Rapporti verbatim tad-dibattiti

It-Tlieta, 23 ta' Ottubru 2007 - Strasburgu

16. L-għoli tal-prezzijiet ta' affarijiet ta' l-ikel, ħarsien tal-konsumaturi (dibattitu)

  Przewodniczący. Kolejnym punktem porządku dziennego jest debata nad

- pytaniem ustnym do Komisji dotyczącym wzrostu cen i środków spożywczych i ochrony konsumentów skierowanym przez Josepha Daula, Lutza Goepela oraz Neila Parisha w imieniu grupy politycznej PPE-DE (O-0065/2007 - B6-0321/2007),

- pytaniem ustnym do Komisji dotyczącym wzrostu cen i środków spożywczych i ochrony konsumentów skierowanym przez Luisa Manuela Capoulasa Santosa w imieniu grupy politycznej PSE (O-0067/2007 - B6-0377/2007), oraz

- pytaniem ustnym do Komisji dotyczącym wzrostu cen i środków spożywczych i ochrony konsumentów skierowanym przez Sergio Berlato, Janusza Wojciechowskiego, Gintarasa Didžiokasa, Liam Aylward w imienu grupy politycznej UEN (O-0069/2007 - B6-0378/2007).

  Neil Parish (PPE-DE), author. – Mr President, it is with great pleasure that I stand up and talk tonight because we are in a situation now where food security has become a real issue. For 25 years we have been in a situation where there has been plenty of food in Europe. In fact, we have been taking many decisions in agriculture, in the common agricultural policy, to restrict production in order to maintain prices and reduce the use of export subsidies and to export products on to the world markets.

Now we are facing a situation that is completely different: cereal prices have risen threefold this year; the livestock sector is having a huge problem, having seen its feed costs going up by perhaps 50% or 60%, and we are extremely concerned about this. Mr Daul, Mr Goepel and I have tabled this oral question – and we are delighted that Commissioner Fischer Boel is here tonight – because we feel we now have to look at every opportunity for getting extra feed into the European Union.

We will have to face up to the reality that there are some feeds that are derived from GM maize and GM soya which cannot come into the European Union at the moment because they are not licensed. I think we have to make sure that we look at this and that we have a system by which we can license these products. Provided they are safe, they should come in to be fed to our poultry, and to our pigs in particular, as well as to our cattle, both beef and dairy, because we need to keep a very competitive industry.

We also have to look at the situation regarding supermarkets, because – do not forget – not only are we concerned at the price that the farmer receives for his or her products, but we are also interested in what the consumer has to pay. There is no doubt that we are seeing, for instance, that only 10% of a loaf of bread is actually made from the raw material of wheat and yet there are huge increases in the price of the loaf because the supermarkets say they are having to pay so much more for wheat. So we need to put pressure on the supermarkets to make sure that consumers are paying the right price.

It is great that it puts European agriculture in a very strong position to face up to the brave new world, because we will need food production, we will need farmers and we need the countryside, and all these things work very well.

But, as I say, we now have to get the balance right between the cereal and livestock sectors, and that is why we have tabled this question. We shall be delighted to hear what Commissioner Fischer Boel has to say about it.

  Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos (PSE), Autor. – Senhor Presidente, Senhora Comissária, é um prazer vê-la uma vez mais aqui no Parlamento. Como sabe, fomos surpreendidos há poucos meses atrás com uma alteração da situação do mercado de alguns produtos agrícolas, que pouco tempo antes julgávamos impensável, uma enorme pressão sobre a procura com as consequências que temos vindo a assistir.

Desde logo uma grande perturbação no sector da produção animal, consequências previsíveis no aumento dos preços aos consumidores e basta lembrar-nos do alerta que a FAO nos fez relativamente às consequências no que respeita à alimentação de muitas zonas do mundo que pode advir desta situação. Basta lembrarmo-nos que, se enquanto na Europa gastamos 10 a 20% dos rendimentos familiares na alimentação, há sociedades em que a alocação desse rendimento é de 90% e mais, e basta imaginar o que significará um acréscimo dos preços para estas vastas populações já tão carenciadas.

É preciso, por isso, agir, agir no imediato e eu congratulo-mo com o facto de a Comissão ter agido - e bem - com algumas medidas paliativas, desde logo a questão da redução a 0 do set-aside para 2008. Pena que não tivéssemos ido mais longe. Há outras medidas que talvez possam ser adoptadas sem custos adicionais para o orçamento comunitário, como sejam, por exemplo, a autorização da antecipação de pagamentos a alguns criadores de gado das ajudas a que têm direito, naturalmente, que estão duplamente afectados não só pelo aumento dos preços, mas pelo facto de terem sido confrontados com doenças animais, como a "língua azul", por exemplo, e portanto penso que podemos ir um pouco mais longe no imediato.

Mas devemos ir sobretudo mais longe na avaliação da situação, no estudo da situação para que possamos rapidamente equacionar quais as medidas que, no curto prazo, podem ser adoptadas no futuro imediato. Confiamos naturalmente na sensibilidade da Sr.ª Comissária e da Comissão para dar sequência a esta nossa preocupação.

