WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2714/97 by Johanna MAIJ-WEGGEN to the Commission. Protective measures
Date: 1997-07-28
Institutions: European Parliament, MAIJ-WEGGEN
Subjects: ACP countries, European Development Fund, Netherlands Antilles, competitiveness, economic recession, export restriction, overseas countries and territories, protective clause, quantitative restriction, rice













EUR-Lex - 91997E2714 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E2714

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2714/97 by Johanna MAIJ-WEGGEN to the Commission. Protective measures  


Official Journal C 082 , 17/03/1998 P. 0130 





WRITTEN QUESTION P-2714/97 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (28 July 1997)Subject: Protective measuresIs the Commission aware of the social and economic impact that the protective measures concerning rice exports from the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba has had on those tiny islands, given that several rice processing plants have closed down, that more than 500 employees have been made redundant, that the number of port operations has fallen sharply and that, as a result, the general investment climate in the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba has been seriously affected?Can the Commission indicate whether it carried out a prior inquiry into the social and economic consequences of the protective measures on these overseas countries and what its reaction is now?Is it aware that the protective measures taken against the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba have also resulted in more than 10 000 farmers in Guyana and Suriname getting into serious difficulties?Is it aware that some of the rice involved in Suriname and Guyana now stored in warehouses has been bought up by Spanish businessmen at knockdown prices and nonetheless been imported into the Community? Can the Commission explain why this selfsame Indica rice may not be exported to the Community by the overseas countries, although it may be so exported by Spanish businessmen?Does the Commission intend to pursue its protectionist policy, which has caused so much damage in Third World countries, or is it prepared to seek a compromise solution acceptable to all parties? What concrete suggestions could it make?Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (10 September 1997)The safeguard measures on rice imports originating in the overseas countries and territories (OCTs) introduced by Council Regulations (EC) No 304/97 and No 1036/97 ((OJ L 51, 21.2.1997; OJ L 151, 10.6.1997. )) were adopted following serious disturbances of the Community rice market. Bearing in mind that, after three months of implementation of the second safeguard measure, the quota of 69 610 tonnes has not yet been exhausted and that, between 1 September 1996 and 15 July 1997, 157 000 tonnes of milled rice equivalent were imported from the OCTs, as against 185 000 tonnes for the same period during the previous marketing year, when no safeguard measure was applied, it is hard to believe that these measures could have the negative impact on the economic and industrial activity of the OCTs which the Honourable Member claims. Moreover, the Court of First Instance refused two applications from the Government of the Netherlands Antilles and the company Antillean Rice Mills seeking to having the safeguard measures suspended by court order, because the applicants failed to prove serious and irreparable damage to operators and to the macro-economic situation of the Netherlands Antilles. It must also be recalled that the Commission has, since 1993, repeatedly warned against the risk of speculative investments in the OCTs.The African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries are entitled to export 125 000 tonnes of husked rice equivalent directly to the Community at reduced rates of duty, but very little of this quota has been used owing to the 'OCT route', which was much used again in 1996/97. Moreover, the Commission has for years been providing assistance to rice producers in Surinam and Guyana through the European Development Fund (EDF), in order to improve the competitiveness of their product and diversify their export market.In view of the critical state of the European rice market (buying-in of indica rice and exports with refunds despite an under-supplied market) caused particularly by imports from the OCTs, the application of safeguard measures was inevitable. However, the Commission has always defended the need to find a compromise in the Council between the development interests of the OCT and the common agricultural policy, through a quantitative restriction on rice imports from this origin. This solution, accepted since November 1996 by fourteen Member States and refused by the Netherlands, is currently being discussed by the Council.