No C 330/12 Official Journal of the European Communities 20. 12. 85 
5.3. The Committee agrees with the justification 
advanced for the new energy objectives and considers 
that public opinion and policy makers must be con­
stantly reminded that there are still risks inherent in 
the present energy situation and that our dependence 
on external factors calls for a sustained effort. 
The Committee wonders whether it would not be desir­
able to have different scenarios in connection with the 
energy prospects and the policy to be pursued. 5.4. The Committee appreciates that Community 
energy policy has a complementary and coordinating 
role vis-a-vis the policies of the Member States. While 
acknowledging that account must be taken of the spec­
ific problems of each country, the Committee considers 
that the Community can and must provide more stimu­
lus and guidance than in the past with a view to 
convergence of the energy policies of the Member 
States. This can apply to relations between the Member 
States and energy-producing third countries. 
Done at Brussels, 30 October 1985. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Gerd MUHR 
Opinion on the perspectives for the common agricultural policy 
(85/C 330/05) 
On 26 July 1985 the Commission referred to the Economic and Social Committee, under 
Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, the paper entitled 
'Perspectives for the common agricultural policy'. 
On 15 October 1985 the Section for Agriculture, which had been instructed to prepare the 
Committee's work on the matter, adopted the following opinion in the light of a report 
drawn up by Mr Zinkin, rapporteur, and Mr Chalioris and Mr Rouzier, co-rapporteurs. 
At its 230th plenary session (meeting of 30 October 1985) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted by a large majority, with two votes against and three abstentions, the following 
opinion: 
I. INTRODUCTION 
1. Agriculture in society 
1.1. The Committee agrees with the Commission 
that agriculture as an industry has special features, both 
economically and socially. 
1.2. In some ways, of course, it is like other indus­
tries. Its primary purpose is to satisfy the demands of 
its customers. Those engaged in it do everything in their 
power to make a living from it. With the sectors which 
supply it and those which process its products, it is a 
major component of the economy of every Member 
State. 1.3. However, economically it is different from other 
industries both in its still large dependence upon the 
weather and in the price inelasticity of the demand for 
many of its products. Free agricultural markets are, 
therefore, inherently volatile, especially since the indi­
vidual farmer is too small to influence the market by 
varying his supply; he can only respond to the signals 
the market gives him. Hence the emphasis in the Treaty 
of Rome on a policy aimed at stabilizing markets and 
assuring the availability of supplies. 
1.4. Socially, farming has largely created the life and 
environment of the rural areas of the Community as we 
know and, usually, value them. Without a reasonable 
number of people in agriculture, village life could lose 
many of the sources of employment and services which 
make it both viable and attractive. A change in the 
20. 12. 85 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 330/13 
methods of agriculture can quickly lead to a degrad­
ation or an improvement in the environment. The Com­
munity has, therefore, an interest both in providing 
for agriculture the conditions which will enable it to 
continue at the centre of rural life, and in making sure 
that agriculture is conducted in ways which enhance 
the environment. The Committee shares the view of 
the Commission that any agricultural policy must meet 
both these conditions. 
1.5. The fabric of rural life has to be preserved, 
virtually the whole of the agriculture of the Community 
is conducted by families who manage the farm them­
selves and provide at least its working capital; in nearly 
all the Member States 90% or more of the labour 
is provided by the family. It is doubtful whether an 
agriculture comprised wholly of agri-industrial enter­
prises would be more economic; what is certain is that 
it would alter the countryside and its way of life in a 
quite unacceptable way. 
1.6. There is a dilemma here. 
1.7. As the Commission points out, effective demand 
for most products on both internal and export markets 
grows only slowly or is stagnating. The population of 
the Community is increasing at a negligible pace and it 
already has enough—some experts say too much—to 
eat. The importing countries in Eastern Europe and the 
developing countries are trying to develop their own 
agriculture; India is now an occasional exporter of 
wheat and China of maize. Other exporting countries 
also have problems with increasing surpluses. 
1.8. As the productivity of labour continues to 
improve, less people will be needed to produce any 
given quantity of livestock and arable products. For 
numbers employed to go down as productivity increases 
is normal. But it could in some areas reduce numbers 
in the countryside below the level needed for rural life 
to produce its traditional satisfactions both to those 
who live in the countryside and those who enjoy and 
visit it. It could add to unemployment. The Committee, 
therefore, shares the Commission's anxiety on these 
matters and recognizes the need for action to prevent 
these undesirable results happening. 
2. The CAP and its objectives 
2.1. Because of these special features of agriculture, 
every developed country has an agricultural policy, and the objectives are normally very similar to those of the 
CAP. 
2.2. The Committee has always supported the objec­
tives of the common agricultural policy as laid down 
in the Treaty of Rome and the resolutions adopted by 
the ministers at Stresa. It is happy to note that the 
Commission puts forward the success of the CAP in 
achieving these objectives as the purpose of all the 
options it has suggested. The Committee considers, 
however, that the time has come for the closer definition 
of some of these objectives and for making them oper­
ational. 
3. The present problems 
3.1. The Committee agrees with the Commission 
that the CAP has been successful in achieving many 
of its purposes. It further agrees in general with the 
Commission's analysis of the problems which have now 
arisen. 
