16. 8. 74 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities No C 97/27 
II 
(Preparatory  Acts) 
COUNCIL 
CONSULTATION  OF THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
on a proposal  for  a Council  Regulation  amending  Regulation  (EEC)  No  816/70  as 
regards  the definition  of liqueur  wines  and  of certain  grape  musts 
A. REQUEST  FOR  AN  OPINION 
On 14 January  1974,  the  Council  decided  ro exercise  its option  of consulting  the 
Economic  and  Social  Committee  on the above  proposal  for a Regulation. 
The request  for an Opinion  was  sent  by the President  of the Council  to the Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee  on 15 January  1974. 
B. TEXT  WHICH  WAS  THE  SUBJECT  OF  THE  CONSULTATION 
The text  which  was  the  subject  of the  consultation  was  published  in the  Official 
Journal  of the European  Communities  No  C 20 of 5 March  1974,  page  6. 
C. OPINION  OF THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
At its 118th  plenary  session  held  in Brussels  on 27 and  28 February  1974,  the 
Committee  adopted  its Opinion  on the text  referred  to under  B by a unanimous  vote  of 
all members  present  or represented. 
The text  of the Opinion  is as follows: 
THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE, 
Having  regard  to the  request,  dated  14  January 
1974,  by  the  Council  for  an  opinion  on  the 
'Proposal  for a Council  Regulation  (EEC)  amending 
Regulation  (EEC)  No  816/70  as  regards  the 
definition  of liqueur  wines  and  of certain  grape 
musts'; 
Having  regard  to the  request,  dated  12 February 
1974,  by the Council  for an opinion  on amendment to the  abovementioned  proposal  presented  by the 
Commission  to the  Council  in accordance  with  the 
second  paragraph  of Article  149  of the EEC  Treaty; 
Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  establishing  the 
European  Economic  Community,  and  in particular 
Article  43 thereof; 
Having  regard  to the  decision  of its  Chairman 
entrusting  the  Section  for  Agriculture  with  the 
No C 97/28 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities 16. 8. 74 
preparation  of an  opinion  and  a report  on  the 
matter,  using  the  urgent  procedure  provided  for 
under  Articles  46 and  47 of the Rules  of Procedure; 
Having  regard  to the verbal  report  submitted  by the 
rapporteur,  Mr Guillaume; 
Having  regard  to the  opinion  delivered  by  the 
Section  for  Agriculture  at its  meeting  held  on 
7 February  1974; 
Having  regard  to the discussions  at its 118th  plenary 
session  on  27 and  28  February  1974,  (sitting  of 
28 February  1974), 
HAS  ADOPTED  THE  FOLLOWING  OPINION: 
1. The  Committee  has  noted  the  remarks  made 
by the  Commission  representative,  and  particularly 
the point  that  Regulation  (EEC)  No  816/70  defines 
liqueur  wines,  among  other  things,  as a product 
obtained  by the  addition  of alcohol  before,  during 
or after  fermentation,  whereas  Regulation  (EEC) 
No 948/70  on Common  Customs  Tariff  definitions 
defines  liqueur  wines  slightly  differently,  since  it 
only  refers  to the  addition  of alcohol  during  and 
after  fermentation. 
The Committee  considers  that  such  a divergence  is 
enough  justification  for a harmonization  of the  two 
definitions. 
2. The  Commission  document  says  that  'grape 
must  with  fermentation  arrested  by the  addition  of 
alcohol'  cannot  continue  to  receive  the  same 
treatment  as liqueur  wines  for  the purpose  of trade 
with  third  countries.  The  Committee  believes  that 
the reason  for this  de facto  equivalence,  which  must 
be ended,  is the  absence  of a definition  of 'grape 
must  with  fermentation  arrested  by the  addition  of 
alcohol'. 
Furthermore,  Council  Regulation  (EEC)  No 1093/70, 
taken  in pursuance  of Article  25  of Regulation 
(EEC)  No  816/70,  allows  agricultural  alcohol  to be 
added  in the  Community  to products  listed  under 
heading  No  22.06  of the  Common  Customs  Tariff, 
which  has  led certain  exporting  countries  to protest 
against  the  fact  that  such  products  cannot  be 
imported  into  the  EEC  if they  are  made  in third 
countries. 
In addition,  since  the  reference  price  for  liqueur 
wines  is very  high,  it has  been  necessary,  under 
Article  9 of Regulation  (EEC)  No  816/70,  to lay 
down  a special  reference  price  for liqueur  wines  for 
processing. 3. With  regard  to  the  particular  point  of 
concentrated  caramelized  grape  must,  the 
Commission  representative  stated  that  the  Italian 
Government  had  asked  that  certain  well-known  and 
traditional  Community  products,  obtained  by 
concentrating  by the  direct  heat  of a fire,  should  be 
allowed  to circulate  and  be marketed  throughout  the 
Community. 
