16. 4. 84 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 103/37 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EEC) No 
2727/75 on the common organization of the market in cereals 
(84/C 103/13) 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the Euro­
pean Communities No C 298 of 4 November 1983, page 4. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 24 October 1983 the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the Econ­
omic and Social Committee in accordance with Articles 47 and 198 of the Treaty 
establishing the European Economic Community. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee prepared its opinion on the above matter at its 
215th plenary session held in Brussels on 29 February and 1 March 1984. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the 
European Economic Community, and in particular 
Articles 47 and 198 thereof, 
Having regard to the request made by the Council 
of the European Communities on 24 October 1983 
for an opinion on the proposal for a Council Regu­
lation (EEC) amending Regulation (EEC) 
No 2727/75 on the common organization of the 
market in cereals, 
Having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau 
on 25 October 1984, instructing the Section for Agri­
culture to draw up an opinion on the matter, 
Having regard to the opinion adopted by that Sec­
tion at its 249th meeting, held on 9 and 10 February 
1984, 
Having regard to the oral report made by the rap­
porteur, Mr de Caffarelli, 
Having regard to the discussions on 1 March during 
the 215th plenary session held on 29 February and 
1 March 1984, 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
by 59 votes to 8 with 7 abstentions: 
1.1. Cereals and derived products constitute an 
important strategic product exploited to the full by competitor countries (United States, Canada) 
through effective trade policy instruments. 
1.2. The Committee has examined the problems 
involved in the sale of cereals which have led to the 
current sizeable stocks in the Community, and are 
due both to the considerable increase in cereals 
production in the EC, and to the import of substi­
tute products. 
(i) Import of these products affects economic ac­
tivity and employment in such major Com­
munity sectors as the import trade, part of the 
cereals processing and packaging industry, and 
some agricultural areas. 
(ii) Moreover, it is unacceptable that imports 
should be so excessive as to cause the present 
difficulties in cereal sales, at a time when the 
cereal sector is accused of creating surpluses, 
There should, on the contrary, be a policy of 
encouraging use of Community cereals (both in 
terms of developing outles on the European 
market and in budgetary terms — savings on 
export refunds). Account must be taken, in 
particular, of supply conditions for animal feed. 
The Commission notes that the rapid and effective 
limitation of imports of cereal substitutes is a pre­
condition for the future application of guarantee 
No C 103/38 Official Journal of the European Communities 16. 4. 84 
thresholds: the Section therefore asks the Com­
mission to present more precise proposals on cereal 
substitutes. 
The Committee welcomes in Commission's pro­
posal to begin negotiations with the United States 
under GATT rules. 
2.1. In the Commission's view, the fixing of Com­
munity guarantee thresholds would be justified by 
the stabilization in demand both in the Community 
and outside. This justification is open to question, 
since the Commission has, by its own initiative, 
limited exports to third countries, causing the can­
cellation of contracts for a sizeable tonnage. It is 
therefore debatable whether there were real difficul­
ties in the way of sales on the world market, or sim­
ply a desire to leave an equivalent share for the 
Community's competitors or to avoid an excessive 
financial burden (refunds). 
In these circumstances, the Commission is not 
trying to solve the problem of exportable quantities, 
but merely to restrict production, and is unwilling to 
institute the dynamic export policy for which the 
Committee has repeatedly called. 
The Committee acknowledges the export role of the 
Community but considers that a revamped export 
policy. 
(i) must not involve expenditure disproportionate 
to the value of the product; 
(ii) must have instruments suited to the characteris­
tics of the Community and enable Community 
traders to operate under fair conditions similar 
to those under which exporters in competitor 
countries operate. These would include an 
effective export credit policy and binding export 
guarantees. 
2.2. The Committee is in favour of a policy which 
would aim to improve the quality of Community 
bread wheat varieties both on the internal Com­
munity market and for export. 
It is essential to make available to industry bread 
wheat consignments of satisfactory quality (i.e. 
which are sound, genuine and of merchantable 
quality). By the same token, market conditions 
should reflect more faithfully the value of the vari­
ous cereal qualities. The Committee is nonetheless surprised by the 
approach advocated by the Commission — that of 
reducing the gap between wheats of recognized 
bread-making quality and feed wheats. This pro­
vision conflicts with the aim of improving varieties. It 
also risks casting serious doubt on the silo price sys­
tem, the effectiveness of which has been repeatedly 
stressed by the Commission. 
It is regrettable that the Commission does not take 
account of all the economic consequences of its pro­
posals for the Community cereals trade and cereals 
industry. Firstly, these technical provisions would 
vastly increase the commercial responsibility of 
dealers in the selection and supply of varieties for 
export; secondly, the introduction of qualitative res­
trictions on exports would inevitably lead to the 
transfer of certain qualities of cereals to the inter­
vention market, for which strict criteria already 
exist. The Committee is therefore concerned at the 
risk of disturbances to trade caused by technical 
measures of this kind. 
2.3. The Committee has studied the Commission 
proposal to apply intervention arrangements to 
sorghum comparable to those applied to other 
cereals. 
Although sorghum does not suffer marketing prob­
lems, it is desirable that a provision of this kind be 
laid down by a Council decision for the following 
reasons: 
(i) sorghum-growing is a major asset for the Medi­
terranean regions of the Community; 
(ii) the market for sorghum should be organized 
similarly to that for maize (which has a similar 
nutritional value, but requires so much water 
that it is not a suitable crop for the Mediterra­
nean environment). 
2.4. The Commission proposes to introduce a 
guarantee threshold for durum wheat, giving the 
existence of regional surpluses in the Community as 
its justification. The Committee draws the Com­
mission's attention to the fact that the Community as 
a whole has not achieved self-sufficiency in this sec­
tor. It would therefore be anomalous for general res­
trictive measures to be taken simply because there 
are local imbalances in some countries. For the 
same reason, a weakening of the intervention system 
— by making it optional — would also be unjusti­
fied. 
Durum wheat plays an essential role in the food 
industry and in the Mediterranean economy and it 
16.4.84 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 103/39 
seems paradoxical that the Commission, which 
claims that it wishes to restore the balance and give 
equal treatment to the Mediterranean regions of the 
Community, should propose constraints on durum 
wheat farming, which is one of the main rational 
alternatives for these regions. 
The Committee therefore takes the view that the 
agricultural policy for durum wheat must be com­
prehensive, on-going and take account of the con­
straints imposed by the social aspects, the character­
istics of Mediterranean agriculture, and the needs of 
the processing industry and consumers. 
2.5. Conclusion 
2.5.1. On cereal prices policy, the Committee feels 
that: 
(i) There are considerable differences between the 
various countries of the world in (a) natural 
conditions and production structures, (b) price 
formation, (c) transport rates, and (d) economic 
and monetary trends affecting agriculture (dif­
fering trends in inflation rates, monetary par­
ities, etc.). For these reasons it is economically 
unrealistic to use prices as the sole criterion for 
measuring the competitiveness of Community-
grown cereals relative to cereals grown in other 
countries. 
(ii) The Community cereal sector must be able to 
adapt itself to international competition. It must 
do this in conditions tailored to specific Com­
munity requirements. 
2.5.2. The Committee acknowledges that mistakes 
were made in the past in fixing the relationships 
between prices of the different varieties of cereals. 
These errors led to disturbances in trade both on the 
internal Community market and in exports to third 
countries. 
2.5.3. The Committee thus recommends the fol­
lowing guidelines: 
Done at Brussels, 1 March 1984. (i) The goal of bringing Community cereal prices 
closer to those of its main competitors, as pro­
posed by the Commission, is unrealistic: it takes 
no account of the differences in production fac­
tors, competitiveness and trade policy in the 
main world exporting countries. 
(ii) Balance between supply and demand and an 
improvement in the competitiveness of the 
Community cereal sector may be aided by the 
application of the European guarantee 
threshold. Crossing this threshold will lead to a 
fall in the intervention price. 
This joint responsibility on the part of farmers 
must be backed by precise market conditions, 
resulting inter alia from effective stabilization of 
cereal substitute imports. 
We are not aiming at Community self-suf­
ficiency in the agricultural and food sectors, but 
there is no point in forcing Community farmers 
to make sacrifices if we do not at the same time 
change import conditions for these products. 
These imported products are generally left over 
from the processing industry and thus have an 
overwhelming competitive advantage. In this 
context GATT rules should be respected. 
(iii) Measures must be taken within the present sys­
tem of ex-silo prices to improve the quality of 
wheat for bread making, to meet the needs of 
industry, commerce and the consumer. 
(iv) The various GATT members should respect and 
apply multilateral trade agreements. It is right 
and proper that the Community should occupy 
its fair share of the world market, and under­
standable that it should take the requisite steps 
to defend its world trade position as effectively 
as its international competitors do. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Francis CEYRAC 
No C 103/40 Official Journal of the European Communities 16. 4. 84 
APPENDIX I 
to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
Rejected amendments 
The following amendments to the Section opinion, tabled in accordance with the Rules of Pro­
cedure, were rejected by the Committee in the course of the discussions: 
Page 2, indent (ii) 
Replace by: 
'The current marketing problems are not all due to cereal substitutes. Low demand on the world 
market and the high exchange rate are much more important factors. In the past consumption of 
cereal substitutes was boosted by the sharp increase in cereal prices, which forced the compound 
feed industry, in particular, to seek alternatives.' 
Voting: 
For: 39, against: 41, abstentions: 3. 
Page 4, paragraph 2 
Substitute: 
'The Committee considers that in a free market the wheats suitable for making the different 
varieties of bread would command an appropriate premium over feed wheat, just as malting bar­
ley does over ordinary barley. The reference price for wheat of minimum bread-making quality is 
therefore unnecessary and serves primarily to enable wheat of a quality much of which the millers 
will not accept for bread-making to obtain a higher price. The Committee therefore considers that 
the reference price for wheat of minimum bread-making quality should be abolished. Meanwhile 
it approves the Commission's proposal to narrow the gap between it and the common interven­
tion price for wheat.' 
Voting: 
For: 20, against: 36, abstentions: 15. 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EEC) 
No 337/79 on the common organization of the market in wine 
(84/C 103/14) 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the Euro­
pean Communities No C 338 of 15 December 1983. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 14 December 1983 the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the 
Economic and Social Committee in accordance with Articles 47 and 198 of the Treaty 
establishing the European Economic Community.