Brussels, 16/12/2013 (Agence Europe) - Eligibility of the products, the member states' role in the procedures, co-funding rate, earmarked budget: these were the main subjects discussed by the agriculture ministers of the EU on Monday 16 December at an initial table round on the proposals to revise the EU strategy to promote the agricultural products of the EU. The examination of the dossier will continue under the Greek Presidency in the first half of 2014.
Commissioner Dacian Ciolos reminded the Council that the agri-food sector of the EU is one of enormous potential: 18% of global exports (€110 billion), 20% of global imports. Additionally, the demand is there: by 2050, in the ASEAN zone; an increase in imports by more than €17 billion a year is noted. Between now and 2027, if there is an agreement with the United States, European exports of agricultural products will rise by 15% (€1.7 billion year), plus 45% for processed products (€13.4 billion).
The Commission forecasts a gradual but significant increase in expenditure. European aid will rise from €61 million in the 2013 budget to €200 million in 2020. The aims are to set in place a European promotion strategy which will improve the targeting of promotion actions: an increase in promotion programmes targeting third countries, and an increase in programmes presented by entities made up of several member states (for both of these categories, a higher co-funding rate has been proposed: 60%).
The proposal opens out the scope of application of the measures with: an increase in the beneficiaries (as well as professional and inter-professional organisations), producer organisations may now also be eligible: - an increase in eligible products (on top of agricultural products, processed agri-food products will now also be eligible for the European quality systems, such as pasta, chocolate and patisserie products); subject to certain conditions, a reference to the origin and brand names of the products will now be possible. n addition, administrative procedures will be simplified and made shorter, with a selection of programmes in one single stage at the Commission, instead of two stages as currently (the member state, then the European Commission). The management of programmes put together by operators of more than one member state will now take place solely at the Commission level. This “one-stop shop” at the Commission will make it much easier to put these programmes together. Given the fact that the Commission alone will examine the proposals, the option of national co-funding will disappear under the proposal. The part regarding management by the Commission will be delegated to an executive agency of the Commission, which already exists. This more ambitious and better-targeted promotion policy should allow the EU to promote its many competitive assets, to increase its market share and allow our agri-food industry to hold onto its important position within the economy and global trade, Ciolos concluded.
Spain welcomed certain elements of the proposal: inclusion of brand names, increased importance given to promotion in third countries, administrative simplification and increase in the budget.
Scope of application. Portugal welcome the inclusion of producer organisations and the option to refer to the origin and brand name of the products. The proposal could be improved further, it said. Sectors such as rice should not be excluded (Ciolos explained that rice would be covered), and promotion within the internal market should be taken into account, added Portugal. Denmark feels that too much emphasis is placed on products with geographical indications. There are other products, we need to find a balance, said the Danish delegation. We can promote the very high standards on organics, animal welfare and food safety, the country pointed out. Italy called for fishing and aquaculture products to be included. Latvia called for the inclusion of processed products without protected denominations (POA and PGI) and bread.
The United Kingdom argued in favour of maximising export opportunities to third countries and emerging countries (China, Brazil and India).
Germany feels that the promotion measures should target third countries only.
Finland argued for the range of products to be extended and for the programme to be opened up to new players. The country called for the quality concept to be expanded beyond EU protected denominations (environment, health, animal welfare, traceability, hygiene). Austria said that promotion within the internal market should not be forgotten.
Role of the countries. The member states should keep the power to intervene in the selection of the programmes, Portugal stressed. Greece said that the countries should be able to play their own role in the framework of setting the strategy. The Czech Republic criticised the administrative role, which would be restricted for the member states as regards decisions on the programmes. Spain expressed concern at countries' exclusion from involvement in selecting the programmes. Bulgaria also opposed the fact that the countries would be excluded from the procedure of selecting the programmes.
Greater emphasis should be placed on products from island regions, said Malta.
Co-funding. Greece, the Czech Republic and Cyprus protested against the removal of the national funding. The Finnish Minister said he did not agree that the countries should not be able to participate in the funding of the programmes. Slovenia also called for co-funding by the countries to be kept in place. Latvia said that the member states should be able to participate in the programmes with a co-funding share, because it is too high a burden for SMEs. Germany called for the EU's co-funding rate to remain at 50%. Bulgaria welcomed the increase in EU co-funding from 50% to 60%. Cyprus said that the Community share could be increased.
Budget. Sweden said it did not fully understand the proposed budget increases. It is the market players who should assume these budgets, it said. The United Kingdom said that like Sweden, it has concerns as to the existence of sufficient proof to justify an increase in expenditure, particularly for actions in the internal market. Finland is cautious over the increase in credits.
The earmarked financial resources are inadequate given the level of ambition of the programme, said the Italian Minister, who referred to the importance of quality products. Malta pleaded in favour of more financial resources than those available today.
Bulgaria, Cyprus and Slovenia, amongst others, welcomed the progressive increase of the budget earmarked for promotion purposes.
Additionally, Cyprus expressed hopes that it would be possible to conclude on this dossier before the European Parliament elections. (LC/transl.fl)