No C 80/28 Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 3. 88 
Opinion on the implementation of agricultural stabilizers (Volume I) and the proposals 
concerning the following sectors: — Sugar (Volume II A) — Milk sector (Volume II B) — 
Sheepmeat and Goatmeat (Volume II C) — Other products (Volume II D) 
(88/C 80/12) 
On 8 October 1987 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under 
Articles 43 and 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the 
implementation of agricultural stabilizers (Volume I) 
and the proposals concerning the following sectors: 
— Sugar (Volume II A) 
— Milk sector (Volume II B) 
— Sheepmeat and goatmeat (Volume II C) 
— Other products (Volume II D). 
The Section for Agriculture and Fisheries, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's 
work, drew up its Opinion on 20 January 1988. The Rapporteur was Mr Schnieders. 
On 27 January, at its 252nd Plenary Session, the Economic and Social Committee adopted the 
following Opinion by 70 votes to 24, with 18 abstentions: 
1. General comments 
On 19 November 1987 the Committee adopted, with two 
votes against, an initial Opinion on the principle of 
implementing a system of budgetary stabilizers in the 
Community's agricultural sector ('). This was one of the 
subjects discussed at the Copenhagen Summit in December. 
The present Opinion, which has been made necessary by 
the failure of the Copenhagen Summit, must be read in the 
light of this initial Opinion and the Committee's Opinion 
on the agricultural proposals for implementing the Single 
Act, which was also adopted on 19 November 1987 (91 
votes to 26, with 11 abstentions) (2). 
Thus, since the Committee has already endorsed, by a very 
large majority, the adoption of effective appropriate 
measures for curbing surplus production and agricultural 
spending, the present Opinion only considers the essen­
tially technical proposals put forward by the Commission 
for certain products. 
The comments on set-aside made in this Opinion disregard 
the Proposal for a Council Regulation (EEC) amending 
Regulation (EEC) No 797/85 and (EEC) No 1760/87 on the 
withdrawal of agricultural land and the extensification and 
(') OJ No C 356, 31. 12. 1987, p. 42. 
(2) OJ No C 356, 31. 12. 1987, p. 35. conversion of production, submitted by the Commission 
on 13 January 1988. 
The Committee will deliver its Opinion on this proposal at 
the earliest opportunity. 
2. Comments on products 
2.1. Cereals 
The proposed maximum quantity of 155 million tonnes is 
based exclusively on domestic consumption and imports of 
cereal substitutes. No account is taken of current export 
prospects. For the Community of Twelve 155 million 
tonnes is less than can be expected from an average harvest. 
The Committee would therefore like to see a more realistic 
maximum tonnage. 
The Committee considers that measures should be 
differentiated according to whether products are in surplus 
or deficit and according to quality (the quality in demand 
on the market being encouraged and the quantity which 
cannot find an economic market outlet being discouraged). 
The Committee points out that measures to stabilize cereal 
production in the Community must be backed up by 
measures on the import of substitution products. These 
should include the extension of the co-responsibility levy to 
these imports. Only if the import of substitution products is 
simultaneously stabilized can measures to limit cereal 
production in the European Community be successful. 
28. 3. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 80/29 
The measures currently proposed by the Commission will 
not have any effect on the 1988 harvest as farmers have 
already planted cereals, rape and beans. Transitional 
measures will therefore be needed for the 1988 harvest. The 
maximum quantity arrangements (stabilizers) should not 
be applied before 1989. 
The Committee believes that set-aside can make an 
effective contribution to the reduction of cereal volumes by 
bringing about sharper price reductions, thus preventing 
further falls in farmers' already much reduced incomes. 
It is suggested that farmers be allowed to choose whether to 
participate in the set-aside programme, to which the 
Committee lent its support on a previous occasion, or pay a 
co-responsibility levy. 
