Brussels, 16/02/2016 (Agence Europe) - EU agriculture ministers, meeting on Monday 15 February, were updated by the European Commission on the state of progress on issues related to international trade agreements.
A considerable number of free-trade agreements have been concluded recently, with Ukraine, Morocco, Western Africa, the Southern African Development Community, Canada and Vietnam, for example. Further bilateral and regional negotiations are continuing or are in the pipeline, with, for example, the United States, Mercosur, India, China (on geographical indications) and Japan.
At the Agriculture Council, Italy argued strongly that the EU agriculture sector must not be sacrificed in these trade negotiations. After expressing concerns over the situation of Italian tomato growers (facing competition from Moroccan tomatoes) and olive oil producers (facing competition from Tunisian olive oil), the Italian minister criticised the concessions granted to Vietnam on rice (tariff rate of zero). Italy says that the defence of geographical indications must be an offensive issue in trade negotiations, including in the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP).
France highlighted the need to protect vulnerable sectors and not to grant too many concessions, particularly to the Americans on tariffs. France rejects any “early harvest” on TTIP. Poland also warned against an overly swift agreement (as early as 2016) on TTIP.
Ireland sounded a warning on the consequences for the beef sector of a trade agreement with Mercosur.
Several countries expressed pleasure that the Commission will submit a report around summer time on the cumulative effects of the trade agreements negotiated.
Sweden, the United Kingdom and Denmark stressed the expected benefits of the trade deals negotiated by the EU, in particular with the United States and Japan.
Agriculture Commissioner Phil Hogan stated that he would not back a swift but unsound outcome on TTIP.
Elsewhere, Italy said that the WTO agreement concluded in Nairobi in December which put an end to export refunds was an important decision while Poland felt this agreement to be disappointing. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)