WRITTEN QUESTION P-1401/01 by Hervé Novelli (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Compulsory set-aside of 10 % of land.
Date: 2001-05-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: agricultural market, agricultural production policy, agricultural situation, aid per hectare, bovine spongiform encephalopathy, grassland, land use, reform of the CAP

C 350 E/144

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

11.12.2001

In the case of major projects under the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund, the Commission insists
on a cost-benefit analysis for an ex ante assessment of each project,
in accordance with the relevant
regulation. An ex post evaluation of 120 Cohesion Fund projects is also nearing completion. The interim
conclusions of this study suggest that the results of environmental projects are broadly consistent with
expectations. For a number of
transport projects the forecasts were too optimistic with regard to
construction time but too pessimistic as regards the traffic using the renovated sections. The ex post cost-
benefit analyses show that in the end the economic rate of return on many of these projects is over 20 %.

(2001/C 350 E/156)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1401/01

by HervØ Novelli (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 May 2001)

Subject: Compulsory set-aside of 10 % of land

Since 1992, arable land has been eligible for Community per-hectare aid under a scheme including set-
aside measures.

This specific scheme was retained at the time of the most recent agreement in Berlin in 1999 on the new
CAP reform.

The new regulation has thus continued the downward trend in the intervention price, for which farmers
receive compensation at 50 % in the form of area aid. This aid is still subject to a requirement to set aside
a proportion of arable land (cid:129) 10 %, or more for producers who wish to do so, within limits set by the
Member States (30 % in France).

This new reform was intended to guarantee the equilibrium of the market, but the successive BSE and
foot-and-mouth crises have shown the limits of the reform and have created a lasting imbalance in the
marketing chain for cattle and sheep producers.

At the last European agriculture summit,
in February 2000, at which no agreement was reached on
reforming the beef and veal market, the Commission nevertheless accepted that the Member States could
grant national aid to producers so as to compensate them for their losses due to the BSE crisis.

Do you not think it is time for the European Union to accept its responsibilities by proposing more
flexible set-aside measures to enable producers either to harvest cereals produced on this land or to permit
cattle or sheep to graze there?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(11 June 2001)

By definition, land set aside under the support scheme for arable crops cannot be used for cultivating any
agricultural products except for non-food purposes or, in the case of holdings managed under the rules on
organic farming, for growing legumes.

The crises affecting the sheepmeat and beef industries will not be overcome by allowing grazing on land
left fallow. A better approach would be to apply suitable measures put forward under the common
organisation of the markets in the sectors concerned.

The measures taken by the Commission since late 2000 have already made a significant contribution
towards restoring stability on the meat market.