  Sergio Berlato (UEN), Autore. – Signor Presidente, signora Commissaria, onorevoli colleghi, in tutta Europa si registrano casi di aumenti generalizzati dei prezzi dei prodotti alimentari. Le indagini di mercato effettuate mostrano come i consumatori europei stiano cambiando radicalmente le loro abitudini alimentari essendo costretti, a causa dei prezzi troppo elevati, a variare la qualità ed il tipo di prodotti da acquistare.

La responsabilità degli aumenti è da attribuirsi da un lato ai troppi passaggi intermedi che i prodotti subiscono dal produttore al consumatore e dall'altro ai rincari eccessivi applicati dalle grandi catene di distribuzione. Una cosa comunque è certa: la responsabilità di questi rincari non può e non deve essere attribuita ai nostri agricoltori, che sono le prime vittime di questa preoccupante situazione.

Noi, signor Presidente e signora Commissaria, riteniamo che oggi più che mai vada difeso il modello agricolo europeo, al fine di preservare la stabilità dei mercati agricoli nazionali dalle fluttuazioni dei prezzi internazionali e dare consistenza alla difesa dei modelli di produzione e di utilizzo del territorio caratteristici dell'agricoltura europea. Condividiamo la decisione del Consiglio che ha approvato recentemente la proposta di azzeramento del set-aside per la campagna 2008.

Ma questo non basta a tranquillizzarci sulla preoccupante situazione degli stock di cereali e l'aumento del loro prezzo sul mercato mondiale. Occorre intervenire anche nelle varie OCM ed adoperare questi meccanismi di riequilibrio del mercato che permettano di calmierare i prezzi degli alimenti almeno nel mercato interno. Per questo abbiamo chiesto alla Commissione, anche con una recente interrogazione, di proporre subito un aumento urgente delle quote latte di almeno il 2-3%, al fine di favorire la stabilizzazione dei prezzi di questo prodotto di prima necessità.

In una congiuntura economica non favorevole come questa, spetta all'Unione europea e agli Stati membri intervenire per permettere ai consumatori di mantenere stabile la loro capacità di acquisto nel campo alimentare e allo stesso tempo tutelare il diritto di reddito dei nostri agricoltori.

  Mariann Fischer Boel, Member of the Commission. Mr President, I recall what I think is an old Japanese curse: ‘May you live in interesting times’, and I think this is exactly what we are doing now. We have seen, over the last six to eight months, prices for raw materials within the agricultural sector rocketing, as mentioned already by the speakers, but I have to say that this is happening from an historically low level. I think this is an important reminder to all of us. These increases in prices will be reflected on consumer prices but to a lower extent. If I may use the example of bread, a basic commodity – and I will use a German example – if you take the price of bread in a supermarket or in a store in Germany, only 4% of the price relates to the price of the cost of the wheat.

For the dairy sector, as has been mentioned already, a number of different measures have already been foreseen. Milk quotas were increased on 1 April 2006 and 1 April 2007 by 0.5% in 11 Member States. On 1 April 2006, eight new Member States received this restructuring reserve varying from between 2% and 5% of their national quota level. On 1 April 2008 – next year – another 0.5% will be added to the increase in the quota allocated to 11 Member States.

In addition, all market support aids have been massively reduced and, at the moment, there are no export refunds and no disposal aid at all – zero for both of them. The market outlook report in the dairy sector will be adopted by the Commission later this year and it will provide us with the basis for a further discussion on whether we need to increase again the quota. Moreover, I have already had the chance here to signal clearly the expiry of the milk quota system by 31 March 2015, and indicated as well that we needed, for the period from now until 2015, a soft landing for the abolition of the quota system. Among the possibilities mentioned is to increase the quota system over the period and we will have the possibility to discuss this during the health check next year.

In the cereals sector there are various different reasons for the increase in prices. I shall just say, just to be sure that there are no misunderstandings, it is not biofuels that are causing the steep increase in prices. We use, today, less than 2% of cereal production for ethanol in Europe, but the reasons are different: adverse weather conditions in Australia, drought in southern Europe, floods in the northern part of Europe, increasing demand from India and China, and restricted exports out of Russia and Ukraine. Then, of course, there is the snowball effect from the very strong focus on ethanol in the United States and, therefore, a certain influence on the increase of prices in corn.

The Commission has, as mentioned already, reacted: set-aside is put to zero for the coming production year, for the sowing to take place this autumn and next spring. Then whether to continue a zero set-aside will be a discussion to be held during the health check. We expect that the zero set-aside could contribute to somewhere between 10 and 12-15 million tonnes, depending on the climatic conditions. Moreover, I will submit to the College of Commissioners a proposal to the Council to suspend cereal import duties only for the current market year. I think that those initiatives will help us to ease the pressure on the livestock farming and the consumer prices.

