WRITTEN QUESTION E-2425/00 by Jeffrey Titford (EDD) to the Commission. European Commission rules governing the measurement of hedgerows and other field margins.
Date: 2000-07-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, aid to agriculture, countryside conservation, eligibility criteria

3.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 103 E/151

(2001/C 103 E/169)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2425/00

by Jeffrey Titford (EDD) to the Commission

(18 July 2000)

Subject: European Commission rules governing the measurement of hedgerows and other field margins

I have been swamped with angry letters from constituents throughout the Eastern Region, protesting at the
Commission(cid:146)s proposals to reduce farm subsidies to farmers whose hedges exceed a total width of four
meters (two metres each side of the field boundaries). The Commission should note that in my county we
use yards rather than metres to measure the width of hedges.

There has apparently been a delay in implementing these rules.

Has any study been done on the impact of this measure on British hedgerows and the British

1.
countryside? If so, where can any such studies be obtained?

2.
How many representations has the Commission received from Britain on the subject of the proposed
new hedgerow rules? Are these available for inspection? Can any file held by the Commission consisting of
representations from Britain on this subject be made available to this Member for him to read?

3.
I understand that subsidies to farmers will be reduced if their hedgerows are more than four metres
in width. How is this four metre width to be checked? Does the Commission send its staff to check the
width of hedges, or does it use aerial photographs?

4.
Can the Commission indicate in detail the formula by which it is proposed to reduce subsidies? For
example, if a farmer(cid:146)s hedge is held to be 4,5 metres rather than 4 metres, what subsidy will be lost?
Where can the proposed rules be inspected?

5.
Is the Commission aware that, throughout England, there has been a reduction in the numbers of
hedgerows and a decline in all kinds of wildlife, both flora and fauna, since we joined the common
market? If so, what is the Commission doing to address these problems?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 September 2000)

The Court of auditors, after a mission to the United Kingdom in 1999, recognised a problem in the
verification of area claimed as arable crop land that is surrounded in particular by hedges. The British
authorities, in close co-operation with the Commission, have since been discussing various solutions that
will, firstly, be in the interest of the environment, secondly, give reasonable consideration to the farmers(cid:146)
positions, and thirdly, ensure that only eligible land benefits from the support scheme for arable crops. It
seems there is sufficient scope for legislation under the powers conferred upon the Commission by the
Council and that, within that framework, a solution in the sense as just described is feasible.

Taking this into account the questions can be answered as follows:

1. Both the British government and some environmental groups carried out studies, which are of course
being considered in the decision taking process. None of these have, to the knowledge of the
Commission, been published. As far as studies that were carried out by the British authorities are
concerned the Commission would invite the Honourable Member to refer to those authorities for
further information.

2. The Commission has been in permanent and close contact on this issue with the British authorities. It
is suggested to contact the British authorities for any information concerning their positions in this
connection.

C 103 E/152

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

3. No decisions have yet been taken on whether there should be absolute maximum widths, percentages
etc. As already said the Commission is trying to find a satisfactory solution for all sides involved while,
at the same time, protecting the financial interests of the Community. It is up to the Member States to
make sure that expenditure of the Common agricultural policy (CAP) support measures is carried out
in accordance with Community law. The Commission is responsible for auditing the administration
and control procedures applied by the Member States and for any actions needed to protect the
financial interests of the Community.

4. Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3887/92 of 23 December 1992 laying down detailed rules for
applying the integrated administration and control system (IACS)
for certain Community aid
schemes (1) stipulates in Article 9 the reductions that have to be applied if
inspections reveal
discrepancies between what is declared in area aid applications and what is determined after checks
that are carried out. If the discrepancy found is 3 % or less of what is declared, the area actually
determined shall be used for the calculation of the aid. If the discrepancy found is more than 3 % or
two hectares the area actually determined shall be reduced by twice the difference found. No area-
linked aid shall be granted if the difference found is more than 20 %. These are general rules applicable
to all area aid applications.

5.

Environmental concerns have, for a long time, constituted an important part of a sound CAP. They
form a major aspect of the CAP reforms of 1992 and 1999. As an example, Council Regulation (EC)
No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European agricultural
guidance and guarantee fund (EAGGF) foresees the possibility to support, in particular, production
methods designed to protect the environment and to maintain the countryside. Moreover, Article 3 of
Council Regulation (EC) No 1259/1999 of 17 May 1999 establishing common rules for direct support
schemes under the common agricultural policy (2) authorises Member States to establish specific
environmental requirements constituting a condition for direct payments, which could include the
maintenance of environmentally beneficial landscape features, such as hedgerows.

(1) OJ L 391, 31.12.1992.
(2) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2001/C 103 E/170)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2426/00

by Jeffrey Titford (EDD) to the Commission

(18 July 2000)

Subject: Article 297 (ex Article 224) of the Treaty establishing the European Community

Can the Commission provide more precise information on the meaning of Article 297 (ex Article 224) of
the Treaty establishing the European Community which states:

Member States shall consult one another with a view to taking in common the necessary steps to
avoid the operation of the common market being affected by measures which a Member State may be
called upon to take in case of serious internal disturbances affecting public policy (cid:133) [EC Treaty:
Member States shall consult each other with a view to taking together the steps needed to prevent
the functioning of the common market being affected by measures which a Member State may be
called upon to take in the event of serious internal disturbances affecting the maintenance of law and
order (cid:133)], in particular

1.
Is it correct that Member States shall only consult one another with a view to taking common action
if there are (cid:145)serious internal disturbances affecting public policy(cid:146) [EC Treaty: (cid:145)the maintenance of law and
order(cid:146)], rather than (cid:145)serious internal disturbances not affecting public policy(cid:146) [EC Treaty: (cid:145)the maintenance
of law and order(cid:146)]?

In the event of one Member State being judged to have (cid:145)affected the operation of the common
2.
market(cid:146) by taking (cid:145)measures(cid:146), would the other Member States of the European Union be enabled, under
Article 297, to take action against that Member State?

3. When Article 297 uses the term (cid:145)the necessary steps(cid:146) [EC Treaty: the steps needed] to avoid the
operation of the common market being affected, could that include police or military action?