Stenograma dezbaterilor

Marţi, 25 septembrie 2007 - Strasbourg

16. Retragerea terenurilor din circuitul agricol pentru anul 2008 (dezbatere)

  Presidente. L'ordine del giorno reca la proposta di regolamento del Consiglio, all'esame della commissione per l'agricoltura e lo sviluppo rurale, recante deroga al regolamento (CE) n. 1782/2003 che stabilisce norme comuni relative ai regimi di sostegno diretto nell'ambito della politica agricola comune e istituisce taluni regimi di sostegno a favore degli agricoltori per quanto riguarda il ritiro dei seminativi dalla produzione per il 2008 (COM(2007)0523 - C6-0302/2007 - 2007/0194(CNS)).

  Mariann Fischer Boel, Member of the Commission. Madam President, I can tell you that the cereal market outlook is clearly at the forefront of our minds, as we are in a situation where the prices have shown unprecedented growth in the recent months. This is not only the case within the European Union but all over the world.

With too much rain in certain parts of Europe and with droughts in other parts of Europe, the climatic conditions within our own regions this year have been adverse to cereal production and, with an estimated output of 258 million tonnes, the 2007 harvest is below average. A compulsory set-aside of the present 10% in the old Member States, the EU-15, is not compatible with the present market situation. Against this background, the Commission has proposed to set 0% on set-aside for the autumn 2007 harvest and the sowing in spring 2008. According to our estimates, this will mean extra production within the European Union of between 10 and 17 million tonnes, and I think this will send a positive signal to the sector and, hopefully, also contribute to stabilisation within the grain sector.

A rapid decision on this matter is clearly needed so that farmers can decide their next production year and, in this context, I am actually very thankful for the fact that Parliament obviously understood the urgency of the matter and agreed to follow the fast-track procedure. I really am very grateful.

Finally, our legal proposal will be as short and as simple as possible and it will not imply any new administrative burdens.

Looking further ahead, it is necessary, within the health check, to take a good look at whether the set-aside is still an appropriate tool in the present and in the future market circumstances. We also need to consider how we can retain the environmental benefits within our set-aside system, such as maintenance of permanent pastures, the protection of riparian strips and measures that are also linked to climate change.

So, thank you for a quick reaction. It is nice to see that Parliament can really move when it is badly needed.

  Neil Parish (PPE-DE), chairman of the AGRI committee. – Madam President, Commissioner, yes, Parliament can move very quickly. Of course, the thought that Parliament could be blamed for the fact that farmers would not know what to plant on their land this year did concentrate our minds quite a lot, so we were delighted to work with you to be able to get to this firm decision. I also compliment my own committee, the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, on its unanimous decision.

The points I would like to raise really is, what a difference a year makes! Twelve months ago we were talking about EUR 90/tonne for wheat. Now we are talking about EUR 250-270, so we are talking three times the price. Now is the time, therefore, to look seriously at bringing set-aside down to 0%. I would even go further back than that. When you think that for 20 odd years now in Europe we have been talking about food surpluses, farmers are not really needed, that we have to turn the land over to something else and that food security does not really matter. All of a sudden food security does matter.

I think there is a moral argument here as well. When the world has plenty of food, then perhaps Europe does not need altogether to do its share of production, but when the world is short of food and the prices go up, then Europe is morally obliged to produce food. Europe is never going to starve, whatever the price of food is, because we basically have money to pay for it, but many parts of the world will. All of a sudden we are in a different world and one that we must face up to. The Commission is proposing a set-aside of 0% for 2008 and at the beginning of the marketing year 2008, like I said, the market is characteristically high in price.

As the Commissioner said, we have had droughts in some parts of Europe and we have had floods in others. We also see, throughout the world, changing situations on grain, where in Australia you have salt coming up through the land and it is becoming very difficult to plant. We are also seeing China and India taking in unprecedented amounts of food because of their economies increasing and wanting more food. All this is taking its toll on the wheat and cereal production throughout the world. We are now probably at about half the stocks that we historically have and stocks are getting low, so now is the time to do it.

I believe, Commissioner, and I am sure you do too, that if we have a common agricultural policy that is decoupled away from production, we cannot really have set-aside in many respects because, if ever there was a policy that was linked to production, then set-aside must be that, so now is very much the time to remove it.

