WRITTEN QUESTION E-0683/97 by Friedhelm Frischenschlager (ELDR) to the Commission (6 March 1997)

Subject: Restructuring of the common agricultural policy

Part A of the final report of the Temporary Committee of Inquiry on alleged contraventions or maladministration in the implementation of Community law in relation to BSE, which was adopted by the European Parliament, by a very large majority, on Wednesday, 19 February 1997 during its February part-session in Strasbourg, makes provision in the section entitled 'Recommendations' for 'changes to the common agricultural policy, so as to create in the future a framework which makes possible and reinforces the responsibility of agricultural holdings for the production of healthy food using sustainable farming methods'.

As part of the critical scrutiny of the Commission's implementation of the measures recommended by the European Parliament, I have the following questions for Commissioner Fischler (DG VI), who has political responsibility for the common agricultural policy:

Does the Commission intend to comply with the above recommendation from the European Parliament for a radical restructuring of the common agricultural policy?

If so, how far has the relevant preparatory work progressed?

In the Commission's view, what are the ten most important questions arising in connection with this matter?

What are the elements making up this new agricultural market policy?

Does the Commission consider that they reflect the letter and spirit of the recommendations made by the European Parliament?

Over what period of time does the Commission expect to be able to carry out this restructuring?

In what way will the Commission involve the European Parliament in the process of restructuring the agricultural policy?

Does the Commission already have an initial timetable for practical (implementing) measures? If so, what does it look like?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (9 April 1997)

It is a declared objective of the Commission to proceed with the reform of the common agricultural policy. The intended orientation of the reform is fully in line with the recommendation of the Parliament namely to 'create a framework which makes possible and reinforces the responsibility of agricultural holdings for the production of healthy food using sustainable farming methods'. An important step in this direction was already made with the 1992 common agricultural policy (CAP) reform and the subsequent adjustments of single market organisations. Currently, the main market organisations, (dairy, beef, cereals, oilseeds and protein crops) are being analysed with a view to proposals for a reform of these sectors. Moreover, the work on rural areas and related policies continues.

In preparing further CAP reform, some fundamental questions have to be addressed, with a view to:

- implement a more efficient policy on quality control and labelling;

- promote environmentally friendly farm practices;

- better balance supply of agricultural commodities with the actual demand;

- stimulate innovation which enhances competitiveness in a sustainable way;

- appropriately reward farmers preserving the environment and the landscape;

- diversify farmers' income and improve employment in rural areas;

- keep budgetary expenditures in line with the financial perspective;

- compensate farmers where policy changes introduce hardship;

- modulate appropriately direct payments to farmers;

- make policies simpler and more readable to citizens;

- enforce common rules in order to avoid distortion of competition;

- integrate farmers into the overall context of a sustainable development of rural areas.

As stated in the Commission's strategy paper on Eastern enlargement, deepening the CAP reform will have to be based on reduced reliance on price support and a further switch to direct payments. While the ongoing analysis will yield a full picture of the challenges and constraints, some guiding principles can already be highlighted. These include the need to guarantee the highest quality standards of agricultural production, to promote an important and competitive position of the Community's farm sector on the international markets, to improve the environmental performance of agriculture and reward farmers for their environmental services, to contribute to an economically viable and sustainable development of rural areas and to meet the requirements of better cohesion within the Community. It is clear that the necessary adjustments have to be introduced in a way which is acceptable to the farming community and to society.

The policy adjustments and reorganisation of competence among the Commission services following the bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) crisis are currently being carried out with a view to achieve an efficient quality control system and improved scientific capacity to deal appropriately with such a difficult subject. In further adjustments of the CAP, as requested in the recommendations of the Parliament, the Commission is ready to take into consideration any concrete suggestion.

While a major part of the factual analysis will be finalised by late spring 1997, the reflections and proposals concerning a further reform of the CAP and rural policies will form part of an overall package of policy proposals presented by the Commission after the intergovernmental conference (IGC). The reform of the structural funds measures have to be finalised by 1999 at the latest. The process of the CAP reform will - just like the 1992 reform - unavoidably be 'work in progress' which becomes clear from a medium-term perspective taking into account the need to react on future market development, the implications of Eastern enlargement and the prospect of a further World trade organization (WTO) negotiation.

The participation of the Parliament in the process of further CAP reform will follow the established procedures. As stated repeatedly, the Commission favours a solution which involves the Parliament on agricultural policy matters on the basis of a co-decision procedure. This position is being expressed by the Commission in the context of the IGC. As recently announced by the President of the Commission, the Commission will in future have a preference for Article 100A of the Treaty in relation to proposals which have health related veterinary or phytosanitary matters as their principal objective. Article 100A requires use of the co-decision procedure referred to in Article 189b of the Treaty, and thus a greater involvement of the Parliament in the legislative process.