Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘proposal for a Council Regulation on actions in the field of beekeeping’ (COM(2004) 30 final - 2004/0003 (CNS))
Date: 2004-04-01
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: apiculture, honey, marketing, production improvement

C 112/114

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.4.2004

2.2
Article 1(2) replaces the annex to the existing directive,
which briefly listed the different types of companies in the
language of each country, with a much more detailed list
which includes the European Company (SE) and the European
Cooperative Society (SCE) as well. This list has the merit of
being clearer and of removing some ambiguity where certain
countries are concerned but, apart
from these necessary
improvements, it does not essentially add anything new.

2.3
Article 2 contains the implementing provisions. The
Member States are to comply with the directive by 31
December 2004, bringing into force all the laws, regulations
and administrative provisions necessary;
they are also to
forward to the Commission the text of the provisions and a
correlation table between the provisions and the directive. The
EESC points out that, in view of the amount of time required,

Brussels, 1 April 2004

particularly in certain Member States, for Community provi-
sions to be translated into national legislation, the deadline set
would seem to be rather short. Given that the directive is to
enter into force in all Member States simultaneously, it may be
that the deadline needs to be extended by six months or more.

3. Conclusions

3.1
The EESC fully endorses the aim of the directive, which
is part of a process of gradual fine-tuning of taxation provisions
intended to avoid both tax evasion and double taxation. The
directive should also indirectly facilitate harmonisation of taxa-
tion systems in the future and help to eliminate distortion of
competition, which is currently all too apparent.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘proposal for a Council Regu-
lation on actions in the field of beekeeping’

(COM(2004) 30 final - 2004/0003 (CNS))

(2004/C 112/29)

On 30 January 2004, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 37 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal

On 24 February 2004, the Bureau of the European Economic and Social Committee decided to instruct the
Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment to undertake the preparatory work.

In view of the urgent nature of the work, the European Economic and Social Committee decided at its
407th plenary session of 31 March and 1 April 2004 (meeting of 1 April) to appoint Mr Joan Caball i
Subirana as rapporteur-general and adopted the following opinion unanimously.

1.

Introduction

1.1
Following its 1994 Communication on European apicul-
ture (1), the Commission proposed a Regulation laying down
general rules for the application of measures to improve the
production and marketing of honey, which was adopted by the
Council in June 1997 (Reg. (EC) No. 1221/97) (2).

In November 1997, the Commission issued Regulation
1.2
(EC) No. 2300/97 (3) laying down the rules for implementing
the Regulation 1221/97 and in June 2001, in line with Article
6 of Regulation (EC) No. 1221/97, the Commission presented

(1) COM(94) 256 final
(2) OJ L 173 of 1.7.1997, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation

(EC) No 2070/98 (OJ L 265 of 30.9.1998, p. 1).

(3) OJ L 319 of 21.11.1997

its first three-yearly report on the application of this Regulation
in the Member States.
the Commission
In this
concluded that the Regulation had been applied satisfactorily
and therefore recommended leaving it unchanged.

report,

1.3
In January 2004, the Commission presented its second
assessment report on the application of national programmes
in the Member States in which it proposes adopting a new
regulation with a view to adapting the beekeeping sector's
objectives to the current situation in the Community.

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/115

instrument

The Committee wishes to point out that Regulation (EC)
3.2
for
No 1221/97 is the only common support
beekeepers in the European Union and must
therefore be
retained. However, this instrument is based on a part-financing
system that falls far short of aid currently provided under the
Common Agricultural Policy and is by no means sufficient to
resolve structural difficulties and guarantee the profitability of
bee farms in the European Union. The European beekeeping
sector is subject to an unstable market that is very dependent
on world honey prices, to increasing climatic adversity caused
by climate change and to bee losses in some regions as a result
of external contamination.

3.3
The EESC believes that the complex nature of this Regu-
lation in administrative terms and the excessive inflexibility
when it comes to fulfilling the expenditure and investment
criteria, together with the fact that the EAGGF financial year
and that of
times (15
the Member States end at different
October and 31 December
respectively) and the national
programmes have different deadlines each year, make it consid-
erably harder for countries to use the expenditure allocated to
them. The EESC therefore calls on the Commission and the
Council to harmonise the criteria used to determine expendi-
ture and investment eligible for aid, in order to ensure that the
scheme used to allocate aid to each country guarantees as fair a
level of support as possible for all European beekeepers.

3.4
The Commission points out that the aim of controlling
varroasis and other related diseases is to reduce the cost of
treating hives. In its report it therefore recommends treating
hives with approved products (i.e. those that do not leave any
residue in the honey) as this is the only way of avoiding the
consequences of this disease. In this regard, the EESC reiterates
the need to encourage the pharmaceutical industry to conduct
studies and research into new molecules that reduce the inci-
dence of varroasis, as this is one of the main reasons for the
emergence of other related diseases and accounts for 41 % of
programmed expenditure in most Member States.