There are different problems for the pigmeat sector. The pipelines are filled with meat, so there is an imbalance on the input and output in the sector and therefore the management committee decided last Thursday to introduce a private storage that I hope will help the problems in the pigmeat sector. There are other possibilities, but I think we should try to find the right balance because, if it is only a question of prolonging the pain, then we gain absolutely nothing.

So, I think that we have reacted and I have had the possibility to thank Parliament for its quick reaction so that we could send clear signals as soon as possible to the farming sector on the zero set-aside. I would like to come back to the GMO question in my final remarks, as I can see that my time has expired.

  Mairead McGuinness, on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. – Mr President, I would have been happy to share my time with the Commissioner, because I am interested to hear her views on GMOs, but I will be here for the entire debate.

I think it is true, because it is not the first time we have said it in this Chamber, that the unpalatable truth is that the era of relatively cheap food is over and that what has happened was not predicted either within the Commission or, indeed, globally.

The Commissioner has gone through some of the reasons why we now have this imbalance in supply and demand and I agree with her: weather, climate change, the demand from the developing countries and, yes, biofuels are impacting globally – the Commissioner has acknowledged that. However, it is important to remember – and there were others in this House prior to my time – what your predecessor Mr Fischler said when reforming the CAP in 2003. He promised farmers better market prices. Perhaps we are seeing the impact of those reforms now, and we are beginning to question those impacts because of the impact on consumer prices.

We have had positive developments on milk and cereals, but we do not have the same on the livestock sector in terms of the beef and lamb producers, chicken and pigmeat that the Commissioner has discussed.

We are asking the questions now about the volatility and whether we are happy with that volatility in demand and supply. A major food company said to me recently that the supermarket buyers have no knowledge or interest in the economics of food production, but they are beginning to take note, and that is positive. However, we need to monitor the power of the supermarkets and to look at whether they are passing on the price increases they are charging to the producers of food. That is something I would urge the Commission – perhaps the Commissioner for Competition – to take a close look at. They have refused to do it in the past.

Concerning GMOs, this is a big issue. There is a problem in relation to the differences of approval methods between the European Union and the US and we need to look at that. So I wait for the Commissioner’s comments on GMOs before making my points in particular.

Lastly, we cannot ignore the impact on the developing world of insecurity, particularly with the grain market, where countries that cannot afford to pay more for food are seeing a massive increase in their food bill. We must acknowledge it in this House and we need to take it into account in our policies going forward.

  Bernadette Bourzai, au nom du groupe PSE. – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire et chers collègues, lors de la Journée mondiale de l'alimentation, le mardi 16 octobre dernier, la FAO a souhaité sensibiliser l'opinion à la sous-alimentation qui frappe 854 millions d'hommes dans le monde à l'heure actuelle. À cette occasion, la hausse des prix des matières premières agricoles a été soulignée et, en particulier, ses conséquences sur les consommateurs des pays développés –  mes collègues viennent d'en parler abondamment – mais aussi sur les populations des pays pauvres, importateurs de céréales. Alors que, dans les pays développés, nous consacrons 10 à 20% du budget des ménages à l'alimentation, il faut savoir que, dans les pays les moins avancés, il s'agit de 60 à 80% du budget pour les populations et qu'une augmentation du prix des céréales de 20% est pour eux tout simplement dramatique. D'autant que cette situation est accentuée par la grande dépendance de certains pays par rapport aux importations, aux variations monétaires, aux variations climatiques et au renchérissement du coût des transports.

Madame la Commissaire, vous avez en partie répondu, mais j'espère qu'il y aura d'autres mesures. Quelles mesures entendez-vous prendre à court et à moyen terme, à l'occasion du bilan de santé de la PAC, pour remédier à cette situation difficile pour les consommateurs du Nord mais encore plus pour ceux du Sud, et pour contribuer à l'équilibre alimentaire mondial?

  Niels Busk, for ALDE-Gruppen. – Hr. formand! Fru kommissær! Det er vigtigt, at der nu bliver sat fokus på den meget interessante situation, vi i øjeblikket ser omkring meget markante prisstigninger på en del af landbrugets råvarer. Samtidig ved vi, at disse prisstigninger på de områder, hvor stigningerne ikke er slået igennem endnu, nemlig svinesektoren, vil give en meget omkostningsfuld vinter med hensyn til foderpriser. Vi kender baggrunden: dårlige høstresultater, tomme kornlagre osv. – det skal jeg ikke komme mere ind på.

Jeg mener, at den situation, vi har i øjeblikket, bør give anledning til flere diskussioner. Først og fremmest skal vi ikke blive bange for, at priserne nu stiger. Alt for længe har mælk kostet mindre end en liter Cola og mindre end en liter vand. Det er fuldstændig urimeligt, at vi ikke vil acceptere, at fødevarer koster det, som de virkelig skal koste, fordi der er en lang produktionstid og mange arbejdstimer bagved, ikke mindst i mælkesektoren. Det er også klart, at der nu er muligheder for at øge den europæiske fødevareproduktion. Markedet kræver det egentlig af os. Kommissionen har taget et godt initiativ ved at fjerne braklægningen, og vi har jo stadigvæk muligheden for, især på mælkeområdet, meget hurtigt at øge produktionen.

