It * COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 14.2.1996 
COM(96) 44 final 
VOL I 
COMMISSION PROPOSALS 
on the prices for agricultural products 
and on related measures (1996-1997) 
VOLUME I 
Explanatory Memoranda 

-/ <K 
The Commission submits herewith its proposals for the agricultural prices for 1996/1997 and 
for certain related measures. The text is in three parts : 
Volume I 
Volume II 
Volume HI Explanatory Memoranda 
Financial implications 
Legal instruments 
Summary of Volume I 
£âgê 
Introduction . 1 
A. General considerations 2 
I. General economic situation 2 
H The agricultural economy in 1995 2 
HI. Agrimonetary measures and budget 6 
TV. Medium term outlook for certain commodities 6 
V. Price proposals and accompanying measures 7 
B. Explanatory memoranda bv product 
1. Arable crops . 10 
2. Cereals 10 
3. Protein crops and linseeds 11 
2. Grain legumes 11 
3. Rice 12 
4. Sugar 12 
5. Olive oil 13 
6. Fibre plants 16 
7. Wine 18 
8. Fruit and Vegetables 20 
9. Milk and milk products 20 
10. Beef and veal 21 
II. Sheepmeat and goatmeat 22 
12. Pigmeat 23 
13. Tobacco . 23 
1i 
C. Annexes 
I. Report on protein crops and linseed 25 
H. Report on beef and sheep sectors 30 
D. Tables 
1. Price proposals in ECU for the various agricultural products . . x 
2. Stabilizers and production thresholds x 
3. Trends in economic indices x 
Vol I EN - 1 c. 
INTRODUCTION 
This year price fixing continues the policy of stable prices and aids which has 
applied since the 1992 reforms. 
In the arable sector prices and aids levels were set in 1992 for the indefinite future 
and no new decisions are required now. For other sectors, unchanged prices and 
aids are proposed in this package. 
This stability in terms of support levels does not, however, imply stagnation of 
policy. Within the sectors which were reformed in 1992 two major simplifications 
are proposed, a unification of the rates of rotational and non rotational set aside and 
the introduction of a single premium for young bulls in place of the current system 
of two annual premia. 
This prices package should also be seen in the context of the continuing process 
of reforming those sectors not covered by the 1992 decisions A new rice regime 
was agreed last December, Council discussions on reform of the fruit and vegetables 
regime are well advanced; the Commission has been glad to note the intention of 
the Italian Presidency to recommence the discussions on the proposed reform of the 
wine regime; and it intends to make proposals for the reform of the olive oil regime 
in the near future. 
This package, based on stability with certain simplifications, has amongst its 
objectives that of contributing to the battle against waste and fraud and the 
improvement of sound financial management The Commission strongly encourages 
the Council to respect the paramount importance of this objective. 
Vol I EN - 2 
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 
1. General economic situation 
After the relatively strong recovery of economic growth in 1994 (2.8%), the EU economy 
exhibited a similar rate of growth in 1995, put at 2.7% according to the latest available 
official estimates. There are however indications that a slowdown of growth occurred in some 
of the major economies in the second half of the year (eg Germany and France), which might 
lead to a downward revision of the 1995 figure. A resumption of growth is still expected for 
the second half of 1996, putting the figure for the year as a whole at 2.6%. For 1997 some 
further (modest) growth acceleration is forecast. 
Private consumption is expected to pick up more gradually helped by rising employment and 
moderate increases in real wages. The rate of unemployment is expected to fall from 10.7 % 
in 1995 to 10.3 % in 1996 and to just below 10 % in 1997 on average. Inflation should 
remain subdued in 1996 (3.0%) and fall further to 2.7% in 1997 due to a rather gentle growth 
and a moderation in wage increases. 
2. The agricultural economy in 1995 
This year saw the implementation of the final part of the 1992 reform. The improvement in 
the economic situation of farming in the Community continued and was further strengthened. 
While weather conditions for farming were fairly satisfactory in 1995 in most areas of the 
European Union, farmers in a large part of the Iberian peninsula had to cope with 
exceptionally high temperatures and drought for the fourth year running. 
The main agricultural markets 
Community cereals production for 1995 is estimated at approximately 175 million tonnes, a 
little higher than the 172 million tonnes of 1994. The rise of just over 2% in the area sown 
to cereals due to the reduction of set-aside by 3% and a switch from oilseeds to cereals (due 
to an overshoot of the oilseeds base area) was partially compensated by a fall in yields (Spain 
and Portugal). By contrast, yields in other Member States rose appreciably, particularly in 
Northern Europe. 
Initially, market prices have reflected, although with a delay, reductions in the intervention 
prices adopted under the reform. Subsequently however, these price drops have been reduced 
on some markets, for some countries by the successive devaluations of certain green rates or 
by the reduction in surpluses following the drop in production and the massive disposal of 
intervention stocks, and by other factors (quality of the harvest, quantities withheld from the 
market by producers or collecting organizations, improvements in prices on the international 
market, etc.). At the end of December 1995, for example, the price for common wheat was 
23% higher than the intervention price in Rouen and 48% higher in Milan. It is expected that 
a reduction in the set-aside rate to 10% for rotational and non rotational set aside and a 
cooling of prices on the world market will go some way to alleviate this situation. 
Vol I EN - 3 
The area sown to oilseeds in 1995 was down overall on the previous year as a result of the 
cut in compensatory aid in 1994/95, following the overshoot of the maximum guaranteed area 
in certain Member States. The drop in sown areas was particularly significant in the case of 
oilseeds grown for food uses (about - 8% on average). The fall was partially offset however, 
by the significant increase in the areas sown to oilseeds for non-food uses (up 57% on 1994 
for all oilseeds and more than 70% for rape). 
Overall production of oilseeds (food and non-food) is expected to be around 12.3 
million tonnes in 1995, slightly down on last year. Those grown for non-food uses should 
increase from 1.4 to 2.2 million tonnes, a rise of just under 60 % in one year. 
After falling sharply in 1994, sugar production rose slightly in 1995 (+ 3.6% on average for 
the European Union as a whole) as a result of a slight increase in the areas under beet and 
a small rise in sugar yields, which nevertheless remain below those of 1993. 
The 1995 Community wine harvest, provisionally estimated at 150 million hi is around this 
level for the third year running, considerably less than it was in 1992 or even in 1993 when 
the harvest was relatively modest. Production is down in most of the producer countries 
because of poor weather conditions and, in certain cases, the drop in planted areas. The 
combination of these factors together with the elimination by distillation of surpluses that had 
built up in earlier years has brought about a relative equilibrium on the market in recent years 
which has had a positive impact on prices (there will be no compulsory distillation in 
1995/96). In the majority of producer countries the prices for red wine in national currency 
at the end of December were considerably higher than at the same time the year before 
(+ 48% in Italy, + 6% in France and + 9% in Spain). 
Milk production in 1995 is estimated to be very slightly up on the previous year (+ 0.5%) 
due to an increase in yields, despite a reduction in the dairy herd. Deliveries to dairies are 
expected to remain virtually unchanged, at last year's level, for the European Union as a 
whole. The drop in butter production noted in recent years continued in 1995 (- 40 000 tonnes 
compared with 1994). Butter production has fallen therefore by around 450 000 tonnes since 
the beginning of the 1990s. By contrast, cheese production continues to rise (+2.1% in 1995 
compared with 1994) as a result of increasing consumption. The fall in butter production, 
together with the almost total exhaustion of public intervention stocks, has pushed up prices 
on the butter market. In almost all the Member States these were above the intervention price 
at the end of September 1995. Over 1995 butter prices rose on average by about 9% helped 
by the conjunction of a number of positive factors on the world market (lower production in 
some exporting countries and rising demand in some importing countries, etc). 
After several years of cyclical fall, beef and veal production began the upward phase of the 
cycle in 1995. In 1996 it is expected to rise by around 1.9% following the 2.7% rise in 1995 
and the fall of more than 4% in 1994. 
Vol I EN - 4 
In accordance with the decisions taken in 1992, intervention prices for beef were reduced by 
6.2% at the beginning of July 1993, by 5.3% at the beginning of July 1994 and by 5.6% at 
the beginning of July 1995. These institutional price reductions were partially reflected in the 
market prices. However, actual reductions were as a rule less than those in the institutional 
prices because of the drop in production in recent years and the substantial reduction in 
intervention stocks. There has also been an additional impact on prices in national currency 
resulting from the monetary adjustments since September 1992. With the recovery of 
production, prices fell in the first half of 1995, before recovering some of the lost ground in 
the autumn. For the most part these remained above the level at which tenders for intervention 
can be opened and in the few cases where tenders for intervention were opened, no purchases 
were made. 
In 1995 pigmeat production is estimated to be slightly down on the previous year (- 0.6%), 
in line with the drop in the pig herd for the European Union as a whole. As a result, pigmeat 
prices firmed up throughout the year, with the exception of a setback in May and June. In 
December 1995 they were on average 11% higher than they had been the previous year. 
Production may fall slightly in 1996 but a recovery can be expected towards the end of the 
year. 
In 1995 poultry m eat production rose by an estimated 2.9%, after a similar increase the 
previous year. This growth is expected to continue at slower rate in 1996. Prices in early 1995 
remained considerably below those for 1994, but by December 1995 were at a comparable 
level as the same time the previous year. 
The slight drop in the production of sheepmeat and goatmeat in 1994 (- 0.8%) turned into 
a small increase in 1995 (0.3%). However a slight decline in production (-0.9%) is again 
expected in 1996. Average prices in ecus at the end of December 1995 were around 10% 
lower than at the same time the previous year. 
Producer prices 
It is estimated that the index of nominal producer prices for all agricultural products increased 
by averages of 2.7% for EUR-15 in 1995 and 3.4% for EUR-12 compared with the previous 
year. This corresponds to falls of 0.3% and 1.1% respectively in real prices. 
It should not be forgotten in this connection that since 1993 the support prices for certain 
products (in particular cereals and beef) have decreased each year and that producers have 
instead received increasing compensatory aids, which are not taken into account in the 
producer price index. 
Vol I EN - 5 
Compared with 1994, the producer price index for crop products increased in real terms by 
an average of 1.5% (2.0% for EUR-12). However, the situation varies considerably from one 
product to another. In the cereals sector, real producer prices remained more or less 
unchanged (-0.7% on average), those for fresh vegetables fell by an average of 4.4%, while 
the decrease was over 5% for oilseeds. On the other hand, potato prices rose by nearly 8% 
in real terms, wine prices by over 10%, fresh fruit 3.7% and olives and olive oil 9.4%. 
The producer price trend was, generally speaking, less satisfactory for livestock products. It 
fell, in real terms, by 3.6% on average, with decreases of as much as 12.5% for eggs, 9.5% 
for poultry, 8.4% for cattle and 5.5% for sheep and goats. The only livestock sector in EUR-
15 which showed an upward trend was pigmeat, for which prices rose by an average of 3.5% 
in real terms. \ 
In 1995 the general producer price index, in real terms, showed an upward trend in Spain 
(+1.5%), Italy (+1.5%) and the United Kingdom (+3.1%) and a downward one in Belgium 
(-4.5%), Germany (-3.6%), Luxembourg (-4.4%), the Netherlands (-4.2%) and also in Sweden 
(-4.1%), Austria (-23.6%) and Finland (-26.6%). 
Farm incomes 
Incomes are expected to have risen in 1995 in the crop sector (cereals, wine, olive oil, fruit). 
Livestock production, in particular eggs and poultry, sheep and goats and cattle farming has 
come under some pressure. However in the cattle, and sheep and goat sectors the negative 
impact of the fall in producer prices has been largely offset by the increase in the level of 
premiums. Conversely, pigmeat production continued to become more profitable in 1995 as 
producer prices improved. 
Unlike 1994, during which all EU 12 Member States recorded an increase in agricultural 
income in real terms, 1995 was characterised by a great variation among Member States. Five 
Member States, Greece, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands and Belgium exhibited a decline in 
farm income ranging from -9.8% in Belgium to -1.7% in Greece. All five countries exhibited 
a strong growth in income in 1994. 
The other EU 12 Member States exhibited increases in farm income for the second successive 
year ranging from United Kingdom (+16.6%) and Denmark (10.5%) to Germany (3.0%) and 
Ireland (1.6%). 
Developments of income were not uniform in the three new Member States. In Austria 
income was little changed, Sweden recorded the strongest EU 15 increase of 25.7% following 
a 21.3% drop in 1994. Income in Finland dropped 7.5% in 1995 following a smaller drop 
(-1.7%) in 1994. 
Vol I EN - 6 
3. Agrimonetary measures and budget 
The 1996 budget guideline for the EAGGF Guarantee Section amounts to ECU 40,823 
million, representing an increase of ECU 2,844 million on 1994. About ECU 1,000 million 
of this increase is due to the integration of the full effect of the GNP of the Union resulting 
from enlargement The remainder of the increase essentially reflects the growth in GNP for 
the Union as a whole and the development of the GNP deflator. The impact on the budget 
of the monetary realignment within the EMS between September 1992 and May 1993 is 
estimated at ECU 1,746 million. 
The 1996 budget has also taken into account the consequences of the decision of June 1995 
to maintain, for a number of Member States with appreciating currencies, the agricultural 
conversion rates applicable to certain direct aids at unchanged levels and to grant degressive 
compensatory aid to producers for income losses resulting from the reduction in the 
conversion rates applicable to other measures. 
Throughout this Volume, all amounts are expressed in "new" ECU even when they refer to 
the period before 1.2.1995 when the switchover coefficient was abolished, to facilitate 
comparisons. 
4. Medium-term outlook for certain commodities 
Two main factors continue to influence the evolution of EU agricultural markets in the 
medium-term horizon: the new policy environment as a result of the CAP reform and the 
application of the GATT agreement. 
In summary, under the assumption of stability in the CAP, the outlook for cereals, oilseeds, 
livestock and dairy products is the following. 
For cereals, area allocation is affected by the level of set-aside. If the current standard set 
aside rate (15 % for rotational set aside and 20 % for non rotational set aside) were to be 
applied for the 1997/98 marketing year the cereals area should be around 32 million hectares. 
Within cereals, the share of soft wheat is expected to increase at the expense of barley, and 
remain rather stable for the other cereals. Yield trends are expected to continue the slower rate 
of annual growth observed since the mid 1980s, thus resulting in a level of total cereals 
production close to 190 million tonnes by the year 2000. Cereals consumption should regain 
the momentum of the first year of CAP reform, provided that world cereals prices decline 
from their present, historically high, levels, thus influencing the adjustment of domestic 
market prices towards the intervention price level. 
Vol I EN - 7 
Area allocation in the oilseeds sector, which is determined by the maximum guaranteed area, 
coupled with reductions in aid for Member Sates who contribute to any overshoot should 
stabilise the area at around 5.3 million hectares by 2000. With yields increasing at much 
lower rates than in the past, oilseeds production should be only slightly higher than its current 
level by the end of the decade. The level of oil cake for livestock production produced from 
oilseeds grown for non food purposes is approaching the limit foreseen in the Blair House 
Agreement This limit will, therefore act as a constraint on non food oilseed production unless 
new end uses can be found for the oilcakes. 
Beef production has entered into its cyclical upturn in 1995. However, its present level is 
lower than previous cycles mainly due to the very strong herd decline in Germany. The 
current beef cycle should thus reach its peak in 1997. However, many uncertainties continue 
to persist in the sector, in particular with respect to consumption. It is not unreasonable to 
hope that consumption will stabilize, with the positive impact of income growth offsetting the 
increased competitiveness of other meats, in particular poultry. But this equation could be 
upset if income growth falters or if there were renewed or intensified health concerns. On the 
more optimistic hypothesis, therefore, market equilibrium in the medium term can be 
maintained at current market price levels but significantly lower prices are likely if production 
restraint were to be relaxed or if demand falls. 
Pork and especially poultry consumption should continue to increase in the future, although 
their level will be determined to a certain extent by the duration of the current high level of 
world cereals prices. Given that production is mainly demand driven in these markets, it 
should adjust to the level of domestic consumption and to export possibilities (which are 
influenced by GATT commitments). However, if Community cereals prices remain close to 
world levels, exports without refunds at least for some products should be possible. 