3.1.1. First, and most urgent, there is no longer for 
many products that balance between supply and 
demand at prices 'which allow agriculture to remain, 
or become, competitive' which was laid down at Stresa 
as a fundamental aim. 
3.2. Secondly, there has not been that levelling up 
of disadvantaged regions and farmers for which the 
ministers hoped. On the contrary, the gap between the 
prosperous and poor regions has widened; and the 
problem of the poor regions will be exacerbated by 
enlargement. 
3.3. Thirdly, some products are supported more 
strongly than others. Perishable products as well as 
eggs, pigs and poultry, generally receive less support. 
The Committee notes that there are less structural 
surpluses where support is less extensive. 
3.4. Fourthly, some of the concessions in commercial 
policy freely made by the original Six when the Com­
munity was in much heavier deficit for the products 
affected, are now much more expensive. 
3.5. Finally, the emphasis upon increasing the vol­
ume of production, necessary when the policy was 
first initiated, together with the pressure of costs and 
competition and the demand generated by the large 
supermarket chains have lead to mass production and 
farm specialization. This has led on occasion to unfor­
tunate effects. There has been a reduction in the number 
of varieties available. There has sometimes been an 
emphasis on quantity at the expense of quality. Some 
of the new methods have had damaging effects on the 
environment. 
No C 330/14 Official Journal of the European Communities 20. 12. 85 
3.6. The Committee further agrees with the Com­
mission that, if not tackled now, all these problems will 
get worse. Both budgetary constraints and mounting 
political criticism make early and effective action 
necessary. 
3.7. The Committee, therefore, welcomes the dis­
cussion that has been sparked off by the Commission's 
Green Book. It observes that the Green Book is not a 
totally new proposal for the general reform of the CAP, 
but is a continuation and a completion of a line of 
reform already established. It is essentially an instal­
ment in the implementations of the policy laid down in 
the Commission's paper in answer to the mandate of 
31 May [COM(81) 608 final] and developed in 
COM(83) 500 final. Other parts of that policy have 
been dealt with, or will be dealt with, separately, e.g. 
wine, structures, milk, sugar, oils and fats. The Com­
mittee would emphasize that all parts of agriculture are 
intimately interdependent, and would, therefore, ask 
the Commission to produce a study of the overall 
effects of the reforms put forward by it, particularly on 
incomes in agriculture, on consumer prices, on the 
landscape and on the population, in the Community in 
the worse-off regions. 
3.8. The Committee notes that, in all the options 
it puts forward, the Commission treats the decisions 
already made by the Council of Ministers on guarantee 
thresholds and financial discipline as given, within the 
constraints of which policy has to be formulated. This 
means that an excess over the thresholds in those prod­
ucts for which thresholds have been established, should 
automatically trigger a reduction in price, and that, to 
a large extent, any extra budgetary expenditure in one 
direction has to be matched by a reduction under some 
other heading. The Committee, however, notes that 
political pressures have not always permitted the 
Council to honour its own decisions, and it also notes 
the Commission's observation that, because changes in 
agriculture happen slowly, a change which will eventu­
ally save money may cost money in the short term. 
3.9. The Committee observes that agricultural 
incomes have lagged behind the average of these in the 
rest of society, and that the tightening of the conditions 
of intervention adversely affects the incomes of farmers. 
Any further reduction in price or further tightening of 
intervention will, in the Committee's view, cause serious 
difficulties for a proportion of farmers. 
3.9.1 The Committee also believes that it is necessary 
to take into account the effect of any change in policy 
on the sectors which serve agriculture. 4. The function of price 
4.1. At the heart of the problem the CAP now faces, 
is the failure of the attempt to use prices at one and 
the same time economically, in order to balance supply 
and demand, and socially, in order to provide a fair 
standard of living for the entire agricultural community. 
This failure is evidenced by the existence side by side 
of increasing surpluses and of farm incomes which have 
not increased in real terms in most Member States in 
the last decade, and have actually fallen in some, and 
also by an increasing inequality of incomes within agri­
culture. A choice has now to be made. If prices are used 
socially, some other means must be found of balancing 
supply and demand. If prices are used economically, 
some other means must be found of giving those in 
agriculture an income society accepts as fair, of which 
direct income payments to the poorest farmers and 
part-time employment outside agriculture would be the 
most effective. 
II. DEALING WITH SURPLUSES 
5. New customers, new uses, diversification and 
research 
5.1. The best way of dealing with surpluses is to 
find new customers or alternative ways of using the 
resources employed in producing these surpluses. Only 
to the extent to which these remedies prove inadequate 
does one need to resort to more drastic methods. 
(a) New customers 
5.1.1. New customers can be obtained in two ways. 
New people can be attracted to existing uses, and new 
uses can be developed. 
5.1.2. Attracting new people to existing uses is pri­
marily a marketing problem, and the Committee 
believes that the common agricultural policy has never 
devoted enough attention to marketing. The Com­
mission cannot be expected to be marketing experts 
but, in conjunction with the food industry and the retail 
trade, it should be possible to develop strategies which 
would increase outlets especially for the Mediterranean 
crops for which demand is not saturated. There has, 
for instance, never been a concerted campaign to pro-
20. 12. 85 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 330/15 
mote olive oil or blood oranges in the northern 
countries, nor is it normally possible in the northern 
countries to buy Community orange juice. 