Vi bør fortsætte reformen af den fælles landbrugspolitik fra 2003 med afkobling af støtten, og vi bør seriøst diskutere yderligere overførsler af landbrugsstøtten til landdistriktspolitikken. Vi har nu muligheden for at kickstarte en dynamisk landbrugsproduktion i EU, og det vil sige, at vi skal give landmændene friere muligheder, end de har i dag, for at udnytte den store efterspørgsel, som der er i øjeblikket. Vi skal selvfølgelig også, som vi har tradition for, tage os godt af de landmænd, der bor i bjergområder og i svage regioner - det kunne lige mangle! Nu gælder det imidlertid om, at vi ikke bliver bange for prisstigningerne, men i stedet for forstår og offensivt bruger den situation, som vi er kommet i.

  Janusz Wojciechowski, w imieniu grupy UEN. – Panie Przewodniczący! W ostatnim czasie w Unii Europejskiej daje się zaobserwować znaczący wzrost cen podstawowych artykułów spożywczych, w szczególności w nowych państwach członkowskich. Przykładowo w Polsce cena chleba wzrosła w ciągu ostatnich dwóch lat o 15%, cena jabłek o 83%, ziemniaków o 33%, zaś cena mleka niemal się podwoiła. Podobne zjawisko jest w niektórych starych państwach członkowskich: we Włoszech, w Irlandii. Z nowych państw członkowskich także na Litwie cena zbóż, mleka, owoców i warzyw również wzrosła prawie dwukrotnie.

Z drugiej strony, polityka Unii Europejskiej polega na ograniczaniu rozmiarów produkcji rolnej i polityka ta wydaje się coraz bardzie sprzeczna z potrzebami konsumentów. Wszelkie tak zwane reformy Wspólnej Polityki Rolnej, polegają na tym, że ograniczamy produkcję w Unii Europejskiej.

Reforma rynku cukru to jest wielkie ograniczanie produkcji cukru w Unii Europejskiej, z 18 mln ton do 12 mln ton. Reforma rynku wina - również ograniczanie produkcji.

Inne reformy także zmierzają do tego, żeby w Unii Europejskiej produkować mniej. Z drugiej strony mamy bardzo istotny sygnał. Konsumenci potrzebują więcej żywności w Europie i to jest sygnał na tyle poważny, że cały cel Wspólnej Polityki Rolnej powinien być zweryfikowany. Musimy się zastanowić nad tym, czy rzeczywiście metoda ograniczania produkcji, kwotowania produkcji jest dobra z punktu widzenia interesu konsumentów przede wszystkim, bo to o nich głównie chodzi.

Chodzi o to, by Europa dostarczała tyle żywności, ile potrzeba jej społeczności. Jest wiele sygnałów, które wskazują na to, że dotychczasowa polityka rolna powinna być zweryfikowana. Dziękuję bardzo.

  Friedrich-Wilhelm Graefe zu Baringdorf, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin! Diese Diskussion ist schon verrückt. Wir haben jahrelang über sinkende Preise, über Tiefstpreise, über historische Tiefs geredet. Alle Redner, die jetzt beklagen, dass die Preise ansteigen – endlich einmal nach oben gehen –, rufen nach Maßnahmen, diese Preissteigerungen doch abzufangen.

Wir sollten froh sein, dass der Markt funktioniert, auch mit Ihrer Hilfe. Mit Hilfe Ihrer Vorgänger, aber auch durch die Forderungen des Europäischen Parlaments sind die Milliardenbeträge abgeschafft worden, die in die Intervention, in die so genannte Preisstabilisierung gegangen sind, also in den Preisdruck, die auf dem Weltmarkt die Marktpreise kaputt gemacht haben und die die Länder der Dritten Welt in Schwierigkeiten gebracht haben. Endlich ist dieser Umstand jetzt abgeschafft, und wir nähern uns dem Markt, kommen in eine Situation, die durch die Herstellung von Treibstoffen aus Mais noch angeheizt wird.

Es gibt viele andere Gründe, warum auf dem Markt jetzt diese große Nachfrage herrscht. Der Markt reagiert, der Preis geht nach oben, und jetzt fordern wir hier im Europäischen Parlament als Bauernvertreter, die Preise doch bitteschön nach unten zu bringen. So etwas Verrücktes habe ich in meinen 20-25 Jahren hier im Parlament überhaupt noch nicht mitgemacht! Darum habe ich bei Herrn Busk geklatscht. Wir sollten uns freuen, dass die Situation so ist. Natürlich müssen wir diejenigen im Auge haben, die sich Lebensmittel zu normalen Preisen nicht leisten können.

