Rapporti verbatim tad-dibattiti

L-Erbgħa, 25 ta' Novembru 2009 - Strasburgu

18. Samit mondjali tal-FAO dwar is-sikurezza tal-ikel - Eradikazzjoni tal-ġuħ fid-dinja (dibattitu)

  Πρόεδρος. - Το επόμενο σημείο το οποίο θα εξετασθεί είναι η δήλωση της Επιτροπής σχετικά με την Παγκόσμια Διάσκεψη του FAO για την επισιτιστική ασφάλεια - Η εξάλειψη της πείνας από τη Γη.

  Karel De Gucht, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, the World Food Summit last week in Rome is the latest in a series of high-level events organised this year where food security and agriculture have featured prominently: in January in Madrid, in July in L’Aquila, in September in New York and Pittsburgh, as well as at the meeting of the Committee on World Food Security last month.

The underlying premise of all these events has been the realisation that we are failing in the fight against world hunger. Over one billion people in the world presently do not meet their daily basic nutritional needs, and the situation is threatening to get worse in many developing countries, owing also to the effects of climate change, which is posing additional challenges to these countries’ capacity to become food secure.

The World Summit on Food Security represented an opportunity to sustain the political momentum that has been building up in past months. Once more, world food security has been in the spotlight. However, the time for discussion is over; now it is time to deliver.

For the European Commission, the summit was a useful event for three reasons. First, there was the pledge to renew our efforts to achieve the first Millennium Development Goal of halving hunger by 2015. In my view that target is still valid, and we should strive to reach it – particularly in those countries and regions where progress towards its achievement has been very limited, for example in Africa.

Second, the promise to improve international coordination and the governance of food security through a reformed Committee on World Food Security, which would become a central component of the global partnership for agriculture, food security and nutrition. The European Commission has actively encouraged this reform and is assisting in providing core funding for it. This is, in my view, a very important step, which will pave the way for a global governance system of food security based on sound scientific advice but one also more open to key actors in the public and private sector and non-governmental organisations. These actors are crucial to making the new system more effective than the current one.

Third, the promise to reverse the downward trend in domestic and international funding for agriculture, food security and rural development. If we want to meet the first Millennium Development Goal of halving hunger by 2015, the commitments taken to increase ODA must be fulfilled – in particular by those countries which have committed themselves to reaching the target of 0.7% of gross national income.

Some have criticised the final declaration for not setting more precise official development assistance targets for agriculture and food security, but we must recall that significant financial pledges had already been made at the G8 Summit in L’Aquila. The priority now is to honour them. With strong support from the European Parliament, the Commission has successfully mobilised the EUR 1 billion food facility, of which 85% is already committed for the period 2009-2011. However, we need more and sustained assistance over time. In order to be accountable for our pledges we need a global pecking system of commitments, but we also have to develop monitoring mechanisms, specific indicators and benchmarks which can be used to report on the outcomes and impacts of investments. However – and let me say this loud and clear – even the most substantial commitment by donors will be worthless if governments in developing countries fail to translate their own commitments into better agricultural policies, strategies and investments.

In discussing food security, we should also be careful about terminology, and distinguish food security from food sovereignty and food self-sufficiency. Efforts to achieve production around the world are not enough in their own right. What counts is that people should have sustained access to food, which is basically a poverty question. Food trade – regional as well as global – plays an important part in enhancing access to food by providing farmers with an income and by allowing consumers access to cheaper food. Self-sufficiency in food or autarchy could be a very costly strategy and will not be necessary when markets and trade work well.

Therefore, concluding the Doha Round with a balanced and comprehensive outcome would be a major step ahead. We should also not forget that global food security is a very complex and multifaceted problem which requires a holistic approach. In this area the European Union has made enormous progress in the past decade and progress will continue to be ensured through the Policy Coherence for Development (PCD) process. The various reforms of the EU common agricultural policy have strongly reduced export refunds and the vast majority of support for farmers in the EU is recognised as being ‘non-trade distorting’ by the WTO. Moreover with the Everything But Arms arrangement, market access to the EU is free for the least developed countries, and the provisions of the economic partnership agreements (EPAs) show an understanding of problems faced by many of the ACP countries in guaranteeing food security to their citizens. We have therefore have come a very long way in the EU, in enhancing policy coherence for development and thereby creating improved food security conditions for developing countries. Other countries and regions should do the same.

To conclude, the FAO Summit has underscored that if we want to keep to our objective of halving hunger by 2015, then we should step up ODA and increase ODA and private investments in agriculture and we should improve global governance of the agricultural sector.

  Albert Deß, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Herr Kommissionsvertreter! Für uns im Europaparlament ist es wichtig, dass wir uns mit dem Thema „Hunger in der Welt“ befassen. Wir können es nicht kommentarlos hinnehmen, dass die Zahl der Menschen, die Hunger leiden – darunter viele Kinder –, zunimmt.

Ich bin vor 20 Jahren zum ersten Mal in ein Parlament gewählt worden, und ich kann mich noch gut erinnern, dass damals internationale Organisationen wie Weltbank, FAO, UNO und auch WTO Absichtserklärungen abgegeben haben, dass in den nächsten 20 Jahren der Hunger in der Welt halbiert werden soll. Was ist passiert? Der Hunger ist nicht halbiert worden, der Hunger hat zugenommen. 1 Mrd. Menschen leiden täglich Hunger! Das Gegenteil von dem, was an Absichtserklärungen verkündet wird, ist eingetreten.

Die Ursachen dafür sind sehr unterschiedlich. Es gibt Länder, wo unfähige Regierungen – wie in Zimbabwe – aus der Kornkammer Afrikas ein Hungergebiet gemacht haben. Ein kommunistischer Herrscher hat es dort fertiggebracht, dass in diesem reichen Land Menschen Hunger leiden müssen, und wir schweigen dazu. Aber auch wir sind mitschuldig. Wir debattieren wochenlang, ja das ganze Jahr lang über das Klima in hundert Jahren. Die Menschen, die heute und morgen Hunger leiden, interessiert nicht das Klima in hundert Jahren, die möchten morgen etwas zu essen haben! Darauf haben wir keine Antworten. Ohne dass ich Zukunftsfragen vernachlässigen möchte, ist es eine Frage der Menschlichkeit, dass wir uns heute um die Menschen kümmern, die Hunger leiden. Und, Herr Kommissionsvertreter, wenn wir sagen, wir würden bis zum Jahr 2050 den Hunger halbieren, finde ich das fast schon höhnisch. Uns muss es doch als Weltgemeinschaft gelingen, dass wir viel schneller die Zahl derer abbauen, die Hunger leiden müssen. Wir bringen in jeden Winkel der Welt Waffen hin, und Lebensmittel bringen wir anscheinend nicht hin. Das ist ein Versagen der Weltgemeinschaft, das möchte ich hier anprangern, und wir müssen hier andere Antworten finden als die Antworten, die wir heute geben.

  Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos, em nome do Grupo S&D. – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Representante da Comissão, Senhoras e Senhores Deputados, os números que ilustram a fome e a malnutrição no mundo, que todos conhecemos e vemos banalmente repetidos, são de tal modo dramáticos que se torna quase obsceno mencioná-los.

O direito à alimentação está associado ao mais sagrado de todos os direitos. O direito à vida, entendendo-a como minimamente digna, e não como uma mera luta pela sobrevivência.

Combater a fome no mundo deveria, por isso, constituir a prioridade das prioridades de todas as agendas políticas e, para atingir esse objectivo, todos os recursos deveriam ser mobilizados.

Infelizmente, todos também sabemos que os recursos, incluindo os financeiros, nem sempre constituem a principal limitação. O problema está quase sempre na sua gestão e utilização e na ausência de uma governança criteriosa e de uma coordenação eficaz aos níveis mundial, regional e nacional.

No projecto de resolução que aqui hoje é apresentado – e de que o meu grupo político, os Socialistas e Democratas, é um dos subscritores – estão contidas propostas e recomendações que, se forem seguidas, podem certamente dar contributos importantes para mitigar tão grave problema. Exorto, por isso, a Comissão a dar-lhe a devida atenção e, com base nele, a apresentar propostas legislativas e a adoptar procedimentos que lhes permitam dar expressão concreta.

O tempo político de dificuldades e incertezas que vivemos é também um tempo de mudança nas políticas que são os melhores instrumentos de intervenção da União Europeia nesta matéria: a Política Agrícola Comum e a Política Comum da Pesca, cujas profundas reformas vamos agora iniciar.

Com os novos poderes que o Tratado de Lisboa nos confere, esta é também uma grande oportunidade para o Parlamento Europeu de passarmos das proclamações à acção concreta. Os Socialistas europeus estão motivados para este desafio. Fazemos votos para que a nova Comissão e os demais grupos políticos estejam disponíveis para nos acompanhar nesta missão.

  George Lyon, on behalf of the ALDE Group. – Madam President, I would like to thank my colleagues who have already contributed.

The first point I would like to make is that I think the recent spike in world food prices serves as a wake-up call to all of us. The doubling of grain and rice prices has had a disproportionate impact on some of the poorest people in developing countries around the world. Indeed, it is estimated that an extra 75 million people around the world went hungry as a direct result of the higher food prices in 2007 and 2008. That is something we have to take very, very seriously. Indeed, in many countries we have seen food riots and political instability as a result of the spike in food prices.

With world population predicted to rise to over nine billion and climate change predicted to have a major impact on our ability to feed ourselves, food security is, I would argue, a major issue that we must confront and address and find solutions to. The European Union must do all it can to help developing countries to develop sustainable farming and food production systems that enable them to feed themselves. That requires finance – as the Commissioner outlined in his statement – and it requires open markets. Here there is a recognition that Europe has gone a long way to assist in opening up and liberalising markets. But also many of the problems that developing countries face result from a failure of politics and a failure of the legal system. No amount of help will actually correct that problem until you have got a stable political system and a stable legal system that allows farmers to flourish and to reap the benefits of higher market prices.

It is estimated that EU production will have to rise by over 70% just to meet rising demand in the future. I would argue that European agriculture has a major role to play, not only ensuring that we are self-sufficient here, but also ensuring that we can contribute to global food security in the future.

  José Bové, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Madame la Présidente, Messieurs de la Commission, chers collègues, la lutte contre la faim nécessite un investissement politique et financier important, que la FAO n'a pas été en mesure de générer à Rome, la semaine dernière, et je le déplore.

Plus d'un milliard de personnes souffrent de malnutrition et 40 millions d'enfants, de femmes et d'hommes meurent de faim chaque année. Ces chiffres dramatiques ont augmenté depuis 1996, année du premier sommet mondial de l'alimentation. La crise financière et économique mondiale a aggravé la situation, et les populations des pays du Sud en sont les premières victimes. 10 % du budget de la publicité dans le monde permettraient d'accorder le soutien nécessaire aux pays en développement pour garantir leurs infrastructures agricoles.

La crise alimentaire est une des principales menaces qui pèsent sur la paix et la stabilité dans le monde. En 2050, les paysans devront nourrir plus de 9 milliards de personnes. La dégradation des sols, les atteintes à la biodiversité, la dépendance par rapport au pétrole, les émissions de gaz à effet de serre, l'épuisement des nappes phréatiques et l'évolution des modes de consommation nous placent dans une situation fragile, plus fragile qu'il y a quarante ans.

La pauvreté et la dépendance vis-à-vis des importations sont la cause essentielle de l'insécurité alimentaire. La nécessité de soutenir les productions locales s'impose. Dès la fin des années 1950, l'Europe a mis en place la politique agricole commune pour produire l'alimentation dont elle avait besoin. Pour y parvenir, elle a protégé son marché intérieur et elle a soutenu ses consommateurs. Cette autonomie de choix, ce droit à la souveraineté alimentaire doit être maintenant accessible à l'ensemble des pays ou groupes de pays qui le souhaitent à travers le monde.

  James Nicholson, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, our resolutions on this issue address the dual challenges of eradicating hunger – which currently affects one sixth of the world’s population – and securing a food supply for the future.

We are facing a situation whereby, on one hand, the world’s population is growing, while, on the other, food production is proving to be an ever more challenging endeavour owing to the negative effects of climate change and rising costs associated with food production.

While the agricultural element of food security is undoubtedly key to solving this problem, we should also firmly focus on how good governance in developing countries is absolutely necessary if we are to have any chance of successfully tackling world hunger. Take Zimbabwe, for example, which Mr Deß has already referred to. It was once known as the bread-basket of Africa, and was once able to feed itself and many neighbouring countries. Now it is unable to do so, after being destroyed by the actions of Robert Mugabe and his henchmen.

We have all got to work together to overcome this problem and prevent the civil unrest and misery that could arise from it.

  Patrick Le Hyaric, au nom du groupe GUE/NGL. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, si l'Union européenne voulait jouer un rôle positif dans le monde, si elle voulait faire vivre un nouvel humanisme, elle devrait vraiment entendre l'assourdissant cri de la famine qui parcourt la planète.

On ne cesse de faire, ici et ailleurs, de beaux discours. Mais, franchement, peut-on, nous, ici, avoir la conscience tranquille quand un enfant meurt de faim toutes les cinq secondes? Et s'il en est ainsi, ce n'est pas parce qu'il y aurait des problèmes techniques. C'est le résultat de cette vague d'ultralibéralisme qui submerge le monde aujourd'hui.

