Brussels, 22/03/2007 (Agence Europe) - The public hearing on reform in the fresh and processed fruit and vegetables sector on Wednesday 21 March at the parliamentary agricultural committee illustrated a consensus among participants about the importance of strengthening producer organisations and competitiveness in the sector, as well as maintaining a certain flexibility in aid to take into account the different products and regional specificities. MEPs were, however, divided about the scale of uncoupling aid (breaking link between bonus and production levels) and crisis management mechanisms.
At the beginning of the year the European Commission adopted a radical draft reform for the fruit and vegetables sector: to strengthen and simplify the system in favour of producer organisations; - to integrate all existing aid for processed products in a single payment system (without excluding payment eligibility for this payment for surfaces growing fruit and vegetables); toughening up the CMO environmental chapter and encouraging fruit and vegetable consumption in respect of WHO nutritional recommendations (EUROPE 9351 on details of the proposal).
The EP rapporteur on the dossier, Isabel Salinas García (PES, Spain), said that she “agreed with the Commission's objectives, but not with its proposals”. She asked for more flexibility in the implementation of uncoupling by leaving it up to the countries that want to apply total uncoupling to do so, and allowing countries that want to gradually introduce the single payment also to do so. Ms Salinas García is afraid of abandoning aid for processing because the changeover to the single payment system endangers double-use production (fresh and processing, such as that for citrus fruit, tomatoes, grapes, pears and plums). She is proposing that member states are able to proceed to a partial uncoupling by replacing single payment with aid for surface area that is similar to aid to nuts. She is also recommending an increase from 4.1% to 6% in the Community commercial production ceiling for producer organisation operational funds and an increase of 50% to 60% in the Community contribution to these funds. For crisis management, the rapporteur calls for the setting up of a “Security Fund”, which all producers can use, whether they are producer organisation members or not and which will be funded equally by the Union, member states and producers. The rapporteur proposes the creation of a price observatory to help plan for crises.
Most speakers supported the rapporteur's aim to increase aid to producer organisations and help them have more weight in dealing with the big supermarket chains and third country competition. Tzanetos Karamichas, President of the Greek Confederation of Agricultural Cooperatives (PASEGES), said that only 13% of Greek producers are affiliated to producer organisations. He said that he was afraid that if aid for processing fell, there would be negative repercussions on the citrus fruit, tomato and fig sectors. Esther Herranz García (EPP-ED, Spain) said that increasing the aid ceiling by 5% to organisations would more realistically take into account budgetary constraints. Hans van Hes, President of the COPA-COGECA fruit and vegetable committee was, like others, concerned about the Commission's aim to dedicate at least 20% of spending from operational programmes on environmental measures. Eduard Baamonde, the director general of the Spanish Confederation of Agricultural Cooperatives, warned against what he called the “fetters” into which very heterogeneous sectors were supposed to go.
Apart from Luis Alequer from the Portuguese Producers Confederation, who supported a total uncoupling of production aid, to give producers real freedom of choice and help diversify production, most participants called for a more flexible approach, with transition periods or specific aid systems according to a given situation. Although experts and MEPs agreed on the need to improve crisis management, their opinions were rather divided about what were the best instruments to achieve this aim. Claude Rehlinger, the president of the national apple section (France), raised the problem of competition from low price fruit and vegetables imported from third countries, and Chinese products (apples and tomatoes) coming onto the market soon. He appealed for a harmonisation of social and phytosanitary standards in third countries, tougher import health controls and the maintaining of the Community import certificate system. Several speakers asked for solutions to be adapted to producers from new member states, which have benefited from less support and where producer organisations are struggling to develop in countries that got rid of the old socialist cooperatives.
Poland, which accounts for less than 1% of producer organisation members, is “excluded” from the Commission's proposal while, out of the 10 million tonnes produced in Europe, 2.5 million are produced by Polish farmers, said Bodgan Golik (PES, Poland). Bozena Nosecka, of the agro-economic and food economy institute in Warsaw, supported the proposal on specific subsidies for soft fruit, put forward by Ms Salinas Garcia, saying that the single payment system could destabilise the Polish sector that makes up 50% of Community production. According to the rapporteur, the financial support, amounting to €20 million per year, would be the only budgetary increase compared to the Commission's proposal. (lc)