WRITTEN QUESTION E-1509/02 by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission. Evolution of agricultural income in 2001.
Date: 2002-05-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU statistics, European Union membership, Galicia, agricultural statistics, common agricultural policy, farm income

C 301 E/164

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.12.2002

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(3 July 2002)

The prohibition of the use of five antibiotic feed additives in 1997 and 1998 (Avoparcin, Bacitracin zinc,
Spiramycin, Virginiamycin and Tylosin phosphate), which were authorised as growth promoters, was a risk
management decision which was taken following the concerns raised by the international scientific
community.

The scientific opinion showed that it was necessary to take into account that anti-microbial resistance can
spread to other microbial populations and that some microbial agents of diseases have become resistant to
standard anti-microbial treatment.

In 2001 the Scientific Steering Committee recommended that the use of antibiotics as growth promoting
agents from classes that are or may be used in human or veterinary medicine should be phased out as
soon as possible and ultimately abolished.

The measures only concerned the use of antibiotics as growth promoters, that is, additives given in feed to
a group of animals irrespective of their health status with the aim of achieving an improvement in their
performance. This policy led to the decrease in the total amount of antibiotics used as feed additives from
1600 tonnes in 1997 to 786 tonnes in 1999.

These measures did not interfere with authorisations and use of antibiotics for therapeutic or prophylactic
applications in animals.

There is no obligation for Member States to communicate to the Commission the occurrence of the most
significant bacterial diseases in farmed animals that are currently controlled by antibiotic treatment. The
Commission is not aware of any evidence suggesting that its policy regarding the use of antibiotics as
growth promoting feed additives led to a decrease in the health status of animals in the Union.

(2002/C 301 E/176)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1509/02

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(29 May 2002)

Subject: Evolution of agricultural income in 2001

The Commission has published data compiled by Eurostat on the evolution of agricultural income, which
state that in 2001 agricultural income in the EC rose by 3,3 %, thanks to a 1,2 % rise in production and a
2 % fall in the number of farmers.

Nonetheless, there are variations between Member States in the pattern of agricultural incomes. In Spain
income rose by only 2,6 %, while in other Member States the increase was four times greater. The figures
for Denmark, Austria and Germany were 12,3 %, 10,9 % and 9,9 % respectively. Portugal and Ireland
scored 11,8 % and 7,8 % respectively.

Can the Commission provide specific information on the evolution of agricultural income in Galicia in
2001?

What is the Commission’s interpretation of the fact that the application of the CAP gives rise to these
disparities in the evolution of agricultural income? What does the Commission believe to be the reasons
for the circumstance that the rise in incomes has been four times greater in certain Member States
(Denmark, Austria, Portugal and Germany) than in Spain?

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/165

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2002)

According to Eurostat, the income from agricultural activity, measured as the net value added at factor
cost,
in real terms and per labour unit, would have increased by 3,3 % on average in 2001 in the
Community as a whole. This increase in income would constitute a renewed sign of recovery after the falls
recorded in 1998 and 1999 and the 3,3 % increase in 2000. Notwithstanding the sanitary crises observed
in the animal sector in 2001 (linked to the bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) and the Food and
Mouth disease (FMD)), favourable price developments (cid:1) notably in the animal sector (cid:1) have enabled to
lift agricultural income to record levels.

If positive developments are forecast in a clear majority of Member States since only one Member State is
foreseen to record a fall in income (Luxembourg at − 0,6 %), wide variations are projected across countries.
Strongest rises would be recorded in Denmark (+ 12,3 %), Portugal (+ 11,8 %), Austria (+ 10,9 %), Germany
(+ 9,9 %), Ireland (+ 7,8 %), Belgium (+ 5,3 %) and Sweden (+ 5,0 %). If the rise in pig prices constitutes the
common factor in the growth of agricultural income in most of these Member States, price increases in
other farm sectors, such as potatoes and milk, and a surge in non-crop specific subsidies are also estimated
to have contributed favourably to the development of agricultural income.

The Commission has no information concerning farm income development in 2001 in Galicia.

The reforms of the Common Agricultural Policy in 1992 and in the Agenda 2000 have contributed to the
improvement in the competitiveness of the agricultural sector in the Community by shifting from market
price support to more direct income payments. They have also contributed to provide a greater guarantee
and stability in the evolution of producer’s income since direct payments to producers represent now on
average in the Community some 32 % of agricultural
in income
development across Member States and sub-sectors still exist. They mainly reflect the differing situations
at the outset carried over from previous years and the diversity in the agro-economic structures and cycles
in the Member States.

income. However, divergences

if Spain benefited,

Accordingly,
like other Member States, from positive developments in the pig and
poultry sectors that outweighed the sharp drop in beef prices, unfavourable climatic conditions affected
crop productions, notably cereals and wine whose production volumes fell by more than 30 % and 23 %
it should be reminded that Spain still shows the second largest increase in
respectively. Nevertheless,
agricultural income in the Community since 1992 (behind Portugal), with a rise of more than 41 % after
taking account of inflation.

(2002/C 301 E/177)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1511/02

by Mikko Pesälä (ELDR) and Samuli Pohjamo (ELDR) to the Commission

Subject: Organising a follow-up to the EU’s forestry strategy

(29 May 2002)

In December 1998, the Council adopted a common forestry strategy for the EU. Before the Council
adopted its resolution on this subject, the Commission had published a communication concerning it and
the European Parliament had adopted a resolution of its own in 1997. The EU institutions have since
considered the Commission communication on the forest-based industry.

Although the above-mentioned documents do not create a common EU forestry policy, it is extremely
important to forestry that the EU should adopt an active approach to forests, and not only from the point
of view of environmental protection. There are major challenges, inter alia with regard to promoting the
use of timber and thus creating an ecologically benign society by replacing other materials with wood,
which is renewable. There are also challenges in connection with the enlargement of the EU, which must