9. 5. 83 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 124/27 
Opinion on the Commission proposals on the fixing of prices for certain agricultural products 
and on certain related measures (1983/84) (volumes I, II and III) 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the European 
Communities No C 32 of 7 February 1983, page 1. 
LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
Following the opinion which it issued on 23 February 1983, at the Council's request, on the 
Commission proposals concerning the fixing of prices for certain agricultural products and 
certain related measures (1983/84) (a), the Committee issued an additional opinion on the 
same matter at its 206th plenary session of 23 and 24 March 1983, in accordance with Article 
20 (3) of its Rules of Procedure. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European 
Economic Community, and in particular Articles 47 and 
198 thereof, 
Having regard to the request made by the Council of the 
European Communities on 20 January 1983 for an 
opinion on the Commission proposals on the fixing of 
prices for certain agricultural products and on certain 
related measures (1983/84), 
Having regard to its decision of 23 February 1983 in 
accordance with Article 20 (3) of its Rules of Procedure 
instructing the Section for Agriculture to draw up an 
additional opinion, 
Having regard to its opinion and the report by the Section 
for Agriculture, 
Having regard to the additional opinion adopted by the 
Section for Agriculture at its 242nd meeting held on 2 and 
3 March 1983, 
Having regard to the oral report made by the rapporteur, 
Mr Schnieders, 
Having regard to the discussions on 24 March 1983 
during the 206th plenary session held on 23 and 24 
March 1983, 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
by 53 votes to 25, with 39 abstentions: 
The Commission's proposals for the various farm 
products call for the following comments. 
Preliminary remarks 
The Committee notes that its opinion on the general 
Commission proposals, adopted on 23 February 1983, 
(') OJNo C 81, 24. 3. 1983, p. 6. was mainly concerned with the average farm price rise. Its 
comments on the individual products also need to be 
considered, it being understood that: 
the average rise proposed by the Commission for farm 
products as a whole should be adhered to, 
in so far as possible the price ratios between the 
various farm products should be improved, but with 
the proviso that the price increases proposed by the 
Commission for products in surplus are not to be 
exceeded. 
1.1. Cereals 
1.1.1. In the Committee's view the Commission's 
proposal to bring EEC cereal prices gradually into line 
with the prices of the other major producing countries 
will have to be examined carefully. In fact there is no 
point in making comparisons unless allowance is made 
for the completely different economic and social 
conditions prevailing in these countries, the policies 
pursued by their governments and the prices actually 
received by the producers. 
1.1.2. The Committee calls for a review of the 
continuing increase in imports of cereal substitutes at very 
low or zero rates of duty or levy. These imports are 
contrary to the principle of Community preference and 
result in high costs for the Guidance and Guarantee Fund. 
The measures proposed and in part adopted by the 
Council to stabilize these imports are a first step. 
1.1.3. The Committee wonders whether it is 
necessary to tighten up the quality criteria for 
intervention and export. Could this not make them more 
No C 124/28 Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 5. 83 
stringent than those used in normal trade and lead to 
quality standards higher than those required by many of 
the Community's traditional customers? 
1.1.4. The aid for durum wheat is an indispensable 
instrument for regulating the market in this type of wheat, 
in that it offsets the higher production costs in certain 
regions. Accordingly, this aid must be raised 
appropriately in line with the trend in production 
costs. 
1.1.5. In view of the situation on the durum wheat 
market and the importance of this product, particularly 
for certain southern regions of the Community, the 
Committee considers that the intervention price proposed 
for this product (4,6%) could be raised by the same 
percentage as the target price (4,8 %). 
1.1.6. The Committee welcomes the Commission's 
proposal to increase the premium for breadmaking rye; 
the cultivation of this crop deserves greater 
encouragement. 
1.1.7. As regards the co-responsibility levy 
introduced for producers, it is pointed out that the cereals 
balance on which the decisions are based is not verifiable. 
The possible margin of error in the estimates far exceeds 
the figure of 350 000 tonnes used by the Commission to 
justify the introduction of co-responsibility in this sector. 
Furthermore, it must be pointed out that 16 million 
tonnes of cereal substitutes were imported in 1981/82. 
Therefore the Committee would ask the Commission to 
check its calculations and, if necessary, to amend its 
proposal. 
