Brussels, 10/03/2005 (Agence Europe) - The European Parliament has launched a scathing attack on proposals to reform the common market organisation (CMO) for sugar, by adopting a resolution tabled by Joseph Daul (EPP-ED, France) and Jean-Claude Fruteau (PES, France) on behalf of the committee on agriculture, in Strasbourg on Thursday (326 votes in favour, 68 against and 24 abstentions). The EP rejected amendments which were more in favour of the Commission's ideas, tabled by the Dutch Socialist Margrietus van den Berg, and thus confirmed its committee's position (EUROPE of 24 February, p.16).
As well as its well-known opposition to the proposed reductions in prices and quotas, the Parliament rejects the proposal of increasing isoglucose quotas, “a measure which would mean reducing sugar quotas even more”. It also criticises the fact that the issue of quota ownership has not been resolved and calls on the Commission to make sure that quotas are held individually. The MEPs also call on the Commission to submit accompanying measures as a matter of urgency to help the ACP countries, which are highly dependent on sugar exports to the EU, to boost their competitiveness.
With a couple of exceptions, all the MEPs reiterated the same arguments in favour of a more gradual reform which are also less harsh on the producers of cane sugar in the islands or beet producers from Portugal and Poland alike. These arguments held no sway with the Commissioner for Agriculture, who wants an “ambitious reform” and is opposed to anything that might slow down its application.
Mr Daul (UMP) emphasised the need to ensure that there remains in place a market management system with a safety net and his hopes that the Commission will carry out an in-depth study into the reasons behind a surplus of 850,000 tonnes last year. He fired a warning shot against “agricultural liberalisation whatever the cost”, which he described as “dogmatism which can only lead to high drama”. Mr Fruteau acknowledged that the reform is “necessary and indispensable”, but pleaded in favour of a well-balanced approach taking account of the futures of the men and women working in this sector. Like many of the other MEPs, he stressed the importance of not allowing standards of living to fall. The reduction of prices and quotas must go hand in hand with a compensation mechanism and the funding of the restructuring of the sector. Mr Fruteau also defended the concept of adapting the “Everything But Arms” initiative to guarantee some regulation of sugar flows.
German Christian Democrat Albert Dess also pleaded for a cautious approach, stating that no fewer than 350,000 agricultural holdings and 230 sugar refineries are involved in this reform. The CSU MEP also rejected the argument that it lies in consumers' interests: the price of bread has risen steadily even though cereals prices have fallen by two thirds over the last forty years, he said. With this reform, “in five years you will have to take further measures”, predicted German Green Friedrich Graefe zu Baringdorf, who said that there was no point in taking action over prices because the multinationals will simply use the least-developed countries to transfer their sugar to the European market. He spoke out in favour of a CMO which is fair to Europe's farmers and to the ACP producers who are observing the social and ecological criteria and for the removal of the export subsidies enjoyed by sugar. Liam Aylward of Ireland (UEN) defended the idea of keeping in place beet production directed towards bioethanol production. Several MEPs from Poland (including the independent Jan Masiel), Hungary and the Czech Republic criticised the rigour of the proposed reform, pointing out that their farmers have already made huge efforts. “We must avoid the electric shock therapy approach”, said Hungarian Socialist Csaba Tabajdi, who underlined the “very serious consequences” to be borne by Polish and Hungarian isoglucose producers if the EPP-ED amendment was adopted.
Of the very few MEPs actually in favour of the reform proposed by the Commission, Mr van den Berg said that the EBA initiative should not become “Everything But Arms And Sugar”. The Commission's approach is also the right one for British Labour member David Martin, who feels that the committee on agriculture's proposals only give false hope to producers.
The cuts proposed by the Commission (33% less for price and 2.8 million tonnes less for quota) are “the bare minimum” to arrive at a well-balanced market and observe international obligations, said Commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel, adding that the compensation offered is enough. She feels that the institutions must stand firm from the word go and not send out the wrong signals to producers. She rejected any idea of a mid-term review or extra delays before the reform or when it is implemented. “Restructuring should ensure the long-term viability of the sector”, she said, stressing that it is no longer possible to have a European price three times higher than world sugar prices. On quotas and how they are allocated, they are essential for the restructuring because they help to identify the regions which are best for production, whilst the others can benefit from the means to invest in more sustainable activities. “The current regime is no guarantor of employment”, Fischer-Boel pointed out, adding that 17,000 jobs have been lost in the last decade and that a further 50,000 would go by 2012. The Commission does not feel that it should turn its back on the “Everything But Arms” initiative just as it is trying to convince the other industrialised countries to open up their markets to products from the least developed countries.