3 Comment (s)

1. Three questions to Mr Vanneste:

   France really can her - - to do something? We gave to be able on our agriculture - via PAC - to the EU. As a result, is this not the Commissioner charged with the file what should meet Mr Barnier? Where more probably still, the actors of course of study?

   I find that it is a bit easy - even if MR BARNIER must find benefit there for the European - that the "representative" has no worry While national Ministers, Agriculture, cannot make thing big!

   Mariann Fischer Boel, European commissioner in Agriculture and in rural development is this not, who should come in France (it is not so far) to reassure our farmers, and to bring them solutions? Instead of sending MR BARNIER quemander a favour to the all-powerful Commissioner? Independence is not supposed to be irresponsibility.

   domestically, is this not Mrs Lagarde who should go to see (or to send in Bercy) for big distribution? It goes without saying that there is a problem! Course of study earns less money, the consumer sees no fall coming. Search error! I do not know if it is the industrialists or the big distri, or two, that goinfrent But problem it is there! The Government goes t him - as of hab - to listen to Mr Leclerc and cie whispering to it in the ear that it is for nothing there, and the file is lined up?

   Why the ministers Frenchmen (and exclusively Frenchman) practice them a strategy of siding consisting in signing this or that commitment in 97 by ex, as the Minister who follows will owe respected, unless he also pushes back the date Until The day when, as if by magic, they announce unless a month of expiry date a very big evolution: ex the reform of PAC - On 2009 - 2013?

   It ill-treats our firms, our courses of study, etc. Who are since then late systematically, and who of this fact lose market shares? Without speaking "dominoes" of effects: if a stockbreeder must suddenly be concerned to make a change of cape, he is going to go off to his bank As the majority of the stockbreeders. Result? Banks are attacked by requests at instant t and find no more anybody to invest other years.

   It not would not be possible to find a system which would allow of, how to say, to give a sense of responsibility to the Ministers? By ex, by making sure that a Minister does not make commitment, in the name of France, outside the period of "nomination" which is his? (Idem for a President or the parliamentarians Except particular case: space, nuclear station (ITER), etc.) and it is not possible to compel this Minister have make a regular "report" to the Parliament, when he makes commitments? History which they know who made decision, when, and why?

   seb May 20th, 2009 Answer

2. Question of coherence:

   According to a confidential of West-France, Bruno Le mayor would be: not favourable to an increase of the European budget, and therefore its tax resources. He would offer a better job of resources , especially on innovation, research, mobility of the young people.

   The idea of giving more money to innovation had however been offered by Tony Blair in 2005 during the last big battle of the European budget. And it had been rejected by France of Jacques Chirac and of Dominique de Villepin (who had then a Directeur de Cabinet who was called Bruno Le mayor).

   Nono Le Maire offers therefore a better job of resources ? Does it mean a reduction of the budget of PAC? In any case, it is in complete opposition with what offers Michel Barnier. Indeed Babar offers:

   to double at least the budget of the fund of adjustment in globalisation, currently endowed with 500 millions as well as to double the European budget of research and throwing of big work , but also to "invest in programmes of railway freight and new motorised engines.

   To augment the European budget, Barnier:

   opposes to " any additional deduction of tax ", and offers three other tracks of financing: mutualiser the national budgets sometimes rival, to raise a loan at European level and to mobilise private savings by creating an European deposit Офис .

   Good Small recall for MR BARNIER: the European loan it is niet, Angela (MERKEL) does not bear a grudge (Mr Sarkozy has already attracted blow) And I know it other who will say "veto". MR COWEN. It is difficult to see how he could say " yes " at European level, when he says on national plan! Other veto: Current MR FISHER PR SIDENT of the European Council! (In the name of R. Czech)

   mutualiser the national budgets? There It is the EPP which does not bear a grudge! (Dixit his President!)

   A case of the European d pots? Not on that BROWN is favourable!