Jusque-là, on travaillait la terre pour nourrir les hommes. Aujourd'hui, le système capitaliste fait que la terre et la nourriture sont devenues des marchandises, des objets de spéculation mondiale. Voilà pourquoi il faut radicalement changer de politique, soutenir la FAO et lui donner les moyens d'agir.

Il faudrait des actes, comme vous l'avez dit, Monsieur le Commissaire, et nous demandons des actes. Mais, pour qu'il y ait des actes, l'Union européenne pourrait faire respecter le principe de souveraineté alimentaire pour chaque peuple, aider à mettre en place des systèmes de rémunération du travail paysan par des prix garantis pour chaque pays et chaque continent, respecter et faire respecter les engagements d'aide publique au développement pour les pays du Sud, annuler les dettes des pays pauvres, faire stopper l'achat des terres par les multinationales et les fonds spéculatifs, et reconnaître que l'agriculture et l'alimentation ne peuvent relever des grands marchandages de l'Organisation mondiale du commerce.

Il faut entendre ce cri de la famine et agir en conséquence. Cela grandirait l'Europe, et c'est urgent!

  Bastiaan Belder, namens de EFD-Fractie. – In de ruim tien jaar dat ik nu deel uitmaak van dit Parlement, heb ik in hier regelmatig grote woorden horen gebruiken. In de aanloop naar de voedseltop in Rome gebruikt de Commissievoorzitter Barroso ook grote woorden. Hij zei: "Wij hebben collectief gefaald in de strijd tegen honger. Dat is een moreel schandaal, het is een grote smet op ons collectieve geweten." Einde citaat. Ronduit terecht. Maar dan is het resultaat wel teleurstellend te noemen. Mij bekruipt het gevoel dat in Rome niet de belangen van die miljard hongerende mensen centraal stonden, maar de politieke belangen van de rijke landen. Om concreet te zijn geef ik een paar voorbeelden: het bio-brandstoffenbeleid, de stimulering hiervan - zo wordt in toenemende mate erkend - draagt bij aan hoge prijzen en daarmee aan honger. Maar er heerst een taboe op kritiek op dit beleid.

Al eerder heb ik in dit parlement gewezen op het gevaar van grootschalige investeringen door derde landen in bijvoorbeeld het continent Afrika, om zo hun eigen voedselzekerheid veilig te stellen. Hoe kan het toch bestaan dat landen waar miljoenen mensen afhankelijk zijn van VN-voedselhulp tegelijk voedsel exporteren naar derde landen? Hier lees ik niets over in de slotverklaring.

Rijke landen komen gemakkelijk weg met goedbedoelde, dringende oproepen en verdere studies naar voor hen controversiële onderwerpen. Verder lees ik dat ontwikkelingslanden vooral zelf verantwoordelijk zijn. In het licht van het falende beleid van de wereldgemeenschap in het verleden zou ik dit willen aanduiden als ronduit beschamend.

Ik heb overigens even teruggebladerd en in de slotverklaringen van eerdere voedseltoppen gekeken: die tonen verrassend veel overeenkomsten, net als de resolutie van dit Parlement overigens. Zij spreken alle over urgentie, er klinkt steevast de roep eerder gedane beloften na te komen. Maar zou een herhaling van al die oproepen geen veeg teken voor ons moeten zijn? Om met de woorden van VN-rapporteur De Schutte te spreken "arme mensen eten geen beloften". Voedselzekerheid zou een mensenrecht moeten zijn, zo wordt vaak gezegd. Ik zou het liever willen omdraaien, mevrouw de voorzitter. In mijn bijbel als christen lees ik de opdracht om hongerigen te eten te geven, en dat is mijn persoonlijke plicht en onze collectieve verantwoordelijkheid.

  Димитър Стоянов (NI). - Аз взех лично участие в срещата на ФАО в Рим. Лично видях какво представлява тази конференция. Мисля, че трябва малко да се отърсим и от лицемерието, което ни е обхванало, защото с разходите за организиране на една такава конференция, на която обикновено резултата е само още обещания, обещания и обещания, практически с тези разходи, може би трябва да се направи една калкулация точно колко, както казаха говорещите преди мен, деца нямаше да са умрели днес от глад, ако тези средства не бяха използвани само за весели приказки. Но тук, г-н комисарят каза, че има проблем с капацитета на производство в световен мащаб на храни и преди да тръгнем да изваждаме треската от чуждото око, нека да видим гредата в своето собствено.

Моята страна, България, е с научно доказано най-плодородната почва в Европейския съюз. Преди 150 г. българският земеделец с технология от 19 век е бил способен да изхранва най-гъсто населените райони на Османската империя в Мала Азия. Днес, обаче, земеделието в България запада все повече и повече. Още повече след като България се присъедини към Европейския съюз. Квотите, които самата Комисия е наложила на България, възпират земеделското производство и земите в България пустеят. Само едно стопанство в една от 28-те области в България може да произведе цялата квота, например, за домати, която е отпусната на България от Европейската комисия. Това било така, защото някакви данни отпреди 10 г. показвали, че официалното производство е толкова. Никой не гледа, обаче, колко може да бъде реалното производство. Вътре в самия Европейски съюз в момента има възпиране на процеса на производство на храна, който би могъл значително да подобри състоянието и наистина да бъде реална мярка за борба с глада. Така че, докато нещата се ръководят от чиновници, които гледат само в листа хартия и не ги интересува нищо друго, тогава всичко, с което ще си останем са само обещанията, но не и действията.

  Filip Kaczmarek (PPE). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Liczba osób cierpiących głód i żyjących w skrajnym ubóstwie w ostatnim roku dramatycznie wzrosła, i to nieprawda, że jest to wina kapitalizmu. Są systemy polityczne, które są znacznie gorsze dla ludzkiego życia i walki z głodem; podam tylko jeden przykład. W Europie kilkadziesiąt lat temu kraj, który ma bardzo dobre warunki rolnicze, został doprowadzony przez komunizm do głodu, w skutek którego zginęło więcej ludzi w jednym kraju, niż na całym świecie ginie w tej chwili. Tym krajem była Ukraina. Radziłbym się zastanowić nad tym, co się mówi w tej izbie.

W 2000 roku 198 członków ONZ przyjęło konkretne zobowiązania milenijne co do rozwoju. Pan komisarz powiedział o pierwszym, najważniejszym celu. Dzisiaj musimy odpowiedzieć na pytanie, czy ten cel jest osiągalny. Europejczycy zadają pytanie, czy nasze priorytety i nasza polityka są słuszne, a konkretnie, czy np. kosztowna walka ze zmianami klimatycznymi jest ważniejsza od walki z ubóstwem. Ja sam dostałem w tym tygodniu takie zapytanie: czy Unia Europejska nie myli celów i środków i zamiast walczyć ze skutkami ocieplenia, rozpoczyna najdroższą w historii ludzkości walkę z wiatrakami, czyli ze zmianami klimatycznymi?