Finally, the milk quota system should ensure stable milk production. A slight increase of non-
subsidised domestic use is expected, mainly as a result of the increase in fresh products and 
cheese. However, this development will be almost totally offset by the continuing decline in 
butter consumption. In the sector as a whole, supply will continue to exceed demand by a 
significant margin. Whether the Union can go to the end of the GATT period without the 
need for quota reductions is heavily dependent on consumption trends. 
5. Price Proposals and Accompanying Measures 
In 1995/96 the support price levels decided in 1992 were applied in full for the first time. 
Their full effect, however, particularly in the cereals sector, could not be properly appreciated 
because, for conjunctural reasons, market prices were well above support levels. Nevertheless, 
there has been nothing in the experience of 1995/96 to suggest the need for fundamental 
change at this stage. The general theme of this prices package, as regards the sectors reformed 
in 1992, is one of continuity, but with certain simplifications. 
The simplifications concern set aside, where a single rate is proposed for rotational and non 
rotational set aside, and beef, where a single premium for young bulls is proposed in place 
of the present two. 
Vol I EN - 8 
The single rate of set aside which is proposed is 18 %. This reflects the fact that under the 
present system of different rates for rotational and non rotational set aside (normally 15 % 
for rotational and 20 % for non rotational set aside) producers have opted to put more than 
50 % of the land concerned into non rotational set aside. It should be stressed that the figure 
of 18 % represents, like the existing figures of 15 % and 20 %, the point of departure for 
decisions by the Council which can, in exceptional circumstances, decide to apply a lower or 
a higher rate. The Commission intends to make a proposal as regards the 1997 set aside rate 
in July 1996, if harvest data justifies a departure from the normal rate. 
The level of the single premium for bulls is one which enables the existing level of support 
for this sector as a whole to be maintained unchanged. 
As regards tobacco, which was also part of the 1992 package, the Commission is due to make 
a report in April. For 1996/97, however, proposals on tobacco quotas have already been made 
and it is now proposed that premia be extended at an unchanged level. 
Continuity is also provided in other sectors, but for wine and fruit and vegetables, where 
reform proposals are already under discussion in the Council, proposals are made on a 
precautionary basis to allow the existing regimes to function until they are updated after 
reform decisions have been taken. The same is true for olive oil, where reform proposals will 
be made shortly. 
As regards other issues, for cotton, where a reformed system was introduced last year, a 
technical change is proposed in order to allow advance payments to be calculated more easily 
and thus to increase the proportion of the aid which can be paid before the end of the season. 
For grain legumes (chickpeas, lentils and vetches), the current aid system is exterMed and the 
maximum guaranteed area is increased, as requested by the Council as part of its decisions 
of December 1993 on the application of the Blair House agreement on oil seeds. 
For flax, as anticipated in the 1994/95 price proposals, it is proposed to introduce a maximum 
guaranteed area (MGA). This is accompanied by a degree of differentiation between 
traditional and non traditional production techniques, in order to avoid the MGA system 
having a disproportionate effect on either system. 
In the milk sector, apart from some purely technical matters, no changes are proposed. It 
should be noted, however, that this degree of stability cannot be expected to last indefinitely. 
Indeed, next year, discussions will need to begin on longer term price and quota policy as the 
expiry date of the current quota regime approaches and as the tariff reductions decided in the 
context of the GATT agreement begin to make themselves felt 
For pigmeat, the changes in the basic price and standard quality agreed last year have allowed 
a better appreciation of the market situation, which improved significantly in 1995/96. No 
further changes are proposed now. For sheepmeat, the basic system of support level is 
extended unchanged but a new means of applying private storage, for application for short 
term actions in specific markets, is suggested . 
Vol I EN - 9 
As regards the measures which are conditioned by interest rates (monthly increments in the 
cereals and rice intervention prices and sugar storage refunds) reductions are proposed 
reflecting the generally downward trend in these rates. For cereals monthly increments, a 
further reduction is made to offset the fact that some of the reductions proposed by the 
Commission since 1992 were adopted only in part by the Council, with the result that there 
has been too much incentive to retain cereals early in the season. 
As Annex I, the Commission is submitting the report on protein crops and linseed requested 
by the Council in its conclusions of the price package of last year. 
As Annex II to the price proposals, the Commission is submitting a report on the beef male 
animal premia, on die deseasonalisation premium and on the derogations from the normal 
rules on livestock premia which are applied to the new German Lander. The proposal for a 
single premium for young bulls emerges from this report Other proposals arising from the 
report are an extension, on a slightly different terms, of the existing deseasonalisation 
premium and the faculty for those Member States liable to problems of seasonality in beef 
production effectively to modulate the second steer premium in circumstances where the 
criteria for the normal deseasonalisation premium have not been met. As regards the new 
German Lander, the existing derogations in the sheep sector are continued in view of the low 
level of production. In the beef sector, however, it is suggested that it is now time for the 
Community rules to be fully applied. 
Vol I EN - 10 
B. EXPLANATORY MEMORANDA BY PRODUCT 
1. Arable crops 
1.1 Rate of set-aside 
When fixing the rate of set-aside for the 1996/97 marketing year, the Council asked 
the Commission to consider the possibility of proposing an amendment to 
Regulation (EEC) No 1765/92 so that, in future, as a general rule, an appropriate 
uniform rate of set-aside could be fixed. 
A uniform rate of set-aside would significantly simplify the rules but would risk 
weakening control of production if the rate were simply that decided on at the time 
of the reform, i.e. 15% rotational set-aside. Producers can currently opt for set-
aside other than rotational set-aside, but only on condition that they set aside an 
additional 5% to compensate for the absence of rotation. This additional amount was 
reduced to 3% for the United Kingdom and Denmark. On the basis of these 
provisions and the forecasts for cereal production and outlets up to 2000, a uniform 
basic rate of set-aside equal to the present basic rates should be fixed. Since the 
beginning of the reform, producers have tended to move from rotational to non-
rotational set-aside despite the additional set-aside required, and by 1995 more than 
half of set-aside in the Community was non-rotational. Given this situation, and in 
order to obtain the same effect with a uniform rate as with the differentiated rates, 
the Commission proposes to fix the uniform basic rate of set-aside at 18%. 
As regards the rate of set-aside to apply for the 1997/98 marketing year, i.e. to the 
autumn 1996 and spring 1997 sowings, the Commission will, if necessary, make a 
specific proposal in July 1996, taking account, inter alia, of the forecast for the 1996 
Community harvest and market developments. 
1.2 In order to ensure consistency, given that the rate of compulsory set-aside will be 
the same for all Member States, the additional rate in the event of transfers of set-
aside between farmers should be fixed at 3%. 
2. Cereals 
2.1 Prices and compensatory payments 
In 1995/96, the final phase of the reduction of intervention prices, the definitive 
arrangements adopted under the reform were introduced. From that marketing year, 
the intervention price and the compensatory payments decided in 1992 remain 
applicable for the subsequent marketing years. The uniform intervention price for 
all cereals is ECU 119.19 per tonne and the compensatory payment ECU 54.34 per 
tonne per hectare of historical cereal yield as fixed in the regionalization plan. 
Vol I EN- 11 
2.2 Monthly increases 
The intervention price for cereals is increased on a monthly basis from November 
to May by a sum amounting to ECU 1.3 per tonne per month for the 1995/96 
marketing year. The increase for May also applies in June. 
The Commission proposes to maintain these arrangements, changing just the level 
of the monthly increase. 
The reductions in the monthly increases proposed by the Commission in the price 
packages since the beginning of the reform have not been accepted in full by the 
Council. The consequences have been felt on the markets, where there has been too 
marked a tendency to hold cereals at the beginning of the marketing year in order 
to market them later. The monthly increases should therefore be reduced to the 
optimum level required to ensure smooth disposal of the harvest throughout the 
marketing year. Furthermore, interest rates are falling and this is likely to continue 
in the medium term. For all these reasons, the Commission proposes to fix the 
monthly increase at ECU 1.10 per tonne per month. 
3. Protein crops and linseed 
* The Annex I attached to this Explanatory Memorandum constitutes the report 
requested by the Council. It shows that a change in the system of payment of the 
aid for those crops would not improve the balance between arable crops. 
4. Grain legumes 
4.1 The scheme for grain legumes was introduced in 1989 by Council Regulation (EEC) 
N* 762/89 in order to maintain these crops having an economic interest for the 
European Community. It expires at the end of the 1995/1996 marketing year. 
4.2 When it adopted the Regulation which implemented the "Blair House" agreement 
on oilseeds in December 1993, the Council made the following declaration: " The 
Council approves the Commission's intention progressively to strengthen the present 
support arrangements for producers of crops such as lentils, chick peas and vetches 
in order to achieve the objective of medium-term cultivation of an additional 
280,000 hectares of such products in Spain. For each year during which that 
objective is achieved the level of aid will be reduced by the percentage by which 
the objective is exceeded". It thus signalled its wish to continue to support these 
products and even to provide for a certain increase in the area cultivated in order 
to provide an alternative to sunflower seed cultivation, particularly in those parts of 
the Union where these crops are a traditional part of the arable area. 
Vol I EN - 12 
4.3 Therefore, the Commission proposes an adapted scheme which retains the main 
elements of the current scheme ( Maximum Guaranteed Area (MGA) and hectare 
aid) , which puts the regulation for these crops more in line with some aspects of 
the regime for arable crops (adaptation of the aid in the current marketing year in 
cases where the MGA is exceeded) and which takes account of the December 1993 
compromise. The Commission executed the aid element of that compromise by 
increasing the aid to 157 Ecu/ha in 1994/1995 and to 181 Ecu/ha in 1995/1996. 
4.4 Therefore, the Commission proposes to increase the Maximum Guaranteed Area 
(MGA) to 400,000 ha and to fix the aid at the current level of 181 Ecu per hectare. 
An overshoot of the MGA in one marketing year gives rise to a proportional 
reduction of the aid during the same marketing year. 
5. Rice 
5.1 Prices 
The intervention prices for paddy rice for the 1996/97 to 1999/2000 marketing years 
were fixed by the Council Regulation on the reform of the COM The price was 
fixed at ECU 351 per tonne for the 1996/97 marketing year. A 15% reduction 
spread over three years will bring the price for 1999/2000 to ECU 298.35 per tonne. 
5.2 Monthly increases 
From the 1996/97 marketing year, the intervention period is from 1 April to 31 July. 
During that period, the intervention price is subject to four monthly increases, the 
increase for July also being applied in August. 
In view of the movement of interest rates, it is proposed to fix the monthly increase 
at ECU 2.06 per tonne. 
6. Sugar 
6.1. The Commission proposes to maintain unchanged the basic price for beet, the 
intervention price for white sugar and the manufacturing margin. 
This proposal relates to the basic price for beet and to the minimum prices for A 
beet and B beet, which depend ultimately on the ceiling fixed for the basic 
production levy and for the B levy, the latter subject to a subsequent increase in the 
ceiling in accordance with Article 28 of Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81. 
6.2. As far as the reimbursement of storage costs is concerned, the Commission proposes 
that the amount of the monthly refund be reduced from ECU 0,45/100 kg to ECU 
0,41/100 kg, to take account of the lower interest rates prevailing in the Community. 
Vol I EN - 13 
1996/97 PRICE PROPOSALS FOR SUGAR 
lJBasic price for beet 
2.Minimum price for A beet (1) 
3 .Minimum price for beet (2) 
4 intervention price for white sugar 
5 .Target price for white sugar 
6 intervention price for raw sugar 
7 .Monthly reimbursement of storage costs Unit 
tonne 
tonne 
tonne 
100 kg 
100 kg 
100 kg 
100 kg 1995/96 
prices 
(ECU) 
47,67 
46,72 
32,42 
63,19 
66,50 
52,37 
0,45 1996/97 
proposal 
(ECU) 
47,67 
46,72 
32,42 
63,19 
66,50 
52,37 
0,41 Change 
% 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
-8,9 
(1) 98% of the basic price for beet 
(2) 68% of the basic price for beet, except where Article 28(5) of Regulation (EEC) No 
1785/81 is applied. 
7. Olive OU 
7.1 Prices 1996/97 
The Commission intends to propose in the near future a major reform of the regime. 
However, in view of the uncertainty over the timing of the proposals and over 
whether the Council can decide on the revised regime in time for it to apply to the 
1996/97 marketing year, as a precautionary measure, the continuance of existing 
prices and aid levels is proposed. 
Following this approach, the prices and aid levels proposed for the 1996/97 
marketing year are detailed in the table. In this table 1994/95 and 1995/96 figures 
are also given for comparative purposes. 
Related measures : 
7.2 The fluctuating production levels specific to this product may result occasionally in 
a shortage on the market and very high prices. In order to be able to respond to 
such a situation by increasing the level of imports, it is proposed to give the 
Commission the power to suspend partially or totally the Common Customs Tariff 
when the market price of olive oil is significantly higher than the intervention price. 
Vol I EN - 14 
7.3 Certain minor adaptations to the consumption aid regime resulting also from the 
implementation of the Uruguay Round agreements are, in addition, proposed. They 
include in particular the suppression of the requirement that olive oil benefitting 
from the aid should be produced in the Community, and of the obligation for 
importers of olive oil (with the exception of olive oil imported from Tunisia under 
the quota benefitting from special arrangements) to constitute a guarantee equal to 
the amount of the consumption aid payable on the quantity imported. 
These adaptations are a consequence of the inclusion in the Common Customs 
Tariff of an amount equal to that of the guarantee to be constituted. They should 
come into force not later than 1 July 1996 when the transitional measures adopted 
under Council Regulation (EC) No 3290/94 will expire. 
Price proposals for olive oil Vol I EN - 15 
Ecu/100 kg 
TYPE OF PRICES OR AID 
1. Production target price 
2. Intervention price 
3. Representative market price 
4. Production aid 
5. Production aid for olive growers 
whose average production is less 
than 500 kg 
6. Consumption aid 
7. Percentage withheld on the 
production aid for : 
- quality improvement 
- aid for producers organizations 
and associations thereof 
8. Percentage withheld on the 
consumption aid : 
- promotion campaigns 
- aid for trade bodies 1994/95 
383, 77 
191, 92 
229, 50 
142,20 
151, 48 
12,07 -
1, 40% 
0, 80% 
0 % 
5,50% 1995/96 
383, 77 
186, 17 
229,50 
142, 20 
151, 48 
12,07 
1, 40% 
0, 80% 
0 % 
5, 50% 1996/97 
383, 77 
186, 17 
229, 50 
142, 20 
151, 48 
12,07 
1, 40% 
0, 80% 
0 % 
5, 50% 
Vol I EN - 16 
8. Fibre plants 
Cotton 
8.1 The cotton regime was reformed last year and so no major changes are proposed : the 
prices, the National Guaranteed Quantity for each Member State and, thus, the 
Maximum Guaranteed Quantity were all fixed for a five years period. 
8.2 However, establishing the level of the advance at the beginning of the marketing year 
1995/96 required the exercise of cautious judgement both as to the level of production 
and as to world prices. This was in order to ensure that the advance would not exceed 
the total payment To avoid having to forecast both these unknown factors, the 
Commission proposes to amend the basic Council regulation in order to provide for a 
variable amount of advance. This advance will be based on the difference between a 
provisional estimate of the target price and the observed daily world price. The 
provisional estimate of the target price will correspond to the target price reduced by 
a provisional abatement This will result from any application of the MGQ stabilizers 
which production forecasts indicate will be necessary. However, such production 
forecasts shall for these purposes be inflated by 15% in order to provide a safety margin 
to ensure that aid advance payments do not exceed final aid payments. The final 
payment, to be made as soon as final production figures are available, will thus become 
a flat raté sum equal to the difference between the provisional abatement and its 
definitive level. Moreover, the current system under which the aid can be prefixed 
created distortion of competition between operators. For this reason, and to simplify the 
management of the regime, the Commission proposes to provide that the demand for aid 
must be lodged on the same day as the cotton is placed in supervised storage. 
Fibre flax 
8.3 Fibre flax is supported by an aid per hectare, part of which is retained to finance a 
linen promotion scheme. 
After several years of important market surpluses, the flax market has been reasonably 
well balanced in recent years, but is now expected to move again into surplus. 
