WRITTEN QUESTION P-3056/00 by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Ending of support for indigenous breeds in Portugal.
Date: 2000-09-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Portugal, cattle, eligibility criteria, goat, protected species, sheep

22.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 151 E/49

(2001/C 151 E/062)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3056/00

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 September 2000)

Subject: Ending of support for indigenous breeds in Portugal

Support for indigenous breeds has played a key role in preserving endangered species, thereby helping to
improve the quality of meat production and enhance its image in the eyes of consumers. The aid has done
a great deal to revitalise the agricultural sector in certain less favoured regions in Portugal(cid:146)s rural heartland.

In accordance with the last Community support framework (CSF), the aid in question was financed under
the Portuguese rural development plan. The plan for the period 2000-2006, to be implemented under the
new CSF, also provided for aid. However, it has emerged that the Commission is preparing to alter the
rules governing the award of aid, reducing breed-related support in cases where the number of females is
below 1 000. What this basically means is that no more aid will be granted in respect of over twenty
indigenous breeds and 140 000 head of livestock (cattle, sheep, and goats). The resulting cut will thus
amount to some PTE 2 billion.

Is it true that the aid rules are to be altered as described above? If so, why has the Commission thought fit
to make this proposal? Does it not consider such a measure to be contrary to the principle of multi-
purpose farming and protection of high-quality production?

Is the Commission aware of the serious socio-economic consequences that the measure will entail for
hundreds of Portuguese producers and many rural regions in the Portuguese heartland?

Does the Commission not consider it preferable to pursue a policy to promote quality and regional
production that would grant a higher proportion of aid to small and medium-sized farmers instead of
reducing that aid to further the interests of intensive mass production?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(30 October 2000)

For the period to 1999, aid for the preservation of endangered species was granted on the basis of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 2078/92 of 30 June 1992, on agricultural production methods compatible with the
the countryside (1). To
requirements of
encourage farmers to rear these less productive breeds, compensation is awarded per livestock unit (LU).
Above all, this measure aims to maintain biodiversity, and can under no circumstances be considered as
constituting aid in respect of farmers(cid:146) income as its function is to compensate for their losses of income
from rearing less productive breeds.

the environment and the maintenance of

the protection of

For the period 2000/2006, endangered breeds are supported within the framework of agrienvironmental
measures laid down in articles 22 to 24 of Council Regulation No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support
for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and
amending and repealing certain regulations (2). Under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1750/1999, laying
down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 (3), aid can be granted to
farmers rearing farm animals of local breeds indigenous to the area and in danger of exinction. In addition,
local breeds must play a role in maintaining the environment in the given areas to which the measure will
apply.

Under Regulation (EC) No 1750/1999, to be eligible for the measure, evidence must be provided of the
endangered statute of the breed consistent with scientific data accepted by international organisations
regarded as authorities in this field. The Commission has thus followed the only criterion currently
available, that of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), by agreeing to assist breeds that in general

C 151 E/50

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

22.5.2001

do not exceed 1000 reproducing females. Nonetheless, the Commission is currently conducting relevant
scientific consultations on the suitability of possibly adopting an approach better adapted to the
Community(cid:146)s specific situation.

(1) OJ L 215, 30.7.1992.
(2) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.
(3) OJ L 214, 13.8.1999.

(2001/C 151 E/063)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3059/00

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(28 September 2000)

Subject: Manufacturing ban on high-tar cigarettes

Can the Commission indicate if it has carried out an impact study into the loss of jobs caused by a ban on
the manufacturing and export of cigarettes containing more than 10 mg of tar, called full-flavour
cigarettes.

If not, why is the Commission recommending such a course of action?

Is the Commission aware of a study published jointly by UK & I Operations(cid:146) representatives of British
American Tobacco, the MSF and the AEEU, indicating that 8 300 jobs are at risk in only two manufactur-
ing sites in England?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(29 November 2000)

The further proposed reduction from 12 miligram (mg) to 10 mg of the tar level in cigarettes (1) continues
a process begun with Council Directive 90/239/EEC of 17 May 1990 on the approximation of the laws,
regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the maximum tar yield of
cigarettes (2). On the occasion of the substantial reductions introduced in the 1990 directive, no negative
economic or employment consequences were brought to the Commission(cid:146)s attention. The Commission is
not aware of any evidence to the effect that the much smaller decrease in tar level presently proposed
would have serious economic or employment consequences. These observations have been confirmed in
the assessment form attached to the new proposal.

According to the recent report of the World Bank (cid:145)Curbing the epidemic(cid:146) the effect of tobacco control on
employment could even be considered as positive (to the amount of 100 000 full-time equivalent jobs in
the United Kingdom) because of the money freed up from tobacco purchases and injected into other areas
of the economy (World Bank, Washington, 1999).

The Commission is aware of the estimates mentioned by the Honourable Member. Furthermore, the
Commission has met representatives of
the industry on several occasions during the last months.
According to the industry itself, exports from the Community are around 15 % of total production and
not all of these cigarettes would exceed the proposed ceiling.

However, in order to allow manufacturers sufficient time to adapt to these new Community standards the
Commission has proposed an extended transitional period.

According to the World Health Organisation, tobacco use is responsible for more than 500 000 deaths a
year within the Community.

(1) COM(2000) 428 final.
(2) OJ L 137, 30.5.1990.