As we remove set-aside, we must remember that there have been some environmental benefits to it and we must remember, too, that farmers will have the choice now as to whether to plough up set-aside land or not. Under single farm payment systems they could still carry on using it if they so chose, but the economic benefits of actually growing cereals will mean that many of them will plough the land. We can still have the six-metre strips around the fields and hedgerows on environmental means and I think that is also very good.

It is not really something to be debated tonight, but I think, in the health check, one of the things we will deal with is that there is no doubt that we will have to move to second generation biofuels and not actually use wheat and oil seed rape for biofuels. Again, a year ago I was very much in favour of that when prices were low, but now when prices are high we will literally only fuel that.

I recommend to Parliament that we deal with this swiftly. I thank all the groups for their support and I thank the Commissioner very much for her speedy response. Together I think we can come to the right decision. There are a few amendments here from the PSE Group and the Verts/ALE Group, most of which we will be able to support. One, however, I cannot accept – and that is a tax on the export of grain, because farmers have suffered low prices in the past. As soon as prices rise, please do not actually put a tax on it because that would not be quite right in my opinion. If we are going to deal with market forces we are going to have to face up to the realities of life.

  Esther De Lange, namens de PPE-DE-Fractie. – Voorzitter, ik wil allereerst toch even de commissaris bedanken voor haar aanwezigheid vanochtend en nu weer hier bij dit late ingelaste debat, maar ik wil haar vooral bedanken voor haar voorstel om de verplichte braaklegging voor het komende seizoen af te schaffen. Ze heeft ons een compliment gemaakt voor onze snelheid, maar de Commissie laat daarmee ook zien relatief snel te kunnen reageren op ontwikkelingen in de markt die inmiddels in het teken staat van slinkende graanvoorraden in de EU. Ook op mondiaal niveau is het de verwachting dat de voorraden aan het einde van dit seizoen een historisch laag niveau zullen bereiken.

Dus een aanbod controlerend instrument als de verplichte braaklegging, ingevoerd in '92, heeft dan eigenlijk geen functie meer. Logisch dus dat de Commissie voorstelt om deze verplichting nu af te schaffen. Logisch ook dat de Commissie het systeem voor de braaklegging wel overeind houdt en slechts het verplichte percentage terugbrengt van de huidige 10 naar 0. Dit houdt de discussie zuiver. Immers, de health check is pas het moment om over een mogelijke verandering van de bestaande regelingen en structuren te spreken.

Verder begrijp ik dat we, indien we met dit voorstel instemmen en de Raad ook snel besluit, we wellicht een record voor snelle wetgeving verbreken. Ook dat kan geen verkeerd signaal zijn aan burgers en vooral aan boeren dat de EU, daar waar nodig, ook snel kan besluiten.

Maar één ding moet me toch nog van het hart, Voorzitter, niet als EVP-spreker, maar als CDA-lid van dit Huis vanuit Nederland. Er zijn ook nog ándere sectoren waar bij de huidige marktontwikkeling enige flexibiliteit op zijn plaats lijkt te zijn. De zuivel bijvoorbeeld, waar de vraag sterk toeneemt en Europa zijn potentieel wellicht niet optimaal benut. Het grensoverschrijdend verhandelbaar maken van quota die in bepaalde lidstaten niet worden volgemolken is daar wellicht een optie, of een grotere quotaverruiming op 1 april 2008 van enkele procenten.

Afsluitend, Voorzitter, doe ik dus een persoonlijke oproep aan de Europese Commissie om ook in andere sectoren, waar nodig, dezelfde voortvarendheid aan de dag te leggen als nu voor granen.

  Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos, em nome do Grupo PSE. – Também saúdo a presença da Sra. Comissária e gostaria de dizer que a actual conjuntura do mercado dos cereais obriga-nos a reflectir mas, sobretudo, a agir e saúdo a postura da Comissão nesta sua postura pró-activa.

O grupo socialista partilha a análise que a Comissária faz da presente situação e está de acordo que, no âmbito do health check, teremos oportunidade de analisar, em profundidade, este problema e tomar as decisões definitivas mais acertadas para o futuro. Temos também total consciência de que o problema com o qual estamos confrontados não se resolverá apenas com a eliminação do set-aside no contexto das decisões transitórias que nos preparamos para tomar, mas estamos de acordo que podem dar um contributo importante para o reequilíbrio do mercado no próximo ano.