For some time now the Commission has been warning in price packages that, after 
watching the development of this crop carefully, there may be a need to propose some 
means of limiting the planted area, e.g. a maximum guaranteed area. 
Because of the desirability of more stability in the flax market and in the areas sown, 
a regime providing for a Community maximum guaranteed area (MGA) based on 
average areas cultivated over the last three years (81,500 ha) is proposed, from the 
1997/98 marketing year onwards. In case of overshoot, a reduction in the aid for the 
marketing year concerned (1% for an overrun of each 1% of the MGA) will apply. The 
decision should be taken now, so that producers can take account of this new policy 
instrument in planning their investment for next year. 
8.4 The planted area has been expanding in recent years more in new growing areas (in 
particular Spain and the UK) than in traditional areas (in particular France, Belgium, the 
Netherlands). 
Vol I EN- 17 
In the new areas the growing techniques are more concentrated on the yield of seed, 
whilst the yield and quality of the fibre is lower, mainly because the crop is harvested 
by cutting the plants rather than by grubbing them (pulling), and also because the flax 
is sown at a lower density. The more traditional and intensive way of growing leads to 
higher production costs with investments in specialised harvesters and scutching plant. 
In order to avoid the effect of the MGA bearing disproportionately on producers 
practising traditional production techniques, it is proposed to introduce from the 1997/98 
marketing year on an aid abatement to be applied to the aid paid to those producers who 
harvest their crops by cutting rather than grubbing up (pulling) their crops. The level of 
the abatement, to be set by the Commission under management committee procedure, 
will take account of the different variable costs involved in the two systems and the 
difference in the value of the output as well as the need to avoid encouraging the non-
traditional producers to invest also in the traditional intensive production techniques, 
which would increase the production of flax fibres and with it the risk of market 
disequilibrium. This new abatement would replace the existing abatements linked to the 
yields of seed, which seem to be no longer justified taking into account the new 
harvesting (retting) techniques used in the traditional areas. This would simplify on the 
spot controls by the Member States after harvest 
8.5 The new system will be reviewed after three years experience, in particular to verify that 
the objective of improving control over the planted area whilst maintaining a reasonable 
balance between traditional and less intensive production techniques has been achieved. 
8.6 For the 1996/97 marketing year the Commission proposes to maintain the current aid 
level and the current amount retained to finance promotion actions at 935.65 Ecu (before 
any aid abatement) and 53.64 Ecu per hectare respectively. 
Hemp 
8.7 In view of the current and foreseeable market situation for hemp and the level of aid 
proposed for fibre flax, the Commission considers that the areas sown with hemp can 
be kept around their current level by keeping the aid for 1996/97 at 774.74 Ecus/ha. 
Silkworms 
8.8 Silkworm rearing is practised in a few areas of the Community only and benefits from 
a flat rate aid per box. Taking into account the benefits for some rearers from large 
devaluations of their national currency the Commission proposes to set the amount of 
aid at the same level as last year, i.e. Ecu 133,26. 
Vol I EN- 18 
9. Wine 
9.1 Since May 1994 the Commission has presented to the Council and to Parliament the 
proposal on the reform of the common organization of the market in wine in order to 
fix new rules for that sector. Among other things, the proposed measures make the 
fixing of guide prices superfluous. It may not, therefore, be necessary to make a 
proposal within the price package. However, since the Council may not adopt the 
proposed measures as they stand and may, moreover, not be able to decide in time for 
the application of the reform to the 1996/97 marketing year, it seems sensible to extend 
various legal provisions of the existing wine regime in order to ensure that, if necessary, 
it can continue to function as at present. 
9.2 The Commission therefore proposes extending the guide prices for the 1995/96 
marketing year into the 1996/97 marketing year. 
9.3 Pending the establishment of the new Common Market Organisation in wine, it is 
proposed to extend for the 1996/97 marketing year certain deadlines established by 
Community legislation concerning the submission of the reports on the sulphur dioxide 
(S02) content of wines, sparkling wines and liqueur wines. 
As regards other reports: 
- the report on measures enabling producer groups to be included with producers for 
compulsory distillation contracts. The postponement of this deadline, which concerns 
Regulation (EEC) No 2046/89, will be studied in the context of a separate proposal 
dealing with amendments to this regulation. 
- the link between structural measures and compulsory distillation will no longer have 
any significance if the administrative guidelines provided for by the reform are 
adopted. It is therefore proposed that the obligation to produce this report be deleted; 
- as to the reports on "enrichment" and the delimitation of wine-growing areas, the 
presentation of the discussion paper and the reform proposal render them redundant 
since conclusions on those subjects have already been drawn by the Commission. 
The studies used by the Commission to draw up its proposal are now available and 
have been provided to the Council. 
It is also proposed to extend certain deadlines for market management, in particular: 
- the rules for calculating the quantities to be distilled for each production region 
(uniform percentage and reference wine year) accepted following the Dublin 
compromise, which were deferred until 31 August 1996, as well as the derogation 
granted for a particular application of the compulsory distillation system in Greece; 
Vol I EN - 19 
- the trial periods for certain deacidification practices which are reaching their expiry 
date; 
- the period during which it is permitted to reserve for the promotion of grape juice 
part of the aid granted for the use of grape must to make grape juice, the deadline 
of which was already extended last year until 31 August 1996. 
9.4 With regard to Spain's problems concerning the possibility of mixing white wine and 
red wine (Mezcla) and marketing wines with a degree of acidity lower than that fixed 
for the rest of the Community, it is proposed to extend for the next marketing year the 
measures already adopted under the last price package and similarly to provide for the 
same derogation on acidity in Portugal as has been granted in the past. 
9.5 The rules currently in force concerning the ban on new planting and the system granting 
Community premiums for grubbing up vines are due to expire in the course of the 
current marketing year. It is proposed, pending a decision on the set of measures 
proposed under the reform, to extend the system in force for a new year. 
9.6 It is also proposed to.provide for a specific derogation for certain special wines( 
obtained from botrytis grapes) in the United Kingdom as regards the maximum S02 
content. For this precise category of wine the maximum content should be raised to 
300 mg/1 (the same as that provided for analogous products in other regions). 
It should be noted that: 
- with regard to the extension of the deadline for the restructuring of vines planted in 
"hybrid" varieties in Madeira and the Azores, the Commission will be submitting to 
the Council the appropriate proposal as part of the amendment it will be submitting 
of Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 concerning specific measures for the Azores and 
Madeira relating to certain agricultural products; 
- the amendments to the general distillation rules concerning the proportional relation 
between infringements and penalties will be submitted as soon as possible. 
9.7 The vineyard register 
Without prejudging the outcome of the discussions under way in the Council on the 
reform of the common organization of the market in wine, the future management 
arrangements for the COM will probably involve a register permitting the area planted 
with vines to be known. 
Given the state of the work for the establishment of vineyard registers in the Member 
States concerned and in the light of experience, the Commission proposes to extend the 
deadline for the completion of the simplified vineyard register (basic reference charts) 
to 31 December 1998 instead of 31 December 1996 as was decided at the time of the 
adoption of the price package last year. 
Vol I EN - 20 
10. Fruit and Vegetables 
Basic and buving-in prices 
Pursuant to Article 16 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 on the common organization 
of the market in fruit and vegetables, each year the Commission proposes a basic price and 
a buying-in price for each of the products listed in Annex II to that Regulation, i.e. 
cauliflowers, apricots, nectarines, peaches, lemons, tomatoes, aubergines, pears, table grapes, 
apples, satsumas, mandarins, clémentines and oranges. 
Pending a decision from the Council on the reform of the common organizations of the 
markets in fresh and in processed fruit and vegetables, the Commission proposes to maintain 
the basic prices and buying-in prices at their current levels. It will draw conclusions from any 
overruns of the intervention thresholds when the total withdrawals during the 1995/96 
marketing year are known. 
11. Milk and milk products 
11.1. The current .situation on the market for milk products seems fairly balanced and does 
not, therefore, require corrective action this year on prices or quota levels. It should, 
however, be underlined that market stability is still fragile and cloaks a structural 
surplus which consistently requires large-scale intervention in the form of subsidized 
end-uses. Furthermore, the progressive application of GATT obligations will put 
increasing pressure on the sector. 
11.2. Since 1992, as part of the CAP reform and linked with the reduction in cereals 
prices, the Council fixed the target price and the intervention prices for periods 
which run from 1 July to 30 June. It seems appropriate to continue this practice and, 
for the sake of consistency, the Commission also proposes to bring the start of the 
marketing year in line with the period for which prices are fixed. 
11.3. In the framework of the Uruguay Round negotiations, certain bilateral agreements 
were concluded which foresee arrangements under which the Union would have a 
more active role in the management of concessions granted by third countries. With 
regard to measures to ensure that maximum advantage can be taken of such 
arrangements, experience has shown that the Commission lacks an adequate legal 
basis to enable it to undertake simply and efficiently the management of these 
concessions. The Commission, therefore, proposes to insert an ad hoc provision in 
the basic Regulation to remedy this difficulty. 
Vol I EN - 21 
12. Beef and veal 
12.1 Prices 
As regards the intervention price, it is proposed to maintain the level of 347,5 Ecu/100 
kg deadweight for male carcases of quality R3. 
No other prices are required to be fixed since the obligation to fix yeariy a guide price 
was removed by the Council (Uruguay Round Agreement). 
Concerning the period covered by the marketing year, it is proposed to amend the 
normal dates so that it would commence on 1 July from 1996 onwards; the next 
marketing year would therefore begin on 1.7.1996 and end on 30.6.1997 instead of 
1.4.1996 and 30.3.1997 according to the existing rules (Article 4 of Council Regulation 
805/68). 
12.2 Premia (related measures^ 
Following the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in the beef sector, the 
Commission undertook to examine the functioning of certain measures introduced by 
the new beef premium regime. In Annex II to this Explanatory Memorandum is 
attached a document entitled "Report on the Beef and Sheep Sectors" which studies the 
following questions : 
- the distribution of the regional ceilings for the Special Male Bovine Premium in 
the Member States in the light of the evolution in structures of production 
following the reform, 
the effects of the deseasonalisation premium, 
- the application, in the territories of the new German Lander, of the provisions 
applicable in the rest of the Community, and 
- the beef market situation in the light of the evolution of the sector and the 
application of the GATT agreement 
As a consequence of this examination it is proposed : 
a) to delete the second age bracket premium for non-castrated male bovines 
whilst increasing by 14% the amount of the single premium which results for 
this type of animal. This percentage increase in the single premium arises 
from me savings made by the deletion of the second age bracket premium 
payment and thus has a neutral budgetary effect; 
b) to maintain the deseasonalisation premium with seasonal slaughtering 
coefficient slightly lower than at present, but calculating this coefficient 
considering the total number of steers slaughtered in the Republic of Ireland 
and in Northern Ireland (the two principal beneficiaries of this measure). Also, 
a possibility of providing an alternative incentive to orderly marketing, 
financed by a deduction from the second tranche of the steer premium is 
Vol I EN - 22 
proposed, for application when the criterion for the application of the 
deseasonalisation premium is no longer fulfilled; 
c) Finally, not to accept requests made by Germany in respect of the New 
Lander : -
(1) For the prolongation of certain derogations from the rules on the 
application of the suckler cow premum; 
(2) For the waiving of the 90 head limit on the male animal premium. 
13. Sheepmeat and goatmeat 
13.1 Prices 
The institutional prices for the 1996 marketing year were fixed in the 1995/96 prices 
package. 
For 1997 the Commission proposes that the basic price remains at the level already 
decided for 1996. The Commission also proposes that the seasonalisation of the basic 
price remains unchanged. 
13.2 Related measures : Speeding up the opening of the private storage procedure 
At present in this sector, the amount of aid granted for private storage may be fixed for 
a certain quotation zone (by Management Committee procedure) either by tendering 
procedure or by fixing in advance the amount of aid at a flat rate. However, if the market 
price (in the Community or in the quotation zone in question) falls below 70% of the 
basic price, which tends to become the rule, the procedure of fixing the amount of aid 
for private storage by way of tender becomes the only procedure authorised. 
In the course of the 1995 marketing year, the Commission has been faced with particular 
requests for private storage intended to relieve rapidly the market during certain periods 
of the year which had become undeniably difficult (e.g. in Ireland, Sweden and Finland). 
Subsequently, with the procedure of tendering being the only authorised method, a 
relatively effective intervention in the market is allowed but it takes place with a 
considerable delay: firstly, with a Management Committee to call for offers; secondly, 
with a Management Committee to fix the minimum level of aid. With the aim of making 
the private storage procedure more effective, in the event that a swift intervention is 
required (sudden market price fall iu a certain quotation zone or agreement from the 
Commission for a defined but limited operation), the Commission proposes to modify the 
basic regulation by establishing the possibility to foresee at any market price level the 
need for private storage by means of the procedure which fixes in advance the amount 
of the aid (the procedure by tender remaining, however, the rule to follow in the majority 
of cases). Under these conditions, a single Management Committee could, if necessary, 
vote without unnecessary delay on the amount of aid judged to be adequate and on the 
maximum, acceptable quantity to be put into storage within a certain deadline. 
13.3 As concluded in the report attached as Annex H, an extension of the derogation 
granted to the new German Lander as regards the application of the limit of the ewe 
premia is proposed. 
Vol I EN - 23 
14. Pigmeat 
14.1 The basic Regulation for pigmeat provides for the fixing of a basic price. Its level is 
primarily meant to indicate the level of prices at which the market will be in balance, 
i.e. which contributes towards stabilizing market prices without, however, leading to 
structural surpluses. The only operational purpose of the basic price is to provide a 
trigger for possible private storage aid. Such a scheme may be initiated when the 
average market price in the Community falls below 103 % of the basic price. The 
basic price is in force from 1 July to 30 June. 
14.2 For the period July 1995 to June 1996 the basic price for pig carcases of standard 
quality was fixed at 1509.39 ECU/t 
14.3 After two consecutive reductions in 1994/1995 and 1995/1996, the basic price stands 
now at a level which represents a reasonable estimate of the point of equilibrium 
between supply and demand. Therefore, it is proposed to keep the basic price 
unchanged and to fix it at 1509.39 ECU/t 
14.4 The standard quality, to which the basic price refers, was changed in 1995/1996, from 
class U to class E. Class E represents the quality of the majority of pigs slaughtered 
in the Community and should be kept unchanged. 
The definition of standard quality should be fixed as follows : 
(a) carcases weighing 60 kg to less than 120 kg : grade E; 
(b) carcases weighing 120 kg to 180 kg : grade R 
15. Tobacco 
15.1 The Common Market Organization as reformed in 1992 is now well established. 
15.2 With respect to the fixing of the guarantee thresholds, the Council requested the 
Commission to present its proposals at an early stage, prior to the price package, so 
as to allow tobacco producers to know their rights in advance of the planting season. 
Accordingly, the proposal regarding the 1996 and 1997 harvests is now before the 
Council, and the decision is expected before the end of February. This proposal is 
essentially a roll-forward of the 1995 situation. 
Vol I EN - 24 
15.3 With regard to the premia. the experience of the 3 last campaigns shows that their 
present level should be maintained also for 1996/97. In fact, production has been close 
to the guarantee thresholds, with minor exceptions due to the market situation, and in 
particular to the reduced demand for some varieties. 
15.4 It should be noted that the Commission will also present before 1.4.96 a set of 
proposals regarding the future of the tobacco regime. These proposals concern only 
the 1998 harvests and beyond. Therefore it seems logical that its discussion be 
separated from the price fixing. 
Vol I EN - 25 
ANNEX I 
Report on the examination of the protein plant and non-fibre flax sectors 
In its conclusions of 22 June 1995 on the 1995/96 price package, the Council asked for an 
examination to be made of whether the application of Article 15(2) of Regulation (EEC) 
No 1765/92 (oilseed arrangements) in the protein plant and non-fibre flax sectors would 
preserve the balance between arable crops. 
1. Protein plants (peas, field beans and sweet lupins) 
7.7 Community production 
The largest area sown before the reform was 1 327 000 ha in 1987. With the 
introduction of a maximum guaranteed quantity in 1988, the area stabilized at between 
1.2 and 1.3 million hectares. A new high was recorded in 1993, the first year of the 
, reform of the CAP, when 1 373 000 ha were sown. In 1995, the area for the 
Community of Twelve fell to 1 142 000 ha. 