The amount of the levy and the practical details of the set-
aside programme should be fixed and communicated to 
farmers before planting starts, to enable them to decide 
which possibility they will opt for. In the light of the present 
state of the markets and the outlook, strong incentives for 
set-aside, extensification, or the search for alternative 
forms of production could be attractive solutions. Lower 
production levels will permit financial savings and 
facilitate agreement in GATT. It is suggested that the 
extensification proposals already adopted by the Council 
be further developed with this in mind. 
Given that these are market stabilization measures, it is 
justifiable for the Community to bear more than 50 % of 
the cost of set-aside of farm land. The obligatory payments 
should be met from the EAGGF (Guarantee Section). The 
Member States must promise to ensure that unusable and 
hitherto unfarmed land does not attract set-aside pre­
miums. Provision could be made for waiving application of 
set-aside in disadvantaged agricultural regions, to prevent 
depopulation and drops in production. 
2.2. Sugar beet 
The market organization system for sugar requires that the 
sector be self-financing. In view of the expected annual 
budget deficit of some 230 million ECU the Committee 
opposes the introduction of supplementary retrospective 
charges. Instead, the cost of market promotion, which is 
borne by the producers, should be made known in advance 
and should, most importantly, be affordable for all 
producers. Furthermore, the Community's sugar producers 
should not be treated any worse than ACP sugar exporters 
and isoglucose producers. Developing countries must not 
be caused any more difficulty either. The use of false blended-sugar declarations to get round sugar quotas must 
also be prevented. 
2.3. Oilseeds 
The Committee favours an increase in the maximum 
quantities specified by the stabilization measures for rape 
and sunflower seed and soya beans. The Committee 
stresses that the increased costs in the oilseed sector are due 
to the lack of external protection. 
Measures to adapt cereal production to the requirements of 
the market place will have a spin-off effect on oilseeds and 
should therefore be coordinated. The Committee is 
opposed to deep price cuts in a deficit sector. 
Arrangements on the lines of the system for sugar should be 
introduced. These arrangements should take account of the 
marketing structure of the oilseed sector. 
The Committee believes that a system of stabilizers must be 
introduced throughout the entire oils and fats sector, taking 
account of the need to avoid arrangements and measures 
which might result in an increase in the consumer prices of 
individual products. 
2.3.1. Olive oil 
This product is very important as an income support for 
many poor families and many poor Mediterranean regions. 
The Committee is in favour of the Commission proposing 
measures which safeguard the incomes of small and 
medium-sized producers in particular without further 
increasing production. Effective controls would of course 
be required. 
2.4. High-protein crops 
Given the enormous zero-tariff imports of soya into the 
Community, the mechanism proposed by the Community 
would have an excessive and unjustified effect on high-
protein crop prices. Since the Community has a low level of 
self-sufficiency and imports 22 million tonnes of high-
protein feed, finding sales outlets is hardly going to be a 
problem in this sector. 
The high-protein crop sector cannot be seen in isolation 
from the adjustment measures for cereals and oilseeds. The 
Committee recommends a small reduction in the subsidy. 
2.5. Fruit and vegetables 
Total EAGGF expenditure in the fruit and vegetable sector 
(fresh and processed) has fallen, as the Commission notes. 
The biggest drop has been in intervention costs — whose 
share of total expenditure has fallen to under 20 %, partly 
No C 80/30 Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 3. 88 
thanks to a cautious intervention-pricing policy. The 
intervention price may be no higher than needed to provide 
a safety net in the event of serious market disturbances. In 
order to avoid excessive intervention, it would be advisable 
to introduce intervention ceilings for certain products. 
The Committee favours coherent application of the 
instruments of the common market organization. Priority 
must be given to effective monitoring of compliance with 
common quality standards and effective protection of 
Community preference. 
2.6. Milk 
The Commission confirms that the milk quota system has 
proved to be an effective means of limiting production. The 
system should therefore be retained for at least an extra five 
years. This is necessary to give producers and processing 
firms clear guidance in their planning. 
