6. 3. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 56/41 
the biological agent representing the greatest hazard 
without infringing on the provisions of Article 3(4). 
Done at Brussels, 14 December 1988. 
1. Introduction 
1.1. The Commission's proposals are designed to 
further reform the sheepmeat (and goatmeat) regime. 
A major reform has already been introduced earlier in 
1988 through the application of agricultural stabilisers. 
1.2. The main philosophy underlying the proposals 
is to harmonize to the maximum extent possible the 
implementation of the regime and to reduce its cost. 
However, the Commission rightly recognizes that some 
differences exist between regions in the Community in 
production conditions and in the final product itself. 
1.3. Although not forming part of the Council Regu­
lation cited above, the Commission also proposes to 
renegotiate the import arrangements with third 
countries. 
2. General comments 
2.1. The Committee cannot offer a definitive 
Opinion on the Commission's proposal for changing 2.12. Article 17 
The word 'serious' should be deleted from Article 17(1). 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
the internal aspects of the regime before the trade 
arrangements with third countries have been renego­
tiated. The Community still imports 20 % of its sheep-
meat requirements and with an increasing production 
trend it will be necessary for the import arrangements 
to allow the EC to become more self sufficient. In 
particular the Committee opposes any increase in the 
proportion of chilled meat imports. 
2.2. Nevertheless, the Committee wishes to outline 
its provisional views on the Commission's proposals. 
2.3. The Committee recognizes that with the 
achievement of the single market in 1992 it will be 
necessary for the sheepmeat regime to be harmonized. 
Some of the proposed changes are radical and they 
therefore welcome that they will be phased in over a 
transition period of four years. 
2.4. The financial implications of the proposals show 
large savings to the EC budget. Unless these are offset 
by significantly higher market prices, producers' Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation (EEC) on the common organization of 
the market in sheepmeat and goatmeat 
(89/C 56/16) 
On 3 November 1988 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Agriculture and Fisheries, which was responsible for preparing the Com­
mittee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 1 December 1988. The Rapporteur was 
Mr. Straufi. 
The Economic and Social Committee adopted the following Opinion at its 261st plenary 
session (meeting of 14 December 1988) with no dissenting votes and 8 abstentions. 
No C 56/42 Official Journal of the European Communities 6. 3. 89 
incomes will be severely affected by the proposals. The 
Committee could not accept this as the income of this 
sector is already amongst the lowest. 
2.5. The Committee believes that the current seven 
sheepmeat regions in the EC should eventually be 
reduced to two, as against the three proposed by the 
Commission. This would provide more balanced sup­
port in southern European regions. 
2.6. Sheepmeat production plays an important role 
in maintaining and improving the rural environment. It 
is vital that the reformed regime allows this to continue. 
3. Specific comments 
3.1. The following comments will be divided into 
the internal and external aspects of the proposals. The 
internal will cover first the regime as envisaged after 
1992, secondly, changes to take place from the start of 
the 1989 marketing year, and thirdly, the transitional 
measures for the marketing years 1989-1992. 
3.2. Internal aspects 
3.2.1. Changes that will become operat­
ive from January 1993 
The Committee concurs that intervention, which has 
never operated in this sector, should be discontinued. 
They believe that private storage aids are more appro­
priate for dealing with short term problems. They also 
agree that any regime should no longer require the 
application of clawback charges. 
3.2.2. The Committee notes that the variable pre­
mium has been of benefit to both consumers and pro­
ducers in regions where it has operated. They believe 
that a further effort should be made to examine the 
possibility of operating a Community-wide variable 
premium scheme in such a way as not to require 'claw-
back'. Operating such a flexible scheme need be no 
more costly than a single 'ewe' premium. 
3.2.3. The single 'ewe' premium proposed by the 
Commission will be calculated on a single Community 
income loss. This ignores the wide variations in systems 
and costs of production, in type of product and in 
market price. Until there is a much closer harmonization 
of these variables, the income loss calculation and sup­
port through premiums should reflect the different con­
ditions in the regions. The Committee, therefore, rec­
ommends that for the foreseeable future, separate 
regional income losses should continue to be calculated. 3.2.4. The difficulties associated with a single Com­
munity income loss are compounded by reducing the 
number of productivity coefficients. The Committee is 
concerned that the most vulnerable producers in the 
Community, many of them in the less favoured areas 
(LFA), will be most affected. 
3.2.5. Changes that will operate from 
2 January 1989 
The Committee welcomes the suggestion that there 
should be two advance payments of the 'ewe' premium 
for all EC ewe flocks during each marketing year. 
3.2.6. The effect of the proposal to redefine 'eligible 
ewes' so as to relate to ewes which have lambed before 
a set reference date, depends principally on the dates 
determined for each Member State. The Committee 
must point out that within Member States lambing 
dates vary widely. In fixing the reference dates great 
care must be taken so as not to exclude any bona fide 
breeder. 
3.2.7. The Committee urges the authorities to re­
examine the proposal that the ewe premium should be 
paid only on the first 500 ewes in each flock (1 000 
ewes in the LFA). Care must be taken to avoid penaliz­
ing those regions where only extensive farming in larger 
flocks is viable. At the same time, the ewe premium 
must continue adequately to support the smaller pro­
ducer. 
3.2.8. Transitional measures for the mar­
keting years 1989-1992 
The Committee agrees that the reduction in the number 
of regions and changes to the coefficients should be 
phased in over a transitional period as they will have a 
direct effect on producers' incomes. Equally, the discon­
tinuation of intervention should be done gradually. 
3.2.9. The introduction of flexible EC-wide variable 
premia, broadly similar to that currently operating in 
Great Britain, would also require a transitional period. 
3.3. External regime 
3.3.1. The Committee fully recognizes the difficulties 
involved in renegotiating the voluntary restraint agree­
ments (VRA) with third countries. The Committee 
notes that the Council has given the Commission a 
mandate to negotiate with third countries. In view of 
the great importance of imported supplies the Council 
should not determine on the internal aspects of the 
6. 3. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 56/43 
regime until negotiations with third countries have been 
concluded. EC producers are being disciplined by the 
stabilizer arrangements. The burden of adjustment 
should be shared between Community and foreign pro­
ducers. 
3.3.2. The Commission is in the process of discussing 
the future of the import arrangements with third 
countries. For New Zealand the Commission has sug­
gested: 
— A reduction in the VRA amount from 245 500 
tonnes per year to 205 000 tonnes. Under this pro­
posal New Zealand would still be able to ship more 
sheepmeat to the EC than it has done in any of the 
past five years. The Committee therefore urges the 
Commission to reduce the amount further. 
— Within the VRA amount an increasing proportion 
of chilled meat will be allowed so that by 1992 
Done at Brussels, 14 December 1988. imports could be double current levels. As imports 
of chilled meat can have a particularly disrupting 
effect on the market the Committee would propose 
the setting of a much lower limit. 
— Reduction of customs duty to zero. The Committee 
could only support this if the price surveillance 
system which is to be established ensures respect of 
price disciplines. 
— Sensitive areas to be eliminated. While the Com­
mittee agrees that this elimination is necessary as 
the single market is achieved, they believe that this 
will have to be phased in over four years instead of 
over two years as proposed. 
3.3.3. The Committee wishes to draw attention to 
the importance of imports from other third countries, 
the preferential terms for which will also have to be 
renegotiated. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE