30.3.2004 EN C 80/59 Official Journal of the European Union
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council
Regulation setting aid rates in the seeds sector for the 2004/2005 marketing year’
(COM(2003) 552 final — 2003/0212 (CNS))
(2004/C 80/17)
On 7 October 2003 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under
Articles 36 and 37 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentionedproposal.
On 23 September 2003, the Bureau of the European Economic and Social Committee instructed the
Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment to undertake the preparatory work.
In view of the urgency of the matter, at its 404th plenary session held on 10 and 11 December 2003
(meeting of 10 December), the European Economic and Social Committee appointed Mr Bros as itsrapporteur-general and adopted the following opinion by 63 votes in favour and 3 abstentions.
1. Introduction
1.1. On 26 October 1971, the Council of the European
Communities established a common organisation of themarket in seeds (Regulation (EEC) No 2358/71) (
1). This CMO
provides, in particular, for the possibility of giving aid to the
production of certain types of seed, according to how they areproduced.
1.2. The amount of aid is determined taking into account
the need, on the one hand, to ensure a balance between thevolume of production required in the Community and the
amount that can be marketed in the light of prices for these
products on third-country markets and, on the other, to ensurea fair income for seed producers.
1.3. Within the framework of CAP reform, and in accord-
ance with Article 37 and Annex VI of Regulation (EC)
No 1782/2003 of 29 September 2003 (
2), the amount of aid
to seed production is included in the calculation under the
single payment scheme. However, Article 70 gives Member
States the option of not applying the single payment schemeto one or more species listed in Annex XI of the regulation.
This new scheme should be implemented by the 2005/2006
marketing year at the latest.
2. The Commission proposal
2.1. The Commission proposes extending the validity of
Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 2358/71 to the 2004/2005
marketing year and to freeze the amount of production aid,taking into account the situation on the European Union
market.
(1) OJ L 246, 5.11.1971, p. 1-5.
(2) OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 1-69.3. General comments
3.1. The seed sector is of primary importance for the
agricultural sector in that it is the guarantor of quality andconsistency of plant produce in future years. For this reason,the Committee draws the Commission’s attention to the risks
inherent in abolishing production subsidies for seeds given the
costs of seed production. Certain plants could be grown mainlyfrom imported seeds, which would not necessarily be subject
to the same standards of production and inspection as those
applicable in the European Union. This fear is all the morejustified by the statement under ‘Whereas (2)’ in the Com-
mission proposal.
3.2. There is a risk that reform of the CAP will introduce
significant distortions into the seed sector in terms of compe-
tition between farmers and between Member States.
3.3. On the one hand, the choice given to Member States
as to whether or not to apply the single payment scheme tothe species covered by the common organisation of the market
in seeds will lead to differences in the level of aid between
Member States. These differences could lead to the penalisationof some national sectors for species that can easily be traded
between countries because of their low density.
3.3.1. Production of garden and beet seed do not attract
Community subsidies under the current arrangements. As
these seeds are produced in arable regions, the Committee
finds it regrettable that the Commission has not taken intoconsideration the risk that the application of the new single
payment scheme may distort competition. The Commission
should have ruled out the possibility of producing these typesof seed with payment entitlement by including these crops in
the list of exceptions in Article 51 of Regulation (EC) No 1782/
2003. In order to avoid these distortions, the Committeeproposes that the Member States harmonise their position inthe context of the implementing regulations.
C 80/60 EN 30.3.2004 Official Journal of the European Union
4. Specific comments
4.1. Due to the development of agro-environmental (inter-
crop and anti-erosion) or sanitary measures (e.g. nematodetraps), demand for seed of the species Brassica napus and
Sinapis alaba has increased and, in the absence of subsidies,
this has led to an increase in imports. For this reason, theCommittee requests that these species be included in the annexto the proposed regulation.
5. Conclusions
5.1. The Committee takes due note of the Commission’s
proposal aimed at extending the regime of production aid for
Brussels, 10 December 2003.
The President
of the European Economic and Social Committee
Roger BRIESCHseeds (Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 2853/71) until the
2004/2005 marketing year.
5.2. The Committee draws the attention of the Council and
the other institutions to its comments concerning, on the one
hand, the risks of distorting competition carried by theapplication of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 to seeds of
species affected by Regulation (EEC) No 2358/71 and to
garden seeds and beet seed, and, on the other, the inclusion oftwo species (Brassica napus and Sinapis alba) in the regime ofproduction subsidies for seeds.