WRITTEN QUESTION E-0336/03 by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Financial impact of the interim review of the common agricultural policy.
Date: 2003-02-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Portugal, common agricultural policy, economic and social cohesion, economic consequence, impact study, reform of the CAP, rural development, sustainable development

14.8.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 192 E/171

‘maksetaan’ (paid) as opposed to ‘korotetaan’ (raised)). To clarify one specific point of interpretation, can
the Commission say whether the period in which a person receives the transitional allowance, as provided
for in Article 7, is credited to his accrued entitlement based on years of pensionable service?

(1) OJ L 187, 8.8.1967, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(21 March 2003)

The Commission agrees that the translation into Finnish of the terms in Article 9 of Council Regulation
No 422/67/EEC, 5/67/Euratom of 25 July 1967 determining the emoluments of
the President and
members of the Commission and of the President, Judges, Advocates-General and Registrar of the Court of
Justice, contains an error.

The Commission is grateful to the Honourable Member for drawing attention to the point and will
consequently undertake a revision procedure in order to correct the error. The text should in future read:

Eläkkeen määrä jokaiselta täydeltä vuodelta, jona kyseinen henkilö on hoitanut tehtäviään, on 4,50
prosenttia viimeisestä saadusta peruspalkasta.

As to the second part of the question, Article 7 of the above Regulation lays down that, during the period
that a former Member is in receipt of the allowance provided for in that Article, his/her pension rights do
not vary or increase. They therefore continue to be calculated on the basis of his/her period of service as a
Member of the institution.

(2003/C 192 E/209)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0336/03

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(10 February 2003)

Subject: Financial impact of the interim review of the common agricultural policy

the status quo. The results of

On 21 January 2003, the Commission presented its legislative proposals on the interim provision of the
CAP. The financial statement annexed to document COM(2002) 23 estimates the financial impact of the
indicate an approx.
current proposals vis-à-vis
EUR 2 180 million reduction in agricultural spending in respect of the markets budget for the EU15, and
approximately EUR 1 560 million for the EU25, between 2004 and 2013. The same financial statement
estimates the impact of so-called ‘digression and modulation’, and the sums to be transferred to the rural
increase annually from
development budget. The Commission estimates
EUR 228 million in 2007 to EUR 1 481 million in 2013, to be allocated by the Member States, following
criteria which include the agricultural area, agricultural employment and economic prosperity levels.

these transfers will

these estimates

that

Taking due account of the method employed, I should like to know:

(cid:1) What the Commission estimates as being the financial impact on Portugal of the current proposals
vis-à-vis the status quo by year (from 2004-2013) and by intervention type (total for market measures,
total for direct subsidies and overall total)?

(cid:1) What transfers for rural development the Commission estimates as a result of applying ‘modulation
and digression’, by year (from 2006-2013) and by Member State (and particularly Portugal)? Given
that the sums to be transferred will be co-financed by the Member States, what additional amount of
national co-funding will be required, by year and by Member State, to guarantee the full uptake of the
new funding to be made available?

C 192 E/172

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

14.8.2003

(cid:1) Given the method employed for calculating cash contributions to the CAP, which the Commission
employed for its Second Cohesion Report, what annual impact does it estimate the current proposals
as having on CAP cash contributions in Portugal?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(13 March 2003)

As outlined in the explanatory memorandum of the interim review of the Common Agricultural Policy
(CAP), the intention of the proposed reform is to enhance the competitiveness of Community agriculture
and to promote a more market oriented and sustainable agriculture. In general, the proposals imply a shift
from product to producer support. Expenditure on market measures is expected to decrease as indicated in
the financial statement of the proposal and as noted by the Honourable Member. The estimates of
expenditure on market measures have been established at Community level and are based on the one hand
on the medium-term projections of Community market developments (published in December 2002) and
on the other hand on various impact analyses made available in January 2003. The basic modelling of the
impact analyses is designed to give projections at Community level. At this time, no further analyses have
been made in order to estimate the financial impact by Member State, as regards expenditure on market
measures.

The horizontal draft Council Regulation provides for a reduction of direct payments in Article 10 for years
2006 till 2012. A part of the resulting amounts will be reserved for strengthening rural development
under the second pillar of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) ‘Guarantee’
Section as set out in Article 12(1) of the same Regulation. The amounts to be transferred to rural
development are at the moment estimated at Community level as indicated in the financial statement. The
principles of how these amounts shall be reallocated to the Member States are given in Article 12(2).
Portugal’s share has been calculated at 4,9 %.

As regards the capacity of utilisation of the amounts to be allocated to each Member State for the period
after 2006, it should be remembered that the total envelopes for rural development and their distribution
between Member States will be decided later in the framework of
the new Financial Perspectives.
Therefore, the need for national co-financing to ensure full use of the rural development programs can
only be estimated after the new Financial Perspectives and new Rural Development programs have been
decided upon.

In the context of the preparation of the Third Cohesion Report, the Commission intends to update the
analysis referred to by the Honourable Member. Nevertheless,
it is already possible to assert that the
present Common Agricultural Policy reform proposal will strengthen the contribution of CAP to economic
and social cohesion and a positive impact could be expected for Portugal.

(2003/C 192 E/210)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0343/03

by Miquel Mayol i Raynal (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(10 February 2003)

Subject: Tax and social charge handicaps in EU internal border areas

According to a study conducted by Mr Hervé Germa, a tax lawyer in Perpignan (France) and Figueras
(Spain), the differences between the social security and taxation systems of the two countries are so great
that they represent a form of unfair competition.

These differences mainly relate to social security contributions and business tax. Social
security
contributions, for example, represent 48 % of a worker’s gross salary in France but only 30,6 % in Spain.
The business tax payable by a company with fewer than ten workers is around EUR 1 200 in France but
only EUR 400 to 500 in Spain.