5.1.3. Better marketing depends heavily on better 
quality and successful innovation. In both cases, what 
is important is that products should be tailored to what 
the consumer and the food industry want. The success 
of drinking yoghurt, of non-homogenized milk in 
Denmark, and of organic foods, though all individually 
small-scale, show what can be done in apparently satu­
rated markets. 
5.1.4. There are further possibilities in processed 
exports. The Community has the most sophisticated 
food and beverage industry in the world which, given 
equal competitive conditions, could have two advan­
tages, first, more added value and employment in the 
Community and, secondly, more outlets for Com­
munity agriculture. 
5.1.5. In the Committee's view, however, these possi­
bilities, both external and internal, require certain 
modifications of policy. There should be no possibility 
of putting into intervention varieties for which there is 
no market; intervention should be available for all 
varieties for which there is a market, at appropriate 
premiums and discounts; intervention should not be 
confined to certain products, e.g. only butter and skim­
med milk powder, thus concentrating the attention of 
the farmer and the food industry upon them and thus 
increasing the surplus of them. Prefinancing, advance 
fixing and restitutions on processed products should be 
fixed in such a way as to give the food industry the 
best possible opportunity of building up a long-term 
market. 
(b) New uses 
5.2.1. New uses can be envisaged for all products, 
and it is important both that research should be directed 
at developing such uses and that the CAP should offer 
incentives for their development. However, the dis­
cussion in the Green Book is essentially about new uses 
for cereals; the Committee, however, considers that 
attention should be directed to possible new uses for 
all products, including Mediterranean products. 
5.2.2. It considers that the chemical and biotechnolo-
gical and starch industries of the Community should 
be enabled to buy their Community raw materials, 
whether cereals or sugar, at prices comparable with 
those paid by their main competitors in the countries. 
It accepts, however, that the resultant increase in con­sumption is not likely, on present trends, to amount 
to more than a one- or two-year increase in cereal 
production. It would, therefore, ease the problem of 
cereal surpluses. It would not solve it. 
c) Food aid 
5.3.1. Food aid can sometimes be an extension to 
new customers and sometimes a new use. The duty of 
the Community's citizens to help the starving is clear 
but, however thoroughly this duty is discharged, it is 
unlikely that it would reduce surpluses much. The 
capacity of the hungriest countries to absorb dairy 
products is very limited, and the needs for cereals 
have more or less been met by the latest increase in 
allocations. Food aid must, moreover, not be used in a 
way which,accustoms people to a diet for which their 
own agriculture cannot cater, or to reduce prices in 
a way which interferes with the development of the 
agriculture of the country suffering from famine. 
d) The alternative use of resources 
5.4.1. The Committee believes, with the Com­
mission, that there is no one alternative use which 
would use up all the resources which would be released 
if supply were balanced with demand. It believes, there­
fore, that it is necessary first, to look at every possible 
use, however small, secondly, to consider those uses 
which require incentives so long as they are possible 
within the budgetary constraints and are not more 
expensive than disposing of the surpluses, and thirdly, 
to negotiate changes in trade policy if these can be 
achieved in conformity with the Community's obli­
gations in GATT and without disproportionately 
expensive concessions elsewhere. 
5.4.2. The commission has itself pointed out many 
small alternative u£es, like medicinal plants and jojoba, 
though some of these still need further research to 
be practical. The Committee would especially draw 
attention to the possibilities in peas and beans, where 
there has already been a large expansion of acreage, 
and to the widened use of rape seed oil and meal which 
could be achieved if their technical limitations could be 
removed by research and if high-yielding double-zero 
winter varieties could be developed. The diversification 
which would use the most acreage, and which would 
be especially valuable in marginal land, is afforestation, 
as the Commission says, but this would require some 
No C 330/16 Official Journal of the European Communities 20. 12. 85 
form of income support in the years when the trees 
were growing, perhaps to be partially repaid when 
the trees are felled. The Committee would ask for 
consideration of the possibility of transferring to affor­
estation much of the money at present spent, particu­
larly by the Member States, on reclamation and drain­
age; this could often also have environmental advan­
tages. The Committee further agrees with the Com­
mission on the importance of investigating the possibili­
ties for such quick-growing trees as poplar and 
eucalyptus, and of encouraging the planting of them. 
5.4.3. Another way of releasing resources might be 
to farm less intensively—use less fertilizer, for instance, 
or adapt the number of stock to the amount of land 
available so that the animal excrement can be disposed 
of without polluting the environment. It would be 
necessary that this should not reduce the farmer's 
income below what he could earn by farming inten­
sively. It would, therefore, be necessary to direct 
research towards developing more low-cost systems of 
extensive farming and then, as they are developed, to 
put a major extension effort into popularizing them. 
Such a programme would fit in well with the Com­
mission's ideas on the environment, where problems 
are caused both by intensive use of nitrogenous fertili­
zers and by the slurry produced by intensive livestock 
farming. 
