tydeligt, at medansvarsafgiften, der har eksisteret i mange år, absolut ikke har kunnet bremse overskudsstigningen.
This levy in its current form has not, according to the report, come up to expectations and we must admit that, on a superficial analysis, this is indeed the conclusion which must be drawn, since we have increasing surpluses, which demonstrate that the entire system of coresponsibility levies, which has already existed for many years now, has failed to remedy this problem.
Den nuværende medansvarsafgift — det må understreges på det kraftigste — er heller ikke mere end et prisinstrument, et negativt prisinstrument, der trykker landbrugernes priser og
Nor is the co-responsibility levy in its present form — and this must be made quite clear — anything more than a price instrument, i.e. a negative price instrument which keeps the
Formanden. — (GR) Før hr. Clinton får ordet, vil jeg gerne besvare det spørgsmål, som hr. Provan lige har stillet.
Mr President, I think I must make my meaning very clear.
Han vil gerne vide, hvad der indtil videre er sket, og hvad der videre skal ske.
My group has spoken in unambiguous terms on the Eyraud report.
Hr. Israël anmodede om, at forhandlingerne blev afsluttet uden, at de sidste tretten talere fik ordet. Hr. van der Vring anmodede om, at man konsuterede, om Parlamentet
The budget was discussed a month ago and during the budget debate it was stated explicitly that we as Parliament were not in favour of the agricultural budget increasing to a greater extent than the average increase in general EEC expenditure.
Formanden stigning, og deres indtægter faldt med 50 % på to år.
Farmers in Ireland, where 50% of the people depend for their livelihood on agriculture, got a price increase for the past three years that was less than half our inflation rate, and their incomes dropped by 50% in two years.
Uanset hvem det var, der var ansvarlig for den stigende inflation, var det i hvert fald ikke de irske landbrugere.
Whoever was responsible for high rates of inflation, it certainly was not Irish farmers.
Der er overhovedet ingen grund til at ule om konvergens, hvis vi fortsætter med at se bort fra disse kendsgerninger i vor prisfastsættelsesordninger.
There is no point whatever in talking about convergence if we continue to ignore these facts in our price fixing arrangements.
Vi kan heller ikke tillade os at se bort fra udgifterne til de nødvendige investeringer til udvik ling af regioner i Fællesskabet, hvor bankrenterne normalt er dobbelt så høje som Fællesskabets gennemsnit.
Neither can we afford to ignore the cost of necessary investment in developing regions of the Community where bank interest rates are usually twice the Community average.
I følge forretninsordnen kunne vi ikke sætte Israel-betækningen under afstemning, men måtte fortsætte forhandlingen under ét.
According to the Rules of Procedure, we were obliged not to put the Israel motion to the vote, and to continue the joint debate.
Forhandlingen skal fortsætte indtil klokken 18.00. Derfor vil afstemningen klokken 18.00 kun vedrøre de betækninger, som allerede er færdigbehandlet.
The debate is bound to go on until 6 p.m.
Efter afstemningen vil forhandlingen under ét om Eyraud- og Mochel-betækningerne fortsætte, og vi vil derefter gå over til at drøfte Ruffolo betænkningen, hvis oprindelig ordfører, som bekendt har trukket sig tilbage.
After the voting the joint debate on the Eyraud and Mouchel reports will be continued, and we shall then go on to discuss Mr Ruffolo's report, for which the original rapporteur, as you know, has resigned.
Den drejer sig også om andre ting, f.eks. monetære udligningsbeløb, fællesskabspræferencer, en politik vedrørende fedtstoffer, som resulterer i en ulige behandling af landbrugere i forskellige dele af Fællesskabet.
It is also about other things which result in unequal treatment for farmers in different parts of the Community, such as MCAs, Community preference, a policy on oils and fats and insistence also that we cannot continue a policy of taxing Community products with co-responsibility levies while allowing the same or substitute products to enter the Community free of similar taxes.
I betænkningen understreges det også, at vi ikke fortsat kan føre en politik, hvor vi beskatter Fællesskabets produkter med medansvarsafgiften, samtidig med, at vi tillader tilsvarende produkter eller ersutningsprodukter at komme ind i Fællesskabet uden lignende afgifter.
It draws attention to the great need for a vigorous export marketing policy supported by adequate refunds and without restriction to any market, including Russia, which I believe it would be to the Community's advantage to develop to the fullest possible extent.
I betænkningen gøres der også opmærksom på det store behov for en effektiv markedsføringspolitik for eksportvarer, som støttes af rimelige tilbagebetalinger, og som ikke opererer med restriktioner for noget marked overhovedet, herunder Sovjetunionen, og jeg mener, at det ville være til Fællesskabets fordel at arbejde videre med denne politik i videst muligt omfang.
Mr Clinton. — Mr President, before starting to make my contribution to this debate, I should like to thank Mr David Curry for the trouble he has taken today to explain his rather unusual speech at the end of the Wettig report the other day which some of us felt was really meant to influence the vote on the Mouchel report. I was the person who objected at that time and I feel very happy about his explanation today.
Hr. formand, jeg, ligesom de tidligere talere i denne forhandling, mener, at det er rigtigt, at Parlamentet udtrykker sin mening om de overvejelser, som Kommissionen har gjort sig ved udarbejdelsen af forslagene til de årlige prisfastsættelser. Som vi ved, rådfører Kommissionen sig med andre organer, så hvorfor ikke også med dette Parlamentet?
Mr President, I, like previous speakers in this debate, feel that it is right that Parliament should express its opinion on the considerations which guide the Commission in the formulation of its annual price proposals.
Som vi også ved, var der sidste år en masse ting, som ikke blev til noget, og forhåbentligt vil det aldrig genüge sig.
As we know too, last year a number of things were allowed to go wrong, which is something we hope will never be repeated again.
Hvis vi havde en sådan politik, ville vi ikke have nogen problemer med at komme af med Fællesskabets overskudslagre.
If we have such a policy we will have no problems in disposing of stocks in excess of Community require ments.
Vi kan ikke forsat se bort fra den kendsgerning, at landbrugerne får priser, som kun udgør 30 % af det beløb, som forbrugeren må beale.
We cannot continue to ignore the fact that farmers get prices which represent only 30% of what the consumer has to pay.
I ledet mellem landmanden og forbrugeren er der et kolossalt stort anul mennesker, som er beskæftiget med forarbejding og distribution af disse produkter.
In between an enormous number of people are employed in the processing and distribution of these products.
Det er nogle af de vigtige overvejelser, som ordføreren med rette understreger i denne betænkning, som jeg håber, Parlamentet vil tilslutte sig fuldt ud.
These are some of the important considerations that the rapporteur rightly emphasizes in this report to which I hope this House will give its full support.
Jeg har ikke sagt noget som helst om Eyraud-betænk-ningen, som jeg også betragter som en yderst vigtig betænkning, men den er blevet kommenteret rimeligt godt af foregående uler.
Now I have said nothing whatever about the Eyraud report which I consider is also an extremely important report, but which has been fairly well dealt with by previous speakers.
Jeg ville blot sige, at jeg også fuldt ud kan tilslutte mig den.
I want simply to say that it has my full support also.
Kirk. — Hr. formand, når vi ser på de to foreliggende betænkninger, og når vi hører på debatten her, må man sige, at Parlamentet ligesom Kommissionen kører i den gamle bureaukratiske rille. Der er ingen nye tanker, vi forsøger sudig at bygge videre på en landbrugspolitik, som på mange områder er blevet forfejlet, fordi alt for mange forkerte elementer er kommet ind i denne politik.
The Commission again unwisely withheld making its proposals until well' after the normal date and then one Member State was allowed to delay giving its consent to a price package agreed by all ten Members, for a reason not even remotely related to farm prices.
