The European Parliament

- having regard to the communication of the Commission to

the Council on the development and future of the CAP

(COM(91) 0100 - C3-0085/91),

- having regard to the communication of the Commission to

the Council and the European Parliament on the development

and future of the CAP (COM(91) 0258 - C3-0303/91),

- having regard to the motions for resolutions by:

- Mr Martinez on behalf of the Technical Group of the

European Right on the Common Agricultural Policy (B3-

1860/90),

- Mr Moretti on the introduction of a Community programme

to assist small farms and other undertakings operating

in the hill and mountain farming sector (B3-2167/90),

- Mrs Muscardini, Mr Mazzone, Mr Fini and Mr Rauti on an

aid plan for agriculture (B3-0171/91),

- Mr Staes on the threat to the countryside (B3-0520/91),

- Mr Kostopoulos on the review of the Common Agricultural

Policy

(B3-0531/91),

- Mrs Randzio-Plath on the impact of reform of the Common

Agricultural Policy on external trade (B3-1097/91),

- Mr Mottola on the serious adverse effects for tobacco

growing of Regulation (EEC) No 1413/91 (B3-1105/91),

- having regard to its resolution of 11 October 1990 on the

stage reached in the multilateral trade negotiations

within the Uruguay Round of GATT,

- having regard to its resolution of 14 December 1990 on the

Uruguay Round of GATT,

- having regard to the negotiations on the European Economic

Area and the Association Agreements with Poland, Hungary

and Czechoslovakia,

- having regard to the conclusions of the OECD Ministerial

Conference of June 1991, and more precisely the

recommendation concerning the need to conclude the Uruguay

Round before the end of 1991,

- having regard to the conclusions of the conference of the

leading industrialized countries, the Group of Seven, held

in London in June 1991, as well as the informal meeting

of EEC trade ministers on 12 October 1991,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on

Agriculture, Fisheries and Rural Development and the

opinions of the Committee on External Economic Relations,

the Committee on Social Affairs, Employment and the

Working Environment, the Committee on Regional Policy and

Regional Planning and the Committee on Development and

Cooperation (A3-0342/91),

A. whereas an efficient and competitive Community

agriculture, which respects the environment, cannot be

sustained by discrimination on grounds of farm size,

B. whereas a fundamental reform of the CAP is extremely

necessary and urgent in view of the present problems

confronting agriculture,

C. whereas the Commission's proposals should be considered

as the first step towards a fundamental reform of the CAP,

D. whereas the Community must guard against the introduction

of bureaucratic measures which would be hard to apply and

harder still to monitor and control,

E. unwilling to play any part in a reform of agricultural

policy that will make the whole system even more

complicated, more inefficient, more susceptible to fraud,

more bureaucratic and much more expensive for ordinary

people, who are expected to contribute both as taxpayers

and as consumers,

F. whereas the common agricultural policy pursued hitherto

has had an undesirable impact on the environment and

public health among other things, and whereas the

Commission has acknowledged this fact without reservation

in its communication,

G. wholeheartedly endorsing an agricultural reform that

simultaneously benefits the environment, offers a prospect

of lower overall expenditure on the common agricultural

policy and paves the way for a new GATT agreement,

H. whereas the present price structure of the common

agricultural policy encourages food production with little

concern for the rural environment,

I. having regard to the need for an active land use policy

that recognizes the interaction between agriculture and

the environment and appropriately rewards farmers for

their indispensable contribution to maintaining and

preserving the countryside,

J. pointing out that consumers are entitled to buy reasonably

priced good quality food that is not contaminated by

pesticide residues or irradiated, making it impossible to

judge how fresh it really is,

K. whereas agriculture must remain an economic, commercial

and social asset of vital importance to the Community, and

whereas it is also an essential activity for the

preservation of a meaningful lifestyle in less-favoured

regions and for the protection of the environment,

1. Reiterates its firm belief that the common agricultural

policy must be reformed and improved through the

correction of its imbalances and inequalities, to respond

to the enormous pressure of budgetary, environmental and

external trade interests now facing the agricultural

sector, with a view to guaranteeing an equitable standard

of living for farmers in accordance with the Treaty,

although the fundamental principles of a single market,

Community preference and financial solidarity must be

respected; emphasizes that this reform must necessarily

reduce regional inequalities and that priority must be

given to the principle of economic and social cohesion;

2. Stresses that reform of the common agricultural policy

will be essential not only to conform with a GATT

settlement and to ensure the more efficient use of

budgetary resources but also to provide a positive future

for Community agriculture;

3. Supports the need for fair distribution of aid granted

through the common agricultural policy, since no reform

could be acceptable otherwise; stresses that any reform

of the common agricultural policy must aim for a European

agriculture which is sustainable in environmental terms

and from the point of view of regional and social

development; at the same time European agriculture also

needs to be efficient both as regards the international

situation in this sector and as regards developments in

other sectors of the economy; considers that the common

agricultural policy should recognize the multiple roles

of farmers as cultivators, stewards of the environment and

dynamic agents of rural life;

4. Calls for the progressive reallocation of budgetary

appropriations hitherto used for organizations of the

market and export refunds to measures designed to

encourage extensive farming;

5. Takes the view that the Commission proposals constitute

a first step in the direction of a fundamental reform of

the CAP but that

(a) the Commission proposals should be examined as to

their effects on

- farm incomes and employment

- encouraging young people to take up farming,

- the family structure of farming,

- market stability,

- less-favoured regions, mountain regions or regions

with specific disadvantages, and regional

employment,

- environmental protection,

- rural development and physical planning,

- the EC budget,

- international trade relations in an increasingly

competitive international environment,

- the position of the developing countries and the

developments in Eastern Europe,

- the economic and social situation of farmers;

- employment of all those working in the upstream and

downstream sectors relating to agriculture over the

next five years,

(b) the proposals to reduce prices, provide direct support

and restrict production are an important contribution

towards restoring balance on the market for

agricultural products and restoring a sound basis for

farmers' incomes;

(c) the cornerstone of economically responsible

agriculture is an efficient marketing and sales

policy, backed up by a policy of direct income support

to offset the social and ecological disadvantages;

(d) the income support measures introduced by the reform

should be regarded as an integral and permanent part

of the organization of the market, understood and

interpreted as an element of socio-environmental

balance in the Community and a factor of internal

cohesion;

(e) farmers should be compensated for losses due to the

proposed price cuts by direct income transfers, as

long as they are consistent with GATT rules;

6. Calls for the reform to be carried out in cooperation with

the farmers affected and for a phased introduction of the

new market regulation rules;

7. Regrets that the Commission has excluded from its reform

proposals a whole range of products, in particular

products from the Mediterranean region and sugar;

8. Regards the task of overcoming the existing surpluses and

adapting agricultural production to disposal capacity as

a significant aim of the reform of the common agricultural

policy;

9. Considers that the reform of the CAP should, both for

internal and external reasons, be based on the fundamental

objective of ensuring that the Community possesses an

effective and adequate agricultural sector which,

incorporating various types and sizes of farm, produces

food and renewable raw materials in accordance with the

marketing opportunities offered by the internal and

external markets and is compatible with the conservation,

upkeep and development of the environment and the rural

landscape; regards stabilization of farmers' incomes as

equally important;

10. Is convinced that

(a) productive and environmentally acceptable agriculture

which respects different territorial needs in terms

of the safeguarding of economic and social

development, particularly in rural areas, will

continue to need external protection in accordance

with GATT agreements;

(b) the extent of external protection should be determined

so as to ensure, on the basis of an agreement in GATT

and the requisite additional bilateral agreements, a

balance between safeguarding Community agriculture and

related requirements in the field of environmental

protection and the interests of consumers on the one

hand, and the necessary liberalization of trade in

agricultural products on the other, with particular

reference to extending access to the Community market

for products from the developing countries and Eastern

Europe;

(c) an independent European farm price level above world

market levels is justified on the grounds of the

strictness of European environmental and production

standards;

11. Takes the view that, if carried out in isolation, neither

measures concerning quantities nor the use of prices as

an instrument will be able to provide a lasting solution

to the problem of surpluses;

12. Advocates therefore that surpluses be tackled by an

effective and balanced package of measures combining a

limitation of production and price management, which takes

due account of the specific conditions in individual

production sectors and regions, the relationship between

such sectors and the income requirements of farmers in

general and the family farm in particular, and contributes

to improving quality and strengthening the market and the

competitiveness of European agriculture;

13. Confirms the need to consider implementation of a policy

to safeguard and enhance the quality of Community

agricultural and food products as an integral part of the

reform;

14. Believes there is a need for effective adaptation to

reduce the adverse effects on the agricultural marketing

mechanism;

15. Calls for the quantitative restrictions to be based on

realistic internal and external disposal opportunities and

for positive development of market prices to be allowed;

16. Considers that more environment-friendly farming should

be further encouraged by direct payments to farmers, but

stresses that this must be decoupled from production and

tied to clear environmental goals which could be set at

local levels where appropriate;

17. Considers that the income losses to farmers arising from

the price reductions and the quantitative restrictions

should be compensated for in full;

18. Considers that any compensatory payments should be made

only to:

- those farms which participate in quantitative

restrictions;

- small farms;

- farms already practising a form of extensive production;

- farms falling within the categories specified in

mountain areas and less favoured areas;

19. Believes, however, that if the compensatory payment is not

sufficient to encourage participation in measures to

restrict production - for example if it is decided to

reduce the prices of market regulation products much less

than provided for in the Commission proposal - a system

of co-responsibility levies (market control contributions)

should be introduced, not only for cereals but also for

other arable market regulation products, from which arable

farmers would be exempt if they participate in the

production control programme;

20. Considers that farmers should be encouraged to draw up an

annual balance of their use of mineral products so as to

promote rational use of such products;

21. Urges that regulations limiting nitrogen input into the

soil should also include nitrogen input from animal

excrement (manure, dung);

22. Recognizes that farmers should be rewarded for the public

good they provide (such as maintenance of the environment)

for which there is no market;

23. Takes the view that measures to restrict production should

create sufficient balance on the European market for

agricultural products so that, after completion of the

measures envisaged, public intervention should be the last

resort;

24. Takes as its basis the level of production which

guarantees food supplies, takes account of traditional

exports and makes possible food aid in a manner which is

economically and environmentally sustainable;

25. Considers that market forces should play a greater part

in agricultural policy, and that the principles of the

internal market should apply to this area too;

26. Is of the opinion that an end should be put to the

practice of dumping Community agricultural products on the

world market to the detriment of, especially, the

developing countries; urges the Commission, therefore, to

present rapidly proposals for a reform in the sugar sector

as proposed on numerous occasions by the European

Parliament;

27. Points out that measures to contain production must,

however, provide the necessary income guarantees for

potentially viable farms, and must in some way be subject

to their capacity and their ability to produce

competitively in the medium to long term;

28. Calls for the hectare aid for arable farming proposed by

the Commission and the premiums for extensive livestock

production to compensate for a reduction in the support

prices and for these payments to be long term in nature

and consolidated in the EAGGF Guarantee Section such that

farmers can rely on them; also takes the view that these

direct forms of aid should not be regarded as measures to

support production and should therefore not form part of

the measures to be phased out pursuant to GATT;

29. Takes the view that the Community must have an interest

in preventing the further isolation of agriculture from

the general increase in prosperity by ensuring the

survival of an efficient and competitive Community

agriculture;

30. Stresses that any attempts at renationalization of the

common agricultural policy would have an adverse effect

on the growth and development of the poorer Member States,

and considers that genuine North-South regional solidarity

is necessary in order to complement the ideals of the

construction of Europe;

31. Considers that, in order to combat the desertification of

the less-favoured regions, it is necessary to preserve the

balance required for the viability of rural populations

through the release of funds to pay for work undertaken

to ensure preservation of the landscape and the

environment;

32. Considers that encouraging extensification, through the

payment of direct compensatory income aids, rather than

through price support, has the advantage that farm

subsidies really would go into the farmers' pockets and

thus help stabilize and upgrade rural life;

33. Advocates that land use in mountain areas and less-

favoured areas should in future be promoted by means of

higher compensatory payments within the meaning of

Directive 75/268/EEC;

34. Considers that livestock unit measures in mountain and

less-favoured areas should be tailored to the requirements

of environmentally sustainable agriculture in the area

concerned;

35. Takes the view that the reform of the common agricultural

policy should serve to preserve many forms and types of

efficient family farms and not lead to discrimination

against certain types and sizes of farms;

36. Calls for a clear distinction between extensification as

a means of reducing the pressure on the market and payment

for specific environment-related activities such as

afforestation and the upkeep of the countryside; believes

that agricultural measures designed to implement EC

environmental legislation, which serve the interests of

the Community as a whole, should be funded fully by the

Community budget; measures for achieving national

objectives should be funded from national budgets;

37. Supports the Commission's proposals to introduce measures

to improve support for small and medium-sized farms; is,

however, of the opinion that these measures should also

apply to farmers organized in producer groupings or

producer cooperatives;

38. Believes that a continuous process of structural

improvements in European agriculture is necessary to

safeguard its (international) competitive position, whilst

taking into account the appropriate social requirements

in terms of the environment, the landscape, social

development and regional variety;

39. Considers that one of the main objectives of the reform

should be to aid the installation of the new generation

of farmers; believes that the Community must guard aganst

measures which would make it more difficult for young

farmers to enter farming; is of the opinion that the

Commission's proposals for a structural improvement

through early retirement may substantially contribute to

the realization of this objective; insists that this early

retirement scheme must apply equally to farmers,

agricultural workers and women working on the farm;

40. Calls for a legal framework to ensure that there is no

further soil, water or air pollution, inter alia from

agriculture;

41. Calls for improvements in the basic economic conditions

for cultivation and use of renewable raw materials;

considers that the use of renewable raw materials should

be accepted as an alternative to set-aside;

42. Takes the view, however, that support for the cultivation

and use of renewable raw materials should not lead to

highly subsidized disposal facilities for agricultural

products which would be a burden on the budget for many

years to come; believes therefore that such support

measures should only be applied if there are realistic

economic prospects for the disposal of such products;

43. Therefore calls on the Commission to submit proposals for

the identification of forms of agricultural production for

non-food uses which may fulfil the conditions of having

such realistic economic prospects for disposal;

44. Believes that set-aside alone will not provide a lasting

solution to the problem of surpluses; is of the opinion

that the set-aside programme can only play a new role in

reducing agricultural production if the aid per hectare

is set at a sufficiently attractive level; is of the

opinion that land set aside should be integrated in the

environmental programmes and the programmes for

afforestation;

45. Is convinced that the reform of the common agricultural

policy must make a significant contribution to preserving

the stability of rural areas and the rural population and

to strengthening economic and social cohesion and to

reducing regional inequalities;

46. Takes the view, however, that structural change in

agriculture must also be accompanied by appropriate

structural, regional, social, environmental protection,

transport and planning policies;

47. Points out that in many instances in the areas of the

Community where a significant proportion of the working

population is engaged in agriculture there are no

resources available at the national level to satisfy

national co-financing of European structural measures,

with the result that the measures needed to improve the

structure of agriculture cannot be satisfactorily

implemented; advocates, therefore, that in future there

should be full EC funding of the structural policy, at

least in the disadvantaged regions of the Community;

48. Warns of the danger of depopulation of rural areas where

farms are too small or too fragmented and the process of

reorganization requires many years and substantial

economic input;

49. Considers that the reform of the common agricultural

policy requires the reinforcement of the socio-structural

accompanying measures, and points out that in order to

ensure its implementation in the least-favoured and

primarily rural regions of the Community, the Community's

financial participation will have to be inversely

proportional to the regions' level of wealth;

50. Takes the view that

(a) reform of the CAP represents an essential supplement

to more comprehensive measures for the rural areas of

the Community; to this end calls on the Commission to

draw up and implement a Community rural development

policy to formulate common guidelines and coordinate

synergetically the contributions from other related

Community policies, in particular environmental

policy, energy and infrastructure policy, social

policy, research and technological development policy

and tourism policy;

(b) the planned review or reform of the Structural Funds,

introduced by the Single Act in 1988, should take due

account of the consequences of reform of agricultural

policy on the socio-economic structure of agriculture

and contribute to the implementation of appropriate

measures to support the necessary structural changes

and guarantee balanced territorial development;

51. Considers that in order to guarantee proper consideration

of specific territorial needs, regional and local

authorities must be involved in the drafting, formulation

and implementation of plans to regionalize the management

of income support schemes;

52. Calls for the adoption of measures aimed at achieving

total harmonization of the arrangements for implementing

VAT in the agricultural sector as from the 1992/1993

marketing year, in order to prevent any distortions of

competition of a fiscal nature;

53. Considers that there is also a need to institute, at

Community level, an insurance scheme for the agricultural

sector with a view to alleviating the more serious

problems likely to affect farmers and stockbreeders,

especially in periods of major difficulty, adverse weather

conditions or natural disasters;

Regional aspects of the Commission's proposals

54. Recognizes that spending under the CAP has had only a

marginal effect on reducing regional disparities;

55. Urges the Commission, in accordance with its obligations

under Article 39(2) of the EEC Treaty, to prepare a report

detailing the financial impact of the proposed measures

on the national economies of those Member States with a

high dependence on agriculture;

56. Is of the opinion that the present structural policy must

be improved and extended in order to reduce existing

structural inequalities; is at the same time of the

opinion that additional measures are needed in order to

arrive at a genuine policy for the development of the

countryside, concerned with the social and economic

development of disadvantaged regions of the European

Community in areas other than the traditional agricultural

policy; to this end, a better integration of the different

structural funds should be achieved;

57. Believes that any reform package must take account of the

high dependence on agriculture in certain under-developed

regions and, in particular, their dependence on a limited

number of products for which there are no alternatives

and, furthermore, that consideration must be given to

their respective abilities to adapt and diversify their

productive structures;

58. Believes that in certain regions where no alternative

employment opportunities exist it is better to provide

direct income aid to low income farmers to maintain them

on the land; considers, however, that such aids should be

provided as an incentive to quality production rather

than as a direct hand-out and should be an integral part

of any CAP reform package;

59. Takes the view, however, that structural improvements in

agriculture must strengthen the regional nature of social

and environmental policy;

60. Stresses the importance of developing policies and funding

to assist the food processing sector in peripheral regions

which will be affected by the new policy changes and of

providing assistance to facilitate research, product

development and market re-orientation, thereby preserving

employment;

61. Calls on the Commission to indicate the impact of their

proposals, in particular the effects of modulation, on

farm and rural population over the next decade, especially

in the peripheral regions; this forecast should be

published before the reform of the regional policy in

1994;

62. Stresses the importance of adequate resources being made

available to encourage non-food production from the land;

63. Calls for reafforestation programmes to be integrated into

the concept of regional planning;

64. Believes that the financing of the measures to implement

and accompany the reform must be unequivocally assured;

65. Calls for the introduction as soon as possible of a

detailed and objective information campaign in all the

Member States, involving regional and local institutions

and agricultural and rural organizations, to accompany and

facilitate the initial phases of the reform; in order to

guarantee a correct flow of information, calls for the

structures already in operation in the Community to be

reinforced and directed towards the creation of rural

information centres;

Environmental aspects

66. Criticizes the Commission proposals concerning the

interaction between agriculture and the environment as

they are only of a very general nature and do not deal

with the future common agricultural policy as a coherent

system, in which environmental protection, market policy

and policy on rural areas are directly linked and

dependent on one another;

67. Calls for full integration of the environment into

agricultural policy through recognition by the Community

that the CAP should also have explicit environmental

objectives;

68. Believes that the extensification promoted by the proposed

reform of the Common Agricultural Policy offers an

opportunity for improvements in farm animal welfare and

calls upon the Commission to encourage a move away from

intensive animal husbandry systems;

69. With reference to its resolution of 19 February 1986 on

agriculture and the environment, calls for a change in

agricultural policy to foster agriculture beneficial to

the environment; recalls the need for a qualitative

European agri-foodstuffs policy which recognizes the

consumers' demands for good quality food at reasonable

prices;

70. Believes that the Commission's proposals will make a major

contribution towards extensification of production;

believes, however, that there is a need for specific

application of the environmental requirements proposed

by the Commission for areas set aside;

71. Calls for decisive action in implementing the accompanying

measures proposed by the Commission for a programme of

environmental protection in agriculture and for the

afforestation of agricultural land;

72. Calls for the areas which are taken out of agricultural

production in the medium and long term to be used to the

extent required by biotopes to preserve the diversity of

species and for appropriate compensation to be provided

to this end;

73. Advocates, for ecological reasons, EC-wide measures to

reduce the use of inorganic nitrogen;

74. Calls for Community legislation on quality, standards and

permitted quantities of pesticides and artificial

fertilizers to be put forward in the form of minimum

directives and adopted by qualified majority in accordance

with the cooperation procedure on a treaty basis giving

absolute priority to the environment;

75. Calls for Community agricultural policy to help achieve

the North Sea Conference's aim of reducing nitrates by

50 per cent;

76. Urges the Commission to take all necessary steps to

implement with a minimum of delay the proposal for a

Council directive (COM(88) 708) concerning the protection

of fresh, coastal and marine waters against pollution

caused by nitrates from diffuse sources;

77. Calls for a more coordinated policy for the food industry

at Community level, with closer integration between

agricultural and other food policy objectives;

78. Proposes that the EC should support the creation and

development of gene banks in order to maintain genetic

variety;

Budgetary aspects

79. (a) Notes in the proposal of the Commission the absence

of a global strategy as well as of a true objective:

in reality it only consists of adjustments within the

existing logic of price support;

(b) Calls for the financial resources of the Community to

be used more efficiently;

(c) Insists that the existing guideline for agricultural

spending from the EAGGF Guarantee Section should be

maintained for the next five-year period; after this

period the question of whether a further reduction in

agricultural expenditure can be achieved should be

considered;

(d) Considers it necessary to use financial resources in

such a way that they can be easily monitored and

abuses prevented;

80. Considers that the reform of the CAP should be based on

the following principles:

(a) the guideline should be laid down in such a way as to

remain the budgetary point of reference for

agricultural spending so that its growth is below that

of budget as a whole;

(b) agricultural expenditure must be forecast ahead more

precisely;

(c) in the long term, support for the agricultural sector

must be based increasingly on mechanisms other than

price support, which would be compatible with the

commitments which will probably be entered into within

GATT;

(d) the Community budget will also have to support the

preservation of the environment, the economic

development of rural regions and the social

consequences of reform;

(e) agricultural support arising from this will have to

be compatible with other ends pursued by the

Community, for example economic and social cohesion;

81. Believes that there is a need for an unambiguous

redefinition of guarantee and structural expenditure;

expenditure on market and price policy and direct aid

under the EAGGF Guarantee Section and the accompanying

measures, set-aside measures and other structural measures

should be financed from the EAGGF Guidance Section;

82. Considers it essential that the financial resources

required for the implementation of the reform and, in

particular, for the compensatory payments should be

released;

83. Considers it necessary to ensure, under whatever

circumstances, a stable income for farmers and to share

the benefits of the reform on an equitable basis between

producers and consumers;

84. Demands that the mechanisms introduced out of a desire to

create stable revenue for farmers should not be

transformed into something of great rigidity, and that

improvements in technology should not provide an incentive

to further production, something which goes contrary to

the principles of good financial management;

85. Believes that farmers must be offered compensation for

such a major change in policy and considers that this

compensation, which farmers would receive in return for

the gradual dismantling of price protection, should meet

the three following criteria:

(a) the terms of the compensation should be clearly

defined in advance: the imperative of a stable source

of revenue makes it necessary that the aids should not

be discussed every year;

(b) this compensation must not become an encouragement to

increase production;

(c) those who benefit from this compensation will have to

be only farmers;

86. Points out that, in line with budgetary discipline, the

Council is required to refrain from adopting any

legislative acts entailing an obligation under the budget;

87. Calls on the Council, when addressing CAP reform, to take

account of the need to do away with the compulsory nature

of expenditure and to make the whole of the expenditure

subject to Parliament's budgetary powers, as called for

in Parliament's resolution of 24 October 1991 on the

classification of expenditure in the budget;

88. Deplores once again the lax behaviour of the Member States

in monitoring policy; points to the need for simple,

transparent and effective control instruments; calls for

greater powers for the Commission to monitor the Member

States and to impose financial penalties on Member States

failing to comply with their obligations;

Trade aspects

89. Recognizes that agriculture does not exist in isolation

from other economic activity, but is one important link

in the food chain that brings together the interests of

farmers, food manufacturers, retailers, consumers,

environmentalists, taxpayers and those concerned with the

impact of these matters on developing countries;

90. Stresses the globality of the whole round and the need for

a comprehensive, substantial and balanced agreement on the

trade negotiations; underlines, nevertheless, that world-

wide rules regarding trade in agriculture have become the

key to success of the Uruguay Round;

91. Recalls the commitment to a substantial and progressive

reduction of overall agricultural support and protection

to the farm sector undertaken by all GATT Contracting

Parties at the mid-term review of the Uruguay Round;

92. Stresses that the multilateral trade negotiations do not

only concern trade in agriculture, but include many other

subjects of great importance to all Member States for the

strengthening and future evolution of a liberal world

trading system and for securing economic prosperity and

democracy in Central and Eastern Europe;

93. Points out that a successful conclusion of the Uruguay

Round would be in the interest not only of industrialized

countries, but also of developing countries;

94. Believes that contracting parties should agree on

procedures for joint efforts to stabilize world markets

of agricultural products, and to eliminate dumping

practices, which would provide particularly a sound basis

for self-reliance policies in food production for the

developing countries;

95. Welcomes the Commission proposals for a reinforcement of

the environmental sustainability of agriculture by the

introduction of an environmental programme for

agriculture; is of the opinion that further measures are

necessary to increase the environmental standard in

agriculture; is of the opinion that during the GATT

negotiations these measures should be respected by all

contracting parties and that efforts should be made to

include such environmental standards in a future GATT

agreement;

96. Welcomes the progress made on a technical level by GATT

Director-General Arthur Dunkel, in particular on the

concept of tarification, acceptance of which would

constitute a major change in the CAP and should have to

be considered as an important concession on the part of

the EC in order to overcome the deadlock of the GATT

negotiations;

97. Looks forward with great interest to the proposals for an

overall agreement on the Uruguay Round negotiations to be

presented by the GATT Director-General and resolves to

play its part in the difficult political decisions

necessary to achieve a successful conclusion in

agricultural matters;

98. In encouraging the Commission and the Council to reach

agreement with the trading partners of the Community

- would support an across-the-board reduction of 30% to

be achieved over five years from the reference base

year, due credit being taken into account for reduced

levels of support implemented since 1986;

- would support a safeguard clause, denominated in

national currencies (i.e. for the Community in ECU),

sufficient to eliminate import surges resulting from

excessive volume and/or price fluctuations;

- would support the introduction of a tariff quota for

cereal substitutes, sufficient to prevent trade

distortions caused by artificial price differentials

between cereals and substitutes, set at a level that

fully reflects traditional trade flows;

- would support the introduction of specific binding

ceilings on direct export subsidies in all relevant

product sectors, but with additional disciplines for the

most sensitive products;

- would support the inclusion of an annual monitoring

procedure, with a Ministerial Review after five years,

which would be committed to agreeing further reductions

in support where the elimination of any trade

distortions so required;

99. Is further convinced that an acceptable agreement on

reductions in internal support close to the EC November

1990 proposals can be reached if agreement is also reached

on the definition of 'GATT boxes'; endorses therefore the

idea of a 'blue box' between the amber and green boxes to

accommodate remaining differences - not least over the

indirect effects on trade of deficiency payments and

similar schemes;

100. Calls for the social and environmental aspects of

agriculture to be taken into account in GATT agreements;

101. Considers that agriculture must not be treated as a

bargaining counter in trade relations with third

countries;

102. Is of the opinion that any reform of the CAP should be in

conformity with the foreseeable result of the Uruguay

Round of GATT negotiations;

103. Recalls that the main objectives of the agricultural trade

negotiations are

- improvement of market access,

- substantial and progressive reduction of export

subsidies,

- substantial and progressive reduction of internal

support;

104. Recognizes that there are many good reasons beside trade

considerations for a fundamental reform of the CAP;

stresses at the same time that any such reform must take

into account its effects on world trade in agricultural

and food products;

105. Calls for improved disposal facilities for the products

of developing countries on the European market in order

to improve the position of such countries; steps should

also be taken to prevent a policy of dumping which is

encouraged by export subsidies;

106. Believes that the Commission proposal, with greater

emphasis on the separation of income support from market

support, would contribute to all of the three objectives

of the GATT negotiations on agricultural trade, because

a reduction of the internal support price level would

reduce the need to subsidise EC agricultural exports,

would reduce the need to charge high import levies on

agricultural products from third countries, thereby

improving market access, and would reduce in the long run

the overall support of the agricultural sector;

107. Stresses that if the reform measures are mainly

quantitative limitations, the adverse repercussions on

market access for third countries and the disruption of

the world market caused by export aids will have to be

paid for in the form of reduced export possibilities for

other products or development aid and that this must be

justified in terms of overall economic figures;

108. Believes that a substantial reduction of the internal

price level in the cereals sector with consequent benefits

to the livestock sector, especially in the cereal

production areas, is the key to overcoming the deadlock

of the Uruguay Round negotiations on agriculture;

109. Points out that such a price reduction would provide some

justification for the EC's request for a "rebalancing",

because only a moderate tariff rate on imports of grain

substitutes would then be necessary to eliminate the

existing distortions between different sorts of cereals

for animal feedingstuffs;

110. Stresses that due regard should be given to the situation

of the food processing industry in the EEC and its

competitiveness on the world market, which implies that

export refunds for processed agricultural products should

not be reduced by more than the internal price level of

non-processed inputs of that industry;

111. Is convinced that the reform proposals of the Commission

would entail a reduction of overall agricultural support

and protection by more than the 30% which the EC has

offered so far in the GATT negotiations and which our

trading partners regarded as insufficient;

112. Advocates, in the interests of both sides, the inclusion

in the forthcoming cooperation agreement of clear rules

to govern imports of agricultural products from Central

and Eastern Europe;

113. In view of the declared wish of a substantial number of

EFTA and Central European states to become full members

of the Community, calls for an assessment of the

mechanisms that would lead to a coherent common

agricultural and food policy by the year 2000;

114. Stresses the importance of improved market access for

agricultural products especially from Central and Eastern

European countries for their economic reconstruction and

insists that the reform of the CAP must provide for an

appropriate level of market access for these countries;

115. Calls on the European Council to give its unconditional

support to the objective of reaching a GATT agreement by

the end of this year and honour the undertakings given at

the G-7 summit in London to ensure a successful outcome

to the Uruguay Round negotiations;

Development aspects

116. Calls for the agricultural products of the developing

countries, and especially the signatory countries to the

Lomé Convention, to be given fair export prices on the

European market; stresses, however, that this is not the

only road to development for those countries which aim to

export agricultural and food products to the Community

market; and considers that development should be

primarily a matter of their internal consumer markets, and

that exports to external markets, including that of the

Community, should be considered only as supplementary and

not as the one and only solution for their need to expand

production;

117. Stresses once again its opinion that the Community's

Agricultural Policy has a considerable effect on the

agricultural production and exports of developing

countries and in particular that its agricultural exports

can generate a number of major prejudicial effects in the

developing countries concerned;

118. Recalls that it advocated for many years the need for a

revision of the CAP, and expressed the opinion that the

policy conducted for some years now by the Community with

a view to creating a better balance between supply and

demand on Community agricultural markets and gradually

eliminating its agricultural surpluses as a result is both

constructive and beneficial for the developing countries;

119. Stresses that the analysis made by the Commission

concerning its proposals on the prices for agricultural

products for the marketing year 1991-1992 underlines e.g.

the chronic, growing, structural imbalance in respect of

many products, the recent accumulation of public stocks,

the fall in prices on the world market and therefore makes

it clear that the modifications introduced so far in the

CAP are notably insufficient;

120. Welcomes the statement made in the Commission's

reflections paper according to which the Community must

recognize the existence of international interdependence

and accept its responsibilities as the leading world

importer and second leading exporter;

121. Deeply regrets however that no mention is made in the two

communications of the specific situation and needs of the

developing countries; asks the Commission to present a

Communication to the Council and Parliament on the

specific situation and needs of developing countries;

122. Believes that a reformed CAP should include procedures for

joint efforts to stabilize world markets of agricultural

products, which would eliminate dumping practices, thus

providing a sound basis for self reliance politics in food

production for developing countries;

123. Stresses that any attempt to revise the CAP must take into

consideration the urgent need to grant a better access to

Community market for both the processed and non processed

agricultural exports of the developing countries taking

into account the social and environmental costs of

production and transport and asks for a progressive

removal of tariff and non-tariff barrier on agricultural

products from developing countries;

124. Stresses nevertheless the importance and the necessity of

specific agreements with developing countries to ensure

an appropriate level of market access for both the

processed and non processed agricultural exports of

developing countries;

125. Calls for short-term extra support to be given to those

least developed non-exporting countries which stand to

lose from an increase in world prices;

126. Points out that it is of crucial importance for a

successful CAP-reform that the main emphasis should not

be put on quantitative production control measures, but

on a balanced mix of those measures and price reductions;

127. Emphasizes that the need to achieve a more effective

supply control on Community markets should not in any way

overlook the fact that the Community has more than ever

to continue to be in a position to supply the developing

countries with satisfactory quantities of a number of

agricultural products, both on a commercial basis and in

the context of specially adapted food aid programmes which

fit into their agricultural and rural development

processes;

128. Asks the Commission to propose the creation of an impact

assessment mechanism to measure the impact of EC policy

proposals in the field of agriculture on developing

countries;

129. Considers that it is necessary to increase funding for

measures in the field of research, infrastructure (access

to markets) and marketing;

130. Welcomes the suggestion to recognize the need for a stable

multiannual framework for agricultural policy to replace

the present year by year approach ; notes that such an

approach would be more consistent with the approach

followed in most fields of the development policy e.g. the

Lomé Convention, the new Latin-American and Asian

framework, the new GSP approach;

131. Once again stresses the importance of a regional approach

in promoting food security in developing countries;

132. Is in agreement that a revised agricultural policy must

fully recognize the farmer's dual role as a producer with

special responsibility for animal health and product

quality, and as a protector of the environment in

connection with the development of rural areas; recalls

that for many years both the European Parliament and the

ACP-EEC Joint Assembly have consistently championed this

point of view with regard to the formulation and

implementation of a development policy for rural areas

in the developing countries; is firmly convinced that the

farmer's potential role in this respect is the same in the

Community as it is in the developing countries, and that

in this connection every consideration must be given to

environmental issues;

133. Believes that a more stable world market which is a better

reflection of the real cost prices of agricultural

products is a sine qua non for an independent food

production policy of developing countries;

Social aspects

134. Considers that there is a need for the introduction of

genuine social measures related to the evolution of the

farming population, and that the authorities should give

priority to tackling the problem of the ageing of the

Community's farming population on the basis of attractive

early retirement packages, to be funded by the Community;

135. Considers that vocational training should be one of the

essential accompanying measures to the reform of the

common agricultural policy, so as to encourage the

retraining of farmers in new forms of cultivation and farm

management, while also giving prominence to the potential

role of women in the renewal of productive activity;

136. Considers that, in order to give full value to the work

of women on family farms, provision should be made to

ensure that direct income support is expressly granted to

both members of a couple where it is not possible to grant

such support on an individual basis in accordance with

the person's particular work on the farm;

137. Believes that it is essential, given that the common

agricultural policy primarily affects farmers, that it

should fully respect the Community principles of economic

and social cohesion and the social dimension of

agriculture;

138. Believes that the common agricultural policy should

contribute to the reduction of regional imbalances and

individual inequalities, thus enhancing the economic

efficiency of the sector;

139. Considers that the common agricultural policy should be

based on the principle of the dual role of farmers as both

producers and managers of the environment and agents of

rural development;

140. Points out that rural development is absolutely crucial

to the harmonious and balanced development of Europe on

the basis of the single market and the preservation and

promotion of the socio-cultural model of rural society;

141. Stresses that, where aids and compensations, or the

related penalizations, are determined on the basis of

rules or mathematical criteria alone, they should be

selective, to ensure that they do not result in the

maintenance of existing distortions or the appearance of

new ones;

142. Calls for mechanisms to be set up to ensure a fair and

equitable distribution of income at regional and sectoral

level;

143. Believes that action must be taken, especially in the form

of accompanying measures, both to encourage rural

populations to remain in their communities - especially

in cases of cessation of farming or afforestation - and

to reverse the drift from the countryside;

144. Considers that, since unemployment will arise in the

sector from the reform of the common agricultural policy

as much as from its failure, it is essential to ensure the

simultaneous adoption of specific accompanying measures,

especially retraining of workers and early retirement;

145. Believes that it is essential to discourage

intensification of farming and encourage extensification,

in order to conserve the environment and natural

resources, promote suitable regional planning and enhance

the quality and purity of products;

146. Stresses that such a policy must, however, take account

of regional diversity and the existing structures and

modes of agriculture, especially in cases where farming

has tended to be extensive, with due attention to the

degree of extensification involved;

147. Believes that the reformed common agricultural policy must

allow the efficient family farm to prosper and survive;

148. Notes that there is, consequently, a vital need for

mechanisms for technological support and aid to marketing

and distribution;

149. Stresses that it is especially important to encourage

young farmers, whether actual or potential, particularly

through education and vocational training, as essential

factors for the future of the sector and rural

development;

150. Is of the opinion that the Commission communication of 1

February 1991 may be considered a satisfactory response

as regards the main objectives of the common agricultural

policy and its reform;

151. Believes it is vital to introduce a far-reaching reform

of the common agricultural policy on the basis of clear

principles and objectives and the creation of carefully

defined mechanisms; the reform must be adopted as a whole

and simultaneously, even if its actual application is

phased in gradually, in the light of the measures involved

and the existing situation;

o

o o

152. Announces that it will deliver separate opinions on the

Commission's proposals concerning individual sectors in

the framework of the consultation procedure;

153. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the

Commission and Council.