30.11.92 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC313/25
OpiniononaCommonSystemofAgriculturalInsurance
(92/C313/12
On24March1992theEconomicandSocialCommittee,actingunderthefourthparagraph
ofArticle20ofitsRulesofProcedure,decidedtodrawupanOpiniononaCommonSystem
ofAgriculturalInsurance.
TheSectionforAgricultureandFisheries,whichwasresponsibleforpreparingtheCom­
mittee'sworkonthesubject,adopteditsOpinionon10September1992.TheRapporteur
wasMrMargalefMasia.
Atits299thPlenarySession(meetingof23September1992),theEconomicandSocial
CommitteeadoptedthefollowingOpinionunanimously .
1.4.Bearinginmindtheneedtoestablishauniform
frameworkwithinwhichboththeMemberStatesand
theCommunitycantakestepstoprotectfarmers
againstexceptionaloccurrencesandinclementweather
conditions,inaccordancewiththeWorkingDocument
onCompetitionConditionsinAgriculture (VI/5934/
86-FR).
1.5.TheCommitteehasdrawnupproposalsaimed
atestablishingcommonsystemstoprovidefarmers
withprotectionagainstexceptionaloccurrencesand
naturaldisastersandatintroducingaCommunityAgri­
culturalInsuranceScheme.Theseproposalsaresetout
below.
1.6.TheCommitteerecommendsthatwhenthetime
comestoputforwardconcreteproposalstheCom­
missionensuresthatconsultationsareheldwithrep­
resentativesofexistinginsurancecompaniesandwith
nationalandCommunityfarmers'representatives .
1.7.Thefollowingmustbetakenintoaccountwhen
aCommunityAgriculturalInsuranceSchemeisstarted
up:
1.7.1.Thedifferentnatureoftheinsuranceschemes
intheMemberStates(privateschemes,Stateschemes,
mixedschemes).
1.7.2.ThecompetitionrulesofArticles86-92ofthe
EECTreaty.
1.7.3.Theharmonization ofrulesoninsurancein
thesinglemarket.
1.7.4.Regionaldifferencescausedbydifferencesin
climate,growingconditionsanddevelopment inthe
MemberStates.1.Backgroundandobjectives
1.1.Inthelightofthefindingscontainedinthe
InformationReportoftheSectionforAgricultureand
FisheriesontheCommonSystemofAgricultural
Insurance (CES454/91fin),submittedattheEconomic
andSocialCommittee'sPlenarySessionof29January
1992,whichanalyzedthecurrentsituationandthe
operationofnationalcompensation systemsforlosses
causedbynaturalphenomenaintheagriculturalsector.
1.2.Takingintoconsiderationthatinthedocuments
oftheNegotiatingGrouponAgricultureofthemultilat­
eraltradenegotiationsoftheUruguayRoundofGATT,
Stateaidtopromoteagriculturalinsuranceisregarded
asnotsubjecttothecommitmenttoagradualand
substantialreductionofsuchaid.Inthisconnectionit
shouldbepointedoutthatinthevariousdocuments
submittedbythepartiestotheGATTagricultural
negotiations ,thefollowingnationalaidsareregarded
as'permittedpolicies':
—incomesupportpoliciesnotconnectedwithpro­
duction;
—assistanceintheeventofdisasterentailingbona
fidelossofproduction,includingdisastersubsidies,
cropinsurance,disasterrelief,etc.
1.3.Takingintoaccountpoint6.4.4oftheESC's
Own-initiative OpinionontheCommunication from
theCommissiontotheCouncilontheDevelopment
andFutureoftheCAP(*),whereitisstatedthat:
'Onewayofprotectingfarmers'incomeswouldbe
toestablishaCommunityAgriculturalInsurance
Schemewhichwouldreceivefinancialsupportfrom
theECbudgetandwouldnotdistortGATTagree­
ments.Suchschemeshaveprovedtobeeffective
incountriesbothinsideandoutsidetheEC(e.g.
Canada)wheretheyalreadyoperate'.2.Compensation forfarmersagainstlossescausedby
exceptionalphenomenaoroccurrences
2.1.Thefollowingmeasurescouldbeadoptedto
compensatefarmersforlossescausedbyexceptional
phenomenaorotherexceptionaloccurrencesnot
coveredbyagriculturalinsurance. (!)OJNoC40,17.2.1992,p.63.

NoC313/26 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 30.11.92
2.1.1.Establishment ofasystemofcover
2.1.1.1.TheMemberStatescouldguarantee,
throughappropriatemeasures,thatfarmerswerecom­
pensatedforlossescausedontheirfarmsby'agricul­
turaldisasters'.
2.1.1.2.Forthispurpose'agriculturaldisaster'would
meanthelossescausedbyexceptionalphenomenaand
wouldbedefinedaccordingtothenatureoftherisk
andscaleoflossinlinewiththefollowingcriteria:
2.1.1.2.1.'Agriculturaldisasteraccordingtonature
ofrisk'.Losses,irrespectiveoftheirextent,causedby
specificrisks,suchasearthquakes,floods,avalanches,
landslides,nucleardisasters,typhoonsandcyclonic
windswouldberegardedasagriculturaldisasters.
2.1.1.2.2.'Agriculturaldisasteraccordingtoscaleor
importanceofloss'.Lossescausedbyotherrisks,such
asfrost,wind,hurricanes,rain,drought,plaguesand
diseases,etc.wouldberegardedasagriculturaldisasters
providedthelosseswereofacertainscaleorimportance
andprovidedthattheseriskswerenotinsurable.
2.1.1.3.Aminimumthresholdforthelossessuffered
andminimumsizefortheareaaffectedwouldhave
tobeestablishedfortheaccidenttoqualifyasan
'agriculturaldisaster'.
2.2.Financingofcoversystems
2.2.1.Suchsystemsofcoveragainstlossescaused
byexceptionaloccurrenceswouldbefinancedbythe
MemberStateandtheCommunityonthe.basisof
discussionsintheCouncilofMinisterswhich,acting
onaproposalbytheCommission ,wouldfixtheper­
centagesandconditions .
3.AgriculturalInsurance
3.1.Thefollowingmeasuresareproposed:
3.1.1.Promotion ofagricultural insu­
rance
3.1.1.1.TheMemberStatesandtheCommunity
wouldencouragefarmerstotakeoutagricultural
insurancecompensatingthemforproductionlossescau­
sedbyexceptionalnaturalphenomena .
3.1.2.Nationalagricultural insurance
schemesorprogrammes
3.1.2.1.Thenationalagriculturalinsuranceschemes
orprogrammestobedevelopedineachMemberState
wouldabidebythefollowingguidelines :
3.1.2.2.InaccordancewithArticles86-92oftheEEC
Treaty,theMemberStateswouldbeabletogrant
subsidiesforagriculturalinsuranceschemesorpro­
grammes.
3.1.2.3.Theinsurancecompanieswouldbefreetocompetewitheachotherandwouldoperateinaccord­
ancewiththespecificrulesofeachcountry.
3.1.3.CommunityAgricultural Insurance
Scheme
3.1.3.1.Inadditiontonationalagriculturalinsurance
schemesorprogrammes ,theCommissionisurgedto
establish,inconjunctionwiththeagriculturalinsurance
associationsandfarmersassociations,asupplementary
CommunityAgriculturalInsuranceSchemewiththe
followingfeatures:
3.1.3.2.UnderthisSchemetheproductstobeinsured
wouldbespecified.
3.1.3.2.1.Therisksagainstwhichtheseproducts
weretobecoveredwouldbespecified.
3.1.3.3.TheSchemewouldapplythroughoutthe
Community .
3.1.3.4.InsuranceunderthisSchemewouldbe
optionalforfarmers.
3.1.3.5.ManagementoftheSchemeineachMember
Statewouldbetheresponsibilityoftheinsurancecom­
panies;theywouldbefreetocompetewitheachother
andwouldoperateundertherelevantnationalrules.
3.1.3.6.Inviewoftheparticularfeaturesoftherisks
tobecovered,co-insuranceagreementscouldbedrawn
upbetweenthesecompaniesforoperationsineach
MemberState.
3.1.3.7.ThecompetentauthoritiesineachMember
Statewouldberesponsibleforsupervisingtheoper­
ationsoftheinsurancecompanies.
3.1.3.8.UndertheCommunity Agricultural
InsuranceSchemeasystemofsubsidieswouldbeset
uptoencouragefarmerstotakeoutinsurance.
3.1.3.9.Thetotalcostofthesubsidiesresultingfrom
theapplicationoftheSchemewouldbemetinequal
partsbytheMemberStateandtheCommunity .The
MemberStatewouldbeabletosupplementthesubsidi­
esreferredtointheprecedingparagraph,providedthat
thiswassodecidedbytheCouncilofMinisters,acting
onaproposalbytheCommissionandtakinginto
accountanyparticularcharacteristics oftheindividual
MemberStateswhichmightjustifysuchadditional
subsidies.
3.1.3.10.Inviewofthespecialfeaturesofthecli­
maticandnaturalrisksaffectingtheagriculturalsector,
theMemberStateswillatalleventshavetoensure
thatwhentheCommunitySchemeisintroduced,the
viabilityofnationalagriculturalinsuranceandre­
insurancesystemsissafeguarded .

30.11.92 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC313/27
3.1.3.11.IneachMemberStateapplyingtheScheme
apublicorganizationororganizationswouldbesetup
withresponsibility forstudyinganddrawingupthe
insuranceconditions,guaranteesandpremiums,work­
ingoutthestatisticalbasesandsupervisingthesystem
ofsubsidies.4.Preventivemeasures
4.1.Communityfarmimprovement programmes
[Regulation (EEC)No2328/91]wouldincludetheset­
ting-upofindividualorjointschemesforprotection
againstadverseclimaticconditions,especiallypreven­
tivemeasuresagainstfrost,hailandwind,thepurpose
beingtoprotectfarmingactivity.Thesemeasureswould
beeligibleforaid.
DoneatBrussels,23September1992.
TheChairman
oftheEconomicandSocialCommittee
MichaelGEUENICH
OpinionofthemodifiedProposalforaCouncilDirectiveonAdvertisingforTobacco
Products(2)
(92/C313/13)
On1July1991theCouncildecidedtoconsulttheEconomicandSocialCommittee,
underArticle100AoftheTreatyestablishingtheEuropeanEconomicCommunity,onthe
abovementioned proposal.
TheSectionforProtectionoftheEnvironment ,PublicHealthandConsumerAffairs,which
wasresponsibleforpreparingtheCommittee'sworkonthesubject,adopteditsOpinionon
7July1992.TheRapporteurwasMrNoordwal.
Atits299thPlenarySession(meetingof23September1992)theEconomicandSocial
CommitteeadoptedthefollowingOpinionby67votesto48,with11abstentions .
ofcompleteharmonization ,sincepartialharmonization
wouldnotbeconducivetoefficientoperationofthe
InternalMarket.ForthisreasontheCommission
announcedanamendedproposalforcompleteharmon­
izationofadvertisingfortobaccoproductsthrougha
banonsuchadvertising.Theamendedproposalallows
advertisingonlywithinspecializedtobaccosalesout­
lets,providedthatsuchadvertisingisnotvisiblefrom
outside.1.Introduction
1.1.Thisproposalseekstoharmonizecompletely
thenationalprovisionsontheadvertisingoftobacco
productsontheradio,inthepress,onbillsandposters,
infilmsandbyanyotheradvertisingmedia.Television
advertisingisalreadycoveredbyCouncilDirective
89/552/EECof3October1989.
1.2.Afirstproposalfortheharmonization of
nationallegislationonadvertisingfortobaccoproducts
wassubmittedbytheCommissionon7April1989.
Therewasnotaqualifiedmajorityforthisproposalat
theCouncilmeetingof3December1990.Nevertheless,
itemergedindiscussionsintheCouncilofHealth
MinistersthatanumberofMemberStatesareinfavour1.3.LiketheDirectiveonthelabellingoftobacco
products,theamendedproposalisbasedonTreaty
Article100A(3),whichstatesthattheCommission ,in
itsproposalsenvisagedinparagraph1concerning
health,safety,environmental protectionandconsumer
protection,willtakeasabaseahighlevelofprotection.
However,completeharmonization canonlyinvolvea
highlevelofprotectionifauthorizationforadvertising
islimitedtotheinsideoftobaccoproductssaleoutlets. (i)OJNoC167,27.6.1992,p.3.