Priserne kunne og burde have været fastsat med tilbagevirkende kraft fra begyndelsen af produktionsrådet.
This quite unnecessary failure to fix prices by 1 April resulted in a very substantial loss of income for Community farmers.
Dette er noget, vi bør skamme o^ over, og noget vi bør rette op på i det kommende år.
In the case of the weakest Member State, Ireland, this loss was estimated at 20 to 25 million Irish pounds.
Landbrugere i Irland, hvor 50 % af befolkningen lever af landbrug, fik en prisstigning for de sidste tre år, som var mindre end halvdelen af vor inflations-
Mr Kirk. — (DA) Mr President, looking at the two reports before us and listening to the debates, it is clear that both Parliament and the Commission still have not got out of the old bureaucratic rut. There are
Fællesskabet, og det vil altså igen være med til at løse en del af de problemer, vi har med overskudsproduktionen. tionen.
In this way we could, I think, enable certain market forces to play a part in our milk policy and ensure that the producers become more interested in marketing their products in accordance with the consumers' wishes, since we should attend to the interests of the consumers as well as to those of the producers.
Dalsager, om det er sket.
I should like to ask Mr Dalsager whether this has in fact happened.
Er det ikke en kendsgerning, at produktionen af mælk er steget år for år, i alle de år vi har haft medansvarsafgiften, også i 1982?
Is it not a fact that ever since the coresponsibility levy was introduced, milk production has increased year after year, including 1982?
Jeg tror, Kommissionen vil svare bekræftende herpå.
The Commission's answer will, I think, be 'yes'.
Vi er altså i en situation, hvor hr. Eyraud foreslår, at man skal indføre flere forskellige regler vedrørende medansvarsafgiften.
Thus, we are in a situation where Mr Eyraud proposes introducing a number of different rules regarding the coresponsibility levy.
Selv om man må erkende, at den ikke har løst de problemer, man forsøgte at løse, da man gennemførte den, vil man nu yderligere prøve på via medansvarsafgiften at gennemføre en form for sociale landbrugspolitiske foranstaltninger.
Even if we must admit that it has failed to solve the problems it was intended to solve, people nevertheless now want to go on trying to carry out some sort of social and agricultural policy measures with the aid of the coresponsibility levy.
Jeg vil derfor meget anbefale mine ærede kolleger, at de ser på de ændringsforslag og de tanker, de ligger bag ændringsforslagene til Eyraud-betænkningen, og at de vil stemme for dem.
I would, therefore, strongly urge my colleagues in this House to give some consideration to the amendments to the Eyraud Report and the ideas underlying them, and to vote in favour of these amendments.
For jeg tror, tiden nu er inde til, at vi får ændret den politik, som bevisligt har været fejlagtig i de sidste mange år, at vi får fjernet medansvarsafgiften, og at vi simpelt hen sikrer, at markedskræfterne og forbrugernes interesse via udbud og efterspørgsel kommer til at virke inden for mælkeproduktionen i Fællesskabet.
Since I think it is high time we revised the policy, which has been demonstrably inappropriate for many years now, that we abolish the coresponsibility levy and that we simply ensure that market forces and the consumers' interests come through the principles of supply and demand, to influence milk production in the Community. munity.
Jeg vil gerne advare Parlamentet herimod, for jeg tror, at vi til sidst vil komme til at stå med en land brugspolitik inden for mælkeområdet som det vil være fuldstændig umuligt at få forbrugerne, og pro ducenterne til at forstå, og som til sidst kun nogle bureaukrater, måske i Europa-Parlamentet, men i hvert fald i Kommissionen forstår hensigten med. Jeg tror, det er en ulykke for os, hvis det får lov til at udvikle sig på den måde.
I should like to warn Parliament against this idea, since we will finally end up, I think, with an agricul tural policy within the dairy sector which is totally incomprehensible to the consumers and the producers and the point of which understood only by a handful of bureaucrats in the Commission and perhaps in the European Parliament. It would be a bad thing for us, I think, if things were allowed to take this course.