Wir müssten eine verkehrte oder verfehlte Lohn- oder Sozialpolitik in den Ländern ankreiden, aber wir können doch nicht auf den Rücken der Bauern, die in den letzten Jahren zu Hunderttausenden aus der Produktion ausgestiegen sind, Maßnahmen ergreifen, um den Armen ihre notwendige Nahrung zukommen zu lassen. Diese Diskussion ist total falsch!

Ich freue mich, dass wir überhaupt über diese Situation hier diskutieren können und dass wir einen Markt haben, wo die Preise endlich einmal nach oben gehen.

  Vincenzo Aita, a nome del gruppo GUE/NGL. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, io credo che questa discussione è importante iniziarla, ma credo che, anche per le cose che ci ha detto la Commissaria, siamo al di sotto di quelli che sono i problemi che stiamo vivendo.

Vorrei ricordare alla Commissaria che qualche mese fa sulla questione della discussione delle modifiche agli OCM sull'ortofrutta - e quello che adesso sta arrivando sul vino - noi chiedevamo una moratoria, di fermarsi e di riflettere su quello che stava succedendo, a partire da alcune questioni che vorrei rilevare.

La prima: qui si fa riferimento ad annate sbagliate per fatti climatici, ma non si fa riferimento al fatto che questo problema ce lo porteremo avanti per anni, perché c'è un cambiamento climatico in Europa e nel mondo. Primo dato!

Secondo: dal 1950, quando eravamo due miliardi e mezzo e avevamo a disposizione 0,5 ettari per ciascun cittadino nel mondo, nel 2020 passeremo a sette miliardi e mezzo (fonti delle Nazioni Unite) con circa 0,2 ettari disponibili per la coltivazione, per cittadino nel mondo.

Io capisco l'onorevole Baringdorf che c'è un problema di fondo, ma non credo che questi aumenti che si stanno registrando in questo periodo siano a vantaggio dei produttori. Perché se guardiamo alla differenza del costo del prodotto a quello che arriva ai consumatori, noi ci accorgiamo che c'è una filiera molto lunga che paga il consumatore, che paga il produttore. Ma questo è grazie anche alle politiche che noi abbiamo fatto qui in Parlamento europeo, allora io credo che la Commissaria qui dovrebbe valutare attentamente gli atti che andiamo a definire.

Certo, è stato importante fare quell'atto di rimettere a produzione il maggese però oltretutto oggi c'è bisogno di una riflessione a fondo. Quando è nata questa Comunità europea, si è fatta per soddisfare l'esigenza alimentare del popolo europeo. Oggi noi dobbiamo fare la stessa politica e non possiamo più consentirci che i terreni vengano messi al riposo per una politica di disaccoppiamento, perché questa determina anche una perdita produttiva sul mercato e sulle questioni nostre. Quindi si tratta di approdare ad una discussione a fondo: se le politiche di questi anni hanno dato risposte ai consumatori e ai produttori o non hanno creato un problema al contrario per questi due soggetti.

  Jim Allister (NI). – Mr President, I want to focus on the position in the intensive sector. I will not take time to recount the dire straits in which many producers in that sector find themselves, rather I want to focus on what I believe the Commissioner should be doing to help. I have four or five points to make.

First of all, I think the Commissioner should recognise that soft measures, like market promotion, are not going to be enough. Secondly, she should face up, more than has happened to date, to the long-term impact on grain availability and prices of the rampant switch in the United States to biofuel production. Their targets, which are very aggressive, are in truth drying up the imports that we need in that regard.

Thirdly, with intervention grain stocks at an alarming low and the ratio with usage being totally out of kilter, there urgently needs to be action to address that balance. Fourthly, I suggest that the Commissioner needs to be more proactive in fighting for speedier approval of GM substitutes. With respect, Commissioner, you need, on behalf of agriculture, to match the vigour of Commissioners Kyprianou and Dimas as they resist GM approvals.

Fifthly and finally, you need to put a floor in the market for our intensive sector, with export refunds extended immediately to meat and hams. On that point I am not sure that helping private storage will solve very much in the longer term.

  Struan Stevenson (PPE-DE). – Mr President, let me be first of all assure Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf that I am happy to see prices going up for our farmers at last, so long as it is farmers who benefit, and not supermarket chains. Up until now the small number of supermarket chains that dominate the retail sector in Europe have been profiteering at the expense of our farmers and producers.

In my constituency in Scotland, dairy producers have for far too long been getting GBP 0.17 per litre for milk, which is below the cost of production, while it was selling on supermarket shelves at over GBP 0.50 per litre. That has driven many dairy farmers in my constituency out of business altogether.

We have now seen the price farmers receive for wheat go up by only 10 %, while the shelf price in supermarkets of wheat-based products has gone up by 40 %. Once again, supermarkets are using fluctuations in price to pocket bigger profits for themselves.

That is a disgrace, and I agree entirely with Mr Parish that we should ask the Commission to start an investigation into the pricing policy of supermarket chains in order to ensure that consumers and producers get a fair deal.

  María Isabel Salinas García (PSE). – Señor Presidente, es evidente que la subida de precios que sufren los consumidores directamente en la cesta de la compra se debe a múltiples factores, pero en mi intervención sólo me voy a referir a lo que ha dicho el señor Stevenson.

