WRITTEN QUESTION E-3450/00 by Jean-Claude Fruteau (PSE) to the Council. Liberalisation of the Community market for LDCs.
Date: 2000-11-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: common agricultural policy, economic consequence, exemption from customs duties, least-developed country, rice, sugar, tropical fruit

C 174 E/56

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

19.6.2001

The concept of substantial equivalence comprises a whole range of scientific considerations, and not

3.
only compositional analysis. It is considered to be a useful element in risk assessment of novel foods.

In the context of the review of the Regulation (EC) No 258/97 of the Parliament and of the Council of
27 January 1997, concerning novel foods and novel food ingredients, which is foreseen for next year, the
Commission intends to reconsider whether it is appropriate that genetically modified (GM) derived foods
and food ingredients benefit from the notification procedure.

(2001/C 174 E/056)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3450/00

by Jean-Claude Fruteau (PSE) to the Council

(8 November 2000)

Subject: Liberalisation of the Community market for LDCs

On 10 October 2000, the Council welcomed a Commission initiative seeking to abolish customs duties on
unlimited quantities of products from the least-developed countries (LDCs).

The proposed exemption from customs duties and quotas of all the products from the world(cid:146)s least-
developed countries would result in the abolition of restrictions on access to the Community market for
such sensitive products as bananas, rice and sugar.

With respect to those three products, liberalisation is scheduled to be carried out in three stages over a
three-year period as follows:

(cid:129) 20 % cut on 1 January 2001,

(cid:129) 50 % cut on 1 January 2002,

(cid:129) 80 % cut on 1 January 2003,

(cid:129) total exemption on 1 January 2004.

it would have a direct and adverse impact on traditional
If that proposal were adopted as it stands,
produce from the ultra-peripheral regions and,
in particular, on the overseas territories. For example,
production on RØunion, which is an integral part of the European Union, is subject to much heavier
welfare costs than the LDCs. If such exemption were actually introduced, my island would be placed in a
very difficult situation compared with Madagascar or the Comores Islands.

What measures does the Council intend to take in order to protect Community producers of rice, bananas
and sugar?

Reply

(26 February 2001)

Firstly, the Council would underline that the proposal for a Regulation to extend duty-free access without
any quantitative restrictions to products originating in the least-developed countries is currently being
examined by the technical bodies of the Council which deal with trade policy; a decision on this proposal
will be taken by the Council at a later stage.

This proposal stems from the Community initiative to improve access to the market for the least
advantaged economies, already included in the new Partnership Agreement with the ACP countries signed
in Cotonou on 23 June 2000.

Article 37(9) of that Agreement stipulates that in 2000 the Community will start a process, which, by the
end of multilateral trade negotiations and at the latest in 2005 will allow duty-free access for essentially all
products from all LDCs.

19.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 174 E/57

The Council would also point out that the Community is the largest importer worldwide of products from
the LDCs, and that already more than 99 % of trade with those countries benefits from duty-free access,
under either the LomØ Convention or the generalised system of preferences.

As regards the provisions relating to Community producers of bananas, rice or sugar, reference should be
made to the Regulations on the common organisation of the respective markets (1).

As regards bananas, the Council would point out that one of the objectives of that CMO is the marketing
of Community products at remunerative prices which guarantee an adequate income to producers. This
regime provides for a range of structural measures and also establishes a compensatory aid scheme for
possible loss of revenue by Community producers. Furthermore, additional aid is granted for certain
producing regions where average production income is significantly less than the average Community
income.

In the proposal amending the CMO for bananas, which it submitted in November 1999, the Commission
noted that one of the objectives of the proposed transitional regime was to enable Community banana-
producing regions to make appropriate adjustments to a freer market, and that appropriate use of the
resources allocated to Member States from the Structural Funds, within the existing overall objectives of
the Community Structural Funds, could have an important role to play in this process.

As regards rice, the Regulation which is currently in force provides for an intervention price system for the
Community which guarantees a financial safety net
for producers, national base areas for which
compensatory payments to producers are set per cultivated hectare (cid:129) with higher amounts laid down
for French Guiana, as well as a separate base area for metropolitan territory; specific provisions on imports
are laid down for the French overseas department of RØunion for its paddy rice and white rice supplies.

The proposal amending the CMO for rice, which the Commission submitted to the Council in June 2000
and which is still under examination, provides for the raising of the current import duty to the level of the
fixed tariff provided for in the Community(cid:146)s GATT list. According to the Commission, this would increase
Community preference.

As regards sugar, current rules provide for a system of production quotas by Member State and by
category of product based on sugar, minimum prices for beet, intervention prices for sugar and specific
intervention prices for sugar in deficit areas within the European Union; this scheme is intended to
guarantee a stable and regular income for sugar producers and manufacturers.

Additional aid is also granted for the refining of raw cane sugar produced in the French overseas
departments, with a view to restoring price equilibrium between that sugar and imported preferential
sugar, for which no import tariff is applicable under the ACP scheme. To ensure optimal supply to
refineries, the quantities of sugar from the overseas departments and of preferential sugar intended for
direct consumption are taken into account in a Community supply estimate.

The new proposal for reform of the CMO for sugar, submitted to the Council by the Commission
in October 2000, and currently under examination, aims marginally to amend the current rules; in this
context, the special character of the outermost regions of the Community is in any case taken into
account.

The Council will not fail to take into consideration the opinions of the European Parliament on each of the
sectoral proposals mentioned above.

Furthermore, the Council can assure the Honourable Member that in deciding on the LDC proposal, it will
examine the possible impact of that proposal on the Community producers concerned very closely, and
will bear in mind the need to ensure consistency between the proposed liberalisation measure and the
sectoral reforms which are currently under examination.

(1) Regulation (EEC) No 404/93 (OJ L 142, 12.6.1993) for bananas, Regulation (EEC) No 3072/95 (OJ L 329,

30.12.1995) for rice, and Regulation (EEC) No 2038/1999 (OJ L 252, 25.9.1999) for sugar.