The Committee thinks that, as a matter of principle, the 
Community must press at the forthcoming GATT 
negotiations for the adoption of equivalent adjustment 
measures by other producer countries. 
The Committee is also opposed to the plan to move the 
start of the milk marketing year from 1 April to 1 October. 
This would make it more difficult for producers to keep to 
the quotas since summer milk production — which is 
heavily influenced by the weather — will be at the end of 
the marketing year. 
The Committee is in favour of the retention of 10 ECU/100 
kg compensation for the 5,5 % quota suspended tem­
porarily. It should remain possible to transfer reference 
quantities from direct sales to deliveries. The mandatory 
establishment of national reserves amounting to 2 % of 
each Member State's guaranteed quantity is rejected. 
2.7. Sheepmeat and goatmeat 
Since its establishment, the market regime for sheepmeat 
and goatmeat has stabilized producers' incomes. The 
premium system has proved its worth, since the funds used 
go straight to the producers. The Committee therefore 
advocates that the harmonization proposals be re­
considered. The calculation of income losses must take account of differences in production conditions, slaughter 
weight, quality and market prices. The Commission's 
proposal for the calculation of income losses would cut 
incomes by an average of 25 % in the European Com­
munity and by up to 50 % in some Member States (e. g. 
region 3). The limit of the number of animals eligible for 
the premium should be raised beyond the 500 mark. The 
simplified definition of an eligible ewe as a ewe which has 
lambed during the marketing year is welcomed. The costs 
of the market organization are determined in the main by 
import factors (prices, quantities, processed produce). The 
viability of this deficit sector in the Community depends on 
the rules governing imports; restoration of Community 
preference is a sine qua non. 
The Committee nevertheless considers that it would not be 
justified to change the present geographical regions. There 
would be a risk of de facto discrimination in assessing 
farmers' loss of income, as a result of the special nature of 
(and differences between) production of high-weight and 
low-weight lambs. 
2.8. Tobacco 
Tobacco production is of decisive importance for the socio­
economic equilibrium in the less developed regions of the 
Community. 
The Committee thinks that the Commission's proposals do 
not take this into account. The ceiling on production 
should be raised, especially in the case of varieties in heavy 
demand, and the imbalance on the tobacco market should 
be gradually eliminated by adopting socio-structural 
measures and switching over to varieties in greater demand. 
2.9. Wine 
The Committee has taken note of the Commission's 
proposals and will comment on the details when the 
proposals are referred to it. 
The Committee supports the Commission's attempts to 
reduce the amount of unmarketable table wine by 
improving quality, reducing the areas under vine and 
introducing socio-structural measures. 
28. 3. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 80/31 
where it is low. Clear and forthright responses are needed 
to adverse publicity which is increasingly being used 
against a product that is a healthy and useful part of a 
balanced diet. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alfons MARGOT 
APPENDIX 
(Article 43, fourth paragraph of the Rules of Procedure) 
The following amendments were rejected at the Plenary Session: 
Point 2.2. — Sugar beet 
Delete the first sentences and substitute: 
'The market organization system for sugar requires that the sector be self-financing, which means that it is 
paid for by high consumer prices rather than by tax payments via the EAGGF budget. The cost can only be 
stabilized by reducing the surplus production. 
Such reduction would eliminate retrospective additional levies. It must be ensured that the cost of sales 
promotion, which is borne by producers, is known in advance and, most importantly, is affordable...' 
(remainder unchanged). 
Reasons 
The high consumer price (currently approximately three times world market price) finances both production 
required for EEC consumption and the subsidies necessary to sell the excesses abroad. During 1986/1987, 
excess Community production has increased further and is now 30,4 %. Too high an average product price was 
paid for this, leaving 230 million ECU to be found next year. Given the 'self-financing' nature, this cannot be 
covered by budgetary funds. The Commission therefore proposes to fund up to 60 % of this by reducing the 
average producer price next year and the rest by further increasing the price paid by the consumer. 
Result of the vote 
Votes for: 31, votes against: 56, abstentions: 15. 