In order  to allow  the free  circulation  of marsala,  the 
Commission  proposes  defining  caramelized  grape 
must  and,  at the same  time,  amending  the definition 
of this  product  in Regulation  (EEC)  No 816/70. 
In order  not  to bring  about  discrimination  against 
third  countries  using  caramelized  grape  must  to 
prepare  certain  liqueur  wines,  the  Commission 
proposes  amending  Regulation  (EEC)  No  948/70  so 
as to allow  the addition  of concentrated  caramelized 
grape  must  to imported  liqueur  wines. 
The Committee  has  no objection  to the introduction 
of a definition  of concentrated  caramelized  grape 
must,  or to the  amendment  of the  liqueur  wine 
definition  which  allows  this  new  definition  to be 
introduced.  It considers  that  as this  method  is used 
in the preparation  of well-known  quality  wines  psr, 
such  wines  should  be allowed  to circulate  freely 
within  the  Community.  It stresses,  however,  the 
need  to take  into  consideration  the  possible  effects 
of misuse  of caramels  (furfural)  on public  health 
and calls  on the  Commission  to make  proposals 
fixing  the  maximum  admissible  amounts  of such 
products  in the Community. 
4. Although  it has  not  been  formally  consulted  on 
this matter  the  Committee  has  no objection  to the 
Commission's  proposals  regarding  the  adoption  of 
provisions  allowing  products  which  are  traditionally 
obtained  by similar  methods  to be imported  from 
third  countries. 
5. However,  the  Committee  has  a number  of 
objections  to the  proposal  to introduce  a definition 
for 'grape  must  with  fermentation  arrested  by the 
addition  of alcohol'. 
Firstly,  the  Committee  wants  to know  in greater 
detail  why  the Commission  proposes  defining  'grape 
must  with  fermentation  arrested  by the  addition  of 
alcohol',  whose  characteristics  do  not  seem  to 
answer  an essential  need  of the  aromatized  wines 
industry. 
Of course,  the  Commission  representative  made  it 
clear  that  among  the  reasons  which  prompted  the 
Commission  to propose  a definition  for 'grape  must 
with  fermentation  arrested  by  the  addition  of 
16. 8. 74 Official  Journal  of the  European  Communities No C 97/29 
alcohol'  was  what  was  judged  to be the  excessively 
high  reference  price  for  liqueur  wines,  which 
precluded  any  import  of such  must  as a raw 
material.  This  situation  has  prompted  several 
Member  States  who  were  not  wine  producers  to 
inquire  about  the  possibility  of obtaining  such  must 
from  third  countries,  as they  could  do before  the 
implementation  of Regulation  (EEC)  No 816/70. 
The Committee  considers,  however,  that  these 
explanations  are  not  enough.  In  particular  the 
economic  consequences  of the  proposed  amendment 
should  be evaluated  exhaustively  and  more  details 
should  be given  about  the  characteristics  of basic 
products  and  products  delivered  for consumption. 
6. Secondly,  the  Committee  considers  that  the 
definition  proposed  by the  Commission,  which  lays 
down  standards  considerably  lower  than  those 
which  could  be  adopted  for  liqueur  wines  and 
aromatized  wines,  is not  conducive  to high-quality 
production  in accordance  with  the  wine-making 
practices  of  the  main  producer  States  in  the 
Community,  even  though  the  alcoholic  content  is 
not the  only  criterion  for  the  quality  of these 
products. 
The Committee  considers  that  the  import  of raw 
materials  of inferior  quality  should  not  be allowed 
as the  main  preparing  States  do  not  use  such 
products,  even  where  municipal  law  allows  such  use. 
Furthermore,  given  that  in certain  countries  which 
are traditional  producers  of  aromatized  wines 
municipal  law  bans  the use  of raw  materials  covered 
by the  definition  of 'grape  must  with  fermentation 
arrested  by the addition  of alcohol'  proposed  by the 
Commission,  it is to be feared  that  if this  definition 
is accepted,  the use  of the raw  materials  in question 
will lead  to a drop  in quality. 
The above  comments  have  prompted  the Committee 
to question  the  urgency  of a specific  definition  for 
'grape  must  with  fermentation  arrested  by  the 
addition  of alcohol'.  It suggests  waiting  until  the 
Community  rules  for  liqueur  wines  and  aromatized 
wines  have  been  adopted;  in the light  of these  rules 
it will  then  be possible  to determine  whether  a new 
definition  of an intermediary  product  is needed. The Committee  considers  in fact  that,  in the 
consumers'  interest,  the greatest  attention  should  be 
paid  to produce  quality  and  it thinks  that  products 
covered  by the  proposed  definition  may  be unstable 
and unsuitable  for the traditional  production  of this 
type  of product. 
