Brussels, 03/05/2007 (Agence Europe) - The representatives of the Association of European Winegrowing Regions (AREV) rallied together in Stuttgart (Germany) on 20-23 April against the European Commission's proposed reform of the common market organisation (CMO) for wine. They handed their final resolution on reform of the sector to Agriculture Commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel, and to German Agriculture Minister Horst Seehofer, who chairs the work of the EU Council. The Commission, which is to adopt its legislative proposals on 4 July this year, is invited to correct the inconsistencies of its communication of 22 June 2006 and to go back on its “disastrous” idea of liberalising planting. AREV represents the interests of 65 winegrowing regions from 15 European countries and claims to be the spokesman for the very large majority of European wine officials. The meeting in Stuttgart brought together 120 delegates from winegrowing regions stretching from the Azores to the Black Sea.
According to its resolution, AREV supports the Commission in its efforts to reform the EU's winegrowing market and to adjust it to the requirements of competitiveness in order to compete with the new operators in the world. It calls for an offensive and consistent policy to be set in place to ensure that wine producers and all those working in that sector of the market have a legal framework that will provide security in the long term. AREV stresses that the many specific features of the winegrowing sector and market make it necessary to have a specific market organisation. The instruments of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), especially the uncoupling of aid, do not meet the requirements of a dynamic sector such as wine production, AREV argues, hoping, moreover, that the different regions and regional professional organisations will have sufficient margin of manoeuvre to manage their winegrowing policies correctly.
Liberalisation of planting: AREV is opposed to the liberalisation of planting vines in Europe as, it believes, it would lead to those vineyards that are difficult to exploit being massively abandoned and relocated in more favourable areas.
Grubbing: AREV is opposed to the massive grubbing or pulling up of planted surface areas. Grubbing should only be used where vineyards produce only low quality wine with no market outlets. It must also be decided by the winegrower. Also, the financing of this measure should not be foreseen in the national budget earmarked for the future CMO. AREV also wants to wait until it has exact information on surface areas effectively planted and on action for pulling up unlawful plantations.
Distillation: AREV admits that crisis distillation no longer meets its initial function as a crisis-management instrument. It does, however, demand that subsidies for the distillation of sub-products (must in particular) be maintained as they help to protect the wine market against fraud and are an important measure for the environment. AREV is also in favour of being able to eliminate sub-products by controlled composting (that already exists in some member states). Subsidies with a view to the distillation of potable alcohol can be gradually phased out over several years.
Observatory: In their resolution, AREV members call for the creation of a European winegrowing observatory responsible for monitoring developments in planted areas, production, marketing and consumption, as well as for assessing the socio-economic consequences of winegrowing on rural life. This observatory would allow crises threatening the European market to be prevented.
Quality wines: AREV does not agree with the Commission's proposal to review the presentation of the table wine category, stressing that such changes could weaken the position of quality wines that already have a geographical indication. The levelling and uniformisation of wine recommended by the Commission after the fashion of New World practices “are not a forward-looking solution for Europe”, they say. AREV recalls that vineyards fashion the landscape and are a major element in rural cultural life, and that the economic importance of winegrowing goes far beyond just the proceeds from wine sales.
Minimum degree: AREV considers that suppression of the minimum natural alcoholic strength as delivered at harvest is detrimental to the quality of wine.
Imported must: AREV refuses the possibility of importing and vinifying must from third countries to make wine in Europe. It is also opposed to the blending of third country wines with EU wines.
WTO: AREV supports the opening of markets in the world, saying that, as “absolute leader in the wine sector, the EU (…) must above all combat customs barriers, tax disadvantages and administrative protectionism”. It must also protect, in Europe and in third countries, the geographical indications and the names of origin with the creation of a multilateral register for wines and spirits in the context of WTO talks and TRIPs agreements (WTO agreements on intellectual property rights). (lc)