Me parece que el papel de los intermediarios y de las grandes cadenas de distribución alimentaria es preocupante. En muchos casos responden a maniobras especulativas, pues las subidas en los productos finales son mayores, como se ha dicho, en porcentaje, que las subidas de las materias primas.

La situación es, además, muy preocupante para los productores que, ante el gran poder de compra de la gran distribución, se ven obligados a bajar sus precios de venta y, además, sin poder repercutir las subidas de materias primas ni de los combustibles.

Por eso creo que —y apoyo a mi predecesor— es importante que la Comisión, y aprovecho para felicitar a la Comisaria por estar aquí, actúe y tome medidas: que se investigue y se pongan los medios necesarios para acabar con estas prácticas desleales y en muchos casos abusivas.

Creo que la resolución es muy oportuna y que estamos a tiempo para poder adoptar alguna medida.

  Andrzej Tomasz Zapałowski (UEN). – Panie Przewodniczący! Wielu moich przedmówców cieszy się z tego, że następuje wzrost cen żywności, ale należy sobie zadać pytanie czy ta cena żywności dotrze do rolnika. Mam tutaj bardzo duże obawy. Likwiduje się w tej chwili wiele małych gospodarstw rolnych zgodnie z polityką Komisji i Unii Europejskiej. Jednak należy też zadać sobie pytanie, jaką żywność otrzymują rolnicy. Otrzymują wołowinę z Brazylii, cukier z Ameryki Południowej, podejrzane kurczaki z Azji i w ten sposób na nasz rynek wpływa tania żywność, która "obniża" nam ceny, a tak naprawdę w Europie ogranicza się produkcję. Tutaj należy zapytać: czy ciągle musimy ulegać lobby przemysłowemu? Dlaczego w końcu nie zaczniemy na nowo wspierać rolników europejskich i to w momencie kiedy pojawia się nisza zwiększenia tej produkcji i zwiększenia kwot np. mleka, skrobi, o które ciągle dopomina się Polska i inne kraje z Europy Wschodniej.

  Διαμάντω Μανωλάκου (GUE/NGL). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, το πρόβλημα των μεγάλων αυξήσεων στο ψωμί, γάλα, πατάτες και άλλα τρόφιμα -που σε ορισμένα κράτη μέλη είναι δεκαπλάσιες του τρέχοντος πληθωρισμού- καθιστά το πρόβλημα πολύ οξυμένο, ειδικά στα χαμηλά εισοδήματα που το μεγαλύτερο ποσοστό του προϋπολογισμού τους πάει στα τρόφιμα.

Δεν προέκυψε ξαφνικά το πρόβλημα. Ξέρουμε ότι ο τομέας των τροφίμων συγκεντρώνεται και ελέγχεται από λίγες επιχειρήσεις με σημαντικά κέρδη σε βάρος παραγωγών και καταναλωτών, αφού οι τιμές καταναλωτή είναι πολλαπλάσιες των τιμών παραγωγού λόγω του μεγάλου αριθμού μεσαζόντων ή της μονοπώλησης της αγοράς. Έτσι, έχουμε σήμερα την αυξανόμενη παγκόσμια ζήτηση τροφίμων και ζωοτροφών, μαζί με τη χρησιμοποίηση των δημητριακών και ελαιούχων σπόρων στην παραγωγή βιοκαυσίμων, που δεν γίνεται για περιβαλλοντικούς λόγους αλλά εντάσσεται στα κερδοσκοπικά σχέδια των πολυεθνικών πετρελαίου.

Έχουμε τον εκφυλισμό των τιμών και της παρέμβασης των δημητριακών καθώς και την υποχρεωτική αγρανάπαυση λόγω της ΚΑΠ. Όλα αυτά μείωσαν δραστικά τα αποθέματα και την παραγωγή της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, μαζί βέβαια με άσχημες καιρικές συνθήκες. Αξιοποιήθηκαν όμως, για να κερδοσκοπήσουν οι εμποροβιομήχανοι σε βάρος των αγροτών και των καταναλωτών.

Αυτές ήταν οι αιτίες της αύξησης των τιμών τροφίμων και ζωοτροφών. Οι αυξήσεις αυτές επιδείνωσαν τη θέση των εργαζομένων, αυξάνοντας τον αριθμό των υποσιτιζόμενων ανθρώπων και οδηγούν στη χρεοκοπία τους μικρομεσαίους κτηνοτρόφους. Στην Ελλάδα οι κτηνοτρόφοι βρίσκονται σε απόγνωση -αλλά και σε κινητοποιήσεις- διεκδικώντας ουσιαστική ενίσχυση για την επιβίωσή τους.