1.1.8. The Committee would add that a clear 
distinction must be made between the normal level of the 
intervention price and that applied as a result of any 
co-responsibility measures. Otherwise the underlying 
effect on all cereal prices will be to penalize producers 
permanently and cumulatively by a co-responsibility levy, 
even if there is a fall in production. 
1.2. Rice 
In view of the particular structure of costs in the 
Community rice-growing sector, the Committee 
considers that there are grounds for giving this sector a 
price rise above that for other cereals which may be 
regarded as alternative crops. 
The Committee recalls that last year it urged a 1,6:1 ratio 
between the price of rice and maize. 
The Committee further considers that the Community 
must pursue a long-term planting policy geared to the actual demand for long-grain varieties, e.g. by applying 
the principle of Community preference more strictly. 
1.3. Sugar 
Co-responsibility has been introduced in full for sugar 
and the costs of surplus production are borne exclusively 
by the producers. The Committee would point out that 
the problem of the allocation of the quotas raises 
numerous difficulties in the Member States and is to be 
reviewed in 1984. In this connection it would refer to its 
opinion of 19 November 1980 (*). 
1.4. Colza 
Colza is not only an oleaginous plant but is also used in 
animal feedingstuffs in the Community to provide 
vegetable protein. As the Community still has a 
substantial protein deficit it encourages the cultivation of 
plants containing protein, e.g. soya. Vegetable fats and 
vegetable protein for use in feedingstuffs are among the 
few products in which the Community is substantially in 
deficit.Therefore the Committee wonders whether the 
introduction of the principle of co-responsibility is 
justified in this sector. It is not the farmers' fault that, on 
account of obligations entered into under GATT, the 
organization of the market in oilseeds is based on aid and 
therefore results in a greater call on funds as harvests 
increase. 
1.5. Olive oil 
The Committee would refer to its opinion of 27 May 
1982 (2). It would further note that the proposed aid is 
insufficient in the light of the trend in production costs in 
the producer countries. The Committee is in favour of an 
improvement in the procedures for granting and 
monitoring production aid. 
Just as the Commission helps dispose of surplus butter 
from Northern Europe by operations of the 'Christmas 
butter' type, it should carry out similar operations to 
promote olive oil in countries which are not traditional 
consumers of this product. Such operations are 
short-term and therefore inexpensive. A maximum 
consumer price should be laid down, as for butter. 
1.6. Seeds 
In previous years aid hast not been increased in line with 
the prices of other farm products. This has made it 
H OJ No C 348, 31. 12. 1980. 
(2) OJ No C 205, 9. 8. 1982. 
9. 5. 83 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 124/29 
increasingly difficult to induce farmers to devote 
sufficient land to seed growing. Therefore an appreciable 
increase is needed if producers are to be assured of a 
competitive price, made up of market price and aid. The 
Committee does not endorse the cancellation of the aid 
for seeds of field peas and field beans. Such a measure 
could deprive the Community of species particularly 
suited to its weather conditions. 
1.7. Fruit and vegetables 
In this particularly sensitive sector the reference price 
system must be improved and the import of storable 
products from third countries monitored more closely as 
it is disrupting the efforts being made to stabilize the 
Community markets. To improve the management of the 
markets the Committee recommends that producer 
groups be reinforced and the list of products covered by 
the withdrawal regime be extended. 
The Committee also believes that supplementary 
measures must be introduced for processed fruit and 
vegetables, in particular common quality criteria for 
products intended for processing, common quality 
standards for processed products (also applicable to third 
country products), extension of the export refund 
system. 
1.8. Tobacco 
The Committee calls on the Commission to encourage 
greater cooperation between producers and 
manufacturers with a view to improving the use of 
Community production. Accordingly the premiums 
should be set at a higher level. In addition, guide prices 
should taker greater account of production costs. 
1.9. Wine 
For about a year a new system of market organization has 
been in operation in this sector. The Committee notes 
that the application of the principle of mandatory 
distillation raises problems for the income of small 
producers (less than 150 hectolitres). The Committee 
calls on the Commission to take appropriate measures. 
Finally, the Committee reiterates the need to resolve the 
problems of excise duties which has an adverse effect on 
the free movement of goods and the balance of 
Community markets. 1.10. Alcohol 
The Committee would point out that a common 
organization of the market in alcohol has still not been 
adopted. Although such a regime is not part of the prices 
package, a suitable set of rules in this sector could help to 
solve the problems of agriculture. 