Myślę, że najlepszym dowodem na brak sprzeczności między działaniami na rzecz klimatu a likwidowaniem głodu byłaby skuteczność w tej drugiej dziedzinie, czyli w rzeczywistym wyeliminowaniu głodu na świecie. Wtedy nikt by nam nie zarzucił, że priorytety są wadliwe i że przedkładamy walkę z klimatem nad walkę z głodem, o czym mówił też pan poseł Deß.

Rolnictwo w najbliższych latach będzie bardzo ważne. To co musimy zrobić, to przekonać kraje rozwijające się i pomóc im w tym, aby inwestowały w rolnictwo, oraz by wypełniały własne deklaracje, że 10% budżetu krajowego będzie przeznaczane na rozwój rolnictwa, bo tylko w ten sposób możemy zwiększyć potencjał rolnictwa w biednych krajach i pomóc w skutecznej walce z głodem.

  Louis Michel (ALDE). - Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, excepté M. Silvio Berlusconi, dont le pays accueillait le sommet, aucun dirigeant membre du G8 n'était présent au sommet de la FAO sur la sécurité alimentaire mondiale.

Ainsi donc, une réunion hautement politique à dimension économique, à dimension sociale et financière a été réduite à une réunion technique banale. Pourtant, l'objectif de M. Diouf était de développer les outils et les moyens de production, de manière à assurer la sécurité alimentaire de façon durable dans les pays en développement.

La crise économique et financière, on le sait, ça été dit abondamment, ne fait qu'aggraver la faim dans le monde. Le sujet était plus que jamais d'actualité puisque la faim touche aujourd'hui, pour la première fois dans l'histoire, plus d'un milliard d'hommes dans le monde. C'est un sixième de la population mondiale, c'est 20 % de plus qu'en 2005, c'est 105 millions de plus qu'en 2008.

Tout cela risque d'ailleurs fort de susciter, comme cela a été dit par M. Bové, des conflits nouveaux et d'une nature d'ailleurs extrêmement grave. C'est le manque d'investissements dans l'agriculture qui a conduit à ce phénomène d'insécurité alimentaire. Or, l'agriculture est le seul moyen d'existence de 70 % des pauvres dans le monde, comme le soulignait M. Diouf. Ce dernier avait lancé un appel pour un montant de 44 milliards de dollars par an pour financer des investissements en faveur des petits producteurs. Sa demande est restée strictement lettre morte: ni calendrier, ni stratégie, ni volonté politique des pays riches.

Monsieur le Commissaire, où en est-on dans l'exécution des engagements du G8 de juillet dernier? Pour avoir été à votre place, je sais les difficultés que l'on a à mobiliser les donateurs. Je me souviens encore de ce combat extrêmement difficile, porté aussi par le président Barroso, pour obtenir ce malheureux milliard d'euros, il y a maintenant deux ans, pour réaliser cette facilité alimentaire. Pourtant, l'avenir de l'Europe est intimement lié au destin des pays en développement.

Je ne crois pas, Monsieur le Commissaire, aux recettes de notre collègue socialiste qui nous parle de l'ultracapitalisme ou de l'ultralibéralisme – ce qui est d'ailleurs une assimilation sémantique sur le plan moral un peu limite. Moi, je ne vois pas la solution dans ce genre de déclamations idéologiques un peu courtes.

Monsieur, je dois vous dire que, dans le sous-développement de certains pays après l'indépendance, l'obscurantisme marxiste porte une responsabilité beaucoup plus lourde que le libéralisme.

Voilà ce que je voulais dire, parce que je ne vais pas laisser passer dans cette enceinte n'importe quelle déclamation ou incantation idéologique courte et limite sur le plan de l'honnêteté intellectuelle.

  Judith Sargentini (Verts/ALE). - Madam President, my colleagues Mr Bové and Mr Belder sketched the problem and the political reality, but there is a new trend in farming. Rich countries ensure their staple food or their biofuels by buying up land in poor countries – land grabbing or, as it is euphemistically called, ‘farmland acquisition’. It happens in Madagascar, for instance.

This seems to be too sensitive for world leaders to discuss. Europe and its leaders have a moral duty to go against this new form of what I would call colonialism. The declaration of the FAO Food Summit did not touch upon the issue of land grabbing and in that respect really missed out on an opportunity to target hunger in the world. Why did you not do that?

Then there is the common agricultural policy of the EU. We produce a lot of food. Europeans have food to eat, but that CAP ruins chances for both small-scale farmers and industrial farmers in developing countries, and they lose the chance to earn a decent living. That causes food shortages and brings a need for food imports. When can we see a free and fair European agricultural policy?

  Richard Ashworth (ECR). - Madam President, both the Untied Nations and the European Union have agreed that the growing world population is going to demand greater global output of agricultural productivity of the order of a 50-100% increase. We accept that. We accept the Commissioner’s point of view, not only because we accept it but because it is a target that the world cannot afford to miss. But, at the same time, agriculture is being asked to do it using less land, less water, less energy, less greenhouse gases. So there are three points which we need to understand.

Firstly, governments – and the EU in particular – must invest more in research and development; we simply do not have the information upon which to base a plan for the future. Secondly, faced with volatility in global markets, we need a safety net from the common agricultural policy. And, thirdly, food security, and all that it implies to the European Union, involves cost. These are costs which we cannot pass on to consumers, and therefore I repeat: we need a strong agricultural policy, and we have to win the argument in the budget debate.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). - Senhora Presidente, a declaração final adoptada na última Cimeira da FAO pelos seus 193 países membros é, infelizmente, um autêntico prato vazio no combate à fome. Faltaram prazos e, sobretudo, faltou a definição de meios e condições concretas para combater um flagelo que afecta mais de 6 000 milhões de seres humanos.

Segundo os dados disponíveis, durante os escassos 90 segundos que durará esta intervenção, 15 crianças morrerão de fome no mundo. Este é o mais vivo e contundente libelo acusatório que pesa sobre um sistema económico injusto, explorador, irracional e, por isso mesmo, historicamente condenado.

Um sistema assente em políticas e orientações concretas, e, já agora, Sr. Louis Michel, em protagonistas e numa retórica liberal que conduziram à situação actual: o favorecimento do modelo agro-industrial, em linha com a defesa dos interesses da grande indústria agro-alimentar, e o consequente empobrecimento qualitativo do sector agrícola mundial. Anos e anos de investimentos insuficientes na agricultura, de promoção do abandono do sector agrícola, de liquidação das pequenas e médias explorações, sector que assegura a subsistência de 70% das populações pobres do planeta.

O fundamentalismo de mercado, as políticas de privatização e de liberalização e o livre comércio tiveram e têm como consequência o abandono da terra, a concentração da sua propriedade e o domínio da produção por alguns poucos e a dependência alimentar de muitos.

Quarenta e quatro milhões de dólares é quanto os especialistas estimam que seria necessário para debelar o flagelo da desnutrição crónica. Soma bem mais modesta que a transferência efectuada pelos Estados para as mãos do grande capital, a fim de o salvar da crise sistémica em curso.

  Diane Dodds (NI). - Madam President, during the World Summit on Food Security, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, said ‘the food crisis of today is a wake-up call for tomorrow’. By 2050 our planet may be home to 9.1 billion people, over two billion more than today – a staggering figure and one which will mean that farmers will have to grow 70% more food.

Farmers in Northern Ireland want to help to meet that need. However, most of them believe that Europe is hindering their ability to produce more food by forcing a reduction in stocking rates through nitrate and phosphate regulations, red tape, a lack of research and development within the industry, and hence an attitude that food security is not an issue.

CAP reform will determine the farmers’ ability to produce food. It will also influence the price of food. If farmers are not supported by Europe through direct payments, the price of food will have to increase to meet production costs. My aim is to promote food production within Northern Ireland and food security within Europe. This will only be achieved by allowing farmers to farm. CAP reform will play a huge part in this, and food security should be a central component of our work as this CAP reform goes ahead.

  Mairead McGuinness (PPE). - Madam President, as one of the authors of this report, can I first thank the political groups, who worked very closely together to come up with a text which does not have amendments to it; I think we should all be very pleased with that. We have different opinions on many things, but I think, on the general point of wanting to do the right thing to assist in feeding the hungry of the world, this text is a step in the right direction.

I was also the author of a report on global food security and the CAP in the previous mandate, so I have worked very hard on this issue. Can I make one very simple point, which seems to escape many: it is farmers who will feed the world if they are given the right climate – and I mean that in the broadest context – to do that particular job. The rest of us will talk about it. It is our responsibility to develop and put in place the policies to allow our farmers to produce food. They will respond if they have two basic elements: one is decent prices and the other is stable incomes. The recent volatility has hit both of those and farming cannot survive on that.

Lest I run out of time – and as one of the authors I beg your forbearance on this – please do not demonise the common agricultural policy. Some of the arguments made now are historic and out of date; we have reformed absolutely this policy and perhaps without the CAP we might have greater problems of food insecurity within the European Union. Why do we not adopt the best parts of it and ask the developing world to take onboard a common agricultural policy? Because let us be very tough on this: we should not let the developing world’s governments off the hook; it is their responsibility to use the development aid properly; it is our responsibility to ensure that more money is spent and invested in agriculture. I think it is time to stop pussyfooting around this issue and be tough with governments and tough with ourselves. We have a moral responsibility and we are prepared to take it on board.

  Enrique Guerrero Salom (S&D). - Señora Presidenta, señor Comisario, el mundo tiene ante sí dos grandes retos, dos retos de larga duración: la lucha contra los efectos del cambio climático y la lucha contra la pobreza y el hambre en el mundo.

El señor Comisario ha dado las cifras, también las han dado otros diputados. Figuran en la declaración final de la Cumbre de la FAO: más de mil millones de personas en el mundo sufren hambre y 40 millones perecen cada año como consecuencia de la pobreza.

La crisis alimentaria, primero, y la crisis financiera, después, nos están alejando del cumplimiento de los Objetivos del Milenio. No avanzamos, sino que retrocedemos. Los retos son de larga duración, pero las respuestas son urgentes, se necesitan ahora. Sin embargo, en las últimas semanas hemos recibido noticias preocupantes: la resistencia de los grandes emisores de gases a tomar decisiones en la Cumbre de Copenhague y la falta de líderes y de concreción en la Cumbre de la FAO, en Roma.

Son preocupantes los problemas que tenemos, pero no lo es menos la falta de capacidad de acción. El género humano ha progresado porque hemos identificado los retos, hemos sabido cuáles eran las respuestas y hemos actuado. En estos momentos también sabemos a qué nos enfrentamos, pero hemos perdido la capacidad de actuar.

Por eso, yo apoyo la resolución, que pide en este Parlamento acción, y acción urgente.

  Franziska Keller (Verts/ALE). - Madam President, Article 208 of the Lisbon Treaty states that the main aim of European Union development policy is poverty reduction and eradication. Poverty is also the main reason for hunger. Article 208 also states that the Union shall take account of these objectives in other policies that might affect developing countries.

However, with export subsidies the EU is destroying markets in developing countries, therefore causing poverty and hunger. If we want our development assistance to be effective, we need to make sure that it is not hampered by other policies. Otherwise, we will not manage to meet the Millennium Development Goals. We should keep that in mind when we review and reform policies such as the common agricultural policy and fisheries policies.

(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8).)

  Mairead McGuinness (PPE). - Madam President, I would like to ask the previous speaker to be specific about what export refunds. I made this point in my speech, and I accept that in the past damage was done through export refunds and that Europe has now reformed its agricultural policy. However, when we introduced export refunds for the dairy sector last year, the only country which complained was New Zealand, which is not a developing country. Can I please ask for an example of where this is currently a problem.

  Franziska Keller (Verts/ALE). - Madam President, of course the frozen chicken example that you all well know is already a bit old, but still now, for example, tomatoes that are highly subsidised in the European Union make it to African markets, are cheaper than the local products and therefore destroy jobs and increase poverty. So that is still a common phenomenon and I think we have to work on that.

  Béla Glattfelder (PPE). - A világban egyre több tudós állítja azt, hogy 2030-ra egyszerre fog kialakulni súlyos olaj-, víz- és élelmiszerhiány. De ezek közül legelsőnek – úgy tűnik –, hogy az élelmiszerhiánnyal kell szembesülnünk, hiszen már ma is 1 milliárd ember éhezik a földön. Az éhezők száma gyorsabban nő, mint a világ népessége, tehát miközben ma még minden hatodik ember éhezik csak a Földön, azzal kell szembesülnünk, hogy néhány évtized múlva már minden ötödik, vagy minden negyedik éhezni fog már. Percenként két gyermek éhen hal. Erre a helyzetre nyilvánvalóan nem az a megoldás, hogy megszüntetjük az Európai Unió közös agrárpolitikáját. Az Európai Unió akkor lehet erős szereplő a világban, akkor lehet erős az Európai Unió, hogy ha erős, közös agrárpolitikával rendelkezik.

