WRITTEN QUESTION E-0015/04 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Apple orchards.
Date: 2004-01-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, arboriculture, grubbing premium, orchard, regulation of agricultural production

C 84 E/526

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

The final declaration of the first summit of Heads of State and Government endorsed the previous
2.
Tunis ministerial declaration on migration in the western Mediterranean of October 2002, which paved
the way for a ‘balanced, integrated, and comprehensive dialogue between the countries of the Western
Mediterranean to cooperate on migration issues of common interest in an organized and coordinated
manner’.

This confirmed the following points as fundamental elements of a Euro-Mediterranean policy which
incorporated the work of the Valencia Conference (April 2002) viewed within the broader context of the
Barcelona process:

(cid:1) to adopt a comprehensive and balanced approach to migrations (measures to combat

illegal
immigration should be complemented by co-development, movement of persons and labour
migration);

(cid:1) to consolidate the integration of legal migrants by protecting their rights (family reunion, facilities for

movement, equal treatment, etc.) while also spelling out their obligations;

(cid:1) to combat illegal

immigration and trafficking in human beings by joint action and cooperation
(including at operational level) while attempting to find a better way of addressing the real causes of
those plagues.

A meeting of the ministerial conference responsible for migration issues will be held in Algiers during
2004.

3.
The Tunis Summit of 5/6 December 2003 gave a warm welcome to the new neighbourhood policy
proposed by the EU. In a sense, this endorses the bilateral and regional policy already launched as part of
specific projects (such as the ‘management of border controls’ programme with Morocco and the JHA
regional programme) as well as the prospect enshrined in future action plans of implementing tailor-made
migration strategies for individual countries. The Tunis Summit also calls for the western basin of the
Mediterranean to be regarded, within the framework of that policy, as a strategic area and an area of peace,
stability, solidarity, prosperity, freedom and justice based on respect for common values.

In addition, the Member States involved in the 5 + 5 Dialogue reaffirmed their condemnation of terrorism
in all its forms. They proposed the adoption of regional plans to coordinate efforts and renewed their
commitment to implementing conventions and recommendations,
in particular UN Security Council
Resolution 1373. Expressing an interest
in a worldwide UN convention on terrorism and in an
international conference on the subject, they reiterated their determination to step up cooperation on
security and on economic, social and cultural development, particularly between the Arab Maghreb Union
and the European Union.

(2004/C 84 E/0601)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0015/04

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 January 2004)

Subject: Apple orchards

Can the Commission state whether any EU legislation has stipulated or resulted in the restriction of British
apple growers from planting new orchards of English apples? In particular, Cox’s apples.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 2004)

Recipients of Community aid for grubbing up apple, pear, peach and nectarine trees for the 1990/1991 to
1992/1993, 1994/1995, 1995/1996 and 1997/1998 marketing years had to undertake ‘to refrain for a
period of 15 years, first, from planting any apple trees (other than cider-apple trees), pear trees (other than
perry-pear trees), peach trees and/or nectarine trees on the areas of [their] holding affected by the grubbing

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/527

up operation and, second, from extending the other areas of [their] holding planted with apple trees (other
than cider-apple trees), pear trees (other than perry-pear trees), peach trees and/or nectarine trees’ (1). This
requirement, not aimed at any particular variety of dessert apple, was necessary in order to give the
grubbing up operations the full economic effect desired and avoid wasting Community funds.

(1) See Article 3(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2467/97 of 11 December 1997 laying down detailed rules for
the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/97 on the improvement of the Community production of
apples, pears, peaches and nectarines, OJ L 341, 12.12.1997.

(2004/C 84 E/0602)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0022/04

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Support for the Po Valley dairy farmers’ campaign

Does the European Commission not consider that the current milk quota scheme, is particularly hard on
dairy producers in the Po valley as Italy is the only one of the Member States where consumption is much
higher than production quotas?

Is the European Commission aware that this anomaly has had serious repercussions on farmers in the
Po Valley who are even now still being forced to leave their farms to take part in demonstrations or man
roadblocks in Milan and Rome to demand that the Italian Government safeguard the rights of Po Valley
dairy production at European level?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 2004)

Milk quotas were introduced by the Council in 1984 to reduce the imbalance between supply and demand
in the milk sector. The production quotas were allocated on the basis not of consumption per geographical
area but of the output of each individual producer over a specified period. That was the only way of
avoiding discrimination between producers.

Since introduction of the quota scheme the reference quantities allocated to Italy have been increased
considerably, by 19,6 % over the period 1984 to 2004, whereas in most of the other Member States
quotas have been either stabilised or reduced.

We consider that the milk quota scheme holds out the prospect of stable production and income security
to farmers without impeding restructuring of milk production in the Union, and take the view that full and
correct application is a guarantee of its being comprehensively effective.

(2004/C 84 E/0603)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0033/04

by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Distortion of competition by the introduction of regional premiums

Chapter 5 of the new Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (1) concerning direct support schemes gives
Member States the option of introducing regional premiums. Denmark and Germany are reported to be
about to introduce such an arrangement.