1.11. Milk and dairy products 
The main reasons for the imbalance are an increase in 
production and a fall in the internal consumption of milk, 
a slackening in world demand and the high level of 
imports of vegetable fats and dairy products on 
preferential terms. 
The Committee would point out that the proceeds of the 
co-responsibility levy have to date not been used 
systematically to ease the market. Besides a continuation 
of the traditional sales promotion programme, the 
available funds would enable stocks to be run down and 
thus help to restore balance to the market. 
The Committee notes that the Commission proposes to 
introduce a double penalization for milk and dairy 
products. 
The Committee considers that the arrangements for the 
necessary participation of producers in the disposal of 
milk surpluses should, however, be such that producers 
who have not increased their production, or have even 
reduced it, should not have to make a larger financial 
contribution. The Committee therefore asks the 
Commission to seek better solutions that make more 
allowance for the specific situation of farms and 
regions. 
The Committee refers to the previous recommendation 
on the use of a 'marker' in milk powder intended for 
animal feed so as to prevent fraudulent utilization for 
human consumption. It urges the Commission to produce 
proposals to this effect as soon as possible, but with a 
minimum of disruption to producers' arrangements. 
1.12. Beef and veal 
The Committee acknowledges the need to improve the 
income of beef and veal producers in order to ensure that 
adequate supplies reach the market, to encourage the 
production of high-grade meat and to achieve a better 
balance between the beef and dairy sectors. 
Consequently, it is concerned that the amendments 
proposed to Article 6 of Regulation (EEC) No 805/68, 
which fixes the intervention price and the threshold for 
No C 124/30 Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 5. 83 
activating the intervention measures at 93 % of the guide 
price, would weaken the guarantees given to 
producers. 
The Committee does not consider it justifiable that in 
future the management committee should take such 
important decisions as the fixing of the buying-in prices 
and their application without precise criteria being laid 
down in the basic Regulation. Pending a better solution, it 
proposes that the present procedure be retained for the 
time being. 
The Committee approves the rapid introduction in all the 
Member States of the Community scale for the 
classification of carcases of adult bovine animals. 
However, it considers that not enough experience has 
been acquired as yet in its use to enable the intervention 
categories and price ratios to be based on the scale as of 
1983/84. It would stress the need to safeguard the supply of raw 
materials for processing. It would like to see export 
refunds differentiated according to quality so as (a) to 
promote the marketing, within and outside the 
Community, of first quality beef and veal without 
large-scale recourse to intervention and (b) to ensure that 
the Community processing industry receives a steady 
supply of raw materials and discontinues its present heavy 
imports which result in an increase in the total volume of 
Community beef and veal exports. 
The Committee notes that in 1982 alone, 520 000 tonnes 
of meat (410 000 tonnes under preferential agreements 
and 110 000 from the supply balance) were imported 
without the normal levy being applied; this deprived the 
EAGGF of 800 million ECU. 
The Committee endorses the Commission's proposal that 
the existing premium schemes in the beef and veal sector 
be continued in 1983/84. The Committee is still waiting for effective and 
adequately supervised rules on the use of hormones in 
animal feed. 
Done at Brussels, 24 March 1983. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francois CEYRAC 
ANNEX 
to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
I. Voting 
A roll-call vote was taken on the opinion as a whole. The following members, present or represented, voted 
for the opinion: 
Mr Amato, Mr Bagliano, Mr Beretta, Mr Berger, Mr Bernasconi, Mr Bornard, Mr Breitenstein, 
Mr Broicher, Mr Camman, Mr Cremer, Mr Dassis, Mr von der Decken, Mr Delia Croce, Mr Drago, 
Mr Elsen, Mrs Engelen-Kefer, Mr Etty, Mr Friedrichs, Mr Glesener, Mr van Greunsven, Mrs Heuser, 
Mr Kirschen, Mr Kolble, Mr Low, Mr Lojewski, Mr Marvier, Mr Masucci, Mr Mols Sorensen, Mr Mour-
gues, Mr Muller, Mr Nielsen B., Mr Nielsen P., Mr Nierhaus, Mr Pfeiffer, Mr Plank, Mr Pelletier, 
Mr Querleux, Mr van Rens, Mr Romoli, Mr Rouzier, Mr Schneider, Mr Schoepges, Mr Sharp, Mr Stahl-
mann, Mr Staratzke, Mr Storie-Pugh, Mr Storm-Hansen, Mr Van der Mensbrugghe, Mr Van Melcken-
beke, Mr Vercellino, Mr Wagenmans, Mr Wagner, Mrs Weber. 