Η απόφαση του Συμβουλίου Υπουργών στις 26 του Σεπτέμβρη για άρση της υποχρεωτικής αγρανάπαυσης και αναστολής των τελών εισαγωγής δημητριακών καθώς και τα άλλα μέτρα που αναφέρατε, κυρία Επίτροπε, θα αμβλύνουν κάπως το πρόβλημα, αλλά δεν το αντιμετωπίζουν, διότι αυτά είναι ημίμετρα, δηλαδή ανεπαρκή. Χρειάζονται ουσιαστικά μέτρα ενίσχυσης ζωοτροφών και ελέγχου των τιμών, κτύπημα των καρτέλ και των κερδοσκοπικών παιχνιδιών.

  Agnes Schierhuber (PPE-DE). – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, sehr geehrte Damen und Herren! Ich bin sehr dankbar dafür, dass wir heute diese Debatte mit der Frau Kommissarin führen können. Bei steigenden Rohstoffpreisen wird auch der Landwirtschaft wieder mehr Augenmerk geschenkt. Die Situation ist einerseits – und das haben die Kommissarin und manche meiner Vorredner bereits angesprochen – auf die Nachfrage aus Drittstaaten und des Weiteren auch auf Missernten in traditionellen Agrarexportstaaten wie z. B. Australien oder Neuseeland zurückzuführen. Es ist daher notwendig, dass wir alle Ressourcen, die wir in Europa haben, aktivieren. Ich habe jetzt festgestellt, zum Beispiel bei meinem Besuch in Rumänien, dass dort nach wie vor mindestens ein Drittel der gesamten landwirtschaftlichen Fläche brachliegt. Hier gibt es auch in Mitgliedstaaten große Ressourcen. Ein erster Ansatz ist sicher die Aufhebung der Flächenstilllegung.

Wie gesagt: Ich bekenne mich als Bäuerin nach wie vor dazu, dass die erste Priorität die Erzeugung von gesunden Lebensmitteln, die zweite Priorität die Erzeugung von Futtermitteln und die dritte Priorität die Energiegrundstoffe sind. Letztendlich glaube ich aber, dass der marginale Preisanstieg für unsere Bauern noch lange nicht den Preisausgleich bringt, der die Einbußen der letzten Jahrzehnte ausgleichen würde. Wir bekommen – und das wurde von vielen meiner Vorredner angesprochen – vielleicht zehn Prozent mehr in den Grundstoffpreisen, der Handel hat aber teilweise 40, 50 Prozent draufgeschlagen. Ich denke dabei z. B. auch an die Butter, und mir scheint das nicht gerechtfertigt.

Eine Antwort von uns Bauern darauf wäre, dass wir uns besser organisieren in Erzeugergemeinschaften mit Vertragslandwirtschaft, um den Monopolen des Lebensmittelhandels gegenüber zu reagieren.

  Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (PSE). – A mostani vita is pontosan megmutatja, hogy mennyire különbözőek az itteni vélemények. Én Stevenson úrral értek egyet, ugyanis ez az áremelkedés csak nagyon kis mértékben jelent jövedelememelkedést a termelők számára, ezt döntően a kereskedelem, az áruházláncok, a spekulánsok viszik el.

Másik ilyen probléma, hogy a gabonatermelők nagyot nyernek ezen az ügyleten, az állattenyésztők pedig rengeteget veszítenek. Tehát nem lehet ezt: különböző szektorok vannak, amelyek a közös agrárpolitikának édesgyermekei és mostohagyermekei, a mostohagyermekek még mostohábbak az áremelkedés következtében, és a gazdagok még gazdagabbak.

Én egyetértek Graefe úrral is, hogy jó, hogy emelkednek az árak, de kinek emelkedik ez az ár? Ezek az ellentmondások tovább nőnek és sajnos, sajnos a közös agrárpolitika torzulásai ezeket a torzulásokat még tovább mélyítik, még tovább fokozzák. Ezért kell a közös agrárpolitikát alapvetően újragondolni, mert minden egyes közbelépés csak kozmetikázás. Addig, amíg az állattenyésztők, a szőlő-bor, a zöldség-gyümölcs, a sertés-baromfi mostohagyermek, addig nem lesz normális közös agrárpolitika. Köszönöm.

  Esther Herranz García (PPE-DE). – Señor Presidente, como ya dije el mes pasado durante el debate que tuvimos en esta Cámara sobre la suspensión del barbecho obligatorio —por cierto, también en sesión nocturna— el aumento de los precios agrícolas debería suscitar una reflexión en profundidad sobre la deriva que está adquiriendo la Política Agrícola Común.

Pronto tendremos encima de la mesa la Comunicación de la Comisión Europea sobre el llamado chequeo de salud de la PAC, pero me temo que en dicha Comunicación el ejecutivo comunitario no se atreva a reconocer que la liberalización de los mercados también tiene un precio y que ese precio lo está ya empezando a pagar el ganadero europeo y el consumidor.

Muchos miembros de esta Cámara han favorecido desde siempre un desmantelamiento de las medidas de gestión de los mercados y han contribuido a transmitir esa imagen negativa que el consumidor europeo se ha construido en torno a la PAC.