In the three main "traditional" producer countries, France, the United Kingdom and 
Denmark, areas developed in parallel. Areas increased in Germany, particularly in the 
new Lander, and in Spain. The area in Italy has been falling since 1986 and was down 
to 39 000 ha in 1995. 
Yields increased satisfactorily until the beginning of the 1990s as a result of genetic 
improvements and improved cultivation techniques, but also of a gradual move from 
field beans to peas and a concentration of sowing in France, where yields are highest. 
In 1994 and 1995, yields tended to fall as a consequence of the reduction of areas in 
the "traditional" producer Member States and an increase in Spain, where yields are 
only around lt/ha. 
The result of these developments was that Community production tended to increase 
up until 1993 and then began to fall in 1994 and 1995. In other words, after a period 
of intensification, specialization and concentration in the most productive regions 
between 1988 and 1993, production has begun to move to the less productive regions. 
Table 1 gives the details of the development of Community production. 
Protein crops 
14/02/96 PEAS, FIELD BEANS AND SWEET LUPINS : AREA SOWN (000 ha) 
1986/87 
1987/88 
1988/89 
1989/90 
1990/91 
1991/92 
1992/93 
1993/94 
1994/95 D11 
63 
102 
89 
68 
46 
36 
30 
1995/96(e) D16 
64 
48 
47 
89 
76 
120 DK 
142 
201 
147 
123 
115 
99 
118 
121 
106 
76 FRA 
313 
474 
548 
656 
715 
667 
715 
753 
679 
581 UK 
152 
211 
261 
214 
216 
203 
208 
244 
229 
191 ESP 
69 
65 
50 
52 
42 
34 
30 
30 
114 
116 
PEAS, FIELD BEANS AND SWEET LUP 
1986/87 
1987/88 
1988/89 
1989/90 
1990/91 
1991/92 
1992/93 
1993/94 
1994/95 D11 
3,60 
3,26 
3,60 
3,50 
3,59 
3,69 
3,63 
1995/96(e) D16 
3,34 
3,40 
2,94 
3,26 
3,20 
3,20 DK 
3,62 
2,62 
3,45 
3,86 
4,79 
4,21 
2,58 
3,77 
3,60 
3,61 FRA 
3,82 
4,06 
4,76 
4,47 
5,15 
4,79 
4,61 
5,06 
5,06 
4,79 UK 
3,82 
2,70 
3,67 
3,40 
3,76 
3,43 
3,39 
3,87 
3.17 
2,93 ESP 
0,84 
0,98 
1,18 
1,15 
1,21 
1,41 
1,27 
1,00 
0,95 
0,57 ITA 
173 
164 
119 
119 
113 
114 
103 
93 
80 
39 other 
59 
110 
80 
57 
26 
22 
37 
43 
21 
19 EUR-12 
971 
1327 
1294 
1289 
1291 
1187 EUR-12+ 
1309 
1199 
1257 
1373 
1304 
1142 EUR-15 
1329 
1436 
1360 
1183 
NS : YIELDS (t/ha) 
ITA 
1,31 
1,38 
1,26 
1.25 
1,32 
1,83 
1,78 
1,57 
1,64 
1,63 other 
3,22 
2,31 
2,74 
2,70 
2,73 
1,59 
2,23 
2,61 
3.71 
2,83 EUR-12 
3,08 
2,94 
3,73 
3,67 
4,28 
4,02 EUR-12+ 
4,26 
4,00 
3,78 
4,22 
3,91 
3,66 EUR-15 
3,63 
PEAS, FIELD BEANS AND SWEET LUPINS : PRODUCTION (0001) 
1986/87 
1987/88 
1988/89 
1989/90 
1990/91 
1991/92 
1992/93 
1993/94 
1994/95 D11 
227 
333 
320 
238 
165 
133 
109 
1995/96(e) D16 
214 
163 
138 
290 
242 
383 DK 
514 
527 
507 
475 
551 
417 
305 
456 
380 
274 FRA 
1196 
1925 
2608 
2931 
3681 
3198 
3293 
3811 
3433 
2784 UK 
580 
57U 
959 
727 
812 
697 
706 
944 
724 
560 ESP 
58 
64 
59 
60 
51 
48 
38 
30 
108 
66 ITA 
226 
227 
150 
149 
149 
209 
183 
146 
131 
64 other 
190 
254 
219 
154 
71 
35 
83 
112 
77 
53 EUR-12 
2991 
3900 
4822 
4734 
5529 
4767 
4716 EUR-12+ 
5578 
4797 
4746 
5789 
5095 
4184 EUR-15 
4301 < 
o 
ffl 
to 
Vol I EN - 27 
1.2 Protein crops and the reform of the CAP 
The aid scheme for protein crops was introduced into the arrangements for arable 
crops in 1992. The aid per hectare for protein crops is ECU 78.49 per tonne multiplied 
by the reference regional cereal yield. This level of aid was introduced in the first year 
of application of the reform at the same time as the support prices were abolished. 
It should be recalled that the intervention price for cereals has been reduced in three 
stages and that the aid has been adjusted accordingly from ECU 30.19 to ECU 42.26 
to ECU 54.34 per tonne of historical yield. 
As a result of the different transitional arrangements for protein crops and cereals, the 
first transitional year, 1993/94, was particularly favourable for protein crops which 
immediately benefited from their final level of aid. On the other hand, it was foreseen 
that, when the arrangements were fully in force, protein crops would lose some of 
their attractiveness compared with that first transitional year, the level of aid having 
been calculated to more or less equalize income from the two types of crop at the end 
of the transitional period. 
This is confirmed by a comparison in two production zones (a department of France 
and East Anglia) of the profitability of protein crops and cereals: 
- before the reform, protein crops were slightly more profitable than cereals; 
- during 1993/94, total income decreased for cereals and increased for protein crops, 
increasing the profitability gap in favour of protein crops; 
- in 1994/95, the situation changed and cereals became slightly more profitable than 
protein crops, the market price for the latter falling more than that for the former, 
- in 1995/96, income from the two crops has increased because of their high market 
price, although protein crops remain less profitable. The income differential has 
increased in 1995/96, in a way that could not be foreseen at the time of sowing, as 
a consequence of the firmness of cereal prices. This is a temporary phenomenon 
arising from market conditions in 1995/96. 
Vol I EN - 28 
Furthermore, as can be seen in the following table, the Community area sown in 
1995/96 is higher than that normally sown, which can be defined as the average area 
sown before the reform (1 265 000 ha for 1988-91) less the set-aside. 
1993/94 
1994/95 
1995/% Set-aside (%) 
15 
15 
12 Threshold (ha) 
1075 000 
1075 000 
1 113 000 Area sown 
1373 000 
1304 000 
1 142 000 Gap (%) 
+28 
+21 
+2.6 
1.3 Conclusion 
When account is taken of the normal effects of set-aside and a certain degree of 
extensification, the recent reduction in the Community area sown with protein crops 
is no cause for alarm. The reduction is certainly aggravated by certain cyclical factors, 
the high price for cereals being the most important The Commission is convinced that 
a satisfactory balance can be maintained between arable crops in the context of market 
prices for feed-grain closer to the intervention price. It therefore takes the view that 
the existing arrangements for protein crops should not be amended. The Commission 
will, however, continue to monitor the future development of the area sown to protein 
crops and will make appropriate proposals if this appears to be warranted. 
2. Non-fibre flax 
2.7 Community production 
In the mid-1970s, the Community area sown with non-fibre flax totalled 30 000 ha. 
It then fell to 5 000 ha to rise at the end of the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s 
to 265 000 ha. The area (EUR-12) for the 1995/96 marketing year is estimated at 
120 693 ha. 
The average yield is 1.7 t/ha, but this can fluctuate widely from year to year and 
region to region. 
The world price for seed flax is unstable: ECU 380/t in 1984, ECU 130/t in 1992 and 
ECU 200-210/t in 1994 and 1995. 
Vol I EN - 29 
2.2 Non-fibre flax and the reform of the CAP 
Community rules on non-fibre flax initially provided for aid equal to the difference 
between the target price set by the Council and the average world market price 
recorded by the Commission. In 1993, a maximum guaranteed area of 266 000 ha was 
introduced. 
From 1994/95, non-fibre flax was fully integrated into the arrangements for arable 
crops. The compensatory aid per hectare is ECU 105.1/t multiplied by the cereal yield 
referred to in the regionalization plan. The base area for arable crops has been 
increased by 63 000 ha (average area sown with non-fibre flax during 1989, 1990 and 
1991). In addition, where it fulfils the conditions, the crop can benefit from the "seed" 
aid, set at ECU 224.6/t. 
2.3 Conclusion 
An examination of the profitability of non-fibre flax shows that there are no 
profitability problems compared with other arable crops, in particular rape. The 
Commission therefore takes the view that it is not necessary to amend the current 
arrangements for non-fibre flax. 
Vol I EN - 30 
ANNEXE 
REPORTS ON CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE BEEF AND SHEEPMEAT SECTORS 
INTRODUCTION 
I. EVOLUTION OF THE BEEF MARKET 
A, Three years since the implementation of the Reform 
B. Short- and medium-term evolution 
a. Production 
b. Imports 
c. Exports 
d. Consumption ^ 
e. General evolution 
n. SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR WHICH A REPORT WAS REQUESTED 
A. Special Male Bovine Premium. 
a. Regional Ceilings 
b. The Second Age Bracket Premium for Bulls i 
B. Deseasonalisation Premium 
C. The Beef and Sheep Quota Regimes in the Neue Bundeslànder (NBU) in Germany 
a. The Beef Quota Regimes 1 
b. The Sheep Quota Regime. 
m. ANNEXES 
I.EU Market Prices- bulls and steers (1991-1995) 
n.Comparison of Beef R3 over Pig carcases Grade U 
IHSuckler Cow Premiums in the Member States of the EU (1992-1994) 
IV.Third Country Commerce (beef) - importations 
V.Third Country Commerce (beef) - exportations 
VI. Supply balance sheet and short/mid-term forecasts -Beef 
VH.Special Beef Premiums in the Member States of the EU (1992-1995) 
Vin. Special Beef Premiums and Production in the Member States of the EU 
DCBeef Deseasonalisation Premium 
X.Beef Premiums in Germany 
XLEwe Premium Claims in Germany (1989-1995) 
Vol I EN-31 
REPORTS ON CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE BEEF AND SHEEPMEAT SECTORS 
INTRODUCTION 
At the adoption of the 1992 Beef and Sheep Reform, Council laid down in the base 
Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 for the beef sector the following requests for reports to be 
produced a couple of years after the reform had been implemented: 
-a report on the effects of the deseasonalisation premium in the beef sector, together with 
appropriate proposals (Article 4c of the basic regulation). 
-a report, accompanied by proposals on the application in the new German Lander of the 
quota rules for beef and sheep which apply in the rest of the Union [Article 4k of regulation 
(EEC) No 805/68, and Article 5c of die basic regulation in the sheep sector (EEC) No 
3013/89]. 
Furthermore, at the 1994/1995 price fixing Council requested that the Commission examine 
and make, if necessary, appropriate proposals before 31 December 1994 on thé regional 
ceiling of the Special Male Bovine Premium between Member States. The Commission made 
no proposals by that date, in particular because it had not received data on the 1993 payments 
and it had no other information demonstrating that a proposal was necessary. 
Finally, in the Council meeting of September 1995 the Commission declared itself to be ready 
to carry out a review of the premium schemes, bearing in mind developments in the beef 
sector and the application of the GATT agreements and to propose adjustments where 
appropriate. 
Besides those requested reports, the Commission takes the opportunity to address some other 
items, such as price evolution, the effects of the increased premiums, the effect of the second 
premium for non-castrated animals and the measures taken to place a control on production. 
Vol I EN - 32 
I. EVOLUTION OF THE BEEF MARKET 
A. Three years since the implementation of the Reform 
1. In November 1993 the Commission presented to Council a report on the prospects for the 
beef and veal markets and the intervention system [COM(93)601 final] in which the market 
evolution until autumn 1993 was commented as follows: 
After the important increase in production in 1990 and 1991, which reached 8.7 million 
tonnes, the production decreased in 1992 to 8.4 million tonnes and decreased further to 8 
million tonnes in 1993. As main factors behind this decrease in production were mentioned: 
-the cyclical nature of beef production which, having peaked in 1991, is following a 
downward trend in 1993; 
-the 1992 year being the reference year for the premium quotas attracted a retention by 
producers in order to increase their quota; 
-the limiting of imports of calves to 425.000 heads per year, 
-the increased exports of live cattle ready for slaughter. 
However, production subsequently decreased further than was expected in the report of 
November 1993 and came down to 7.7 and 7.4 million tonnes in 1993 and 1994 respectively. 
Besides the abovementioned reasons, the fall in the total number of cows present in the Union 
from 33.4 million heads in 1991 to 31.8 million heads in 1993 had also contributed strongly 
to that extra decrease in beef production. 
2. This important decrease in production had the following effects on the market: 
- Stable prices, slightly under the 80% of the intervention price in 1992, were experienced 
until July 1993; then, in absolute terms, prices decreased somewhat but, due to the three 
planned 5% decreases in the intervention price (as foreseen in the 1992 Reform and 
compensated by the increase of the premiums), prices stayed well above 80% of the 
intervention price until May 1995 (see graph in Annex I). 
- This price evolution made it possible for the Commission to reduce gradually the buying-in 
prices for intervention, making intervention less attractive to the abattoirs. The introduction 
by the Commission in 1992 of a weight limit for carcasses presented to intervention, made 
in order to discourage the selling of large carcasses of low market demand into intervention, 
had a further effect, albeit slight, on this evolution because the quantities offered to 
intervention had already begun to reduce steadily. Subsequently, with the firm market prices 
recorded, no more bids for intervention have been presented since autumn 1993. 
Vol I EN - 33 
- The 1992 Reform included reductions in beef intervention prices with compensation aimed 
primarily at extensive production, in part in order to reflect the reduction of the costs of 
intensive producers arising from the reduction of cereals prices and in part in order to 
maintain the competitiveness of beef by comparison with pigmeat. Pigmeat prices did indeed 
fall following the implementation of the Reform, as production expanded in anticipation of 
lower feed prices. As explained above, beef prices fell less than the reduction in the beef 
intervention prices. This led to a price ratio of over 200% between beef and pigmeat in 1994 
which helps explain a reduction in beef consumption of around 2.5% that year. During 1995, 
however, beef prices fell in the early months of the year before recovering during the autumn. 
Meanwhile, pigmeat prices have recovered significantly. This makes it possible to hope that 
the decline in beef consumption can now be arrested (see graph in Annex II). 
- Intervention stocks were at a level of 1.1 to 1.2 million tonnes in 1991 and 1992. Due to 
the fact that the buying-in phased out in the course of 1993, these stocks could be reduced 
gradually to 718.000 t in 1993, to 163.0001 in 1994 and to a quantity of around 15.000 t in 
autumn 1995. The sale of these stocks were mainly directed to third countries and exported 
in the pre-Uruguay Round years. These remaining quantities will be used for social aid 
schemes in the Union. 
3. In 1995 there will be an increase of production of about 3% mainly due to the usual, 
cyclical increase of production but also stimulated by the relatively high prices in 1993 and 
1994. Together with a certain decrease of consumption and other disturbing elements on the 
market, in particular exchange rate developments, the effect was a rather abrupt decrease in 
prices this year from 85% of the intervention price in February 1995 to 78% in June 1995. 
This sharp and sudden price reduction created problems for producers and consequently the 
Commission took measures both to help producers by increasing the advance on the special 
male bovine premium and to stimulate exports. Mainly as a result of the resumed export 
activities, from mid-August prices started to increase again and by mid-October were at 84% 
of the existing intervention price, which had by then been decreased again by 5% . 
Altogether, it can be said that, during the first three years following the 1992 Reform, the 
market price evolution has been for the most part somewhat higher than was set out in the 
Reform, with 1993 and 1994 recording rather high prices and, after the sudden decrease in 
prices occurring in the spring of 1995, a similarly sharp recovery being recorded in the 
autumn. 
