WRITTEN QUESTION E-0402/97 by Katerina Daskalaki (UPE) to the Commission (13 February 1997)

Subject: Reorganisation of the Common Organisation of the Market in Tobacco

The Commission report on the Common Organisation of the Market in unprocessed tobacco was examined at the same time as the report on the EU's role in the campaign against smoking, despite the fact that latter topic is in many ways the diametrical opposite of the former and the joint treatment had adverse consequences for it. The Commission in effect orchestrated a negative approach to the tobacco sector, presenting tobacco growers with the painful choice of either accepting its proposals or reducing the sector until the point where it disappears. Apart from the positive and logical initiative of grading premiums in accordance with quality, the proposal on voluntary withdrawal from tobacco growing will chiefly affect growers of 'noble' oriental varieties.

Why did the Commission agree to the joint examination of these two reports? Does it lie within the Commission's powers to offer voluntary withdrawal, or is this a matter for the Member States? What measures does it intend to take in respect of young growers, since there is no mention of any integrated proposal for this group, despite the fact that it is an established fact that employment is necessary to maintain the social and economic fabric in mountainous and barren regions where there are no alternatives? What measures does it propose for setting up a national quota fund for young growers? Finally does the Commission not agree that the proposed schedule of four years for the new measures is excessively short?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (19 March 1997)

As the Honourable Member stated in her question, the Commission started discussion of the two reports, the objectives of which are diametrically opposed, at the same time. By so doing, the Commission indicated that subsidising tobacco-growers in no way prejudices the fight against smoking. This procedure made it possible to begin a wide-ranging debate before formal proposals are made to the Council and Parliament.

The rules governing voluntary withdrawal of farmers from a sector subsidised by the Community are primarily within the competence of the Commission.

In Part V (proposals for the future of the common organisation of the market in raw tobacco, section B.3(3) ((Doc. COM(96) 554 final. ))), the Commission refers to the need to make the quota system more flexible and also to the creation of a national quota reserve. In this context the Commission is ready to examine means of facilitating access for young growers. However, where implementation and use of the national reserve are concerned, detailed provisions must be the subject of implementing regulations which cannot be adopted before the basic Regulation (Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92 on the common organisation of the market in raw tobacco ((OJ L 215, 30.7.1992, p. 70. ))) is amended.

The Commission considers that an evaluation is justified after four years of application of the new scheme and notes that the evaluation of the 1992 reform of the market organisation in raw tobacco was also carried out after four years, in 1996.