WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1705/98 by Stéphane BUFFETAUT to the Commission. Power of joint-trade organizations restricting competition
Date: 1998-05-29
Institutions: BUFFETAUT, European Parliament
Subjects: France, agricultural guidance, agricultural production, application of EU law, common organisation of markets, government bill, market intervention, producer organisation, professional association, restriction on competition

C 13/66

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.1.1999

The additional 353 000 tonnes proposed is applicable to the whole of the Community although the reason for
introducing it is to take account of the enlarged Community following the accession of Austria, Finland and
Sweden. It corresponds to the average net imports into these three Member States in the period 1991-1993.

On 26 June 1998 the Council reached a political agreement to set the within-quota duty for the 353 000 tonnes
autonomous tariff rates quota (TRQ) at 75 ECU a ton. The figure that was formerly proposed by the Commission
was 300 ECU a ton but the Council revised the figure to 75 ECU a ton. This new level means that the autonomous
tariff quota will be at the same rate as the basic tariff quota of 2 200 000 tonnes.

The Commission does not have any proposal to introduce a tariff system without licences and a standard tariff
rate as it is not obliged to do so following the World trade organisation (WTO) ruling nor does it believe it would
comply with its obligations towards Community producers and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states.

(1999/C 13/096)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1705/98

by StØphane Buffetaut (I-EDN) to the Commission

(29 May 1998)

Subject: Power of joint-trade organizations restricting competition

In France, joint-trade organizations exist to deal with agricultural products covered by a common market
organization (COM). They operate:

› either under laws and decrees dating back to 1942 and 1943, which give such joint-trade organizations
powers as regards Market Management And Price Fixing, which are in breach of Union rules. Accordingly,
their decisions have been repeatedly struck down by the European Court of Justice (in particular in Cases
123/83, 136/86 and C-249/91),

› or under the amended Law No 75600 of 10 July 1975 which limits their remit to the advertising and

promotion and the statistical monitoring of the product, in accordance with Union rules.

The French Government is preparing to submit to the French National Assembly an agricultural guidelines bill
(PLOA) which would extend the powers of the agricultural joint-trade organizations deriving from the 1975 law
and approximate them to those provided for in the 1942 and 1943 laws. Accordingly, pursuant to Article 87 of the
PLOA, the joint-trade organizations would be able to:

1.

intervene in market management
requirements, etc.,

to ensure that product quantities were more in line with market

2.

intervene in order to improve food safety, in particular by the identification of products ...

This involves areas, currently within the Exclusive remit of Union and/or national authorities, in respect of which
each regional joint-trade organization may well promulgate its own rules, varying from one region to another, a
process which will culminate in damage to the internal market. Similarly, the notion of improving the
identification of products is the major pretext put forward in an attempt to justify any moves to impose an
obligation for wines to be bottled in the region of production.

Does the Commission feel that intervention by joint-trade agricultural organizations, in the form of the
promulgation of binding rules in these two areas, complies with Articles 34, 85 and 86 of the EC Treaty, despite
the case-law of the Court of Justice referred to above?

(1999/C 13/097)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1707/98

by StØphane Buffetaut (I-EDN) to the Commission

(29 May 1998)

Subject: Delegation of powers to joint-trade organizations

In the event of a serious crisis affecting one of more national agricultural products subject to a common market
organization (COM), the current Treaty and the case-law of the Court of Justice authorize the Member States, and
the Member States alone, to take emergency measures in order to avoid serious public order disturbances.