B. Short-and medium-term evolution of the market 
Given that the evolution of the market has been, in general, positive since the introduction 
of the 1992 Reform, the question arises as to whether it can be expected to continue. A 
possible answer can only be given after examination of the various elements behind the 
evolution of the market. 
Vol I EN - 34 
a. Production 
For 1995 it is expected that the production will have increased by around 3% while for 1996 
production is expected to increase by 1 or 2%. This is part of the usual upward trend in the 
production cycle in the beef sector after the important decrease in production between 1992 
and 1994. However, it should be noticed that the reproductive herd (total number of cows 
present in the Union) did not increase during recent years. It remained stable from 1993 to 
1995. The total number of dairy cows continued to decrease by 200-300.000 heads per year, 
but the suckler cow population increased by nearly the same number. As offspring from 
suckler cows generally produce heavier carcasses, this change in the breeding cow herd could 
explain a part of the anticipated increase in production in 1995/1996. 
With respect to the future evolution, a further gradual decrease in the dairy cow herd by 1 
or perhaps 2% per year may be expected, but it is obvious that this development of the sector 
may be to some degree offset by the increases expected in the suckler cow herd in coming 
years. 
According to Eurostat figures, in December 1994 there were 10.4 million suckler cows in the 
Union (EU-12). In the same year, premium was granted for 9.4 million suckler cows (see 
Annex EI). However, potential premium rights (the sum of all the individual premium quota 
rights held by producers) are available for 10.8 million suckler cows. Since in 1992 it had 
been decided as part of the Reform that the year 1992 could be the reference year for the 
individual suckler cow quota, many producers may have stocked up their number of suckler 
cows and now find themselves with a number of animals above the "density clause" (2.5 
LU/ha in 1995). Thus, these producers cannot claim premium for all their suckler cows. 
Nevertheless, as time passes, transfers of quota will take place with the result that premium 
claims will increase. This process could thus lead to a further rise in suckler cows numbers, 
offsetting partly or totally for the coming years the decrease in the number of dairy cows. 
Other important factors determining future evolution of beef production are: 
- The reduction in the density clause, introduced by the 1992 Reform as a measure to 
orientate the sector to an extensive form of production, within the general context of control 
of production, and to avoid rural depopulation ("desertification"), will continue to exert its 
influence in stabilising production in 1996 when the maximum permitted stocking rate passes 
from 2.5 LU/ha to 2.0 LU/ha. 
- Since around 6 million calves are destined for veal production each year, it is important for 
the market equilibrium that this production be maintained at its present level. Given that the 
veal sector does not receive any specific assistance under the common market organisation 
for beef and veal, market balance is determined by supply and demand. Should demand for 
calves for veal production fall, the calves will be reared to heavier carcase weights and this 
could have a significant effect on the balance of beef production as a whole. 
Vol I EN - 35 
- The restriction on calf and young cattle imports to 425.000 head, introduced in 1991, had 
a very positive effect on the control of production. However, according to the PECOS 
association agreements this restriction has now been increased to 500.000 head, which means 
that an equivalent extra quantity of beef will be present on the Union's market. 
b. Imports (see Annex IV) 
Most of the imports of young animals and beef take place in the form of quotas or import 
arrangements in association agreements. Total imports for all types of products in the beef 
sector are set at 525.000 t carcase equivalent and there is not much evolution in these 
quantities. It is important to note, however, that due to the fact that the Union's self-
sufficiency lies over the 100%, for each tonne of beef that the Union imports, unless there 
is an increase in consumption, an equivalent quantity of production has to be cut. 
c. Exports (see Annex V) 
Total exports of beef and beef products were at a level of 1.3 million tonnes carcase 
equivalent in 1991 and 1992 and decreased to 1.2 million tonnes in 1993 and 1994. It should 
be noted that, in each of those years, these quantities include some 500.000 t of exported 
intervention beef. According to the Uruguay Round rules, for the UR year running from the 
1 July 1995 until 30 June 1996, the Union has to limit the delivery of export certificates to 
1.118.700 t, although that figure is subject to revision in the light of the current negotiations 
of Article 24 (6) of the GATT Agreement. Due to the fact that the small quantity of 
intervention stocks remaining (15.0001) is not available for export, this export ceiling should 
not, in itself, have created too many problems in its first year of application. However, as the 
ceiling operates on the level of delivery of certificates, some problems have emerged due to 
competition between exporters for that limited volume of certificates. 
However, distributing the limited volume of export certificates which we are entitled to grant 
has not proven easy. World market prices have been firm and there has therefore been keen 
competition between exporters to take advantage of the opportunities it has offered. 
Establishing the correct level of refund and the most appropriate terms for granting the 
certificates (i.e. duration and level of deposits) has been difficult and controversial. 
Indeed, exporters and the Commission are in the process of adapting to a situation where 
export licences are no longer available in unlimited quantities. In the framework of the 
Management Committee, this process of adaptation has been addressed. However, it should 
be recalled that in the year 2000 this export ceiling has been established at 817.000 t, which 
represents 300.000 to 400.000 t less than in the early 1990s. 
Vol I EN - 36 
d. Consumption 
Over the past few years, the annual net balance for beef and veal consumption has been 
between 21 and 22 kg per person (see Annex VI). In 1993 and 1994 this figure decreased 
somewhat. The decline is partially explicable in terms of relative price but health and, in the 
case of veal, animal welfare issues also played a part. The recent revival of public concerns 
over B.S.E., in particular in the United Kingdom, is bound to have an adverse effect on 
consumption but, at present, it is not possible to foresee whether this effect will be long 
lasting or transitory. Our current forecasts, therefore, do not take account of this and show 
a stable trend in consumption in the Union as a whole. 
e. General evolution 
At the present moment and based on the latest forecasts available, the Commission expects 
that after the rather small increase in production in 1995, a further small increase is likely to 
occur in 1996. Under these circumstances, it is clear that no measure whatsoever should be 
taken which would have the effect of encouraging an increase of production. On the contrary, 
if there are measures which could lead to a decrease in production and which can be regarded 
as small adaptations of the Reform, they should be seriously examined. The only measures 
that the Commission could contemplate taking at this stage are, therefore, adaptations which 
would tend to decrease, rather than increase, production. On the other hand, there is nothing 
in the evolution of the market which has so far been experienced, or foreseen, which suggests 
that the 1992 Reform should be changed fundamentally. 
Vol I EN - 37 
H. SPECIFIC ITEMS FOR WHICH A REPORT WAS REQUESTED 
A. Special Male Bovine Premium. 
a. Regional Ceilings 
The main objectives of this premium scheme are to give a certain compensation for the 
decreased intervention price mainly to the small and medium-sized producers and to stimulate 
more extensive methods of production and the scheme can be said to have had a positive 
effect as an income support for the fanner for a limited production and to have worked in the 
right direction as far as the need to control production. 
In terms of the distribution of regional ceilings, it will be recalled that in the 1992 Reform, 
the possibility for the Member states to choose the year 1992 as reference year was 
established. In 1994, Council concluded that taking 1992 as the reference year had given rise 
to a certain lack of balance between the distribution of the regional ceiling in the various 
regions of the Union. Through Regulation (EC) No 1884/94, Council revised that distribution 
and reduced the Union's global ceiling from 11.517.000 to 10.281.000 heads. In Annex VU, 
data are given concerning the granting of the Special Beef Premium and in Annex VIE 
information is presented on the relation between the number of male bovines for which the 
premium was granted and the number of animals slaughtered throughout the Union. 
It is not to be expected that there will be a single relationship between the size of the regional 
ceilings and the number of animals slaughtered in each Member State. In the first place, 
animals may attract a premium in one Member State but be slaughtered in another. The 
regular trade in store animals between France and Italy is a well-known example of this 
phenomenon. In the second, other restrictions in the granting of the premia (the 90-head limit 
and the density clause) affect the number of animals eligible to different degrees depending 
on the different structure of the beef industry in different parts of the Union. It is, therefore, 
not surprising to note that those Member States where the size of the ceiling is low by 
comparison to the number of animals slaughtered have not in fact had to scale down premium 
payments as a result of the ceilings. 
Therefore, due to the successful rôle played by the current form of the Special Male Bovine 
Premium Scheme in the general balance of the 1992 Reform, the Commission does not intend 
to propose changes in the regional ceilings. 
Vol I EN - 38 
b. The Second Age Bracket Premium for Bulls 
With regard to the second age bracket premium, the table in Annex VII shows that in 1994 
this premium ,was claimed for 870.800 bulls. Information from farmers indicates that many 
producers try to keep bulls until 23 months of age in order to obtain the second age bracket 
premium and that the increased value of the premium in 1995 will encourage more fatteners 
to do so in future. According to trade and slaughterhouse sources, those 23-month old bulls 
do not really represent the required quality and tend to be, in general, overfat and overweight. 
It may be concluded that the second age bracket premium for bulls stimulates a product not 
required by the market and furthermore increases beef production artificially. For that reason 
the Commission proposes to delete that second age bracket premium for bulls and to increase 
the corresponding first age bracket premium from the actual level of 108,7 ECU to 123,9 
ECU per animal (+ 14%), which would thus be in the form of a single premium payment paid 
once in the lifetime of the animal. On the assumption that the change does not lead to 
additional production of steers and lower production of bulls, this is a financially neutral 
measure since, based on 1994 figures, the expenditures for the second age bracket premium 
may be used to offset the increase cost of the increased first age bracket premium. 
The deletion of the second age bracket premium will also remove an unintended consequence 
of the change in the premium regime which was made in 1992 as regards bulls used for 
bullfighting. In applying the 1992 Reform in 1993, Spain, quite legitimately, changed the 
system of payment of the premium from payment at slaughter to payment on the farms. This 
meant that the producers were able to claim the second premium on bulls which had been 
selected as fighting animals as well as bulls destined for slaughter at abattoirs. This aid has 
been criticised as it has been seen as an aid for the production of fighting bulls. Such an aid 
is legitimate in the sense that the existing regime accidentally fails to exclude it but did not 
form part of the Commission's intention in proposing the 1992 Reform. Should Council decide 
not to adopt the proposal to delete the second premium on bulls then the Commission reserves 
the right to make a second proposal to remove this anomaly. 
B. Deseasonalisation premium 
This premium, established as part of the 1992 Reform, is intended to encourage producers to 
extend the marketing of their steers throughout the whole year instead of delivering the bulk 
of the production in the autumn peak period. To this effect, the actual regulation [Article 4c 
of Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68] foresees that: 
"Where, in a Member State, the number of male bovine animals slaughtered during the period 
1 September to 30 November of the year exceeds 40% of annual slaughterings of male bovine 
animals producers may qualify, as from the 1993 calendar year, on application, for an 
additional premium to the special premium granted under Article 4b (deseasonalisation premium)" 
The 40% clause was meant to limit this premium to regions where producers bring to the 
market a major part of their production in the autumn peak period and to encourage those 
producers to change the periodicity of their traditional marketing. 
Vol I EN - 39 
It can be said that the deseasonalisation premium in Ireland has had a major effect in the way 
steers are marketed in the September-November period since autumn marketings have 
decreased from 50% in 1990-92 to 41% in 1993-94 and marketings in the spring have 
increased from around 24% in 1990-92 to 35% in 1994. 
The abrupt ending of the deseasonalisation premium at the end of each April, as foreseen 
originally in the 1992 Reform, tended to concentrate slaughterings in that month. This 
problem was addressed by a modification to Article 4c (2) of Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 
which provided for a gradual scaling down of the amount of the premium. However, there 
remain some factors which should be mentioned and which played a role in the functioning 
of the deseasonalisation premium: 
a. The annual increase of 18 ECU of the premium for male animals between 1992 and 1995 
had the effect of stimulating producers to market their animals in the following spring instead 
of in the previous autumn. As the final annual increase was made in 1995, this extra 
stimulating effect will no longer exist in the future. 
b. The fact that in 1995 (and this will also be the case in 1996) the deseasonalisation premium 
was applicable in the Irish Republic but not in Northern Ireland created some tensions. This 
situation concerned not only similar production methods in the same type of landscape in 
comparable geographical regions, but it also provided financial incentives to producers and 
traders to send animals from Northern Ireland to the Republic of Ireland for the sole purpose 
of claiming premium. However, since this cross-border trade is, for veterinary reasons, not 
permitted, the premium rules created incentives which were manifestly contradictory to the 
animal health measures. 
c. The number of animals exported live to third countries increased from 6.6% of total Irish 
beef exports in 1992 to 20.2% in 1994. These exports are based upon a specific request by 
certain third countries and continue the whole year around, even in those periods with 
traditionally low to very low supply of the market. In the autumn peak period those exports 
do not increase substantially. 
In Annex IX, detailed information about the application of the deseasonalisation premium is 
presented. Forecasts currently available show that in 1995 the 40% trigger will not be met for 
the Republic of Ireland. Consequently, according to Article 4c (1) of the basic regulation, the 
deseasonalisation premium would not be applicable in 1997. This abrupt ending of the 
premium, together with the end of the stimulating effect of the yearly increase of the premium 
in 1996, may lead to a situation in which producers go back to their former pattern of 
marketing the bulk of their production in the autumn. In that case, the market organisation 
could come under pressure to apply measures which are "undesirable" for the Union's beef 
market as a whole. 
Therefore, in order to keep producers to the pattern of marketing which they are currently 
practising and to avoid certain inconveniences of the scheme as applied in the past, the 
Commission proposes to modify the existing dispositions of Article 4c (1) of the basic 
regulation in the following sense: 
Vol I EN - 40 
a. In order to avoid the situation where the deseasonalisation premium is applicable in the 
Republic of Ireland but not in Northern Ireland, the calculation of the percentage of steers 
slaughtered will be made on the basis of the total number of steers slaughtered in Republic 
of Ireland and in Northern Ireland. Furthermore, in order to take into account that the seasonal 
effect is generally less pronounced in Northern Ireland, the trigger is reduced to 38%. 
b. In Member States or regions where steer production accounts for more than 60% of the 
total male bovine animal production and where Article 4c (1) has been applied in the past, 
a Member State may grant a deseasonalisation premium of 43.47 ECU (that is, 60% of the 
current premium of 72.45 ECU), scaled down at the end of the period in the same manner 
as at present. In this case, where this premium is applied in the Republic of Ireland, it shall 
also apply in Northern Ireland, and vice versa. The expenditure for this deseasonalisation 
premium shall be covered by an appropriate reduction of the second age bracket premium for 
steers. That reduction, calculated for each region separately, will be established by the 
Commission according to the Management Committee procedure before the final payment of 
the second age bracket premium. <-
C. The Beef and Sheep Quota Regimes in the Neue Bundeslànder fNBL) in Germany 
a.. The Beef Quota Regimes 
Under Article 4k of Regulation (EEC) No 805/68, a derogation for the new Bundeslànder 
(NBL) meant that: 
a) Germany has: 
-a special regional ceiling of 660.323 male bovine and 180.000 suckler cow premiums. 
- an option to switch up to 15% of premium rights between the two special ceilings. 
- permission to decide the conditions for distributing the special ceilings. 
-a special derogation to the suckler cow definition from 1993 to the end of 1995. 
b. The Commission: 
-may adopt special rules for implementing this article which option was not taken. 
-shall submit, before the end of 1995, a report to Council, with proposals on the application 
in the NBL territory of the rules which apply in the rest of the Union. This is the subject of 
the present part of this report. The Council shall decide on these proposals before the end of 
1996. 
Broadly speaking, the bovine sector in the NBL has evolved from a position, just before 
reunification, of comprising almost 2 million dairy cows but hardly any suckler cows. Some 
45% of the dairy herd was slaughtered in 1990-91. In 1995 claims for suckler cow premiums 
reached a level of 179.300 heads, thus meeting the regional ceiling. The bull herd in the 
former DDR numbered 1.27 million heads while claims for bull premium in 1995 are 
estimated at 400.000 head and stayed below the regional ceiling. In Annex X, the evolution 
of the beef herds and the premiums granted in the Alte and Neue Bundeslànder of Germany 
are presented. 
Vol I EN - 41 
Within the framework of the Suckler Cow Regime Germany has requested: 
a. to apply the 15% switch between the male bovine regional quota and the suckler cow 
regional quota. As this possibility is foreseen in the basic regulation, the Commission has no 
objection to that transfer. 
b. to apply another 15% switch in the same direction in future. This procedure, however, is 
not foreseen in the basic regulation. As such a switch is obviously in contradiction with the 
need to control production, the Commission cannot propose to amend the basic regulation in 
that sense. 
c. to continue the regional quota for suckler cows until the year 2000. On this point the 
Commission's position is that, after a 5-year transition period, the individual limits should be 
introduced now to make producers aware that there is a problem in controlling beef 
production. Rights, which have not been allocated to producers at the moment of the switch 
to the system of individual rights, should be cancelled, except an allocation, calculated as 3% 
of the total number of individual rights allocated to producers, which may be made to the 
national reserve. However, the sum of the total number of individual rights allocated plus the 
rights allocated to the national reserve, shall not exceed the sum of the original special 
regional ceilings. 
d. continue the derogation of the suckler cow definition for two more years. It should be 
noted that this derogation ends on 31 December 1995. As similar requests from two other 
Member States did not receive a positive response from the Commission, it is not in a 
position to accede to the present request. 
In general terms, suckler cow production was taken up rather well in the NBL and the 
regional ceiling was reached in 1995. As Germany wishes to apply the 15% switch foreseen 
in the basis regulation, there is some room for further evolution of that type of production. 
However, there are no major reasons to continue the regional ceiling for suckler cows and 
therefore suckler cow producers in the NBL should work from 1997 onwards under same 
conditions of the individual producer quota as their colleagues in the rest of the Union do. 
On the Special Male Bovine Premium, the German authorities wish to waive the 90-head 
limit or at least to obtain a temporary derogation on that limit for the NBL until the year 
2000. On this point it should be mentioned that the German authorities interpreted the 
provision which enables them to establish rules for the distribution of the special ceilings as 
permitting them to derogate from the 90-head limit rule. 
As emphasised earlier in this report, the Commission cannot accept any change in the beef 
regime which might lead to an increased production. Thus, it is not in the position to propose 
the general deletion of the 90-head limit for the Special Male Bovine Premium. Moreover, 
it should be noted that the total numbers available under the regional quota in the Alte and 
the Neue Bundeslànder is rather large, leaving sufficient margin for the eventual development 
of bull production in the New Lander under the same conditions as in the rest of the Union. 
It should also be noted that the NBL is not the only region of the Community with large bull 
production enterprises. The existence of such enterprises is not, therefore, a sufficient reason 
for a derogation for the NBL. 
Vol I EN - 42 
b. The Sheep Quota Regime 
Under Article ,5c of the basic regulation (EC) No 3013/89, a derogation for the sheep sector 
in the NBL, similar to that in beef, meant that: 
a) Germany has: 
-a special regional ceiling of 1 million ewe premiums 
-permission to decide the conditions for distributing the special ceiling. 
b) The Commission: 
-may adopt special rules for implementing this article (option not taken) 
-shall submit, before the end of 1995, a report to Council, with proposals on the application 
in the NBL territory of the rules which apply in the rest of the Union. This is the subject of 
this part of the report. Council must also decide on these proposals by the end of 1996. 
In the former DDR the sheep flock of 2.6 million head was mainly directed to wool 
production. After unification the 1 million head ewe flock decreased to 500.000 ewes, but has 
now stabilised, giving a premium claim total of 550.000 ewes in 1995 (Annex XI). 
The German authorities request a simple continuation of the existing derogation until the year 
2000, arguing that the restructuring is not yet completed and that the introduction of 
individual producer limits would now create administrative difficulties in the NBL. 
The Commission does not accept the argument of administrative difficulties for not 
introducing the individual producer limits. It can, however, agree with the argument that the 
restructuring process is not yet completed since the regional quota is far from having been 
met, in contrast to the situation which prevails with regard to suckler cows. Consequently, the 
Commission can agree to postponing the introduction of the individual limits until the year 
2000. Also, Germany may decide to introduce individual limits in the whole of the NBL 
before the year 2000. Rights, which have not been allocated to producers at the moment of 
switch to the system of individual rights, should be cancelled, except an allocation, calculated 
as 3% of the total number of individual rights allocated to producers, which may be made to 
the national reserve. However, the sum of the total number of individual rights allocated plus 
the rights allocated to the national reserve, shall not exceed the original special regional 
ceiling. 
ANNEX I 
EU MARKET PRICE - BULLS AND STEERS (1991-95) 
UE PRIX DE MARCHE - JEUNES BOVINS ET BOEUFS (1991-95) 
EU MARKTPREIS - JUNGRINDER UND OCHSEN (1991-95) 
.5? 'S 
o 
(0 
(Q 
O 
u. 
(Q 
O 
O) 
XL 
O 
O 
T-3 o 
UJ 
«î 
0) 
z 380 
370 
360 
350 
340 
330 
320 
310 
300 
290 
280 
270 * \ i*»--»* » » 
• » ' 
.» V / 
- /'*•*•% ,% / 
80% (330) 
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 | « t 
» » 
» 
80% (309) \ 
1 1 t 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 80% (292) \ 
1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 J 80% (278) — 
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 88 
- 84 
80 
76 
72 
- 68 
64 
60 C 
o 
C 
Jan/91 Jul Jan/92 Jul Jan/93 Jul 56 
Jan/94 Jul Jan/95 Jul Jan/96 Jul 
Month 
Lr> 
ANNEX II 
COMPARISON OF BEEF AND PIG CARCASE PRICES - (1987-95) 
COMPARAISON DES PRIX DE CARCASSES DE BOEUF ET PORC - (1987-95) 
VERGLEÏCH DES KARKASSENPREISES VON RINDERN UND SCHWEINEN - (1987-95) 
* 
Q 
CL 
0) 
Q) 
OÙ 
ai 
'3 
a to 
o 
hm 
(Q 
O 
CI 
O 
o 
3 o 
UJ 
z 400 
«M 300 h-
200 
100 o 
CL 
k. 
0) 
> O 
*•-
<D 
0) 
m 
0) 
en 
•4-" 
C 
<D 
O 
k. 
0J 
CL 
Year 
_£ 
ANNEX 111 EU SUCKLER COW PREMIUM (1991-94) 
UE PRIME AUX VACHES ALLAITANTES (1991-94) 
EU MUTTERKÛHPRÂMIE (1991-94) 
Number of cows having received the premium (R. (EEC) No. 1357/80 and 805/68) 
Nombre de vaches ayant bénéficié de la prime (R. (CEE) N* 1357/80 et 805/68) 
AnzahlderKûhe, fOrwelche die PrSmle gewâhrtwurde (R. Nr. (EWG) 1357/80 und 805/68) 
||MèTnrfô&ptàtèg 
Belglque/Belglë 
Danmark 
Deutschland § 
Elias ('90) 
Espafla 
France 
Ireland 
Italia 
Luxembourg 
Nederland 
Portugal 
United Kingdom 
ôsterrelch 
Suoml/FInland 
Sverlge 
TOTAL 12 
TOTAiÈi5 
Legend: 267.504 
84.110 
205.746 
131.471 
1.307.916 
3.260.759 
783.636 
700.943 
8.880 
41.483 
204.752 
1.488.043 Zl993^v-:^ 
403.029 
121.661 
446.628 
132.006 
1.363.337 
3.616.219 
1.024.757 
704.000 
11.648 
67.444 
240.099 
1.669.538 ^^f5wh^|§|É 
mixed HerâyS^ 
435.098 70.000 §§ 
101.947 700 
413.237 54.641 
125.823 2.005 
1.215.115 85.058 
3.603.923 343.790 
883.757 51.377 
673.673 137.901 
13.179 2.700 
50.209 5.000 §§ 
240.000 20.000 §§ 
1.558.206 12.844 
8:485.243 ^^9.800;366 MllHBl ^'••9.314.167 786.016 §§ 1994*^ajp r(orwfiïcri"mlx'oci 
423.728.0 70.000,0 §§ 
104.420,0 590,0 
505.685.0 67.117,0 
120.874.0 2.145,0 
1.133.150,7 90.000.0 §§ 
3.492.260,0 311.700,0 
910.091.0 51.680,0 
807.938,0 97.786,0 
13.235.7 2.135,7 
57.521,0 902,0 
236.348,4 4.671,1 
1.552.408,0 13.368,0 
9.357.659,8 712.094,8 §§ Pôtëritiâl rights 
• Provisional figures 
§ Including New Under (90=67.880, 91=27.860, 92=91697, 93=114.430, 94=153.327) 
§§ Estimated figures 
(a) In the case of DK and NL the figures refer to daims 
(b) Not Consolidated. Estimated figures excluding additional rights foreseen for extensive producers. 
(c) EUROSTAT (for Sweden figures refer to 6/94) 443.166 
135.937 
651.122 
149.778 
1.462.527 
3.886.366 
1.106.528 
787.762 
14.826 
98.006 
286.554 
1.805.323 
325.000 
55.000 
155.000 
10.827.895 Suckler cow 
herd(12/94)(c) 
11.362.895 475.000 
105.000 
594.700 
87.800 
1.396.000 
3.968.000 
956.700 
722.000 
29.400 
72.000 
230.000 
1.783.000 
90.000 
33.600 
165.000 
10.419.600 
10.708.200 
ST 
ANNEX IV EU BEEF TRADE - IMPORTS FROM THIRD COUNTRIES (1981-94) 
UE COMMERCE DE VIANDE BOVINE - IMPORTATIONS EN PROVENANCE DES PAYS TIERS 
EU RINDFLEISCHSEKTOR - IMPORTE AUS DRITTLANDERN 
•'^ëar •.•-*• 
1981 
1982 
1983 
1984 
1985 
1986 
1987 
1988 
1989 
1990 
. 1991 
1992 
1993 
1994 _ WSSÊUS&"^^:^' :f f :-y&y . '.•,;:^^^^:i;. m^m?m §##MEÂJS$ ^^^•/"•V-:'-.. '• 
V'^'^ Tonnes ' ; :-;;^;.vVp^'^^ 
Caïvès^fp^^ Meat ^sW- ^:F^ TOTAL 
t^>!^gS^ replacements^, (a+b+c) equivalent ... -u .,... ••.; :o -u &?&,w* ^..v&smoked^Vc; (cooked i uncooked) . (e+f+g+h+I) 
a 
61.948 
186.581 
216.295 
175.469 
145.830 
179.613 
272.018 
184.187 
473.918 
853.367 
339.345 
247.545 
395.399 
477.640 b 
195.333 
243.803 
247.652 
218.536 
298.434 
268.860 
350.365 
348.946 
372.480 
343.518 
376.510 
384.657 
88.900 
90.796 c 
53.223 
57.764 
40.724 
33.820 
45.654 
31.403 
44.251 
37.077 
60.383 
46.504 
44.164 
83.808 
114.187 
103.041 d 
310.504 
488.148 
504.671 
427.825 
489.918 
479.876 
666.634 
570.210 
906.781 
1.243.389 
760.019 
716.010 
598.486 
671.477 = e 
50.055 
66.010 
63.654 
54.273 
71.097 
63.357 
85.702 
87.364 
101.739 
101.854 
87.308 
92.533 
80.110 
76.799 ._. f 
54.519 
72.011 
86.545 
84.535 
126.510 
129.525 
138.495 
131.450 
122.147 
124.659 
151.719 
163.796 
144.725 
143.189 g 
120.666 
163.441 
152.564 
128.418 
139.722 
115.849 
120.698 
110.126 
109.398 
108.650 
109.823 
101.959 
93.138 
128.697 h 
306 
236 
364 
609 
274 
269 
277 
295 
290 
304 
345 
"~ 339 
371 
687 I 
138.363 
138.483 
144.453 
146.783 
151.431 
156.325 
151.205 
178.515 
172.312 
165.179 
185.323 
213.794 
180.829 
182.901 J 
364.009 
440.181 
447.580 
414.618 
489.034 
465.325 
496.377 
507.750 
505.886 
500.646 
534.518 
572.421 
499.173 
532.273 
ANNEX V EU BEEF TRADE - EXPORTS TO THIRD COUNTRIES (1981-94) 
UE COMMERCE DE VIANDE BOVINE - EXPORTATIONS A DESTINATION DES PAYS TIERS 
EU RINDFLEISCHSEKTOR - EXPORTE AUS DRITTLANDERN 
^PSi 
1981 
1982 
1983 
1984 
1985 
1986 
1987 
1988 
1989 
1990 
1991 
1992 
1993 
1994 ^ MlVE?ANIMAliS^ V ' X 
1 1 1 
m^M^^MM&^^^^imy::^ v^^'-U:^'." ^v^:''.^--::>-'-•;•;•/;>MEATS^ 
j'^Tonn^s;;' 'o;-'';;;.n'\-£--r^ 
^^^^^^^^^S^^S^Êj^^lWW^--'^ • ÇMf?* • v- — ^ré^^:-:'':0Ffozeife-,-.••>Sajté1d>drleci \:-• :iProcessed TOTAL 
v., "'*'•*:* *,J,'^|*jpjr5|^ equivalent ' '""•'/:-*'? ; ' '& smoked (choked & uncooked) (e+f+g+h+i) 
a 
7.591 
5.848 
4.039 
4.121 
4.613 
4.098 
3.309 
4.018 
3.162 
3.216 
3.194 
3.244 
3.143 
4.824 b 
360.696 
299.780 
339.611 
295.707 
145.362 
115.731 
77.527 
70.437 
58.864 
73.744 
157.395 
207.472 
400.385 
440.088 c 
32.972 
36.113 
53.854 
66.920 
124.789 
67.209 
87.119 
50.347 
52.790 
49.843 
166.629 
115.791 
78.910 
87.987 d 
401.259 
341.741 
397.504 
366.748 
274.764 
187.038 
167.955 
124.802 
114.816 
126.803 
327.218 
326.507 
482.438 
532.899 = e 
100.282 
88.379 
102.984 
96.058 
72.030 
49.479 
43.498 
30.314 
30.596 
34.106 
80.942 
84.724 
143.237 
147.906 f 
183.364 
117.638 
144.620 
185.979 
157.967 
169.179 
133.927 
80.232 
81.337 
90.888 
143.827 
105.062 
104.248 
110.885 g 
340.052 
235.539 
316.004 
463.154 
532.799 
903.845 
694.189 
643.172 
880.608 
656.997 
1.029.712 
1.013.700 
887.175 
848.456 h 
763 
839 
828 
1.064 
1.013 
1.388 
1.142 
1.375 
1.833 
4.645 
1.442 
1.818 
1.965 
1.093 I 
37.725 
37.873 
38.326 
44.171 
40.841 
42.662 
36.341 
30.352 
29.236 
29.383 
68.943 
118.090 
91.858 
111.914 J 
662.186 
480.268 
602.762 
790.426 
804.650 
1.166.553 
909.097 
785.445 
1.023.610 
816.019 
1.324.866 
1.323.394 
1.228.483 
1.220.254 
Source: EUROSTAT-COMEXT 
ANNEX VI 
EU BEEF SECTOR: SUPPLY BALANCE SHEET AND SHORT/MID-TERM FORECASTS 
U.E. VIANDE BOVINE : BILANS D'APPROVISIONNEMENT ET PREVISIONS A COURT-MOYEN TERME 
EU RINDFLEISCH: VERSORGUNGSBILANZ UND KURZ- UND LANDFRISTIGE VORAUSSCHATZUNGEN 
in thousand head/metric tonnes 
EU 12 EU 15 
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 (estimated 1995 (forecast) 1996 (projected) 
Bovine population (1000 head) 
Cow herd (1000 head) 
Net Production1 (Tm) 
Meat Imports (Tm) 
Meat Exports (Tm) 
Variation In stocks (Tm) 
a) Public 
b) Privés 
Available for consumption 
(Tm) 
in kg/capita 
Gross Internal Production ' 
(Tm) 
% Self Sufficiency 
Public Intervention (Tm) 
a) Purchases 
b) Sales 84.675 
33.385 
8.723 
447 
1.244 
+ 373 
1.011 
0 
7.553 
21,8 
8.705 
115,3 
1.027 
766 ±% 
-1,4 
- 1,5 
+ 5,1 
+ 2,0 81.435 
32.165 
8.396 
480 
1.239 
+ 155 
1.166 
0 
7.482 
21,6 
8.378 
112,0 
890 ±% 
-3,8 
•3,7 
-3,7 
0,9 
-3,8 79.320 
31.825 
7.710 
419 
1.085 
-448 
718 
0 
7.492 
21,5 
7.824 
104,4 
165 
780 ±% 
-2,6 
- M 
-8,2 
+ 0,1 
6,6 78.540 
31.830 
7.380 
455 
1.072 
-555 
163 
0 
7.318 
21,0 
7.445 
101,7 
0 
393 ±% 
- 1,0 
+ 0,0 
-4,3 
-2,3 
4,8 78.980 
31.770 
7.625 
• 160 
0 
0 
7.400 
21,1 
7.650 i% 
+ 0,6 
-0,2 
+ 3,3 
+ 1,1 
+ 2,8 84.320 
33.790 
8.100 
. 460 
900 
- 160 
3 
0 
7.820 
21,0 
8.120 
103,8 
0 
160 ±% 
+ 3,3 84.000 
33.650 
8.200 
470 
850 
0 
0 
0 
7.820 
20,9 
8.200 
104,9 
0 
0 ±% 
•0,4 
-0,4 
+ 1,2 
+ 0,0 
+ 1,0 
1 Net Production = Total Slaughterings 
2 Gross Internal production = Net Production - Live Animal Balance 
ANNEX Vil EU SPECIAL PREMIUM MALE BOVINE ANIMALS 
UE PRIME SPECIALE BOVINS MALES 
EU SONDERPRÂMIE MÂNNLICHER RINDER 
Number of bovine animals having received the premium (R. (EEC) No. 468/87 and 805/68) 
Nombre de bovins ayant bénéficié de la prime (R. (CEE) N* 468/87 et 805/68) 
Anzahl der Rinder, fûrwelche die Pramie gewâhrtwurde (R. (EWG) Nr. 468/87 und 805/68) 
Belglque/BelglS 331.487 1993 
223.842 £2ndage Of 
which 
;builèy 
48.376 np 1st age 
236.202 1994(a) 
2nd age, of which 
iulls; 
49.799 48.311 Ceiling 
1993-94(b) 
331.487 Ceiling 
1995(c) 
293.211 
Danmark 335.493 295.489 7.998 np 287.058 10.568 8.682 335.493 
Deutschland ('90) 2.582.833 884.277 ** 393.634 369.839 1.784.041 438.723 421.127 3.653.183 
Ellas 143.337 122.606 6.330 np 137.092 §§ 6.500 §§ 6.000 §§ 143.337 324.652 
3.092.667 
140.130 
Espafia 536.584 460.151 •• 32.466 np 520.220 27.840 27.720 561.584 551.552 
France 2.262.064 1.580.917 633.393 np 1.726.033 479.723 272.769 2.262.064 1.908.922 
Ireland 1.547.651 544.286 1.137.958 np 959.138 816.301 3.279 1.547.651 
Italia ('91) 794.000 533.033 § 25.326 § np 629.191 24.771 24.771 834.848 
Luxembourg 21.593 16.813 3.875 np 19.999 4.803 2.031 21.593 1.286.521 
824.885 
19.300 
Nederland('91) 281.797 223.789 8.809 00 166.244 13.023 13.023 264.000 264.000 
Portugal 141.930 140.000 16.565 np .154.897 19.568 19.568 141.9301 154.897 
United Kingdom ('91) 1.381.234 1.404.041 683.272 13.652 1.380.183 745.131 23.515 1.419.811 1.419.811 
ôsterrelch 
Suoml/Flnland 
Sverlge 
B tf2;998:002; 8.000F298 i &636V75o|â;: ^87b'796'^'\| <11.516;981 
x-Wt----;w 
•••A*.-*:------
Legend: § Provisional figures - §§ = Estimated figures - np= not provided 
* Does not include new Lflnder (NBL) or Canarias - " = including NBL or Canarias 
Underlining Proportional reduction applies due to regional ceiling being exceeded (e.g. 1993 UK claims for first age bracket = 1.857.372 head) 
(a) Provisional figures. In the case of DK and NL the figures refer to applications. 
(b) Provisional ceiling for 1993-94, including rights of NBL (780.000) for DE and Canarias (25.000) for ES 
(c) Ceiling as amended by Reg. No. 1884/94. 423.400 
250.000 
250.000 
16'.280.548 
11.203.948 
5D 
ANNEX Vlll 
EU SPECIAL PREMIUM MALE BOVINES: PREMIUMS AND PRODUCTION 
UE PRIME SPECIALE BOVINE: PRIMES ET PRODUCTION 
EU RINDERSONDERPRAMIE: PRÀMIEN UND ERZEUGUNG 
Member State 
België/Belgique 
Danmark 
' 
Deutschland 
Ellas Year 
92 
93 
94 
92 
93 
94 
92 
93 
94 
92 
93 
94 
Espafia | 92 
I 93 
! 94 
France 92 
93 
94 
Ireland 1 92 
j 93 
| 94 
Italia 
Luxembourg 
Nederland 
Portugal 
United Kingdom 
EU TOTAL 
Legend: 92 
93 
94 
92 
93 
94 
92 
93 
94 
92 
93 
94 
92 
93 
94 
92 
93 
94 
(a) 
(b) 
(c) Production 
(a) 
310.8 Number of head (x1000) Percentage 
i 
Premiums Ceilings | 
(b) 
331,5 
320,7 I 223.8 
315.9 j 236.2 
433.2 | 335.5 
400.0 295,5 
355.7 j 287.1 
2.774.3 j 2.582.8 
2.328,1 ; 884.3 
2.082.0 | 1.784.0 
201.2 i 143.3 
186,5 j 122.1 
183.6 ! 137.1 1993-94 
331.5 
335.5 
3.653.2 
143.3 
1.144.9 ! 536.6 I 
1.023,5 ! 460,2 | 
876,0 i 520.2 | 561.6 
1.673.1 j 2.262.1 
1.482.9 I 1.580.9 
1.397.7 j 1.726.0 
939.1 1.547.7 
828.2 i 544.3 
650.0 ; 959,1 
2.330,6 i 794.0 
2.194,3 i 533,0 2.262,1 
1.547,7 
2.124,4 | 629,2 | 834.8 
8.5 i 21.6 
9,0 j 16.8 
8.8 | 20.0 
488,7 ! 281.8 
434.0 223.8 
437.9 . | 166.2 
247.2 | 141.9 
245.5 ! 140.0 
211,9 ! 154.9 
1.675.3 j 1.381,2 
1.486,9 I 1.404,0 
1.539.8 ! 1.380.2 
12.216.0 ! 10.360,0 
10.939,7 | 6.429,2 
10.183,7 j 8.000,3 
I 21.6 
264.0 
141,9 
1.419.8 
11.517.0 i 
1995 | (c) 
293.2 
324.7 
3.092.7 106.7 
69,8 
74.8 
77,4 
73,9 
80,7 
93.1 
38.0 
85,7 
! 71.2 
65,5 
140,1 j 74,7 
! 46,9 
i 45,0 
551,6 | 59,4 
j 135,2 
106,6 
1.908,9 | 123.5 
164,8 
65,7 
1.286,5 | 147.6 
824.9 
19.3 
264.0 
154.9 
1.419,8 
10.280,5 
Eurostat = Net Production (slaughterings) of bullocks+bulls. 
Animals receiving first age bracket premium (provisional). 34,1 
24,3 
29,6 
254,1 
186,7 
227,3 
57,7 
51,6 
38,0 
57,4 
57,0 
73,1 
82,4 
94,4 
89.6 
84,8 
58,8 
78,6 
(a/b x 100) = % of animals receiving premium, in relation to animals slaughtered 
ANNEX IX BEEF DESEASONALIZATION PREMIUM 
PRIME BOVINE A LA DESEASONNALISATION 
SAISONNEUTZERRUNGSPRÀMIE IN RINDFLEISCHSEKTOR 9 
Member3State - -2&C±K ïx^X'ëàrM vNurriberidf Bullocks :*%jot bullocks slaughtered .Number of animals 
!ïMÊ$&^'-ÏÏ '••'"£' -•%!':-rr'^M^ ^^^^^^^^IÊÊ^^^- Jan-Apr - receiving premium 
Ireland 
Northern Ireland (UK) ** 
Deutschland 
Danmark 
EU TOTAL 
Legend: 1991 
1992 
1993 
1994 
1991 
1992 
1993 
1994 
1991 
• 1992 
1993 
1994 
1991 
1992 
1993 
1994 
1993 
1994 
n n 923.200 
926.600 
813.200 
631.300 
235.000 
250.000 
206.000 
219.000 
46.200 
47.000 
39.900 
41.000 
4.500 
4.800 
4.600 
5.200 48,0 
49,6 
40,8 
41,2 
44,0 
40,2 
28,7 
28,9 
78,0 
74,4 
62,5 
55,7 
90,0 
72,9 
65,0 
46,0 24,9 
23,2 
32,7 
35,7 
27,4 
30,6 
42,0 
40,7 
8,5 
10,9 
20,6 
29,0 
-
12,5 
19,6 
44,2 
Eurostat = Net Production (slaughterings) of bullocks i 
UK information | | 239.456 
195.331 
90.617 
86.835. 
9.533 
13.384 
692 
1.886 
340.298 
297.436 
figures rounded). 
ANNEX X BEEF PREMIUMS IN GERMANY (1989-95) 
PRIMES BOVINES EN ALLEMAGNE (1989-95) 
RINDERPRAMIEN IN DEUTSCHLAND (1989-95) 
g^^l^p^pfanlmaj^^ 
^^^(xlpop^hêaçi)^^^ 
Males - stocks > 6 months (a) 
- premiums -1 st age (b) 
- 2nd age bracket 
Cows - stocks dairy herd (a) 
- stocks suckler herd (a) 
(c) - suckler cow premiums 
Legend: 
(a) 
(b) 
(c) 
(d) Uy^M&$& 
1989 
1271,6 
-
-
1958.0 
16.6 
-ï^^g^Nëue Bundeslànder ;:/..; ^&J..u£\ 
1992 
475,5 
177,9 
n.a 
1036,0 
98,7 
91,7 1993 
420,2 
230.8 
94.9 
1058,3 
119.2 
114,4 1994 
407,0 
252,2 
88,1 
1041,2 
166.2 
144.1 1995(d) 
400,0 
179,3 ••^;ifev-:>,>-^^^^ •' 
1989 
2941,0 
0.0 
-
6886.0 
281.0 
81.0 
NBL=Neue Bundeslànder; ABL=Alte Bundeslànder; D=Deutschland; n.a.= not applicable. 
December livestock census 
Male Regional ceilings (1995): NBL=660.323; ABL=432.344; D=3.092.667 
Suckler Cow ceilings: NBL=180.000; ABL=471.122; D=651.122 
Estimated applications for 1995 ' 1992 
2665,0 
2582,8 
n.a. 
4329,2 
408,4 
336,2 - 1993 
2648,0 
630,5 
275,0 
4242,7 
433,6 
298,8 1994 
2508,7 
1531,8 
350,7 
4232,1 
457,0 
361,6 
ANNEX XI EWE PREMIUM CLAIMS IN GERMANY (1989-95) 
DEMANDES A LA PRIME OVINE EN ALLEMAGNE (1989-95) 
MUTTERSCHAFPRAMIENANTRAGE IN DER BRD (1989-95) 
Year 
Breeding ewes In census 
Ewes for which premium claimed 
Number of producers 
Average claim per producer 
* "-*•. -/a*;v ' *V:.*•••"*•'** % 
Year 
Ewes for which premium claimed 
Number of producers 
Average claim per producer 
... . . ••- •:^.- '-:r:L> 
Year 
Ewes for which premium claimed 
Number of producers 
Average claim per producer •*.*.-; .•':•.','•:'•'..••_.: 
1989 
1.040.849 
-
-
-
,.,,. ,,; .. 
1989 
1.267.825 
27.051 
47 
•W'-- ;-.-•:•'• 
1989 
1.267.825 
27.051 
47 Neue Bundeslànder 
1990 
799.584 
611.852 1991 
533.342 
638.919 
5.639 
113 
Alte Bundeslànder 
1990 
1.427.358 
29.247 
49 
Deutsche E 
1990 
2.039.210 
29.247 
70 1991 
1.423.928 
29.152 
49 
lundesrepubl 
1991 
2.062.847 
34.791 
59 1992 
471.234 
550.573 
4.329 
127 
1992 
1.362.015 
28.392 
48 
k 
1992 
1.912.588 
32.721 
58 1993 
473.388 
521.703 
3.630 
144 
1993 
% 
1.230.699 
25.474 
48 
1993 
1.752.402 
29.104 
60 1994 
486.211 
528.135 
3.768 
140 
1994 
1.239.463 
24.079 
51 
1994 
1.767.598 1995 
-
553.805 
3.806 
146 
1995 
1.199.121 
22.358 
54 
1995 
_ 
1.752.926 
27.8471 26.164 
631 67 
•^ 
^ 
No 1 
Price proposals in ecus for individual products 9l 
Product and type of price or amount 
(Period of application) 
1 
Cereals 1.7.96-30.6.97 
- Intervention price 
- Compensatory payment (1) 1995/96 Decisions 
Amounts 
in ECU/t 
2 
119.19 
54.34 % change 
3 
-7.4 
* +28.6 Proposals 1996/97 
Amounts 
in ECU/t 
4 
119.19 
54.34 % change 
5 
0 
0 
Rice 1.9.96-31.8.97 
- Intervention price - paddy rice 373.84 0 351 -6.11 
Sugar 
- Basic price for sugar beet 
- Intervention price for white sugar (2) 1.7.96-31.8.97 
47.67 
63.19 47.67 
63.19 
Olive oil 1.11.96-31.10.97 
- Producer target price 
- Intervention price (3) 
- Representative market price 
- Production aid 
- Consumption aid 3,837.7 
1,919.2 
2,295.0 
1,422.0 
120.7 0 
0 
0 
0 
0 3,837.7 
1,919.2 
2,295.0 
1,422.0 
120.7 0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
(1) To be multiplied by the customary regional cereals yield to obtain the payment in ECU/ha. 
(2) ECU/100 kg. 
(3) After application of the adjustment due to the maximum guaranteed threshold being exceeded. 
No 2 
Price proposals in ecus for individual products if 
Product and type of price or amount 
(Period of application) 
1 
Linseed 1.8.96-31.7.97 
- Fixed-rate aid (fibre) (per ha) 
Hemp 1.8.96-31.7.97 
- Fixed-rate aid (per ha) 
Silkworms 1.4.96-31.3.97 
- Aid per box of silk seed 
Cotton 1.9.96-31.8.97 
- Guide price 
- Minimum price 1995/96 Decisions 
Amounts 
in ECU/t 
2 
935.65 
774.74 
133.26 
1,063.0 
1,009.0 % change 
3 
0 
0 
-0.05 
0 
0 Proposals 1996/97 
Amounts 
in ECU/t 
4 
935.65 
774.74 
133.26 
-% change 
5 
0 
0 
0 
-
Milk 1.7.96-30.6.97 
- Target price 
Butter 
- Intervention price 
Skimmed-milk powder 
- Intervention price 309.8 
3,282 
2,055.2 0 
0 
0 309.8 
3,282 
2,055.2 0 
0 
0 
Beef/veal 1.7.96-30.6.97 
- Guide price for live adult bovine animals 
- Intervention price R3 carcases 
- Male bovine animal premium (calendar year) (1) 
- Suckler cow premium (calendar year) (1) 2,383.9 
3,475.0 
1995 
108.68 
144.90 0 
-5.5 
+20 
+26 3,475.0 
1996 
108.68 
144.90 
Sheepmeat 2.1.96-1.1.97 
- Basic price (carcase weight) 5,040.7 0 5,040.7 0 
(1) In ECU/head. The required density changes from LU 3 to 2,5/ha. The other premiums (deseasonaliaztion, calf 
conversion, extensification) are maintained at the level set in the May 1992 reform. 