   Anyway, the coherence lives! In when the next Council of ministers to clarify mystery? Unless it is about an animal strategy not to say anything?

   seb May 20th, 2009 Answer

3. EH FRANCE! YOUR MILK DOES THE CAMP!

   There was at the time when they believed still a bit in marvellous and in the some fast disappearing stocks, this picture of the Milky Way about which they said that it drove the pilgrim towards Saint-Jacques de Compostelle.

   The Milky Way which is noticed these days in many our cities, seems to drive nowhere, but after everything them would not allow us to join Towers of Babel, European or worldwide, which resemble the original certainly since driving to the confusion of languages, but exceed him widely by driving to a generalised confusion.

   While our milk producers pour out into the streets of the thousands of litres of it the very first element of the human eating, children die of hunger in the world to the rhythm of one every five seconds!

   While the precious liquid in motive is wasted that we are unable to watch this basket exceeding human size and where they want to put all eggs together, the Pr sident de la Commission europ enne wearing a smile which pleases to see, declares that our agriculture goes well, then insists: our agricultural policy goes well!

   They will not miss to criticise the farmers big spenders, by forgetting that it is pitiful that the only way of making itself heard what is to throw us to the face what they carefully produced in the sweat of the forehead and which an infamous and unfair economic system intends to pay to others.

   He had tears in eyes this producer on the market of Saturday morning in Bergerac: We were obliged to pour out into ditches about three thousand litre of milk, how please that the starving persons who understand nothing there could accept it.
   He was young farmer in the the sixties, there were in Dordogne sixty thousand small farmers as him, there remains a little more than eight thousand there, fallows increased the density of population does not exceed zone in some an inhabitant in the km , of rich Englishmen especially.
   To some babies who stay, the European Union and its policy which goes well declare, if you give up producing some milk it will be poured to you a wage based on your productions of the previous years.
   The old agricultural pensioners who had fault to produce, touch only a retirement of misery, meadow pensioners of the milk will touch a lifelong private income on the condition of not producing!

   It will be possible to object of course that the farmers would not be there there if they had been able to keep and respect the co-operative tool extension of working, where it not and not the capital which works and is remunerated, but the Man.
   This co-operative tool, truth, set up more than hundred years ago had allowed to make of our agriculture one of the first ones of the world. We not only left it, but we were unable to set it up in its original form in the developing countries where it is more urgent than agriculture to allow to attain the level of food self-sufficiency, rather than to respect sacrosanct and fatuous prescripts of the structural adjustment of the International World Bank and of the Monetary Fund.
   This tool, they respected him and wanted to keep him the farmers, so much, constructed from the bottom, his effectiveness is based on his dimension with human size.
   He was systematically demolished, dismantled, vandalized from the sixties by concepts of globalisation and by their application in Europe through the sinister policy of SICO MANSHOLT, new blight of God.

   You should be necessary saturate any more from now on the local markets by local productions or export than surplus or import only what was missing. Defined from above and thanks to the only job of the capital of the shareholders were needed through structures, to make turn agricultural productions endlessly all over the world, in order to line prices up on the lowest production costs. He will be anything says the quality which follows from it.
   In the huge wasting which resulted from it, the levels of production not being adapted to needs, but to necessity to bring down prices by the free play of competition, in this wasting was added the implementation of systems of expensive transport, spenders of energy and who contribute moreover to the deterioration of the quality of an environment which they pretend to want to protect.

   Ah yes! Do not forget as as since you began reading this text, two-three hundred babies died of hunger in the world.
   This makes nothing, him is not counted will say "Economy" the supporters of equitable said trade, of lasting alleged development, of growth at all costs, of unbridled consumption and of world dedicated to the God where the Man could not have his place any more.

   Jean-Pierre Canot author Learn from Us rather to fish! . Bergerac on May 20th, 2009
   See also:
   
   

   BOAT May 25th, 2009 Answer

1 Return (s)

1. June 3rd, 2009: of Crisis of the milk: negotiations have to continue - Christian Vanneste - Deputy of the North

Post a comment on the article "About the crisis of the milk"

Name (required)

E-mail (will not be published) (Required)

Website