Partilhamos a opinião de que com esta medida poderão voltar a ser consagrados à produção, num cenário pessimista, pelo menos metade dos actuais 3,89 milhões de hectares e tal poderá representar, num ano climatericamente normal, uma produção suplementar entre 5 a 10 milhões de toneladas, no mínimo, mesmo tratando-se, em parte, de solos menos produtivos porque são, naturalmente, os solos menos produtivos, aqueles que os agricultores afectam ao set-aside.

Pensamos, no entanto que, para atingir tal objectivo, seria conveniente que a Comissão fosse um pouco mais longe nesta derrogação, isto é prolongando a eficácia da medida não por um, mas por dois anos e compreende-se que assim seja porque é óbvio que a agricultura carece de programação e no início da próxima campanha de Outono-Inverno não estaremos ainda na posse de uma decisão definitiva na sequência do debate que iremos travar no âmbito do health-check. Apelo, por isso, à Comissão, para que tenha em conta a emenda que vamos apresentar neste sentido e que estou certo, irá merecer acolhimento maioritário na sessão plenária de amanhã.

Por outro lado, todos temos consciência de que recolocar toda esta área em produção terá impactos negativos óbvios, quer quanto à libertação de CO2 do solo, quer quanto à biodiversidade, já que é hoje por todos reconhecida a mais valia que o set-aside trouxe no plano ambiental. Por isso parece-nos adequado que a Comissão realize um estudo de impacto tão urgentemente quanto possível por forma a que possamos dispor de elementos úteis para a decisão que dentro de um ano seremos obrigados a tomar sobre este mesmo assunto.

  Friedrich-Wilhelm Graefe zu Baringdorf (Verts/ALE). – Frau Präsidentin, Frau Kommissarin! Ja, wir haben schnell gearbeitet, aber die Kommission hat auch spät vorgelegt. Es ist lange darüber diskutiert worden, und die Ungeduld der Bauern war dadurch ziemlich geschürt: Wann kommt es denn jetzt endlich? Wir haben jedenfalls nichts verzögert, das ist richtig, das wollten wir auch nicht tun.

Ihre Begründung lautet, dass die Preise hoch sind und man hier etwas stabilisieren müsste. Ich hoffe, wir freuen uns beide – und Ihr Mann ganz besonders mit seinem Betrieb –, dass endlich mal Geld bei den Betrieben ankommt. Das war lange überfällig! Und wir sollten hier vorsichtig sein, zu sagen, wir müssen etwas tun, um die Preise nach unten zu drücken. Außerdem widerspricht das etwas Ihrer Aussage von heute Morgen in Bezug auf den Zucker. Sie erinnern sich, dass Sie sagten: Bei dem Getreidepreis gehen jetzt vielleicht schneller Leute bei den Angeboten in das Getreide und aus dem Zucker raus. Wenn Sie die Getreidepreise jetzt wieder nach unten treiben, könnten Ihre eigene Logik und Ihre eigenen Vorhaben damit unterlaufen werden.

Sie sprechen auch an, dass es um die Fruchtfolgen geht. Ja, das ist richtig. Ursprünglich war das eine in die Fruchtfolge eingebundene Maßnahme, da die Fruchtfolge auch eine Begrünung brauchte. Das heißt, wir müssen uns um den Umweltaspekt kümmern, auch wenn dieser in den letzten Jahren sehr vernachlässigt wurde, einmal durch die Möglichkeit einer ständigen Flächenstilllegung und dadurch, dass ein großer Teil ja in die Produktion für Energieerzeugnisse genommen wurde.

Wir fordern Sie in einem Änderungsantrag auf, sich 2008 mit dem, was Sie vorhaben, nicht nur zu befassen, sondern uns auch im Parlament vorzulegen, wie denn die Fruchtfolgen im Sinne des Umweltschutzes gestaltet werden sollen.

  Vincenzo Aita, a nome del gruppo GUE/NGL. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, io credo che il Parlamento deve cogliere come un elemento nuovo e che apre una nuova riflessione, una nuova discussione sulle produzioni agricole nella nostra Europa. Il punto non è soltanto che abbiamo avuto un cambiamento climatico e che in alcune aree del paese abbiamo avuto difficoltà nelle produzioni. La questione è che sta cambiando il sistema complessivo sul terreno delle produzioni agricole perché, e ne abbiamo avuto qualche eco nella discussione precedente, molte produzioni oggi vanno in altri sistemi di produzione, così come è stato richiamato.

Il punto è che oggi va rivista la politica che negli ultimi anni ha attuato la Comunità europea in direzione delle produzioni agricole. Non avremo solo il problema dei cereali, fra qualche mese avremo il problema della produzione della carne, della produzione dei lattiero-caseari, perché già oggi ci sono modificazioni di produzione e cali produttivi su questo terreno. Allora, credo che la Commissaria e la Commissione devono fare un'attenta riflessione e mettere il Parlamento in condizione di dare una risposta definitiva a questi problemi per evitare quello che sta succedendo: l'aumento dei costi per l'alimentazione umana che mette in difficoltà molte famiglie in Europa e non solo in Europa.

  Jim Allister (NI). – Madam President, at a time of spiralling and punitive increases in feedstuff prices, which is so hurting our intensive sector, it would be criminal to lock out of production land capable of decreasing our reliance on foreign imports. Thus set-aside must go and must go now.

But more is needed, including a proactive plan to address the looming crisis in our intensive sectors. For my part, such must include hands-on pressure on the multinational supermarket chains to give up the pricing strategy which suppresses farm-gate prices. If this does not happen, we are facing wipe-out in much of our intensive sector. Such would be the greatest failure of agricultural policy of our time and something, Madam Commissioner, which you must urgently address.

  Esther Herranz García (PPE-DE). – Señora Presidenta, para empezar, me congratulo de la decisión del Parlamento Europeo de adoptar, por el procedimiento de urgencia, la suspensión inmediata del barbecho obligatorio.

Creo que el consumidor europeo y los ganaderos son las principales víctimas del aumento espectacular del precio de las materias primas agrícolas. Creo que la situación actual debería llevarnos a emprender una reflexión en profundidad sobre la deriva que está tomando actualmente la política agrícola común, y deberíamos asegurarnos de que las decisiones adoptadas en esta materia se encuentran efectivamente en armonía con el contexto mundial, en el que la demanda de países terceros crece a un ritmo escalonado, debido, sobre todo, al crecimiento del consumo de países como la India o China, con un papel determinante en la economía mundial.

De prolongarse esta situación de déficit, pienso que la Unión Europea debería pensar en articular nuevos mecanismos para evitar las alzas insostenibles en el precio de los alimentos.

Llevamos años oyendo que la política agrícola común supone un coste excesivo para el contribuyente europeo, pero me gustaría que ahora los Gobiernos explicaran al ciudadano la razón por la que ahora tendrán que pagar más por el pan o por la leche. Me gustaría también que explicaran los Gobiernos las medidas que están dispuestos a adoptar para garantizar un precio justo al consumidor y evitar una carga excesiva a los productores que ponga en riesgo la rentabilidad de muchas explotaciones.

El mundo necesita cada vez más alimentos y el crecimiento exponencial que está teniendo el consumo no se resolverá con una política agrícola cada vez más avara, más cicatera para los productores europeos. Pienso que los líderes europeos deberían pensárselo un par de veces antes de poner a los productores entre la espada y la pared.

Creo que la Unión Europea debería aprovechar el health check de la política agrícola común para introducir mecanismos que eviten en el futuro situaciones de déficit grave si no queremos que otros productores mundiales acaparen los mercados internacionales.

  Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE). – Señora Presidenta, es verdad que las existencias de cereales se han reducido durante los últimos años y ya hemos escuchado algunas razones coyunturales –incremento del consumo en países emergentes, condiciones climáticas adversas en países productores o reserva de producción para consumo interno en países exportadores. Tampoco podemos olvidar el impacto de ciertos movimientos especulativos en los mercados de referencia, como París o Chicago. Todas estas cuestiones han contribuido a que los precios alcancen máximos históricos.

Pero, según los datos del Consejo Internacional de Cereales, al problema de abastecimiento se suma un problema de reservas: las mundiales, inferiores al 17 %, que según la FAO garantizan la seguridad alimentaria, y las comunitarias, prácticamente agotadas en un mercado con precios por encima de los internacionales.

En mi opinión, señora Comisaria, deberíamos reflexionar de cara al chequeo médico sobre el papel que juega en esta crisis la desaparición de los instrumentos comunitarios de regulación del mercado.

La Unión Europea, obsesionada con los costes de gestión de los stocks y la presión de la Organización Mundial del Comercio, ha reorientado su política agrícola hacia la contención de la producción y la liberalización de los mercados y ha dado la espalda a productores y a consumidores, abandonando el principio fundamental de la PAC: la garantía del autoabastecimiento.