5.4.4. There are possibilities, too, in organic farming. 
The demand for organically produced food is growing; 
what is now required is a system of labelling and 
inspection which will give the purchaser confidence that 
the food for which he is paying a premium has truly 
been organically produced. 
e) Alternative uses of labour 
5.5.1. The Committee considers it important to 
develop alternative outlets for the people engaged in 
agriculture, including the development of services such 
as the provision of game reserves, leisure activities, 
holiday accommodation and educational opportunities. 
f) External trade 
5.6.1. The Committee finds the Commission's pro­
posals somewhat vague. The central idea would appear 
to be that it might be possible to reduce protection on 
certain products and to increase it on others, thus 
making it more economic to divert land from cereals 
to other crops. The Committee recognizes that this is 
theoretically possible, but is doubtful whether much 
can be achieved in practice. Given the importance of 
the Community market to a wide variety of suppliers, any unbinding of duties which have been fixed in GATT 
at zero or low levels is likely to be very expensive in 
compensation and therefore to be limited, as indeed the 
Commission itself appears to recognize. The Committee 
has always supported the stabilization of imports of 
cereal substitutes, and the Committee believes that the 
Commission should give this priority in its negotiations. 
5.6.2. The Committee believes that the highest 
importance should be given to trying to achieve a 
coordination of sales policy with other cereal exporters 
and some agreement in GATT on the rules governing 
competition in export markets, particularly all forms 
of State aid. Meanwhile, the Committee would support 
any measures which enable the Community to match 
its competitors; examples are the applications to agri­
cultural exports of the normal provisions for export 
credit and insurance, soft loans for developing countries 
which do not need food aid but do require concessional 
terms, and long-term contracts where these can be 
arranged on mutually beneficial terms. 
5.6.3. Exports should preferably be of processed 
products rather than of bulk commodities and the 
arrangements for export restitutions should reflect this. 
The pre-financing and advance fixing arrangements for 
the food industry need to be improved. 
5.6.4. The Committee believes that the smooth 
development of exports and the predictability of 
budgetary expenditure require a greater measure of 
monetary stability than has prevailed in recent years. 
5.6.5. The Committee emphasizes the importance of 
ensuring that any steps the Community takes to restrain 
its own production should not be cancelled out by 
expansion by its competitors. 
g) Withdrawal of land from production 
5.7.1. The Commission puts forward the possibility 
of withdrawing land from production in two places, 
once under the heading of environment and again as 
one of its social policy options. 
5.7.2. The Committee considers that it may well 
frequently be desirable to shift land from agricultural 
production to alternative uses, including recreation and 
tourism, the preservation of wild flowers, the provision 
of habitats for wild life, the restoration of hedges and 
broad-leaved farm woodlands, and housing. But in each 
20. 12. 85 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 330/17 
case the expenditure involved has to be justified by the 
value of the new use. The resultant reduction in sur­
pluses would, however, save the Community money, 
making possible larger expenditure and providing a 
reason for a Community contribution. 
5.7.3. The Committee does not believe, as is 
explained on point 11.7, that withdrawal of land from 
production can be justified as a form of income aid, but 
it may be justified as a method of reducing surpluses. 
III. OPTIONS FOR CEREALS 
6.1. The Green Paper pays considerable attention to 
the cereals problem. 
6.2. However, the Committee has been informed 
that the Commission will shortly submit a memor­
andum on revising the common organization of the 
market in the cereals sector. 
6.3. Under these circumstances the Committee will 
give its final views after studying the memorandum; 
but at this stage it has the following comments to make 
in answer to the questions raised on cereals in the Green 
Paper. 
6.4. The Committee considers that a cautious price 
policy for cereals is necessary as a means of combating 
structural emphases. However it cannot, in isolation, 
improve the market balance without entailing unaccept­
able social and political consequences. 
6.5. The Committee recognizes that overall effective 
demand is unlikely to increase to any considerable 
degree. Nonetheless, any switch-over of production 
capacity as part of a policy of crop diversification 
should be regarded as a complementary measure to the 
diversification of the use of vegetable crops to include 
industrial applications. 
6.6. Crop diversification offers a wide range of possi­
bilities from the production of medicinal plants, high-
protein plants and protein-rich oil plants, to afforest­
ation. In the latter case investigations will have to 
be carried out into medium- and long-term cost/yield 
equations. 
6.7. The increased production of crops for which the 
Community has a shortfall must be entitled to benefit 
from the redeployment of the budget of the Guarantee 
Section of the EAGGF. 
6.8. The implementation of such measures could cer­
tainly be achieved through a number of instruments, one of which is co-responsibility in the cereals sector. 
6.9. At present it is very expensive to produce petrol 
which includes bio-ethanol extracted from agricultural 
raw materials. The Committee calls for the financing 
of new research with a view to reducing the cost and 
for investigations into the impact on employment and 
regional development and the consequences for refiner­
ies in the Community. 
6.10. The Committee will give a more precise opin­
ion on these matters after consideration of the proposals 
to be put forward by the Commission in the near future. 
6.11. The implementation of an active trade policy 
could alleviate the problems of cereals. Such a policy 
would give support to all the measures which could 
make the export policy more effective—without 
increasing overall financial intervention—such as 
export credit and insurance, measures to achieve the 
right levels of trade, the negotiation of medium-term 
and long-term contracts and stricter quality standards 
and controls. 
6.12. Finally, the Committee supports—as it has 
already made clear in a recent draft opinion on agri­
culture and GATT—the idea of agreements between 
the main exporting countries with a view to adjusting 
the amount of surplus agricultural products on the 
world market and thereby avoiding competition based 
on excessive subsidies. 
IV. RESEARCH AND EXTENSION 
7.1. It is important that every effort should be made 
in research and extension to help the farmer to reduce 
his costs and to reduce the costs in the food chain 
between the farmer and the consumer. 
7.2. This will require a considerable research and 
advice effort on, for instance, lower input systems and 
on teaching farmers the most economic practices. 
7.3. The Committee considers that the Commission 
should devote a larger research effort to investigating 
the reasons for the considerable difference between 
Member States in the cost of the supplies the farmer 
buys, and, to searching for methods by which the costs 
incurred in distribution could be reduced. 
No C 330/18 Official Journal of the European Communities 20. 12. 85 
7.4. Finally, the Committee believes that a consider­
ably larger research effort than at present is needed to 
improve the profitability for the farmer of the crops 
which are possible alternatives for cereals, whether by 
stabilizing and increasing their yields, or by enabling 
them to be grown more widely, or by freeing them of 
their defects, e.g. the gluconsinolates in rape seed. A 
special effort should be devoted to woodlands; very 
little work has hitherto been done on the genetics of 
trees. All such research should be eligible for a consider­
able Community contribution. 
V. THE CAP AND THE ENVIRONMENT 
8.1. The Committee stresses, like the Commission, 
that agriculture and forestry play a crucial role in 
conservation of the countryside. Agriculture and for­
estry—the major source of food, raw materials and 
regenerative forms of energy—have always contributed 
to the shaping and conservation of the environment 
and the landscape, and have paid most of the costs. 
This is especially clear in hill and mountain areas, 
particularly the latter, which would be uninhabitable if 
it were not for agriculture and forestry and would 
not support any economic activity. By preserving the 
natural environment, agriculture and forestry also cre­
ate the basis for other areas of employment such as 
tourism and leisure activities, which are of increasing 
importance in modern-industry society. 
8.2. In reality, agriculture and forestry have been the 
first to suffer from the pollution of the natural resources 
(water, air, soil) on which they are dependent. It is 
all too often forgotten that this pollution is mainly 
industrial and urban in origin, and that its sources 
sometimes lie far away (cross-frontier emissions). 
8.3. The Committee is therefore paying close atten­
tion to the development of the Community's environ­
ment policy, which can have a very beneficial impact 
on agriculture and forestry. A reduction in pollution of 
the atmosphere—in particular acid rain—and of surface 
and ground water will be very beneficial to agricultural 
and forestry production. 
8.4. The Committee agrees with the Commission 
that polluting agricultural methods must be eliminated 
as far as possible. One of the main tasks of the agricul­
tural information services is, in its view, to show far­
mers how they can restrict the use of pesticides and 
fertilizers to a minimum and to impress upon them that products of this kind must not be used if they pose any 
hazard to human or animal health. The Committee 
also considers that action must be taken against the 
pollution of surface water by agricultural waste, and 
that waste water must not be discharged if this leads 
to death of fish and that farms as well as firms in other 
sectors must be required to submit new projects for 
approval. The Committee endorses the principle that 
'the polluter pays' but is aware that in the agricultural 
sector it is sometimes difficult to establish who the 
polluter actually is, e.g. in the case of the pollution of 
water by nitrates. Opinions sometimes differ over the 
use of these substances. As regards the rules of the 
subject, the Committee will give its views when it is 
consulted on the Commission's relevant regulations and 
directives. 
8.5. The Committee also stresses that agriculture can 
make a major contribution to resolving a number of 
environmental problems, e.g. replacement of lead by 
ethanol in petrol, biodegradable products made from 
agricultural raw materials (plastics, pesticides, washing 
powders, etc.), beneficial impact of agricultural product 
diversification on the environment and the landscape 
(see above). 
8.6. The Committee considers that constructive, vol­
untary measures must have priority. These measures 
must help to improve the environment and at the same 
time safeguard the viability and flexibility of farms. 
Reduction of production should not be their main aim. 
8.7. The Committee stresses that a major effort must 
be made on the agricultural research front, and to 
inform and train farmers, and that the groundwork for 
this information campaign must be done in order to 
enable farmers to improve productivity in terms of 
the quality of food products and protection of the 
environment. The stress laid on these points by the 
Commission's Green Paper is to be welcomed. 
8.8. The Committee takes the view that priority 
should be given to laying down common rules in this 
area (harmonization of the law on the use of pesticides, 
fertilizers, hormones, etc.). Imported products should 
be subject to the same rules as Community products 
(given that the rules have an immediate economic 
20. 12. 85 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 330/19 
impact and directly influence the relative competitive­
ness of farms). 
8.9. When the Community lays down limits or 
restrictions in the interest of the environment or con­
sumer protection, it should ensure that they can be 
complied with (e.g. maximum nitrate concentration in 
drinking water). 
VI. SOCIAL POLICY 
9. Paid workers 
9.1. The Committee would wish to emphasize the 
importance in all formulation of policy of taking into 
account the position of agricultural workers, both 
seasonal and permanent. Present policy concerns itself 
little with their problems; sometimes, as with the impo­
sition of quotas, it even affects them adversely. Yet 
their incomes are usually very low, and their jobs are 
frequently at risk when times are difficult or production 
has to be reduced. Between 1970 and 1980 in the Com­
munity of Nine over a quarter of a million jobs for paid 
workers were lost. 