The following members, present or represented, voted against the opinion: 
Mr Bazianas, Mr Berns, Mr de Caffarelli, Mr Cashman, Mr Chalioris, Mr De Tavernier, Mr Emo 
Capodilista, Mr Jakobsen, Mr Kamizolas, Mr Kelly, Mr Lauga, Mr Laur, Mr Law, Mr Miller, Mr Mills, 
Mr Morselli, Mr Poeton, Mr Rainero, Mr Schnieders, Mr Strauss, Mr Vasseur, Mr van der Veen, Mr 
Wick, Mr Yverneau, Mr Zinkin. 
The following members, present or represented, abstained from voting: 
Mr Binnenbruck, Mr Boddy, Mr Briganti, Mr Burnel, Mr Chappie, Mr De Bievre, Mr De Bruyn, 
Mr Debunne, Mr Delourme, Mr De Normann, Mr Dunet, Mr Fortuyn, Mr Fuller, Mr Goris, Mrs Gredal, 
9. 5. 83 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 124/31 
Mr Hemmer, Mr Hilkens, Mr Jaschick, Mr Jenkins, Mr Margot, Mr Milne, Mr Monier, Mr Murphy, 
Mrs Nielsen M., Mr Ognibene, Mrs Patterson, Mr Pronk, Mr Ramaekers, Mrs Rangoni-Machiavelli, 
Mr Regaldo, Mr Roycroft, Mr Schwarz, Mr Smith A. R., Mr Smith L. J., Mrs Strobel, Mr Tixier, 
Mr Ventejol, Mrs Williams, Mr Zoli. 
II. Amendments or changes made to the text during discussions 
The following passages of the section opinion were replaced by an amendment adopted at the session: 
— Point 1.1.3: 
'The Section does not consider it necessary to tighten up the quality criteria for intervention and export 
as this could make them more stringent than those used in normal trade practice and demanded by 
many ot the Community's traditional customers.' 
— Point 1.1.6, second sentence: 
'However, in view of the need to stimulate cultivation of this crop, the Section does not consider the 
proposed increase adequate.' 
— Point 1.1.7, third sentence: 
'Furthermore, if account is taken of the 16 million tonnes of cereal substitutes imported in 1981/82, the 
guarantee threshold is not exceeded and hence the application of the co-responsibility principle is not 
justified.' 
— Point 1.3, second sentence: 
'Therefore there is no justification for proposing such a low increase for the basic quota 
(A quota).' 
— Point 1.11, third and fourth paragraphs: 
'The Section notes that the Commission is introducing a double penalization for milk and dairy 
products. 
In view of the economic and social consequences which such measures would have for the income of the 
two million small-scale milk producers in the Community, the Section is against any fall in the 
intervention price.' 
— Point 1.12, fourth paragraph: 
'The Section endorses the Commission's proposal that the existing premium schemes in the beef and 
veal sector be continued in 1983/84. It deplores the failure to increase these premiums.' 
Voting: 
For: 70. Against: 4. Abstentions: 46. 
No C 124/32 Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 5. 83 
III. Minority statement 
Following the recorded vote on the opinion, the undersigned members of the farmers' group, who voted 
against, issued the following statement: 
'The following comments are made by the members representing agriculture, who voted against the 
additional opinion on the ground that it conflicts with tin general position they had taken in the 
minority opinion submitted at the plenary session of 23 and 24 February. 
2. Comments on specific agricultural products 
2.1. Cereals 
The representatives of agriculture share the concerns voiced in the Committee opinion on this 
point. 
They also ask that appropriate steps be taken to stabilize the import of cereal substitutes subject to very 
low or zero customs duties or levies. 
The proposed steps for stabilizing these imports, which have been partially adopted by the Council, are 
only a first, inadequate step. 
For these reasons, in particular, the representatives of agriculture oppose the co-responsibility 
measures set out for cereals. They also point out that these co-responsibility measures, as proposed by 
the Commission, will entail a permanent cumulative penalization of farmers. 
The representatives of agriculture are opposed to the abolition of the end-of-year indemnities for maize, 
which will impede the expansion of this crop, in which the Community is far from self-sufficient. 
2.2. Rice 
The representatives of agriculture accept the Committee's comments on this product. 