Point 2.3. 
Delete existing paragraph and substitute: 
'2.3. Oilseeds 
The Committee reiterates its strong objection expressed in CES 356/87 to the proposed stabilizer for oils 
and fats, which is in fact an oils and fats tax. 
The Committee believes that a system of stabilizers must be introduced throughout the entire oils and fats 
sector, taking account also of the need to avoid arrangements and measures which might result in an 
increase in the consumer prices of individual products.' The Committee stresses the need to avoid the malpractice 
of using table grapes to make wine. It also urges the 
Commission to take appropriate measures to encourage 
greater wine consumption, particularly in the regions 
Done at Brussels, 27 January 1988. 
No C 80/32 Official Journal of the European Communities 28. 3. 88 
Result of the vote 
Votes for: 33, votes against: 67, abstentions: 2. 
Opinion on the: 
— proposal for a Council Regulation adopting a research and training programme (1987 to 1991) 
in the field of controlled thermonuclear fusion 
and the 
— proposal for a Council Decision approving amendments to the Statutes of the Joint European 
Torus (JET), joint undertaking (1) 
(88/C 80/13) 
On 11 September 1987, the Council of the European Communities decided to consult the Economic 
and Social Committee under Article 170 of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy 
Community on the above-mentioned proposals. 
The Section for Energy, Nuclear Questions and Research, which was responsible for preparing the 
Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 15 January 1988. The Rapporteur was 
Mr Campbell. 
At its 252nd Plenary Session (meeting of 27 January 1988) the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion unanimously. 
1. First and foremost it has to be recalled that in 
November 1984 (2), the Committee endorsed the Commis­
sion proposals adopting a Research and Training Pro­
gramme (1985 to 1989) in the field of Controlled 
Thermonuclear Fusion and for the realization of a Tritium 
Handling Laboratory. 
2. The Council Decision (3) adopting this programme 
required that it be reviewed during its second year and that 
on the basis of that review, the Commission submit a 
proposal for revision aimed at replacing the present 
programme by a new five-year programme on which the 
Committee is now consulted. 
3. In the light of the explanatory memorandum, of the 
opinions expressed by the Scientific and Technical 
Committee and the Consultative Committee for the Fusion 
Programme, which accompany the Commission proposals 
and on the basis of previous comments contained in its 
1984 Opinion, complete support is given by the Committee 
to the new five-year programme proposed by the Commis­
sion and for the proposed amendments to the Statutes of 
JET. 
4. This programme proposal (1987 to 1991) should 
advance the first of the three stages in the development of 
thermonuclear fusion to the point at which firm prepar­
ations can be made for the second stage (NET). These three 
stages, which in practice, will overlap are: 
(!) OJ No C 247, 15. 9. 1987. 
(2) OJ No C25 of 28. 1.1985. 
(3) OJ No L 83, 25. 3. 1985, Council Decision 85/201/Euratom of 
12 March 1985. — scientific feasibility, 
— technical feasibility, 
— commercial feasibility. 
5. In practice, this new programme proposal makes 
provisions for the following: 
(a) extension of the life of JET and the addition of certain 
equipment to allow the potential of the plant to be fully 
exploited; 
(b) continuation of the operation of a number of smaller 
plants based on the Tokamak principle; 
(c) continuation of the construction and operation of two 
plants using different configurations and processes, 
Stellarator and Reversed Field Pinch; 
(d) continued collaboration with non-EEC countries; 
(e) preparation for the specification and design for the next 
main stage of technical feasibility testing i. e. Next 
European Torus (NET) to be built in the 1990s; 
(f) a small but adequate expenditure (1 %) on maintaining 
a continuous review of world-wide research in the field 
of inertial confinement so as to be aware of alternative 
approaches. 
6. In the field of thermonuclear fusion the Community, 
together with Sweden and Switzerland, who are partners, is 
already committed to much of the work in plants already in 
operation or under construction. No significantly new