De éhezés nem csak Afrikában van. Éhezés van az Európai Unióban is. Mert vannak ugyan az Európai Uniónak olyan régiói, ahol az emberek a jövedelmüknek kevesebb, mint 10%-át költik élelmiszerre, de vannak olyan régiói is – Bulgária egyes részei, Románia déli régiói –, ahol az emberek a jövedelmüknek átlagosan több mint 50%-át élelmiszerre költik. És ebben vannak olyanok – ez az átlag –, akik ennél sokkalta, sokkalta többet költenek élelmiszerre. Ezt azért érdemes kihangsúlyozni, mert szembesülnünk kell azzal, hogy mindig, amikor egy olyan új szabályt alkotunk, ami drágábbá teszi a mezőgazdasági termelést, amelyik csökkenti a hatékonyságát – mondjuk az állatjóléti előírások –, mert növelik az 1 kg hús előállításához szükséges takarmánymennyiséget, akkor nem csak a környezetnek teszünk rosszat, mert ezzel több CO2-t fogunk kibocsátani, hanem minden egyes ilyen intézkedéssel növeljük az éhezőknek a számát, és lehet, hogy éppen az a takarmánymennyiség, amit többletként kell felhasználni – mondjuk a baromfitartásban –, pont egy éhező gyermek asztaláról fog hiányozni.

  Corina Creţu (S&D). - Cifra persoanelor subnutrite în lume a trecut de un miliard, ajungându-se la dramatica situaţie ca unul din şase oameni să sufere de foame. Din păcate, aşa cum s-a spus mai devreme, liderii principalilor puteri industrializate au tratat cu indiferenţă un summit atât de important şi necesar, precum cel organizat de FAO la Roma zilele trecute. Conducătorii statelor membre ale G8 au considerat oportun să nu participe la această reuniune, excepţie făcând premierul italian.

Nu pot să nu constat discrepanţa enormă şi injustă între atenţia maximă a reprezentanţilor acestui grup de ţări care însumează 60% din produsul intern brut la nivel mondial faţă de salvarea sistemului bancar, în comparaţie cu neglijarea realităţii dramatice a foametei ce afectează tot mai mulţi semeni ai noştri, iar criza de care nu sunt vinovate ţările sărace, le afectează cel mai tare tocmai pe acestea.

Am ajuns în cel mai grav punct al foametei globale din 1970 încoace. La fiecare 6 secunde, un copil moare de foame. Din păcate, ţările dezvoltate ale lumii închid ochii în faţa unei tragedii care ne va afecta prin implicaţiile sale complexe pe noi toţi. Cel mai bun exemplu şi, totodată, avertisment îl reprezintă neglijarea agriculturii, timp de peste două decenii, până când s-a ajuns la actuala criză alimentară. Din totalul ajutorului oficial pentru dezvoltare, sumele destinate agriculturii au scăzut ca pondere de la 17% în 1980 la 3,8% în 2006.

Securitatea alimentară reprezintă o provocare extrem de serioasă care necesită soluţii urgent, în primul rând prin deschiderea pieţelor şi ajutorarea fermierilor din ţările în curs de dezvoltare pentru asigurarea hranei şi eradicare cât mai rapidă a foametei.

  Esther Herranz García (PPE). - Señora Presidenta, en primer lugar quisiera felicitar a la señora McGuinness por esta iniciativa, en la que se pone de manifiesto el importante papel que desempeña la PAC a la hora de hacer frente a las necesidades de suministro de alimentos a escala internacional.

Ahora que la Comisión Europea parece querer reducir el peso de la PAC dentro del presupuesto comunitario, hay que decir muy alto y muy claro que la PAC ya no es una prioridad, pero la suficiencia alimentaria sí debería serlo, y en décadas pasadas se ha visto que sin la PAC la suficiencia alimentaria es muy difícil, por no decir imposible, de alcanzar.

La agricultura no se puede comparar, por tanto, con otros sectores de la economía capaces de prosperar en un mercado libre, porque el mercado alimentario no es un mercado libre. El agricultor necesita el respaldo de la Unión Europea para poder sacar adelante su empresa y la Unión necesita, a su vez, al agricultor para mantener un modelo agrícola capaz de proveer alimentos suficientes y de calidad a un ciudadano cada vez más exigente.

Creo, por tanto, que tendría que producirse un cambio de rumbo de la PAC, pero no desaparecer. Para ello, sería necesario garantizar las ayudas directas a los agricultores, además de restablecer una política de gestión de los mercados agrícolas que aporte mayor estabilidad a los precios, lo que repercutiría en beneficio no sólo de los agricultores sino también de los consumidores y de los países terceros.

Sería necesario establecer un marco de buenas prácticas para favorecer unas relaciones equilibradas entre los diferentes agentes de la cadena alimentaria, evitando prácticas abusivas y promoviendo un reparto más justo de los márgenes comerciales.

Además, hace falta una política de información al consumidor europeo que haga hincapié en los esfuerzos realizados por los productores comunitarios para cumplir la normativa de la Unión Europea en materia de medio ambiente, seguridad alimentaria y bienestar de los animales, porque los productores comunitarios tienen que competir con las producciones de países terceros, donde se aplican, a esas importaciones, unos estándares muy inferiores.

Y esos productores de países terceros prefieren exportar a la Unión Europea que abastecer los mercados de sus propios países por una cuestión de rentabilidad, con el aval de las negociaciones de la OMC.

  Michèle Striffler (PPE). - Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, on l'a dit tout à l'heure, dans le monde un enfant meurt toutes les cinq secondes de faim et de pauvreté, et on estime à plus d'un milliard le nombre de personnes qui souffrent de malnutrition.

La question de la sécurité alimentaire mondiale revêt donc un caractère extrêmement urgent et doit se trouver au premier plan de l'agenda politique européen et international. Il est nécessaire de renforcer la cohérence des politiques européennes pour assurer la concrétisation du premier objectif du Millénaire pour le développement.

La facilité alimentaire d'un milliard d'euros est une première étape nécessaire, et il est essentiel que les mesures de mise en œuvre soient axées sur les petites et moyennes exploitations d'agriculture familiale et vivrière, en particulier celles gérées par des femmes, et sur les populations pauvres, donc celles qui sont le plus touchées par la crise alimentaire.

L'agriculture durable doit être un domaine prioritaire. Des mécanismes de financement novateurs, tels une taxe internationale sur les transactions financières, doivent être explorés pour accompagner l'adaptation au changement climatique, tout en étant accessibles aux petits exploitants des pays les plus vulnérables.

  Ricardo Cortés Lastra (S&D). - Señora Presidenta, colegas, ante la reciente conclusión de la Cumbre sobre seguridad alimentaria, me gustaría expresar mi decepción por la leve repercusión social, mediática y política del acontecimiento. Decepción, sobre todo, por la incapacidad de llegar a un acuerdo sobre el paquete de 44 000 millones de dólares destinado a ayudar a los campesinos más pobres; decepción porque todo sigue igual.

Cuando hablamos de seguridad alimentaria, agricultura y desarrollo, a menudo se nos olvida la cuestión del agua y de su escasez, un problema esencial del presente y sobre todo del futuro. En el contexto actual de crisis económica y medioambiental, necesitamos más que nunca un compromiso por parte de los países desarrollados para la articulación de un nuevo foro de reflexión internacional, al más alto nivel, con el objetivo de conseguir consolidar el agua como un bien público, compartir tecnologías y desarrollar sistemas de gestión del agua eficientes, sostenibles y económicamente viables.

Si no cuidamos el agua, nunca podremos hacer frente a la lucha contra el hambre.

  Chris Davies (ALDE). - Madam President, in 18th-century England, Thomas Malthus predicted that population increase would exceed food supply. Now, in many ways his ideas have been discredited because we have had a series of agricultural revolutions which have transformed our society. But his words were also true: in the lifetimes of many of us, world population has trebled – trebled, quite incredible – and, in too many parts of the world, that has exceeded our food supply. We need to be doing more if we want to prevent hunger and control population growth, and the way of doing that is to ensure that women everywhere have control over their reproductivity. And we have got to save the lives of children. The best way of reducing population growth is to save the lives of youngsters, so that people do not feel the need to have bigger families.

Here in the Western world we are addicted to eating meat: a massive waste of resources. All I can say is – and I see my time is up, Madam President – as someone who gave up eating meat 20 years ago, if we want to save the world and prevent hunger, then we eat green, not red.

  Peter Jahr (PPE). - Frau Präsidentin! Ausreichende Ernährung ist ein Menschenrecht, und Hunger ist ein Verbrechen an der Menschheit. Ich denke auch, so dass die Menschheit über ausreichende technische und naturwissenschaftliche Kenntnisse verfügt, dass niemand in der Welt an Hunger leiden müsste. Natürlich braucht man zur Bekämpfung des Welthungers auch Geld. Aber es geht nicht um das Geld allein, vorher müssen folgende Voraussetzungen erfüllt sein: erstens Aufbau einer stabilen demokratischen Struktur in den Entwicklungsländern, zweitens Bekämpfung der Korruption, drittens Etablierung einer angepassten Landwirtschaft in den Entwicklungsländern, und dann erst kommen Investitionen in die Landwirtschaft. Und gerade über die ersten drei Punkte wird häufig zu wenig diskutiert, und häufig versickern sehr viele finanzielle Mittel halt doch in den Ländern, geraten in falsche Hände und landen bei der Korruption.

  Marc Tarabella (S&D). - Madame la Présidente, je voudrais approfondir le propos que j'ai tenu ici même avant-hier concernant la crise alimentaire dramatique dans laquelle est plongée principalement l'Afrique, et le manque évident de soutien des pays les plus industrialisés, ainsi que des pays émergents, envers le problème de sécurité alimentaire mondiale.

À l'occasion des débats qui ont eu lieu au sommet de la FAO, à Rome, plusieurs ONG ont accusé les multinationales de l'alimentaire de chercher à s'emparer des milliers d'hectares de terres très fertiles appartenant aux petits paysans du tiers-monde. Plus de 40 000 hectares ont déjà été ainsi acquis de l'Éthiopie jusqu'à l'Indonésie.

Elles ont également dénoncé la tendance de nombreux pays riches à favoriser l'utilisation de fertilisants chimiques et de nouvelles technologies en Afrique au lieu d'encourager le développement durable de l'agroécologie. Elles ont ainsi fustigé les firmes agrochimiques, l'utilisation des OGM et le développement des biocarburants au détriment des cultures vivrières.

Je demande à l'Union européenne de s'investir d'urgence dans la mise en place du projet de partenariat mondial, qui permettra de mieux coordonner les actions de lutte contre la faim. L'agriculture de subsistance est assurément la réponse la plus évidente, me semble-t-il.

  Elisabeth Köstinger (PPE). - Frau Präsidentin! Langfristige Ernährungssicherheit ist eine der zentralen Herausforderungen der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik. Gerade angesichts von Nahrungsmittelknappheit muss nachdrücklich auf die Bedeutung einer starken Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik hingewiesen werden, die auch in Zukunft eine Schlüsselrolle für die Bewältigung der globalen Herausforderungen spielen muss.

Dies erfordert auch eine langfristige, ausreichende finanzielle Ausstattung der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik. Die GAP ist ein wichtiges Element der EU-Lebensmittel- und Sicherheitspolitik, und nach 2013 wird sie eine bedeutende Rolle in der Entwicklungspolitik spielen, auch bei externer Ernährungssicherungspolitik. Dabei sind die einwandfreie Funktion der Ökosysteme, fruchtbare Böden, stabile Wasserressourcen und eine weitere Diversifizierung der ländlichen Wirtschaft von höchster Priorität. Internationale Zusammenarbeit und Solidarität sowie ausgewogene Handelsabkommen, welche die Ernährungssicherheit nicht gefährden, sondern fördern, sind ein wesentliches Element der globalen Ernährungssicherheit. Und hier kann eine starke Gemeinsame Agrarpolitik wirksam sein.

  Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE). - În primul rând, cu riscul de a repeta o idee deja exprimată de colegul Stoianov, deplâng faptul că în multe state din Europa avem atâtea terenuri necultivate, în timp ce discutăm despre foamea în lume.

În al doilea rând, pentru că propunerea de rezoluţie abordează această problemă şi mă bucur că domnul comisar a atins acest subiect, doresc să atrag atenţia asupra pericolului pe care îl poate prezenta obiectivul foarte la modă al autosuficienţei alimentare. Acest obiectiv, care nu este sinonim cu securitatea alimentară, poate avea un efect nedorit în condiţiile actuale, pentru că schimbările climatice afectează fiecare regiune într-un mod diferit. Această situaţie face mai necesar ca oricând comerţul şi nu ambiţia fiecărui stat de a produce tot ceea ce doreşte să consume.

  Marian Harkin, author. − Madam President, I just want to comment on two matters raised in the debate so far. First, the link between hunger and climate change. As Ban Ki-moon said in Rome, at a time when the global population is growing and our global climate is changing, by 2050 we will need to produce 70% more food, yet the weather is becoming more extreme and unpredictable. So any positive efforts we make on climate change will impact positively on food production.

Another issue raised once again is the easy option: blame the CAP – as if the CAP were responsible for all of the ills of the developing world. The CAP is not perfect, but it has been reformed. If we want our farmers to continue producing and ensure food security for Europe, we cannot, by regulation and withdrawal of support, literally force them out of business.

For example, has anybody done a study on the recent reform of the sugar industry in the EU to see if the decimation of the EU sugar industry has benefited those in Third World countries or if it has just benefited the sugar barons and landowners while leaving the small sugar growers in poverty? In no way do I want to minimise the issue of world hunger, but we need to ensure that when we put forward solutions to the problem, they actually do alleviate it.