2.3. Sugar 
The representatives of agriculture accept the comments made in the Committee's opinion. Last year 
producers agreed to increase Community stocks by 2 million tonnes, including more than 1 million 
tonnes of "C" sugar, and they reduced their take-up by 9 %. They are willing to make a similar effort 
this year. It is therefore unjustified to propose such a low price increase for the basic quote 
(quota A). 
2.4. Colza 
Apart from the Committee's comments, which they endorse, the representatives of agriculture consider 
that the aid currently granted for crushing colza seed should be extended to whole seeds used in animal 
feed, in order to create, in view of the difficulties encountered in selling colza oil, an additional market 
for colza seed. However this step should not be allowed to impose pressure on the organization of the 
market in oilseeds or on Community support for this product. 
9. 5. 83 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 124/33 
2.5. Olive oil 
The representatives of agriculture refer to the Committee opinion of 27 May 1982 ('). They point out 
that the 5,5 % increase in the production aid proposed by the Commission is completely inadequate, 
given the production-cost increase of more than 16,5 %. In addition it will be necessary to introduce 
more effective price-regulator instruments in order to ensure appropriate consumer prices. The 
representatives of agriculture call for an improvement in the procedures for granting and monitoring 
production aids. 
The absence of an overall policy on fats and oils, based on respect for Community preference, lies 
behind the serious market distortions and the heavy cost to the EAGGF. 
During the negotiations on enlargement of the Community, a tax should be introduced on all fats and 
oils for human consumption — whether imported or produced in the Community - in order to bring 
the Community sector for fats and oils back into balance, improve price ratios between the products 
concerned and increase the Community's "own resources". 
Such a step would do much to ease the problems which will be posed by the accession of Spain and 
Portugal. 
The Community already furthers the sale of northern European butter by schemes of the "Christmas 
butter" type. It should publicize olive oil in the non-traditional consuming countries by similar schemes, 
of limited duration and therefore inexpensive. As in the case of butter, a maximum consumer price 
should be laid down. 
2.7. Fruit and vegetables 
A more correct and comprehensive application of Community preference is essential to ensure a decent 
income for growers in this particularly sensitive sector. 
To this end it is necessary to improve the reference-price system, and the monitoring of imports of 
storeable products from non-Community countries which hamper the efforts made to stabilize 
Community markets. 
In order to improve market management, it is essential to strengthen producers' association, ensure 
greater respect of quality standards and increase the number of products subject to the reference-price 
and withdrawal system. 
The representatives of agriculture are opposed to any limitation of processing aid. They consider that 
the list of products should be lengthened and that additional steps should be taken with respect to 
processed fruit and vegetables, in particular common quality standards for products intended for 
processing and for processed products. These standards should also be applicable to third-country 
products. In addition, the system of export refunds should be widened. 
2.8. Tobacco 
Although the Community is only 45 % self-sufficient, growers' incomes are under constant pressure as 
a result of the inadequate operation of the regulations governing this sector. 
The representatives of agriculture consider that the following steps should be taken to remedy this 
situation: 
— To ensure a strict application of Community preference, target prices should be tied to production 
costs and inflation rates in the Member States. The premiums paid to the first processor should take 
account of the considerable differences between inflation and exchange rates in the Member States 
and third countries. 
— The Commission should support growers in their bid to obtain coherent undertakings from the 
manufacturing industry with respect to Community tobacco, in order to limit intervention buying 
caused by short-term economic fluctuations. 
(') OJ NoC 205, 9. 8. 1982. 
No C 124/34 Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 5. 83 
— Exports refunds should be increased for all Community varieties and all destinations. This will 
reduce the tonnage offered to intervention agencies, and thus expenditure. 
— Exceptional and specific action should be taken to overcome the serious crisis affecting certain 
varieties. 
2.9. Wine 
In addition to the Committee's comments, which they endorse, the representatives of agriculture 
consider that the present wine regulation does not provide the requisite guarantees for growers' incomes 
and market balance. It cannot meet the preconditions they have laid down for enlargement. 
The representatives for agriculture want the price for preventive distilling to be increased to 80 % of the 
guidance price. The obligatory distilling price should be at least 70% of the guidance price. 
They also ask that the destination guarantee should be increased to 25 % of each grower's crop. For the 
current and future market years, the possibility of substitution of wine effectively sent for distillation 
should be reintroduced. 
They stress the need to expand markets by cutting duties and by providing consumers with 
information. Exports should be boosted, and helped by Community-financed publicity campaigns. 
Article 57 of Regulation (EEC) No 337/79, on support for storeage of quality wine psr, should be 
applied in the current marketing year. 
The price of white wine should be increased more substantially, so as to narrow the price gap between 
red and white wine and to take account of market price trends (as provided for by Article 2 (2) of 
Regulation (EEC) No 337/79. 
2.10. Alcohol 
The representatives of agriculture refer to the ESC opinion and urge, in particular, a guarantee that 
alcohol produced by preventive distillation of wine will be taken over by the EAGGF at Community 
prices. 
2.11. Milk and dairy products 
The Farmers' Group agrees with the comments made in the Section's opinion. It would also point out 
that the Commission's proposal to introduce double penalization would substantially reduce farmers' 
incomes, with serious economic and social repercussions for the Community's 1,8 million or so milk 
producers, most of whom are small farmers. 
The Group is opposed to any increase in the co-responsibility levy. Nor can it accept the proposed drop 
in intervention prices linked with guarantee thresholds. 
In order to match supply and demand more effectively, a set of measures will have to be implemented 
within the Community (stimulation of demand and voluntary cuts in production) and in external 
trade. 
2.12. Beef and veal 
The Farmers' Group could support the Committee's stand provided that the opinion is amplified as 
follows. 
The Group recommends standing intervention for beef and veal carcasses and the retention of private 
storage aid when the market is slack. 
It disagrees with the restriction of intervention purchases to male animals. Heifers should also be 
eligible. 
9. 5. 83 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 124/35 
The Farmers' Group calls on the Commission to consider whether intervention could be extended to 
encompass the purchase of entire carcasses or quarters (front or hind) at any time of the year when the 
market situation so requires. 
It agrees to the proposed retention of the existing system of beef and veal subsidies in 1983/84 but 
regrets that these subsidies are not to be stepped up. 
In view of the current state of the market the Farmers' Group wishes imports qf meat from non-member 
countries to be strictly limited to meet Community requirements. It calls in any event for (a) the 
introduction of stringent monitoring for meat intended for processing purposes so as to ensure that such 
meat is not sold directly to the consumer and (b) the return of the "twinning" system.' 
Mr Bazianas, Mr Berns, Mr de Caffarelli, Mr Cashman, Mr Chalioris, Mr De Tavernier, Mr Emo 
Capodilista, Mr Jakobsen, Mr Kelly, Mr Lauga, Mr Laur, Mr Morselli, Mr Rainero, Mr Schnieders, 
Mr Strauss, Mr Vasseur, Mr van der Veen, Mr Yverneau, Mr Wick. 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation altering, with effect from 1 April 1983, the 
intervention prices for butter, skimmed-milk powder and Grana Padano and Parmigiano 
Reggiano cheeses 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official journal of the European 
Communities No C 318 of 4 December 1982, page 5. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 25 November 1982 the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the Economic 
and Social Committee in accordance with Articles 47 and 198 of the Treaty establishing the 
European Economic Community. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee prepared its opinion on the above matter at its 
206th plenary session held in Brussels on 23 and 24 March 1983. 
The full text of the opinionis as follows: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European 
Economic Community, and in particular Articles 47 and 
198 thereof, 
Having regard to the request made by the Council of the 
European Communities on 25 November 1982 for an 
opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation 
altering, with effect from 1 April 1983, the intervention 
prices for butter, skimmed-milk powder and Grana 
Padano and Parmigiano Reggiano cheeses, 
Having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 
23 November 1982 instructing the Section for 
Agriculture to draw up an opinion on the matter, 
Having regard to its additional opinion (') on the 
Commission proposals on the fixing of prices for certain 
(') See page 27 of this Official Journal. agricultural products and on certain related measures 
(1983/84), 
Having regard to the opinion adopted by the Section for 
Agriculture at its 241st meeting held on 14 and 
15 February 1983, 
Having regard to the report submitted by the rapporteur, 
Mr Schnieders, on the abovementioned proposals, 
Having regard to the discussions at its 206th plenary 
session held on 23 and 24 March 1983 (meeting of 
24 March), 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
by 37 votes to 15 with 27 abstentions: 
The Committee cannot approve the Commission's 
proposals for the following reasons: