Brussels, 26/03/2009 (Agence Europe) - In Strasbourg on Thursday 26 March 2009, the European Parliament adopted by a wide majority (425 to 71 with 62 abstentions) a report by Czes³aw Adam Siekierski (EPP-ED, Poland), backing the continuation of the EU programme to donate food to the needy within the EU itself. The MEPs agreed with the broad thrust of the European Commission's initial proposal, including the legal basis (which is being challenged at the Council). The two main changes made by the plenary are: 1) the EP is calling for the EU budget to continue to fund the programme 100%; and 2) for the food distributed to the poor to only come from countries in the EU. The EP threw out a PES amendment calling for EU funding also to cover the costs of distributing the food, like transport and storage charges (the proposal only mentions transport costs).
During the debate, Czes³aw Adam Siekierski said he backed the Commission's idea of increasing EU funding by two-thirds, saying it should rise from €305 million in 2008 to €500 million in 2009. The rapporteur repeated the argument that co-funding of some of this expenditure by EU member states, as suggested by the Commission, could actually prevent some countries (the ones facing the greatest problems) from being able to participate. He defended the EP amendments, explaining that the food handouts should be fresh, local food from EU countries as this would help stimulate demand and ensure the food was of high quality. The rapporteur pointed out that the Council's legal department has challenged the legal basis suggested by the Commission but the EP backs the Commission's idea, namely using Article 27 of the EU Treaty (agriculture). Siekierski said he hoped the issue would be decided upon at the Council in May or June this year.
Mariann Fischer Boel, EU Agriculture Commissioner, welcomed the way the report says that the programme should remain part of the CAP at a time when some people claim that food is not related to farming in any way. She defended the idea of getting national authorities to co-fund it (in order, she explained, to make countries more responsible for managing funding and to ensure that loans genuinely meet the real needs of individuals) but said she agreed with the EP that they must not find themselves in a situation where member states have to withdraw from the programme, which is why there was a phasing-in of the co-funding. According to the draft legislation, EU countries would provide 25% of the funding in 2010-2012 and 50% in 2013-2015.
Agreeing that the priority should go to fresh, local products, Fischer Boel said that products made outside the EU should not be ruled out because the EU runs the risk of being accused of protectionism. The commissioner therefore rejected the EP's idea that all the food should come from the EU. The Commission has explained that the programme provides food to more than 13 million poor people in the EU (19 EU member states are involved), said Fischer Boel, stating that the programme had provided its worth and should now be expanded and made permanent.
Most of the representatives of the political groups backed the report, including Agnes Schierhuber (EPP-ED, Germany) and María Isabel Salinas García (PES, Spain). Only Willem Schuth (ALDE, Germany) said that his group had had trouble reaching agreement. Some of his colleagues disagree with the report because they want the legal basis to be Article 308 (social policy) rather than Article 37 (harking back to the time when there were food mountains to dispose of, commented Schuth). Moreover, some members of the EPP-ED from countries not involved in the EU programme, like Struan Stevenson of the UK and Christa Klass of Germany, argued that giving food to the poor should be removed from the CAP and become a national welfare policy instead. They said that EU funding should definitely not fund the entirety of the programme.
Liberal amendments ruled out
The five amendments tabled by the ALDE Group (to change the legal basis to Article 308 from Article 37) were ruled inadmissible under Article 35.5 of the EP rules of procedure whereby amendments to amend the legal basis of legislation are not allowed if they are presented in plenary without the validity or pertinence of the legal basis in question having been challenged by the relevant committee or the legal affairs committee. For the case in point, the EP's agriculture committee rejected the five amendments by a large majority and the debate is therefore deemed to be closed. The only solution left for those who disagree is to vote against the entire report. (L.C./transl.fl)