WRITTEN QUESTION E-0669/03 by Giacomo Santini (PPE-DE) to the Council. Young farmers ignored under the new CAP.
Date: 2003-03-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: State aid, aid system, aid to agriculture, installation allowance, investment aid, reform of the CAP, young farmer

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/37

decentralised basis, a series of registers would have to be consulted every day, whereas the national gazette
offers a central source of information; and (b) in all Member States, a daily consultation of the register(s)
would have to be made for all companies which are of interest to a third party, whereas the national
gazette offers the advantage of drawing the attention explicitly to only those companies for which new
documents or particulars have been filed.

With respect to the costs faced by small businesses because of such a publication, the Commission would
first like to stress that Article 3 of the First Directive does not require publication in the national gazette of
the full text of the documents filed. Member States are free to provide that only a reference to the
documents filed must be published in the national gazette, with a view to limiting the publication costs
faced by companies.

Secondly, the Commission would like to refer to its Proposal for a Directive amending the First Company
Law Directive, adopted on 3 June 2002 (3). With respect to the publication in a national gazette, Member
States will first be able to keep this national gazette in electronic form: the Commission expects that the
decision to use modern technologies for publication of the national gazette will lead to a decrease in the
publication costs charged to companies.

Finally, under the same Proposal, Member States will also be able to replace the publication in the national
gazette with equally effective means (subject to the provision of a central and chronological access to
company information, which is the main function performed by a national gazette). The Proposal requires
Member States to make company documents and particulars accessible to third parties ‘by electronic
means’, which does not necessarily mean that registers have to set up a website where all documents and
particulars would be available on line as suggested by the Honourable Member: electronic means indeed
cover a series of different technologies, including e.g. e-mail. The Commission nevertheless observes that
the provision of information through a website is the option preferred by many Member States, and that
the Proposal allows Member States to make decisions aiming at reducing the publication costs for
companies in such a situation: if the register website offers a central and chronological access to company
information, no further publication in the national gazette would indeed be required.

(1) OJ C 52 E, 6.3.2003, p. 82.
(2)

First Council Directive 68/151/EEC of 9 March 1968 on co-ordination of safeguards which, for the protection of
the interests of members and others, are required by Member States of companies within the meaning of the second
paragraph of Article 58 of
the
Community, as last amended by the 1994 Act of Accession, OJ L 65, 14.3.1968.

the Treaty, with a view to making such safeguards equivalent

throughout

(3) OJ C 227 E, 24.9.2002. The Parliament adopted the Report of Mr Lehne in its plenary meeting on 12 March 2003.

(2004/C 51 E/037)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0669/03

by Giacomo Santini (PPE-DE) to the Council

(6 March 2003)

Subject: Young farmers ignored under the new CAP

One voice has been missing from the passionate debate surrounding the reform of
the common
agricultural policy (cid:1) that of young farmers. Nor was there any tangible reference in the Commission
document to what will become of these farmers, their problems and their expectations.

We have therefore not moved on from Articles 7 and 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 (1), which
envisage higher percentages for the EAGGF premium, so that instead of the ceiling of 40 % of the volume
of investments for ordinary holdings, the figure rises to 45 % for young farmers and 55 % for young
farmers in disadvantaged areas.

Article 8 envisages a maximum amount of EUR 25 000 of setting-up aid for young farmers. This is not
much as an incentive for a young person to set up a farm, faced with the forthcoming major reforms.

C 51 E/38

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

Can the Council therefore say why the draft CAP reform does not set aside a specific chapter devoted

1.
to young farmers?

2. Whether it is possible to incorporate in the draft reform an amendment to update Article 8 of
Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999, proposing at least a 100 % increase in the setting-up aid, raising it to
EUR 50 000?

3. Whether it is possible to incorporate in the draft reform an amendment to increase aid as a
percentage of the volume of investment from 45 % and 55 % to 65 % and 75 % respectively for young
farmers in lowland and mountain areas?

4. Whether it is possible to incorporate in the draft reform an amendment to suspend the system of
State aids as regards direct aid to young farmers from the Member States and regional authorities?

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 80.

Reply

(2 October 2003)

The Council is aware of the importance of young farmers to the Community’s agriculture. Following the
debate on the Commission proposals, the political agreement on the CAP reform package reached by the
Council on 26 June 2003 provides, in Regulation (EC) No 1257/99 on support for rural development
from the EAGGF, for the introduction of special measures for young farmers, in particular, greater support
for investment purposes and increased aid to help them get started using advisory services related to their
activities. It has also been agreed that the text of the regulation should specifically state that measures
introduced for young farmers need to be more workable.

(2004/C 51 E/038)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0676/03

by Marco Cappato (NI) to the Council

(7 March 2003)

Subject: Fumigation in certain coffee-growing areas of Colombia

I was visiting Colombia last week together with the Secretary of

the International Anti-
Whilst
Prohibitionist League, Marco Perduca, a number of reports were received about a plan for the imminent
fumigation of the coffee-growing areas of Colombia, in the context of a disastrous and indiscriminate
campaign of chemical fumigation, from a very high altitude, of vast areas of the country, designed to
eradicate coca leaf production and to be carried out in agreement with the US Administration.

In view of the devastating impact of this practice on human health, the environment and socio-economic
equilibrium, and the fact that the Commission is carrying out alternative development programmes in
some of these areas, has the Council taken steps to inform the Colombian authorities of its disapproval
and the need to suspend immediately the alternative development programmes in those areas as soon as
the operation is launched?

How does the Council intend to try and ensure that the fumigation is not carried out and officially request
that the operation be suspended all over Colombia?