WRITTEN QUESTION E-0773/01 by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Cultivation of grapes to produce certain varieties of dried grapes.
Date: 2001-03-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, crop production, dried product, grape, production aid

4.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 340 E/89

The stability/convergence programmes and the implementation of budgetary plans in all EU member states
are examined closely by the Commission and the Council, which may decide to issue and publish
recommendations whenever it deems there is inconsistency with the adopted BEPGs.

In the Commission(cid:146)s and Council(cid:146)s view, Irish budget plans for 2001, announced in December 2000, are
stimulatory and pro-cyclical and therefore inconsistent with the BEPGs. The Council therefore issued, for
the first time, a recommendation to end the inconsistency with the BEPGs.

The situations of the French and Spanish economies are different and policy is not construed as having
contradicted the BEPGs. The French economy has one of the lowest inflation rates in the euro zone.
Moreover, French fiscal policy cannot be considered as pro-cyclical. Spain is indeed currently experiencing
a high rate of inflation, but fiscal policy has been and continues to be restrictive and also therefore is not
pro-cyclical.

(2001/C 340 E/103)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0773/01

by Jorge HernÆndez Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 March 2001)

Subject: Cultivation of grapes to produce certain varieties of dried grapes

On 22 July 1999 the Commission adopted Regulation (EC) No 1621/1999 (1) on aid for the cultivation of
grapes to produce certain varieties of dried grapes.

Since this regulation came into force and despite its generous provisions, in MÆlaga province (Spain) the
area given over to muscatel grapes intended for the production of dried grapes has been reduced.

The regulation establishes a contract-based system as the main channel for receiving aid. However, the
deadlines chosen are creating producer insecurity: 1 August is too early to set a price adjusted to demand
(muscatel raisins are traditionally sold at Christmas), and the contract mechanism thus obliges producers to
make a contract on pain of not receiving any Community aid.

In the last marketing year prices were offered in November to non-contract producers at a level exceeding
(cid:129) by ESP 100/kg (cid:129) the average price laid down in contracts signed three months previously. While the
regulation provides for the possibility of negotiating, in practice this does not happen since buyers are not
interested: accordingly, the contract price prevails.

Some standard contracts define the payment date as being six months from delivery of the dried grapes:
this is too long a time-lag for fragile economies such as those of this sector. Buyers may also attempt to tie
the date of payment of Community aid (31 May) to the date of payment for the product.

Is the Commission willing to consider altering the contract timetable for muscatel grapes cultivated in
MÆlaga province with a view to the production of dried grapes by setting a date (e.g. 31 October) more in
line with demand for the product?

Should this not be possible, would the Commission consider introducing a system to put an end to the
dominant position of the buyer in the case of dried grapes?

Would the Commission consider proposing that the contract should no longer make reference to the
payment date, given that this is not required under Regulation (EC) No 1621/1999, or, should such
reference continue to be made, that the payment period should in future not extend up to the delivery
deadline?

(1) OJ L 192, 24.7.1999, p. 21.

C 340 E/90

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.12.2001

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 2001)

Article 3(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1621/1999 of 22 July 1999 laying down detailed rules for
the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/96 as regards aid for the cultivation of grapes to
produce certain varieties of dried grapes (1) stipulates that the aid is to be granted on specialised plots,
production from which has been delivered to processors under contracts.

That provision meets the producers(cid:146) need for security as regards the disposal of their production as well as
that of the processors as regards supplies to their plants.

The time limit for signing contracts strikes a fair balance between the need for the contract to be drawn up
early enough to be fully effective and the competing need for operators to be provided with up-to-date
data on the coming harvest.

Over the marketing year fluctuations in prices for perennial crops and non-perishable products are slight.
Nonetheless, the Commission made provision in Article 5(2) of the abovementioned Regulation to allow
prices agreed upon in contracts to be revised up to 30 November 2001.

The selling price is to be agreed between the contracting parties. The time limit for payment is one of the
components of the price. The Commission will look into the advisability of bringing this time limit into
line with those applying in other aid schemes for products processed from fruit and vegetables.

However, the best way to strengthen the producers(cid:146) position vis-(cid:224)-vis the distributors and processors is to
improve producer organisation and increase the concentration of supply. To that end Council Regulation
(EC) No 2200/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of
in fruit and
vegetables (2) provides for specific measures to encourage the setting-up and development of producer
organisations.

the market

(1) OJ L 192, 24.7.1999.
(2) OJ L 297, 21.11.1996.

(2001/C 340 E/104)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0774/01

by Juan Naranjo Escobar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 March 2001)

Subject: Crisis in Turkey

The severe crisis in Turkey following the political clash between its president and prime minister has
forced the government to float the currency, which is continuing in free fall against the US dollar and has
lost as much as 43 % of its value in dollar terms. The currency has been devalued with IMF support, even
though that same body had, in December 2000, injected USD 7,5 billion into the Turkish economy, in the
last instalment of an international loan package. The immediate knock-on effect of the Turkish crisis on
emerging economies, from eastern Europe through Latin America to Asia, has once again demonstrated
that financial globalisation is here to stay and that it operates in trigger fashion, not only when there is
a major disturbance in a G7 country but also when problems occur in one of the larger emerging
economies, such as Turkey.

Having shut the door on Ankara in Luxembourg in December 1997, the EU revised its position two years
later in Helsinki, to add Turkey to the twelve eastern European and Mediterranean candidates on the
waiting list for accession. Given Turkey(cid:146)s severe problems in achieving monetary stability and meeting the
convergence criteria, what is the Commission(cid:146)s current position on the matter? What is the present state of
play on the reforms embarked on by Turkey concerning respect for human rights and recognition of the
cultural identity of the Kurdish minority, as preconditions for any launch of the accession process?