5^ 
No 3 
Price proposals in ecus for individual products 
Product and type of price or amount 
(Period of application) 
1 
Pigmeat 1.7.96-30.6.97 
- Basic price (carcase weight) 1995/96 Decisions 
Amounts 
in ECU/t 
2 
1,509.39 % change 
3 
-3.8 Proposals 1996/97 
Amounts 
in ECU/t 
4 
1,509.39 % change 
5 
0 
Fruit and vegetables - Basic price 
- Cauliflowers 1.5.96-30.4.97 
- Tomatoes 11.6.96-30.11.96 
- Peaches 1.6.96-30.9.96 
- Lemons 1.6.96-31.5.97 
- Pears 1.7.96-30.4.97 
- Table grapes 1.8.96-20.11.96 
- Apples 1.8.96-31.5.97 
- Mandarins 16.11.96-28.2.97 
- Sweet oranges 1.12.96-31.5.97 
- Apricots 1.6.96-31.7.96 
- Aubergines 1.7.96-31.10.96 
- Clementines 1.12.96-15.2.97 
- Satsumas 16.10.96-15.1.97 
- Nectarines 1.6.96-30.8.96 -0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 -0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
Table wine (1) 
- Guide price Type R I 
- Guide price Type R II 
- Guide price Type R HI 
- Guide price Type A I 
- Guide price Type A II 
- Guide price Type A IE 1.9.96-31.8.97 
3,828 
3,828 
62,150 
3,828 
82,81 
94,57 3,828 
3,828 
62,150 
3,828 
82,81 
94,57 
Tobacco (Premiums) 
I. Flue cured 
H. Light air cured 
HI. Dark air cured 
IV. Fire cured 
V. Sun cured 
VI. Basmas 
VQ. Katerini 
VIE. Kaba Koulak 2.709,65 
2.167,48 
2.167,48 
2.383,62 
2.167,48 
3.754,15 
3.185,41 
2.276,15 0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 2.709,65 
2.167,48 
2.167,48 
2.383,62 
2.167,48 
3.754,15 
3.185,41 
2.276,15 0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
(1) R I, R II and A I expressed in ECU/%/hl. 
R in, A n and A III expressed in ECU/hl. 
STABILIZERS AND PRODUCTION THRESHOLDS 
SUGAR 
(WHITE SUGAR 
EQ.) 
ISOGLUCOSE 
INULIN SYRUP 
OLIVE OIL 
WINE 
TOBACCO 1994/1995 
Quotas or MGQ 
applicable 
EUR-12 
QuoU A: 11 187 Mt 
QuoU B: 2 488 Mt 
EUR-12 
QuoU A: 240 743 t 
QuoU B: 50 342 t 
EUR-12MGQ: 
1 350 000 t 
Compulsory distillation: 
Price based on the 
quantity covered by the 
compulsory-distillation 
schemes, as follows: 50% 
of the guide price for the 
equivalent of 10% of the 
volume used; 7.5% of that 
price for the remainder 
EUR-12quoU: 350 000 1 
ofleaf tobacco. 
Allocated by variety Market situation 
EUR-12 production in 
Mt 
QuoU A: 10 897 
QuoU B: 2 406 
Sugar C: 2 225 
ToUl: 15 528 
Production within 
quotas 
Estimated production: 
1 408 023 t (Reg. 
2540/95) 
Exceptionally short 
crop. Strong prices. No 
compulsory distillation 
announced so far. 
Question to be 
reviewed by the end of 
February 1995 
Production within the 
quotas Overrun 
Final production 
94/95 will be fixed in 
July 1996 
No compulsory 
distillation 1995/1996 
QuoU or quantity' 
applicable/proposed 
EU-15 
QuoU A: 11974Mt 
QuoU B: 2 609 Mt 
EU-15 
QuoU A: 251 588t 
QuoU B: 51 4271 
EU-15 
QuoU A: 261 562 t 
QuoU B: 61 5981 
Same MGQ as for 
1994/95: 
1 350 000 t 
Compulsory distillation: 
Price based on the quantity 
covered by the 
compulsory-distillation 
schemes, as follows: 50% 
of the guide price for the 
equivalent of 10% of the 
volume used; 7.5% of that 
price for the remainder 
EU-15 overall quota: 
350 600 t allocated by 
variety and group of 
varieties. Market situation 
EU-15 production in . 
Mt(e) 
QuoU A: 11 721 
QuoU B : 2 420 
Sugar C: 2 030 
ToUl: 16 180 
EU-15 production (e) 
QuoU A: 251,5881 
QuoU B: 51,4271 
C:0t 
EU-15 production (e) 
QuoU A: 127 0001 
QuoU B: 0 t 
QuoU C : 01 
Production (e): 
1 230 000 t 
Still short crop. Strong 
prices, especially in 
Italy. 
No compulsory 
distillation. Definitive 
decision by the end of 
February 1996 
Production within the 
quotas Overrun 
No overrun 
expected 
Probably no 
compulsory 
distillation will be 
decided 1996/1997 
QuoU or quantity 
applicable/proposed 
EU-15 quotas 
unchanged 
EU-15 quotas 
unchanged 
EU-15 quotas 
unchanged 
EU-15 MGQ: 
1 350 000 t 
Reform under 
discussion. 
Probably no change for 
this year 
No change scheduled 
or 
r 
COTTON 
FRESH TOMATOES 
CAULI-FLOWERS 
NECTARINES 
PEACHES 
APPLES 
ORANGES 1994/1995 
Quotas or MGQ 
applicable 
MGQ: 701 000 t 
EUR-12 intervention 
threshold: 600 800 t 
EUR-12 intervention 
threshold: 64 300 t 
EUR-12 intervention 
threshold: 83 100 t 
EUR-12 intervention 
threshold: 303 600 t 
Intervention threshold 
EUR-12: 257 800 t 
EU-15: 260 000 t 
EUR-12 intervention 
threshold: 1 179 900 t Market situation 
EUR-12 production: 
1 318011 
Withdrawals: 50 220 t 
Withdrawals: 194 3191 
Withdrawals: 191 523 t 
Withdrawals: 799 262 t 
Withdrawals: 629 014 t 
Withdrawals: 220 659 t Overrun 
Reduction of aid: 
23.843 ECU/100 kg 
in 1994/95 
No overrun 
Overrun: 5% 
Overrun: 20% 
Overrun: 20% 
Overrun: 9% 
Overrun: 9% 1995/1996 
QuoU or quantity 
applicable/proposed 
MGQ: 1031 0001 
Spain: 249 000 t 
Greece: 782 0001 
EU-15 intervention 
threshold: 607 200 t 
EU-15 intervention 
threshold: 63 800 t 
(3% of average quantity 
produced for consumption, 
not including products for 
processing, in the last five 
years) 
EU* 15 intervention 
threshold: 90 800 t 
(10% of average quantity 
produced, same basis as 
for cauliflowers) 
Intervention threshold: 
304 600 t 
(12% of average quantity 
produced, same basis as 
for cauliflowers) 
Intervention threshold: 
281 200 t 
(3% of average quantity 
produced, same basis as 
for cauliflowers) 
Intervention threshold: 
1 202 000 t 
(10% of average quantity 
produced in the last five 
years plus 752 392 t) Market situation 
Estimated production: 
Greece: 1 250 000 t 
Spain: 97 5001 
Withdrawals 
(provisional): 20 0001 
Withdrawal: n.a. 
Withdrawal: n.a. 
Withdrawal: n.a. 
Withdrawal: n.a. 
Withdrawal: n.a. Overrun 
Reduction of aid: 
Greece: 40% 
Spain: 0% 1996/1997 
QuoU or quantity 
applicable/proposed 
MGQ: 1 031 0001 
Spain: 249 000 t 
Greece: 782 000 t 
Reform under 
discussion at the 
Council 
Reform under 
discussion at the 
Council 
Reform under 
discussion at the 
Council 
Reform under 
discussion at the 
Council 
Reform under 
discussion at the 
Council 
Reform under 
discussion at the 
Council 
LEMONS 
SATSUMAS 
CLEMENTINES 
MANDARINES 
PROCESSED 
TOMATOES 
DRIED GRAPES 
WILLIAMS PEARS 
PEACHES SYRUP 1994/1995 
Quotas or MGQ 
applicable 
EUR-12 intervention 
threshold: 363 0001 
EUR-12 intervention 
threshold: 177 200 t 
EUR-12 intervention 
threshold: 130 600 t 
EUR-12 intervention 
threshold: 36 300 t 
ToUl Quota: 
concentrate: 4 317 339 t 
peeled: 1 543 228 t 
others: 736 220 t 
Maximum Guaranteed 
Area Currants, Sultanas 
and Moscatel: 53 000 ha 
EUR-12 guaranteed 
threshold: 102 805 t 
EUR-12 guaranteed 
threshold: 582 000 t Market situation 
Withdrawals: 6 476 t 
Withdrawals: 589 t 
Withdrawals: 40 8801 
Withdrawals: 4 4971 Overrun 
Overrun: 10% 
No overrun 
No overrun 
Overrun: 2% 
No overrun 
Overrun: 3.25% 
No overrun 1995/1996 
QuoU or quantity 
applicable/proposed 
Intervention threshold: 
361 6001 (10% of average 
quantity produced in the 
last five yean plus 
250 9931 
Threshold: 176 8001 
(10% of average quantity 
produced' in the last five 
yean plus 150 0001) 
Intervention threshold: 
128 6001 
(10% of average quantity 
produced in the last five 
yean) 
Intervention threshold: 
36 300 t 
(10% of average quantity 
produced in the last five 
yean) 
ToUl Quota: 
concentrate: 4 317 339 t 
peeled: 1 543 2281 
others: 736 220 t 
Maximum Guaranteed 
Area Currants, Sultanas 
and Moscatel: 53 000 ha 
Same thresholds as in 
1994/95 
EU-15: 102 805 t 
Same thresholds as in 
1994/95 
EU-15: 582 0001 Market situation 
Withdrawal: n.a. 
Withdrawal: n.a. 
Withdrawal: n.a. 
Withdrawal: n.a. 
Withdrawal: n.a. 
Withdrawal: n.a. 
Withdrawal: n.a. 
Withdrawal: n.a. Overrun 
-
Overrun: 17.84% 
No overrun 1996/1997 
QuoU or quantity 
applicable/proposed 
Reform under 
discussion at the 
Council 
Reform under 
discussion at the 
Council 
Reform under 
discussion at the 
Council 
Reform under 
discussion at the 
Council 
Reform under 
discussion at the 
Council 
Maximum Guaranteed 
Area Currants, Sultanas 
and Moscatel: 
53 000 ha 
Reform under 
discussion at the 
Council 
Reform under 
discussion at the 
Council 
i) 
MILK 1994/1995 
Quotas or MGQ 
applicable 
EUR-12 quoU 
Wholesales quoU: 
107 062 3021 
Direct sales quoU: 
1 983 6271 Market situation 
-Overrun 
No EU overrun, but 
overrun in Belgium, 
Denmark, Greece, 
Ireland, 
Luxembourg, The 
Netherlands and 
United Kingdom: 1995/1996 
QuoU or quantity 
applicable/proposed 
EU-15 quoU: 
Wholesales quoU: 
114 909 3021 
Direct sales quoU: 
2 363 6271 
("SLOM" quantities for 
new Member States : 
380 0001) Market situation Overrun 
No EU overrun 
expected but 
possible overrun 
on a few MS 1996/1997 
QuoU or quantity 
applicable/proposed 
EU-15 quota: 
Wholesales quoU: 
114 909 302 t 
Direct sales quoU: 
2 363 6271 
("SLOM" quantities for 
new Member Sûtes 
380 0001) 
o 
TRENDS IN ECONOMIC INDICES FROM 1980 TO 1994 IN REAL TERMS 
.",": -EUR12-
Index based on 1989-90-91 = 100 
YEARS 
1980 
1981 
1982 
1983 
1984 
1985 
'. .1986 
1987 
1988 
1989 
1990 
' 1991 
1992 
1993 
1994 Expenditures 
EAGGF-
Garantee 
(D(5j. 
70.8 
; 62.9" •'. 
.64.8 • 
• 78.0 
85.S 
88.1 ' 
.96.5 . 
97.8 
108.9, 
'95.4 
94.1 
110.5 
106.8 
.118.0 
*1"11.3 • GDP 
total 
V (2). 
. 78.9 
78.9./ 
79.7 
81.0 
82.9 
.84.9 ' 
87.4 
89.9 
93.7 
97.2 
100.1 
102.7 
103.9 
103.5 
106.5. Final • 
' agricult. 
output 
(2) 
* 89.4 .. 
88,0 
'92.7 
93.4 
95.4 
95.6 
96.6 
97.6 
• .98.2 ' 
99.3 
99.4 
' 100.6' 
103.3 
100.7 
99.8 Employm. 
in 
agric' 
InAWU' 
'136.7 
130.1 
1.25.6 
123.6 
121,1 
,118.5* 
115.0. • 
112.1 
108.7 
•103.6-
102.8 
'97.2 " 
92.2 
87.4 
' 85.1 Final agric. 
output per 
pers. empl. 
(2) 
65.4 * 
67.6 
73.8 * 
75.Ô .: 
78.8 
8Ô.7 ' 
84.0 
87.1 
90.3 
95.8 
'96.7 
•103.5 
112.0 • 
.'115.2 
117.3 NVA 
agric. 
(1) 
114,5 • 
110.2 
117,5 
111.5 
112.1 
105.9 
103.8 
98.9 • 
98.1 
104.5 
101.5 
. 98.5 
92.2 
a7.8 
91.0 NVA 
perAWU 
(D 
83.8 
84.7 
93.6 
90.2-
92.6 
89,4 
90.3 
88.2 
90.2 
1*00.9 
' 98.7 
101.3 
100.0 
100.5 
106.9 Support 
prices 
(3) 
132.6 
134.4 
.135.7 
132.1 ; 
126.8 
123.6 
' 1.19.1 
111.5 
107.2, 
104.4 
' 100.4 
95.2-
90.3 
94.0 • 
87.8. Producer 
prices 
(4) 
129.2 
130.3 
127.6 
124.6 
' 122.0 
116.7 
110.8 
105.4'. 
103.7 
105.1 
.102.2 
97.8. 
• 89.3 
84.8 
85.4 Prices of 
Intermediate 
consumption 
(4) 
127.2 
131.1 
128.9 ;•; 
129.0 
129.8 
' 124.1 . . 
115.9 
106.2 
104.8 
. 104.2 
101,3 
98.7 
95.4 
94.6 
92.4 
(1) In real terms (GDP deflator). 
(2) Fn constant prices. 
(3) Weighted-average, for products with common prices, of support prices (Intervention price or equivalent); 
. irt national currency real terms (GDF? deflator). 1989-90-91 = 100. 
(4) Weighted average of allproducts and intermediate consumption In ECU, EUR-10, deflated by the'consumer Index. 
(5) Budget 1987: from 1st January to 31 st October .1987. 
Budget 1988 : from 1st november 1987 to 15st October 1988. 
from Budget 1989 : from 16th octoberyearn to 15th.october year n+1. 
GDP : Gross Domestic-Product at market prices. 
NVA : Net Value Added*at factor cost. 
AWU: Annual Work Unit ^ 
l.i 
140 
130 
120 
110 
100 
90 Net Value-Added and Employment 
Agricultural indices in real terms (1989-90-91 = 100) 
P.P.6.5 
^ 
'*•••-*. Annual Work Unit (AWU) 
••*. 
80 j ^—— * <A« a • • m m "•* » » » r. .•»•• 
0 • •••^#«* 
4* 
1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 
1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 
130 
120 
110 
100 
90 
80 
70 
60 Trends in a^icultural economic indices 
in real terms (1989-90-91 = 100) 
P.P. 6.5 
1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 
1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 u 
140 
130 
120 
110 
100 
90 
80 
70 o ural price indices 
in real terms (1989-90-91 = 100) 
P.P. 6.5 
Support Prices Prod. Prices jnterm. Cons. Prices 
.-'....•.. ••."••. 
1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 



ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(96) 44 Vol. I 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 03 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-96-068-EN-C 
ISBN 92-78-00566-5 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg