WRITTEN QUESTION E-1976/00 by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Revision of the Berlin agreements in 2003 and the reform of the COM in milk.
Date: 2000-06-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: animal nutrition, common organisation of markets, family farming, guaranteed price, milk, production quota

13.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/123

(2001/C 81 E/147)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1973/00

by Camilo Nogueira RomÆn (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Milk quotas and milk market transparency in Galicia

(21 June 2000)

Has the Commission made any provision for action which takes proper account of the real facts of
Galician milk production, by stepping up the quotas assigned to it, in order to put an end to the current
utter lack of transparency, which tends to reduce selling prices to the considerable prejudice to the
incomes of Galicia(cid:146)s small farmers?

(2001/C 81 E/148)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1974/00

by Camilo Nogueira RomÆn (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Superlevies on milk production in Galicia

(21 June 2000)

Given that the average annual milk quota in Galicia is a mere 44 716 kilograms per farm, the lowest in
Spain despite the fact that the region produces 35 % of all Spanish milk, does the Commission intend to
implement arrangements which will prevent the superlevy affecting farms whose production figures do not
meet the Spanish average per farm?

(2001/C 81 E/149)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1976/00

by Camilo Nogueira RomÆn (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(21 June 2000)

Subject: Revision of the Berlin agreements in 2003 and the reform of the COM in milk

Is the Commission considering a review of the COM in milk in 2003 which will embrace such matters as
the disappearance of the current historic reference amounts by Member State a new approach to the
allocation of the right to produce which will guarantee the maintenance of small and medium sized family
farms, and the establishment of guaranteed prices up to 100 000 kg of production based on the land,
giving priority to the quality of life and the implementation of clear and unambiguous standards for
animal feed, with a ban on hormones, products made from waste and animal meal?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-1972/00, E-1973/00, E-1974/00 and E-1976/00
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(18 July 2000)

Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1256/1999 of 17 May 1999 amending Regulation (EEC)
levy in the milk and milk products sector (1) reads as follows:
No 3950/92 establishing an additional
(cid:145)The Council undertakes to conduct a mid-term review in 2003, on the basis of a Commission report, with
the aim of allowing the present quota arrangements to run out after 2006.(cid:146) However, the direct payments
to producers which are planned to start in 2005 are currently established by tonne of reference quantity
((cid:145)quota(cid:146)) of milk. If the Council decided to abandon the system of quotas, it would have to accept all the
consequences, including those relating to the base and the method of calculating direct payments. The
Commission has not yet determined the content of its report, or the measures that it intends to propose.
In any case, it would be imprudent to determine measures now but not publish them until 2003, and so
without taking account of the current situation, which may have changed in the meantime.

Originally, the volume of milk quotas was calculated to bring production more closely into line with total
disposal opportunities and then distributed among the Member States in proportion to their historical
production. The quotas for Spain were then increased several times to take account of its particular
situation and regional problems, most recently under Agenda 2000. The allocation and redistribution at

C 81 E/124

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.3.2001

level of these quotas, including the fixing of priorities and the financial conditions, are the
individual
responsibility of the Member States. Similarly, Community legislation now permits transfers of quotas with
or without land, partly to avoid speculation, according to rules to be drawn up by each Member State.

The Commission can communicate with regional bodies only via national official channels.

The Commission considers that the transparency of the market price for milk in Galicia depends, not on
an increase in the quotas, which would increase the regional surpluses which already weigh heavily on
prices, but on greater compliance by operators with existing rules and disposal of all their production
through trade channels.

From the point at which a Member State exceeds its overall quota, the super-levy is due proportionally
from all producers who contributed to the overshooting, but after any reallocation of quotas not used
elsewhere, and according to rules to be drawn up by the Member States. No derogation from this principle
can be considered without
jeopardising the whole quota system. Consequently, exempting certain
producers who have overshot from the super-levy is tantamount to imposing it on others, who have
respected their quota, which is impossible.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2001/C 81 E/150)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1978/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council

(19 June 2000)

Subject: EU sanctions and Austria

Austria, a landlocked country in southern central Europe, is one of Europe(cid:146)s core countries by virtue of the
fact that it includes part of the eastern Alps and of the Danube region as well as through its proximity to
the Mediterranean. Because of its geopolitical situation it has always been at the crossroads of major
European cultural and economic areas. From the time of the border marchland and the rule of the
Babenbergs through the 600-year reign of the Habsburgs until the present-day republic, Austria has
continually been at the centre of European intellectual and cultural history and has helped shape Europe
decisively. The Austrian economy has intensive links with the EU, stronger than, for example, Sweden,
Finland or Switzerland. It is hardly surprising therefore that a large majority of the electorate voted in a
referendum on 12 June 1994 for accession to the Community.

Austria and its people have not deserved to be excluded either from bilateral relations (cid:129) as the superficial
argument goes (cid:129) or from European affairs (cid:129) as is the case de facto.

This being so, when will the Council give thought to Austria(cid:146)s significant services to the cause of Europe
and call a halt to the pointless policy of sanctions?

Reply

(10 October 2000)

The Council has not adopted a position on this matter and is, therefore, unable to reply to the Honourable
Member(cid:146)s question.