2. Gist of the proposal

The

Commission

national
2.1
programmes for a period of three years, with the following
measures:

establishing

proposes

a. technical

assistance

to beekeepers

and groupings of

beekeepers;

b. control of varroasis;

c. rationalisation of transhumance;

d. measures to support the restocking of hives in the Com-

munity;

e. cooperation with specialised bodies for the implementation
of applied research programmes in the field of beekeeping
and apiculture products.

Under this new regulation, measures financed under
2.2
Regulation (EC) No 1257/99 (1) will be excluded from the
apiculture programmes.

the
The Member States must carry out a study of
2.3
production and marketing structure in the beekeeping sector in
their territory, which they must communicate to the Commis-
sion with the apiculture programme.

2.4
The Community will provide part-financing equivalent
to 50 %, while expenditure by the Member States must be
made by 15 October each year at the latest. The Commission
will present a report on the implementation of this Regulation
to the European Parliament and the Council every three years.

3. General comments

3.1
Beekeeping has a number of unique characteristics that
set it apart from other types of agricultural activity. Its main
functions are rural development, helping to maintain the ecolo-
gical balance, and, as an economic activity, the production of
honey and other beekeeping products. It is important to point
out that bees play a vital role as primary pollinating agents and
in terms of their contribution to maintaining biodiversity. In
this connection, the FAO estimates that the economic value of
entomophilous pollination by bees
the
commercial value of all beekeeping products (2).
In some
Member States, beekeeping is practised in less prosperous
regions and is the only way of maintaining the rural fabric and
agricultural employment.

twenty times

is

(1) OJ L 160 of 26.6.1999, p. 80. Regulation as last amended by Regu-

lation (EC) No 1783/2003 (OJ L 270 of 21.10.2003, p. 70).

(2) Information taken from the publication Frutales y abejas, Juan B.
Rallo García, 1986, MAPA, Agricultural Advisory Service Publica-
tions, Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, NIPO:
253-86-034-2, ISBN: 84-341-0529-2, p. 13.

3.5
Controlling varroasis and other related diseases must
continue to be one of the priority tasks of the sector. It is there-
fore important for this Regulation to provide for part-financing
of this measure and for a genuine veterinary policy to control
bee diseases to be implemented by the relevant Community
institutions.

C 112/116

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.4.2004

A number of Committee opinions (1) have already
3.6
pointed to the need for the proposed regulation to refer to the
movement of honey in the internal market and other aspects
relating to the world honey market. The Commission should
lay down quality standards for honey produced in the European
Union and encourage the consumption of high-quality Euro-
pean honey under internal promotion policy and by using the
PDOs, PGIs and TSGs. Furthermore, as the Commission recog-
nises in its report, account should be taken of the extremely
important consequences for the honey market of China's entry
into the WTO, as well as plans to review existing preferential
agreements and even draw up new ones. These agreements are
permanent instruments of free trade policy in the world market
and cause unfair competition and lower producer prices and
incomes, to the detriment of European producers.

and the part-financing percentage laid down in this Regulation
need to be increased.

3.11
The Committee points to the need for the Member
States to carry out an in-depth study of the structure of the
sector. This study, which will be submitted annually by the
Member States to the Commission as part of the three-yearly
national programmes and will cover production, marketing and
price formation, is an essential tool for providing statistics on
the changing face of beekeeping in the European Union.

In order to raise awareness among young people,

in
3.12
particular,
the
Committee believes that the proposal's priority objectives must
include vocational training programmes for young beekeepers.

job opportunities

in beekeeping,

about

3.7
The Committee wishes to point out that quality control
measures for honey have proved to be effective and should
therefore be stepped up, both for imported honey and honey
produced in the EU (analysis of floral origin and residues).
These quality control measures, which are already one of the
few stabilising factors in the market, are even more important
in the light of the new Directive on labelling (2), this being,
moreover, the only way of distinguishing Community honey
from imported honey. The EESC believes that for all these
reasons the honey analyses measure should not be abolished, as
proposed by the Commission. The EESC therefore proposes
either leaving the title of the Council Regulation as it is or
to improve production and
changing it
marketing in the field of beekeeping’.

‘On actions

to:

3.8
The EESC believes it would be a good idea to strengthen
the principle of cooperation between the competent authorities
in the Member States and representative organisations and
cooperatives in the beekeeping sector, as this will help improve
the way in which programmes are managed and ensure that
they are administered transparently.

3.9
In view of the contribution of beekeeping to rural devel-
opment and maintaining the ecological balance, the Committee
believes that it needs to be afforded higher levels of support
and protection, as existing aid under Regulation (EC) No.
1221/97 is not sufficient to guarantee the profitability of bee
farms or prevent the disappearance of professional beekeeping.