9.2. The Committee believes that it would be appro­
priate to provide for enhanced redundancy payments 
and early retirement for these paid workers who lose 
their jobs as a result of changes in the common agricul­
tural policy, with a Community contribution to the 
cost. 
10. Jobs 
10.1. There are two problems. 
10.1.1. First, the numbers employed in agriculture, 
which have been diminishing for many years, are likely, 
in the Committee's view, to continue to diminish. It is 
important, therefore, that those displaced should be 
able to find jobs elsewhere. This involves both extensive 
programmes of retraining and a deliberate attempt to 
bring jobs to all rural areas which are seriously affected, 
and not only those which will benefit from the inte­
grated development programmes already contemplated. 
10.1.2. Secondly, many of those employed in agri­
culture are occupied in it for less than half their time. 
A fifth are occupied for less than a quarter of their 
time. If the tissue of rural life is to be preserved, it is important tha-t many of these should remain on the 
land, especially in the less-favoured regions. The Com­
mittee, therefore, welcomes the Commission's under­
lining of the importance of part-time work outside 
farming but within agricultural areas. This part-time 
work may take many forms, from fishing to letting 
rooms, to pursuing a craft. It will also often be desirable 
for one spouse to take full-time work off the farm, 
while the other spouse looks after the farm. Over a 
quarter of farmers already have another occupation, 
and this figure may well be understated; it does not 
include spouses in other occupations. The Committee 
believes that everything possible should be done to 
encourage such work off the farm. 
11. Income aids 
11.1. Direct income transfers are no alternative to a 
prices and markets policy which lets average farmers 
receive adequate incomes. But as a supplement for 
disadvantaged regions, they have long been a necessary 
measure. Direct income transfers can be a compensation 
for inadequate farm incomes and a recompense for the 
work which agriculture does in disadvantaged regions 
in taking care of the countryside. In those regions where 
they are used, they have developed into an essential 
part of effective income support. They should be used 
even more extensively so that land in distant parts of 
the Community may be retained in cultivation and so 
that regional settlement and economic structures may 
be strengthened. 
11.2. Furthermore, the Committee believes that 
direct aids to income are the best way of dealing with 
poverty and with the transitional difficulties caused by 
major changes in the CAP. 
11.3. It, nevertheless, has grave doubts about the 
illustrative schemes put forward by the Commission. 
They would cost a great deal of money, which, the 
Commission makes clear, would reduce the resources 
available for other parts of the CAP. They are not 
precisely targeted on the poor or on those whose tran­
sitional difficulties would be most serious. They are not 
related to what is done for other sections of society. 
No C 330/20 Official Journal of the 
11.4. The first proposal is for larger early retirement 
pensions. The Committee considers that this has several 
defects. It would not reduce production, since those 
taking over the holdings would probably be more 
efficient; there is no income limit; the pension proposed 
is large in relation to the pensions paid at normal 
retiring age in several Member States. 
11.5. The second proposal is intended to aid those 
who are put in particular difficulty by changes in the 
CAP. The Commission talks of those with heavy debts 
as a result of investment on the basis of the CAP as it 
has been hitherto, and of those who have to transfer 
to other crops but who will in due course be viable. 
But its actual scheme, which will cost 4 000 to 5 000 
million ECU, does not provide for the application of 
either of these criteria. The Committee would welcome 
a scheme directed specifically to assisting transfer to 
activities other than cereals and to helping, for a tran­
sitional period, those who find themselves excessively 
indebted as a result of having invested on the basis of 
the CAP as it has been hitherto, but it considers the 
Commission's scheme too vague and too all-embracing. 
11.6. The third scheme aims to help those with 
incomes below a certain proportion of the regional 
income. The Committee welcomes the idea, but con­
siders that any such scheme must be coherent with what 
is done for other people with low incomes in each 
Member State. The Committee believes that this raises 
complex issues which the Commission does not appear 
as yet to have considered. 
11.7. The fourth scheme is one for withdrawal of 
land from production. Such a scheme, in the Commit­
tee's view, may be considered if it is a cheap way of 
reducing surpluses. It is unlikely to relieve poverty. 
Moreover, the Committee would not approve of paying 
more than the profit from the land for the withdrawal; 
this would be a most unfortunate precedent for other 
industries. 
11.8. The Committee believes that any scheme for 
income aids must meet certain criteria. 
11.9. In so far as their purpose is to enable viable 
farmers to survive the transition period while they adapt 
to the reforms made in the CAP, they must, first, 
provide for compensation strictly limited to a pro­
portion of the loss of income due to the reforms, sec-European Communities 20. 12. 85 
ondly, they should not reduce the effect of the reforms 
in reducing production, and, thirdly, they should be 
limited in time and be degressive over the period for 
which they are in operation. 
11.10. In so far as their purpose is to deal with 
poverty, they should, first, make no distinction between 
farmers and agricultural workers, secondly, take 
account of the whole income of the husband and wife 
and not merely of the agricultural income, and thirdly, 
not treat people in agriculture substantially differently 
from these who are similarly poor in other sections of 
society in the Member State. 
11.11. The Committee would be in favour of a Com­
munity contribution to direct income aids which meet 
its criteria. The contribution should be modulated in 
accordance with the relative prosperity of the Member 
States. It should come from an adequately expanded 
social fund, so that the amounts spent can be judged 
by comparison with other social priorities, and to avoid 
overburdening the budgetary allocations for the CAP. 
