WRITTEN QUESTION E-2964/01

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(25 October 2001)

Subject: Restructuring and conversion of vineyards

On 21 August 2001, the Commission adopted Decision 2001/666/EC(1) fixing, for the 2001/2002 marketing year and in respect of a certain number of hectares, an indicative allocation by Member State for the restructuring and conversion of vineyards. The Commission has thus distributed the 422 million euros earmarked for the second year of the implementation of this measure by the producer Member States. Article 14(1) of EC Regulation No 1493/1999(2) lays down that the allocation shall be based on objective criteria and take account of particular situations and needs.

Furthermore, Article 14(3) of that regulation claims that the vineyard area of each Member State will be taken into account, while Article 13(3) states that the Community contribution will be larger for Objective 1 areas.

However, in the proposed distribution, Portugal and Spain receive the smallest subsidies per hectare, despite their being cohesion countries.

What then are the objective criteria used by the Commission in distributing the aid to each Member State?

(1) OJ L 233, 31.8.2001, p. 53.

(2) OJ L 179, 14.7.1999, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 December 2001)

The Honourable Member points out that, under Commission Decision 2001/666/EC of 21 August 2001 fixing, for the 2001/2002 marketing year and in respect of a certain number of

hectares, an indicative allocation by Member State for the restructuring and conversion of vineyards under Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999(1), the average aid per hectare received by Portugal and Spain is lower than that for the other Member States. Although it is about 8 % lower than the average for all the producing Member States, it should be pointed out that this mathematical calculation by itself cannot be used to compare the characteristics of the various forms of winegrowing existing in Europe.

The Community contribution is directly linked to the actual restructuring and conversion costs, which of course vary greatly from one winegrowing area to another depending on vineyard type, vine training method, density, slope, etc. In the absence of precise data, the financial allocation decided by the Commission for the first marketing year when the rules applied (2000/2001) was made in consultation with the Member States on the basis of estimates. All the allocation factors and criteria stipulated by Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 on the common organisation of the market in wine(2) were taken into account.

Those factors can be summarised as follows:

- proportion of the Community winegrowing area in the Member State concerned;

- estimated average restructuring costs in the various winegrowing areas;

- proportion of the winegrowing area to be restructured located respectively within and outside Objective 1 regions;

- proportion of the winegrowing area to be restructured which could receive aid for loss of income during the period when the area is not yet in production.

The amounts thus allocated enabled many more hectares than forecast to be completed, which proves that the average estimated aid is appropriate.

For the second marketing year (2001/2002), the Commission had at its disposal detailed statements from the Member States describing specific needs based on the efforts to be made in each winegrowing area. A new criterion with a 20 % weighting was added to the criteria used for the previous marketing year, to take into account the applications submitted by Member States. In this connection it should be pointed out that the applications ( 612 million) exceeded budgetary resources ( 422 million).

In subsequent marketing years the Member States, which are responsible for implementing restructuring plans, will of course benefit from increased experience in applying the new rules. The Commission will take into account any proposals which Member States may present to it based on that experience with the aim of adjusting allocations according to actual needs in future marketing years.

(1) OJ L 233, 31.8.2001.

(2) OJ L 179, 14.7.1999.