Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, this report seeks to express the European Parliament’s position on the Commission communication on options for the plant protein sector, given the two million tonne increase in the shortfall resulting from the ban on the use of animal meal in the European Union. The debate on this matter at the current juncture in the European Union requires me to make an assessment of the problem and a suggestion for its resolution. The assessment is, unfortunately, easy to make, given that it concerns the extremely vulnerable situation the European Union is in, being only 23% self-sufficient, as indeed the report states. What is at issue is not only the fact that one of the most powerful blocs in the world – the European Union – has a production sector that is so highly dependent on the supply of raw materials from outside the EU. What is also at issue, apart from this high degree of dependence with regard to raw materials for meat and milk production, is the fact that these imports are concentrated in only three countries, the United States, Argentina and Brazil, which are, of course, our main competitors in the world agri-food markets. The enormous risk that we are running in the European Union, in terms of competitiveness, is, therefore, easy to see from the fact that sectors as important as these – meat and milk – are ultimately dependent on our main competitors. This does not make sense. The solution to this problem must involve three main measures, in line, in fact, with the rapporteur’s proposals. The first is to end the area limits imposed by Blair House. With the current WTO agreements coming to an end, and with the alignment of oilseed aid to that of cereals from the beginning of the current season, there are clearly no more reasons for self-imposed limits. The second reason, or the second measure, is that due to the excessive deficit specifically in the plant protein sector, the current increase in aid must be maintained or, if possible, increased. With this aid differential and without the area limits (the semi-area imposed by Blair House), we will be able to improve our situation within a few years. And the third reason, also mentioned in the report, is that a review must be undertaken of the ban on fishmeal in ruminant feeds, following a proper scientific study. To conclude, I wish to state that, in addition to the importance of plant proteins in the European Union’s food production chain, we must stress the strategic importance of these crops in the European Union’s Mediterranean areas, where the choice of crops is limited, and where, above all, there are few crops that provide farmers with options, but where these particular crops adapt very well to the unproductive land and the predominant soil in these areas, which is poor, limited and marginal. It would, therefore, be necessary to extend the range of eligible crops, as the rapporteur also states, because it is incredible and unacceptable that the main varieties of plant proteins from the Mediterranean regions are not currently eligible for aid. This situation must be reviewed. Lastly, I would like to add that we also need to see what the relationship is between this Commission communication and the new proposals for a mid-term review of the CAP, which provide for a separate production aid system.

Political group: PPE-DE