7. In  this  connection,  the Committee  deplores  the 
fact that  the  liqueur  wines  and  aromatized  wines 
regulations,  which  the  Commission  has  been 
promising  to propose  for  many  years  have  not  yet 
been  the subject  of a formal  proposal. 
It notes  that  the  Commission  considers  — notably 
for reasons  of harmony  in general  wording  and 
layout  — that  it should  wait  until  the  Council  has 
adopted  the  regulation  on sparkling  wines  before 
preparing  new  regulations  on special  types  of wine. 
The Committee  believes  that  this  argument  is well-
founded  but  considers  that  the  Commission  should 
present  its proposal  on special  types  of wine  as early 
as possible.  While  this  would  not  rule  out  a 
subsequent  change  in the  general  wording  and 
layout,  it would  enable  precious  time  to be gained 
in the decision-making  process,  which  is always  very 
long  at Council  level,  and  allow  the  Economic  and 
Social  Committee  to examine  this  proposal  within 
more  adequate  time  limits  than  those  which  too 
often  are given  to it for consultations. 
8. In  view  of the  above,  the  Committee  did  not 
feel that  it was  opportune  to  make  specific 
comments  on individual  articles  of the Commission's 
proposal  at present.  However  the  Committee  wishes 
to state  that  it approves  the Community's  provisions 
laying  down  maximum  contents  of sulphur  dioxide 
being  extended  to cover  certain  wines  imported 
from  non-member  countries. 
Done  at Brussels,  28 February  1974. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Alfons  LAPPAS 
ANNEX 
to the Opinion  of the Economic  and  Social  Committee 
Rejected  amendment: 
The following  amendment  was  rejected  during  the discussions. 
No C 97/30 Official  Journal  of the European  Communities . 16. 8. 74 
— Delete  paragraphs  5 (from  the second  subparagraph  onwards)  and  6. 
— Replace  by the  following  text: 
'Given  that  such  musts  have  to be defined  mainly  according  to how  they  are  used,  the 
Economic  and  Social  Committee  therefore  suggests  waiting  until  the  Community  rules  for 
liqueur  wines  and  aromatized  wines  have  been  adopted,  in order  to determine  whether  a 
new definition  of an intermediary  product  is needed'. 
Reasons: 
While  this  amendment  comes  to the  same  conclusions  as the  draft  opinion  (see  last  sub-
paragraph  of paragraph  6), it: 
1. deletes  the passages  which  prejudge  the future  regulation  on aromatized  wines  and  liqueur 
wines  (first  and  second  subparagraphs  of paragraph  6); 
2. avoids  a premature  stand  being  taken  in what  is still  a much  debated  matter. 
It is in fact  possible  to put  forward  a series  of counter  arguments  to those  which  are  now  in 
the draft  opinion,  and  which  should  be deleted  from  the opinion  and  included  in the record  of 
the proceedings.  Among  these  counter  arguments  are: 
— In favour  of the Commission's  proposal: 
— By creating  artificial  technical  barriers  for economic  and  not technical  reasons,  Regulation 
(EEC)  No  816/70  has  prevented  normal  competition  and  a possible  lowering  of the 
prices  of popular  aperitifs; 
— Outlet  for (surplus)  production  of Community  alcohol; 
— Sales  possibilities  for products  containing  less  alcohol; 
— Possibility  of using  wines  with  a low  alcohol  content. 
— Against  the Commission's  proposal: 
— Difficylty  of finding  products  with  a low  alcohol  content  which  are  stable  without  the 
use of a stabilizing  agent; 
— Need  to support  table  wines  with  a high  alcohol  content. 
Outcome  of the voting: 
Votes  in favour:  16. 
Votes  against:  34. 
Abstentions:  13. 
CONSULTATION  OF THE  ECONOMIC  AND  SOCIAL  COMMITTEE 
on a Recommendation  for a Council  Decision  setting  up a Committee  for Youth 
Questions  and  a Recommendation  for a Council  Decision  setting  up a Youth  Advisory 
Committee 
A. REQUEST  FOR  AN  OPINION 
At its 247th  meeting  held  on 18 and  19 June  1973,  the Council  decided  to exercise  its 
option  of consulting  the  Economic  and  Social  Committee  on the  above  draft 
Recommendations. 
The request  for an Opinion  was  sent  by the President  of the Council  to the Chairman 
of the Economic  and  Social  Committee  on 21 June  1973.