VII. REGIONAL POLICY 
12.1. The Committee regrets that the Green Book 
makes no mention of the studies the Commission has 
carried out on the impact of the CAP on the regions, 
which have several growing economic and social dispa­
rities between them. 
12.2. Something has already been done within the 
CAP to reduce those disparities, notably the Mediter­
ranean package and the special measures for mountain­
ous and less-farmed areas. Some of the Green Book 
proposals on subsidies and employment would also be 
helpful to these disadvantaged regions with a high level 
of agricultural employment. 
12.3. However, many of the ideas put forward in the 
Green Paper, in so far as the lower farm incomes and 
employment, would have their most serious effects on 
the least-favoured regions. A special policy for them is, 
therefore, needed which should also take into account 
the problems presented by enlargement, and which 
would help to mitigate the present imbalances in the 
Community. 
20. 12. 85 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 330/21 
12.4. The Committee agrees with the Commission 
that the problems of the agricultural sector in the disad­
vantaged regions must be solved within an overall pol­
icy for the development of these regions. It has, there­
fore, always supported with the original policy inte­
grated programmes and the integrated Mediterranean. 
The Committee notes the Green Book's statement that 
the new structural policy and the reform of the Regional 
Development Fund adopt the same approach. 
12.5. The Committee believes that policy must 
reflect the wider role of agriculture, in protecting the 
environment, creating jobs and relieving world hunger 
as well as producing its traditional items. 
12.6. The Committee believes that special consider­
ation needs to be given to the uplands, the southern 
islands and to those disadvantaged regions of the Medi­
terranean and northern Europe where agriculture is a 
major source of employment. 
12.7. The Committee believes that special consider­
ation must be given to those regions whose economies 
are largely dependent on, and which have few alterna­
tives to, particular agricultural sectors. These are 
especially vulnerable to the pressures of change, and 
appropriate steps must be taken to preserve the assets 
these activities represent for the Community and the 
regions. 
12.8. Solutions to some of these problems may lie 
within a reshaped common agricultural policy. How­
ever, the Committee stresses that a more effective 
regional policy with access to larger financial resources 
will also be necessary. 
VIII. CONCLUSIONS 
13.1. The approach and suggestions were mooted in 
the Green Paper of the mandate conferred upon the 
Commission by the Stuttgart Summit. The guidelines 
which were set then have influenced negotiations on 
price-setting over the last few years and have led to a 
number of decisions, particularly in the following areas: 
— production targets and guarantee thresholds for cer­
tain products, 
— milk quotas, 
— compulsory distillation of wine, 
— budgetary discipline. 
13.2. The Committee regrets the Commission Green 
Paper's failure to give details of the positive or negative effects of the recent measures, or to give estimates of 
the effects of its proposals, for example: 
— effects on real price levels, 
— effects on farmers' incomes and on employment in 
agriculture, 
— likely level of expenditure on direct income sub­
sidies, 
— financial consequences of the various measures pro­
posed on national and Community agricultural 
spending, 
— impact of the proposals in the various regions of 
the Community. 
13.3 This failure makes it difficult to assess the scope 
and effects of the new guidelines. 
13.4. The common agricultural policy has generally 
achieved the objectives set for it by the Treaty of Rome 
and the Stresa agreements. 
13.5. However, there has been a steady increase in 
the gaps in incomes and development levels among the 
Community's farmers and from one region to another, 
and in the structural imbalances between supply and 
demand in many areas of production. 
13.6. The Committee acknowledges the need for a 
new strategy, to take account of: 
— the need to ensure as far as possible that the agricul­
tural policy reform is comprehensive; this is the 
only way to guarantee maximum fairness in the 
allocation of resources and the sacrifices which this 
involves. The system used by the Commission at this 
stage of the reform process, whereby unconnected 
regulations are adopted piecemeal for individual 
products, will not bring the greater economic and 
social balance which we seek, let alone consensus 
on these goals, 
— the goal of eliminating regional imbalances, 
— the need for measures to provide new jobs and 
income support for surplus workers, giving particu­
lar attention to seasonal workers, who are often 
forgotten, 
— the need for economic rationalization, 
No C 330/22 Official Journal of the European Communities 20. 12. 85 
— budgetary constraints, 
— improved use of the potential offered by the Com­
munity's internal market in which there will be 
320 million consumers, 
— a reasonable proportion of farm products in total 
EEC exports, 
— the scale on which processed products are exported, 
— consumer demand for quality products, 
— balanced social and population structures in farm­
ing and rural areas, 
— preservation of family farms and farming jobs and 
the creation of proper conditions for the installation 
of young farmers, 
— conservation of Europe's natural resources, 
— protection of the environment. 
13.7. The Committee foresees, however, that the 
requisite policy of economic stringency and its inherent 
side effects will have serious social consequences. 
13.8. Support for Community agriculture is no high­
er than in the USA and less than in Japan and some 
other industrialized countries. 
13.9. Yet spending on price and market support 
measures under the EAGGF Guarantee Section has been 
Done at Brussels on 30 October 1985. rising steadily in the case of certain products, thereby 
generating major discrepancies between supply and 
effective demand, areas of production, regions and farm 
earnings. 
