WRITTEN QUESTION P-2421/00 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Reform of the COM for rice.
Date: 2000-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: common organisation of markets, rice

3.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 103 E/149

From the point of view of Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects
of certain public and private projects on the environment (2), it is clear that the quarry is intended to
supply the raw material for cement production in the future cement factory. Accordingly, it is not possible
to split a global economic project (cid:129) construction of a cement factory with a quarry in the immediate
vicinity for supplying raw material (cid:129) into two parts and evaluate the direct and indirect effects for only
one of those parts (the quarry).

A letter to this effect has been sent to the Spanish authorities. Having learned that a complaint had been
filed on the matter the Spanish authorities informed the Commission that the impact study would be
revised to evaluate the direct and indirect effects of the project as a whole. The Commission expressed its
satisfaction that the study was being revised but warned the Spanish authorities that since the project in
question was located within a site of Community importance for birds they had to take account of the
obligations arising out of Article 6 of Directive 92/43/EEC.

The Commission asked the Spanish authorities to send it a copy of the new impact study to be made on
the project, in order to verify that the relevant Community law was being complied with.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(2001/C 103 E/167)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2421/00

by Concepci(cid:243) Ferrer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 July 2000)

Subject: Reform of the COM for rice

On 7 June the Commission adopted a proposal for the reform of the COM for rice which will entail the
abolition of the intervention price mechanism and an increase in direct aid, with rice being included in the
COM for arable crops. It appears that it is also intended to use this as an opportunity to increase tariffs on
rice from third countries.

The intervention price plays a fundamental part in protecting the sector in the face of imports from third
countries whose prices are more competitive on the world market, and the increase in aid may not be
sufficient to offset the losses caused by the abolition of the intervention price, which will make the sector
less profitable. Moreover, rice is already subject to a discriminatory system of penalties by comparison with
other arable crops. How will the Commission remedy this discrimination?

Can the Commission say what measures it will propose to ensure that the reform of the COM for rice does
not lead to market imbalance?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(1 August 2000)

The proposed reform of the common organisation of the market in rice (1) is based on integrating rice into
the arable crop system and abolishing the intervention price.

The Commission does not consider that the proposal would place rice at a disadvantage compared with
other arable crops or could cause a market imbalance. The proposal is based on: an increase in the area
payment (currently € 52,65/tonne) to € 63/tonne in line with the aid stipulated for cereals from 2001/
2002 onwards; scope for adopting exceptional measures if there is market disruption following abolition

C 103 E/150

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

of the intervention mechanism; and (subject to negotiation with the supplier countries) greater external
protection and Community preference through applying the general system of fixed tariffs.

These measures, in conjunction with the introduction of set-aside, will make it possible to balance supply
and demand while still maintaining rice growers(cid:146) income.

(1) COM(2000) 278 final.

(2001/C 103 E/168)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2423/00

by Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(18 July 2000)

Subject: Crop damage in northern and eastern Germany

Because of the unusual weather this year, farmers in the north and east of Germany will have lost between
40 and 70 % of their crops. Agenda 2000 has already reduced farm incomes, and on top of this, farmers
now face potential ruin on account of the extreme weather conditions. As farms have thin equity
positions, this is a serious prospect for many.

What scope is there for farmers in northern and eastern Germany to receive assistance from special funds
to help them overcome the difficulties arising from the extreme weather?

What structural and regional policy measures is the Commission planning in order to support the regions
concerned?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(14 September 2000)

The Commission has noticed the damage to crops in Northern and Eastern Germany in 2000. However,
no special funding is available to make good the resulting loss of income by farmers. The arable crops
regime already provides a certain degree of protection against the variations in yields because the area
payments are fixed, decoupled from real production. The Commission can make certain application rules
more flexible in order to help farmers located in well-defined zones where agricultural activity is severely
affected by weather conditions, like drought, or flooding. In such cases, farmers might be allowed to
declare as voluntary set-aside some fields that could not be sown.
It must be underlined that the
Commission acts only if the Member State has produced in time a detailed and duly motivated report.
This was not the case for the Eastern part of Germany this year.

Under Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from
the European guidance and guarantee fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain regulations (1), it
is in the competence of the Member States to establish rural development programmes which meet the
needs of the concerned regions. The Regulation provides the necessary instruments for rural development
including measures on restoring agricultural production potential damaged by natural disasters and
introducing appropriate prevention measures.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.