3.10
The EESC stresses the importance of aid granted under
Regulation (EC) 1221/97 in terms of developing the sector and
boosting the number of professionals working in it, both of
which are essential to achieving a multifunctional European
agriculture. Despite the budgetary restrictions which the
Commission itself recognises, both the total amount allocated

(1) Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for
a Council Regulation (EC) laying down general rules for theapplica-
tion of measures to improve the production and marketing of
honey. OJ C 206 of 7.7.1997, p. 60.

(2) Council Directive 2001/110/EC of 20 December 2001 relating to

honey. OJ L 10, 12.1.2002, p. 47-52.

4. Specific comments

The Committee welcomes the Commission's proposal to
4.1
to all beekeeping products.
extend actions
However,
it also points out that calls by the Council of the
European Union (3) to significantly improve the proposals put
forward by the Commission have thus far been ignored.

in the sector

to meet

the needs of

4.2
The EESC is in favour of tripling, at least, the total
amount of aid (currently EUR 16.5 million for the EU of 15)
the sector and proposes
in order
increasing the percentage of financing covered by the EAGGF
Guarantee Section to at least 75 % of expenditure. Moreover,
the Committee believes it is essential for the budget to be
increased in view of imminent EU enlargement. The next enlar-
gement in May 2004 is the sixth and most important enlarge-
ment
the number of new members. Because
beekeeping is such an important agricultural sector in the
accession countries, the number of hives in Europe is expected
to rise by 30 %. The existing budget would therefore fall far
short of meeting the demands of an EU of 25.

in terms of

The Committee believes it is important for a European
4.3
observatory to be set up with the 2 % of the budget that the
Regulation allocates for carrying out joint actions drawn up
jointly by the Commission and sector representatives, in line
with the principle of cooperation laid down in the Regulation
itself.

The EESC points out that Community legislation (4) lays
4.4
down that, as of 1 January 2005, the traceability of food must
be ensured in the production and processing stages. Aid should
therefore be provided to cover expenditure in this area and
ensure that products are of a high quality.

(3) 2410th meeting of the Agriculture Council, Brussels, 18 February

2004

(4) Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 28 January 2002; OJ L 31 of 1.2.2002, p. 1-24.

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/117

varroasis and other bee diseases (account must also be taken of
the emergence of new diseases) to offset the high cost of veter-
inary medicines.

4.9
The EESC believes it is also necessary to introduce a
pollination premium to reflect the environmental contribution
of bees in terms of maintaining biodiversity and the natural
environment and an annual compensatory premium to offset
income lost due to the fact that there is no Community prefer-
ence in the European beekeeping sector.

4.10
The Committee believes that the proposed Regulation
will do what its title suggests and urgently address the promo-
tion and marketing of high-quality honey and consumer
protection, by including measures to promote joint marketing,
investment
and
measures to promote beekeeping products in general. It would
therefore be a very good idea for this Regulation to retain the
honey analyses measure, as it is a fundamental and strategic
tool
for promoting European beekeeping products and for
protecting food quality and safety for consumers.

in packaging and classification centres,

In order to improve the instrument for providing statis-
4.11
tical data on the structure of the beekeeping sector, the EESC
calls for Commission support and recommends setting up
national observatories in the Member States in cooperation
with producers' organisations. The main task of these observa-
in the internal
tories would be to monitor prices at source,
market and across borders, update production costs (i.e. fixed
and variable costs of bee farms) and assess the inventory of
national hives, marketing structures and packaging costs.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH

4.5
The EESC has serious reservations about the Commis-
sion's proposal for national programmes to be drawn up every
three years as, while this could be simpler in administrative
terms for the Member States, it would complicate the necessary
annual presentation and review of national programmes. This
would be a major disincentive to using such aid and would
also increase the administrative problems currently experienced
in some EU Member States. This in turn would have a detri-
mental impact on European beekeepers who already complain
that
in some Member States efforts are concentrated on
measures that do not benefit them directly.

4.6
The Committee recalls that available funds are distrib-
uted annually on the basis of the Member States' estimates of
expenditure and the number of hives. The EESC supports the
idea of three-yearly national programmes, providing that they
are subject to an annual review. This review must coincide
with the distribution of funds, as has been the case until now,
and be accompanied by mechanisms for reallocating funds that
certain Member States are unlikely to be able to spend to other
Member States, during each EAFFG financial year.

4.7
The EESC welcomes the European Parliament's resolu-
tion (1) of 9 October 2003 and is in favour of implementing
the decline in the bee population and
measures to halt
promote its immediate recovery.
therefore welcomes the
measures to support the restocking of hives in the Community
proposed by the Commission, as this is an explicit recognition
of the gravity of this problem.

It

4.8
instruments,

In the EESC's view, there is a need for new support
funding for controlling

inter alia additional

Brussels, 1 April 2004

(1) Resolution on the difficulties faced by the European beekeeping

sector – Reference: RSP/2003/2569