13.10. Anxious to remain within the financial limits 
imposed by the Council, the Committee considers that 
it is a question of finding ways of using EAGGF funds 
differently and more effectively. 
13.11. The Committee calls for: 
— redeployment of budget funds so as to achieve 
soundly balanced production which satisfies effec­
tive demand on internal and external markets, 
— more satisfactory income distribution helping to 
preserve the farming activities on which many parts 
of the Community so depend, 
— an improved supply of products in which the Com­
munity has a substantial deficit and which are 
imported from other industrial countries, 
— effective action first to contain and then reduce the 
costs of factors of production (e.g. the cost of credit) 
so as to avert major economic and trade distortions, 
— a strengthening of regional policy and the pro­
motion of multisectoral development programmes 
to stimulate also healthy socio-structural develop­
ments in the agricultural sector. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Gerd MUHR 
20. 12. 85 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 330/23 
APPENDIX 
to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
A. Rejected amendments 
The following amendments, based on the Section opinion and tabled in accordance with the Rules of 
Procedure, were rejected by Committee during the plenary session debate: 
Paragraph 2.2: 
'This applies in particular to the objective of "reasonable prices for consumers" to which no attention has 
been paid hitherto. The Committee considers that the concept of "reasonable prices for consumers" can best 
be defined as "price level that brings about a balance of supply and demand in the medium term in a free 
market". As far as the external aspect is concerned, it should be added that here, too, account will have to 
be taken of the extent Community preference should apply.' 
Result of the vote 
For: 17, Against: 67, Abstentions: 10. 
Paragraph 3.3: 
Replace the last sentence by the following: 
'The Committee notes that in general structural surpluses are linked with the level of support for the products 
in question.' 
Result of the vote 
Against: a large majority. 
Paragraph 5.1.5, three lines from bottom of paragraph: 
Delete the word 'restitutions'. 
Result of the vote 
Against: a large majority. 
Paragraph 5.4.2: 
Replace the fourth sentence, line 8 ('The Section would ask ... environmental advantages') by the following: 
'The Committee would ask for consideration of the possibility of providing major funds for afforestation. 
Reclamation and drainage work must also be continued. In addition, studies could be carried out to assess 
the impact of this work on agricultural development and the environment.' 
Result of the vote 
Against: a large majority. 
Paragraph 5.6.2: 
Delete the passage: 'Meanwhile the Section would support any measures which enable the Community to 
match its competitors'. Start a new sentence as follows: 
'Attention should be paid inter alia to the application to agricultural exports of ...' 
Result of the vote 
Against: a large majority. 
Paragraph 5.6.3: 
Delete. 
Result of the vote 
Against: a large majority. 
Paragraph 6.7: 
Delete. 
No C 330/24 Official Journal of the European Communities 20. 12. 85 
Result of the vote 
Against: a large majority. 
B. The following passages of the section's opinion were replaced by amendments approved during the 
plenary session debate 
8.4. Farmers have sometimes been forced to farm more intensively and to use more fertilizers, pesticides, 
etc., albeit with adverse side-effects. Their main purpose in doing this has been to protect their livelihoods 
and their families and farms, and to remain competitive with imports (identical and substitute products). 
The agricultural community, subject to appropriate compensation arrangements and to the provision of funds 
additional to those of the EAGGF, would therefore be prepared to: 
(a) take even more radical action to protect the environment, water and the atmosphere (optimum use of 
fertilizers, pesticides, etc.); 
(b) continue its contribution to conservation of the countryside, reafforestation, re-establishment of zones 
for protection of species, etc. 
Result of the vote 
For: 64, Against: 33, Abstentions: 12. 
12.8. If regional policy is to perform adequately all these functions, the Section believes larger resources 
will have to be devoted to it. 
Result of the vote 
For: unanimously. 
Opinion on guidelines for the strengthening of relations between the Community and Latin 
America 
(85/C 330/06) 
On 12 April 1984 the Commission of the European Communities asked the Economic and 
Social Committee to deliver an opinion on the Commission's guidelines for the strengthening 
of relations between the Community and Latin America. 
The Section for External Relations, to which the matter had been referred, adopted its 
opinion on 10 September 1985 in the light of the report by Mrs Bredima. 
At its 230th plenary session (meeting of 31 October 1985), the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following opinion by a majority vote, with eight votes against and seven 
abstentions. 
1. The Committee applauds the fact that most Latin 
American countries have recently made great strides 
towards democracy and hopes that the remaining auth­
oritarian regimes will shortly follow in their footsteps. 
These countries' move towards political and economic 
democracy and their regional approach to their econ­
omic problems lead the Committee to endorse the Com­
mission's call for closer ties between Latin America and 
the Community. The accession of Spain and Portugal 
highlights the importance of this. 2. The Committee agrees with the Commission com­
munication that relations between the EEC and Latin 
America should be situated within an overall context 
on three levels, regional, sub-regional and bilateral, and 
welcomes the agreements which have been or are being 
concluded with this end in view. However, the Commit­
tee regrets that the agreements concluded with Mexico, 
Brazil and the countries of the Andean Pact have had 
little effect on the development of those countries, and 
hopes that they will be effectively implemented. It urges 
that negotiations be started or continued with other 
countries in which democracy has advanced, in particu­
lar Argentina.