  Sari Essayah (PPE). - Arvoisa puhemies, on erittäin hyvä, että samana päivänä, kun käsittelemme Kööpenhaminan ilmastokokouksen päätöslauselmaa, myös ruokaturvallisuus ja nälkäongelma nostetaan esille, sillä nämä asiat linkittyvät hyvin syvästi toisiinsa.

Muutama edustaja on jo nostanut esille sen ongelman, kuinka ilmastopolitiikalla olemme osittain myös aiheuttaneet lisää ongelmia. Olemme asettaneet epärealistisia tavoitteita muun muassa biopolttoaineelle, mikä on johtanut siihen, että kehitysmaista on ostettu maapinta-alaa biopolttoainekasvien viljelyä varten. Siten köyhimmistä köyhimmiltä ihmisiltä riistetään maata, jota he voisivat käyttää maanviljelykseen ja oman maataloustuotantonsa kehittämiseen.

Vastaavalla tavalla myös maatalouspolitiikassa on ollut vääristymiä, jotka ovat johtaneet siihen, että ylituotantoa on viety kehitysmaihin, ja siten on estetty kehitysmaiden oman maatalouden kehittyminen. On äärimmäisen tärkeää muistaa se totuus, että tänäkin päivänä meillä on maailmassa tarpeeksi paljon ruokaa, mutta halu jakaa se oikeudenmukaisesti puuttuu.

  Czesław Adam Siekierski (PPE). - Pani Przewodnicząca! Na ostatnim szczycie FAO państwa nie zdołały wypracować konstruktywnych propozycji. Brak wspólnej strategii na poziomie międzynarodowym niepokoi, szczególnie w świetle ciągle rosnącej liczby ludności świata, która ma osiągnąć 9 mld w 2050 r.

Wszyscy dobrze pamiętamy skutki kryzysu żywnościowego w roku 2007, kiedy w wyniku nagłego wzrostu cen podstawowych produktów rolnych miliony ludzi na całym świecie stanęły w obliczu braku pożywienia. Myślę, że kryzys ten powinien być dla nas lekcją. Musimy zatrzymać działania zmierzające do ograniczania produkcji rolnej, tak popularne o dziwo w ostatnich latach w naszej Unii.

Uważam, że w świetle światowych trendów na rynku żywnościowym każda próba ograniczenia WPR jest nierozsądnym posunięciem, które w bliskiej przyszłości grozi bezpieczeństwu żywnościowemu naszego kontynentu. Krajom rozwijającym się pomóżmy stworzyć taką politykę rolną, aby mogły same zapewnić bezpieczeństwo żywnościowe dla swoich obywateli.

  Karel De Gucht, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, I also deplore that none of the G8 leaders were present at Rome except for Commission President Barroso, and of course it adds to the image that this has been a summit which did not bring that much new. When you look at the final declaration this is, I think, also obvious. On the other hand, I think it is also very important that we managed to keep the food security item on the political agenda and the result of the several summits we have been witnessing in 2009 has certainly been that it is now high on the international agenda and that, whenever world leaders meet, for example latterly in Pittsburgh for the G20, there is talk of development cooperation and development policy. So that in itself is a very positive element.

I have been in Rome and I must say that apart from the final declaration which is, I must agree, a little bit disappointing, there have been very good discussions and also a very good presence, and something can come out of it. For example, there was a whole discussion on the selling of fertile land in developing countries and countries which have no arable land; buying them itself is a very interesting topic to discuss and I think it is also one where we can come to some common understanding.

The second thing I would like to say is that, as a couple of Members have already said, the CAP is of course not ideal. Nothing is ideal in this world, but when you look at the effect of the common agricultural policy on the developing world, I think we can claim that it is by far the least harmful system of a big trading block with respect to distorting effects in the developing countries. The WTO has acknowledged that most if not all of our subsidies are non-trade-distorting because they are supporting agricultural income, not the prices of agricultural products.

I am also a little bit, how should I put it, disappointed that we are blaming ourselves all the time. Europe is not ideal either but I think that with the Food Facility, for example, we took a major step forward. This involves EUR 1 billion on a two-year basis; it is not about supporting the delivery of food, but is largely focused on delivering seeds and so on sustaining small agricultural producers in the developing world. I think this really is an innovation. It has also been acknowledged as such by the World Bank, for example, which is taking over this mechanism. So we should not blame ourselves all the time. By the way, this facility was an innovation by my predecessor. There is one thing I do not agree with him and that was about a gentleman who in the mean time has disappeared, Mr Le Hyaric. He is not a socialist, my predecessor, he is a communist; I mean you should look at his political group: he is a communist and that probably explains the reasoning he was using.

Having said this, also in L’Aquila we took up our responsibility as a European Commission and we pledged USD 4 billion, which is about 20% of the food package and the support package that was agreed in L’Aquila. With that we are by far the largest donor that made pledges in L’Aquila and we are also going to honour them, we are also going to commit this sum and to disburse this as soon as possible.

I will end by saying a last word on the new EU agricultural and food security policy because in the 2010 work programme of the Commission there is a plan to present to the Council and the Parliament a communication on a renewed policy for agriculture and food security for the European Union. This document will review current issues affecting agriculture and food security, for example, challenges posed by climate change, enhanced attention to nutrition and food quality, safety nets and social protection policies, impact of biofuels on food production or the use and impact of new technologies and biotechnologies, increased calls for rights-based approaches, large-scale land acquisition etc.

The communication will aim firstly at renewing the EU commitment to assist developing countries advancing their agricultural production. This remains crucial notably in view of the increasing demand for food due to a growing global population and changing dietary patterns and the challenges and threats that climate change is posing to sustainable agricultural production. Secondly, it will aim at launching reflection on how the EU could best use its experience and know-how to support the emergence of regional policies and strategic frameworks in agriculture and food security. Thirdly, it will aim at providing the basis for the whole EU approach to harmonise existing ECMS policy frameworks following the commitments set out in the L’Aquila agenda for action. Fourthly, it will aim at proposing ways on how the EU could contribute to accelerating the process towards the achievements of the MDGs and notably MDG1 in view of the upcoming review of the MDGs in September 2010 in New York. Fifthly, it will aim at better positioning the EU vis-à-vis current developments in the global food agricultural governance system, and lastly, at addressing issues that have recently gained prominence in the food security agenda.

A public consultation on an issues paper was launched on 16 November and will close in early January. Thus we will consult all the stakeholders and then come forward with a formal communication by the European Commission.

  Πρόεδρος. - Έχω λάβει έξι προτάσεις ψηφίσματος⁽¹⁾ που έχουν κατατεθεί σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 110, παράγραφος 2, του Κανονισμού.

Η συζήτηση έληξε.

Η ψηφοφορία θα διεξαχθεί την Πέμπτη 26 Νοεμβρίου 2009.

(1) βλ. Συνοπτικά Πρακτικά.