  Bernadette Bourzai (PSE). – Madame la Présidente, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, je veux d'abord exprimer mon accord concernant la remise en culture, sur une base volontaire, des terres actuellement en jachère, afin d'augmenter la production européenne de céréales et d'oléagineux, de reconstituer les stocks et d'assurer ainsi notre autoapprovisionnement.

Deux campagnes de production et de commercialisation semblent par contre nécessaires pour permettre aux agriculteurs de s'adapter à ce changement. Il est également important de contingenter les exportations de céréales, afin de privilégier la satisfaction des besoins européens.

Par contre, je serai plus prudente avec la proposition d'une mesure de suppression des taxes sur les importations d'aliments pour animaux. J'ai bien conscience que l'augmentation du prix des aliments met en grande difficulté les éleveurs, mais je ne voudrais pas que cette mesure favorise trop les importations de soja et de maïs modifiés génétiquement. Je pense qu'il serait bon, au contraire, de favoriser et d'encourager le développement d'une filière européenne d'alimentation animale exempte d'OGM, qui serait d'ailleurs plus à même d'assurer noter sécurité alimentaire et notre indépendance.

Je tiens aussi à rappeler que, si le gel des terres a perdu sa justification économique, il présente un intérêt majeur pour la biodiversité et pour la protection des sols et des cours d'eau, intérêt qui doit être reconnu et maintenu. Le groupe socialiste demande donc à la Commission de réaliser une étude d'impact des effets sur l'environnement de la suppression des jachères. Je pense en particulier aux conséquences qu'aurait la suppression des jachères sur la nécessaire diversité des sources d'approvisionnement en pollen et en nectar des abeilles, à un moment où elles traversent une grave crise.

Enfin, ce n'est pas parce qu'on supprime les jachères maintenant que l'on va résoudre tous les problèmes qui seront au cœur du bilan de la PAC en 2008 et 2009.

  Mariann Fischer Boel, Member of the Commission. Thank you, Madam President, and I should like to thank the Members very much for all the positive comments, for all the endeavours to stabilise our cereal market. I feel quite well equipped now to continue this discussion in the Council tomorrow with the Member States and I hope that the legal act can be published within a short period. I am quite sure farmers will be keeping an eye on us to see what decision will be taken here in Parliament and in the Council tomorrow.

I shall just speak briefly on the four different groups of amendments. On the idea of extending this one-year 0% set-aside to two years, I must say that we will have the possibility of discussing the communication during the winter and the legal proposals next spring and summer, when we will have a clear idea of which direction we are moving in. So I will not be able to support the idea of extending the one-year period, but we will return to this issue.

On the environmental benefits of the set-aside, it is obvious, as I said in my first intervention, that we will have to look into this in the health check to see whether we can find solutions to maintain the benefits of the environmental biodiversity issue in the set-aside.

On the monitoring of the cereal market, it is obvious that we will do everything possible to keep up a strong dialogue with Member States, stakeholders and the public at large to see in which direction the market is moving.

On Amendment 8 on export restrictions and the possible introduction of an export tax, I must say that this is not the way we want to follow. It will send totally different and wrong signals to the market. It will bring us into a situation similar to that of Russia and Ukraine, which we have both accused of using this tool to keep their production for themselves, and therefore this is not the way to follow.

Regarding the other idea that you mentioned on the import side, we will look – and we have actually started doing so already – into the suspension of cereal import duties. They do not fit with the present situation. A change of the entire policy, the stock policy, would, I think, be an option for us to discuss in the health check to find the best way to tailor-make solutions both to farmers and to cereal stakeholders, to the cereal sector.

Thank you, again, very much. I do really appreciate the enthusiasm with which Parliament and the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development have acted in this case.

  Presidente. La discussione è chiusa.

La votazione si svolgerà mercoledì.

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 142)

  James Nicholson (PPE-DE), in writing. – A serious situation has developed through rising grain prices throughout the European Union which is being driven by high world prices. It is necessary that we have security in our food supply. We no longer have that. The cost of grain has continued to spiral upwards. This can only be dealt with through rising prices to the consumer. The Australian government last week said that Australian production this year will be down by 30%. We must have market access to cereal substitutes from the United States or the supply of beef, sheep and chicken meat will become more difficult. I call on the Agriculture Council and the EU experts to approve new cereals at a faster pace to guarantee us security of supply.