Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down general rules for the application of measures to improve the production and marketing of honey` () (97/C 206/12)

On 27 January 1997, the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Articles 43 and 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Agriculture and Fisheries, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 3 April 1997. The rapporteur was Mr Zarkinos.

At its 345th plenary session (meeting of 23 April 1997), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 71 votes to 17, with 11 abstentions.

1. Introduction

1.1. The Commission proposal is a follow-up to the 1994 communication (COM(94) 256 final) on beekeeping in Europe. The proposal's aim is to use Community funds of ECU 15 000 000 per year to promote national programmes which will include technical support, laboratory analysis and measures to combat the diseases which affect bees and, national studies on the structure of the sector as regards both production and marketing.

In the Committee's view the Commission proposal is positive, marks a step in the right direction and should be supported, because it will contribute to the development of beekeeping in Europe.

1.2. The priority actions in the proposal focus mainly on the following:

- improving the conditions for the production and extraction of honey by providing technical assistance to beekeepers and producers' organizations;

- rationalization of transhumance (seasonal migration of bees);

- control of varroasis and related diseases of bees, improvement of the conditions for the treatment of hives and the harvesting, storage and packaging of honey;

- measures to support national laboratories carrying out analyses on the physical/chemical properties of honey;

- cooperation with specialized bodies on the implementation of applied research programmes to improve the quality of honey.

2. General comments

2.1. The activity of beekeeping is indissolubly bound up with agricultural production (as a branch of animal production); its main functions are economic activity and agricultural development, the production of honey and other beekeeping products, and its contribution to the ecological balance, the quality of the natural environment and of agricultural eco-systems.

2.2. The total number of beehives in the European Union is about 7,5 million, maintained by about 435 000 beekeepers. Only 3,1 % of these, i.e. about 13 000 people, are professional beekeepers. According to estimates by the sector's professional organizations, professional beekeepers maintain 3,5 million hives (42 % of the total) and account for 45 % of total honey production in the European Union.

2.3. Although the third largest producer on a world scale (after the countries of the former Soviet Union and Asia), the European Union continues to have a 50 % deficit in the basic beekeeping product, namely honey. Constantly increasing demand is met with imports, mainly from China, Argentina, Mexico, Hungary and Australia.

2.4. In the Committee's view the Commission proposal should also concern itself with the movement of honey in the Community market. The greater pressures on beekeeping in the European Union at present arise from the substantial imports of honey of unchecked quality from third countries (mainly from China). Consequently, to improve consumer protection the Commission should lay down quality standards for honey produced in the European Union.

2.5. The Committee, recognizing the contribution which bees make to the ecological balance, takes the view that the beekeeping sector requires greater support and protection, and regards the resources allocated to the sector as insufficient. However, it believes that the Commission proposal is a step in the right direction even if the measures envisaged might be indicative rather than exhaustive. In any case it is positive, if the measures laid down in the proposal constitute a start to support for the sector and not the conclusion of this effort.

2.6. The Committee feels that the proposal should provide for the establishment of a token subsidy per hive, which would be granted to both professional and non-professional beekeepers. This subsidy would be granted both for ecological reasons (maintaining enough bees to ensure pollination of the flora) and for the economic reasons (additional expenditure on feeding bees in winter).

It is pointed out that a similar proposal was made by the European Parliament in its report of December 1994.

2.7. Given that beekeepers can be covered also by various other regulations, Community initiatives and specific programmes (e.g. Regulation 2328/91, Regulation 866/90, Regulation 1360/78, the Leader programme, etc.), the system of co-financing action is acceptable, and the Committee expresses the hope that all the Member States, in cooperation with beekeepers' professional organizations, will respond positively to the Commission's call.

2.8. The Committee takes the view that greater flexibility is needed to ensure the effectiveness of the programmes planned under the priority activities - to be submitted by the Member States and approved by the Commission - taking the principle of subsidiarity into account.

2.9. In order to raise awareness - particularly among young people - and interest in the occupation of beekeeping, the Committee considers that the proposal must also include vocational training programmes for new farmers among the priority aims.

3. Specific comments

3.1. To ensure better consumer protection, the term 'natural honey` in Article 1 of the draft regulation needs to be further clarified. The term 'natural honey`, as stated also in Annex II to the Treaty of Rome, denotes honey produced by bees, and not any other kinds of blended substance.

3.2. In the Committee's view it is wrong to restrict the measure on combating diseases to varroasis and related diseases. There are other serious diseases which afflict bees (e.g. foulbrood, chalkbrood, nosema disease). In practical terms it is essential to provide for action to be taken against these diseases also.

Brussels, 23 April 1997.

The President of the Economic and Social Committee

Tom JENKINS

() OJ No C 378, 13. 12. 1996, p. 20.

APPENDIX to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee

The following amendment, tabled in accordance with the Rules of Procedure, was rejected in the course of the discussion:

Point 2.4

Delete last two sentences and replace by:

'To ensure the highest standards of consumer protection, all honey must comply with the quality criteria specified in the various EU directives and regulations and these must be rigorously checked and enforced.`

Reason

1. Quality standards already exist and are being updated by COM(95) 722 final on which the Committee recently gave its opinion, CES 1259/96.

2. Procedures for checking and enforcing quality standards are already covered by Directives 89/397 and 93/99 EEC. It is only necessary to apply these. The present proposal also provides for support of analytical laboratories where this is needed.

3. Differential control measures specifically directed against importing countries are illegal under the GATT/WTO.

Result of the vote

For: 42, against: 51, abstentions: 7.