Como ya indiqué en la pasada sesión plenaria, me gustaría saber cómo vamos a explicar ahora a los ciudadanos que apenas disponemos de instrumentos para controlar esas subidas de los precios agrícolas en la Unión Europea.

Sería interesante también pedir a la Comisión Europea que haga una estimación del coste que le va a suponer al ciudadano europeo ese incremento de precios de los alimentos y comparar ese coste con el que tiene que soportar cada ciudadano para sufragar la Política Agrícola Común.

También me gustaría realmente saber si el ciudadano saldrá beneficiado o no en los próximos años de esa liberalización de los mercados y del recorte drástico de las ayudas directas que están sufriendo los agricultores europeos.

Les voy a dar un dato que me parece muy significativo: antes de la creación de la PAC, en el año 1961, los precios de la materia prima para la fabricación de piensos eran dos veces mayores a los precios soportados por los ganaderos veinte años después. La Política Agrícola Común permitió asegurar un abastecimiento de materia prima a un coste razonable y al mismo tiempo el consumidor europeo se benefició también de un precio justo para un bien básico.

En un país como el mío, España, estamos viendo cómo están aumentando los precios de alimentos tan básicos como es la leche. Pienso que los Ministerios de Economía y Hacienda de los Gobiernos europeos deberían estar ahora más preocupados también por las repercusiones que este incremento tendrá sobre la inflación en sus Estados.

  Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE). – Señor Presidente, señora Comisaria, todos los que estamos aquí esta noche conocemos las causas del alza de los precios de los cereales y de las materias primas, desde la primera hasta la última. A pesar de que usted nos ha hecho una buena reflexión sobre cuáles son esas causas, hay otras cuestiones sobre las que, sin embargo, ha pasado de puntillas.

Yo preferiría, ya que en noviembre nos va a presentar sus propuestas sobre el «chequeo médico» de la PAC, decirle ya lo que pienso yo y decirle que espero que, en ese «chequeo médico», analice usted si estamos ante una PAC acorde con las nuevas necesidades del mercado mundial, porque una de las causas principales del encorsetamiento de la producción europea ha sido —estoy convencida— precisamente la falta de previsión de los expertos comunitarios.

Es necesario revisar la actual política de stocks extremadamente reducidos. Los almacenes de intervención comunitaria —ya se ha dicho aquí— deben ser la red de seguridad para garantizar el abastecimiento en momentos como éstos, pero los abastecimientos y los almacenes comunitarios están vacíos.

Estoy muy preocupada, señora Comisaria, por las consecuencias que, sobre la ganadería europea, está teniendo la subida de los alimentos para los animales, que está surtiendo un efecto muy negativo, sobre todo para las pequeñas y medianas explotaciones.

  James Nicholson (PPE-DE). – Mr President, this is a very timely debate. We all know that cereal prices have increased dramatically, and we know the reasons why. Commissioner, it is a fact that we depend on, and still need, grain imports and substitutes from outside the European Union, mostly from the United States. In this respect, I am concerned that it is taking so long to decide on the new strains of grain that are up for approval. I am well aware that this is not necessarily the Commission’s fault. It is the fault of the national governments, because they could not agree. You are going to have to take the decision, and I hope you take it as soon as possible.

I would urge speedier approval of the new strains of grain that are in the pipeline. As price inputs rise, the cost is inevitably passed on to the consumer. That is not something that anyone looks forward to, but it is where we must face up to the power of the supermarkets.

I have known Mr Graefe zu Baringdorf for nearly 19 years now – ever since I have been in this Parliament. I have to say that sometimes he gets it right and sometimes he gets it wrong; he is wrong on this occasion. I am not against prices going up, as long as the price comes through to the producer as well as to the processor and the consumer.

We must address not only this issue, but also the use of GM grain. We are importing into the European Union food for our consumers to purchase in our stores when we have no idea how it was produced. There is no traceability of these imports. They could have been produced using any manner of means. That is something that we must confront. A large amount of the meat coming from Brazil, to name but one country we have discussed, is almost certainly produced using GM-grain. How can we tell the difference?

  Catherine Neris (PSE). – Monsieur le Président, Madame la Commissaire, chers collègues, je tiens à féliciter les auteurs de cette résolution et à leur apporter mon soutien.

L'envolée du prix des céréales et, partant, des denrées alimentaires, traduit la dépendance actuelle de l'Europe vis-à-vis de la volatilité des marchés agricoles mondiaux. Accepter cette situation reviendrait à accepter que le consommateur devienne une variable d'ajustement lors des phases de correction de ces marchés. Accepter cette situation reviendrait également à nier l'influence de la grande distribution qui contribue depuis 40 ans à une baisse tendancielle des prix agricoles alors même que les prix alimentaires aux consommateurs stagnent ou augmentent.

Cette captation anormale des marges aurait pu, aurait dû se traduire en contrepartie par une absorption de la hausse du coût des matières premières agricoles par les grands distributeurs, dans la crise que nous traversons actuellement. Manifestement, il n'en est rien. La grande distribution continue d'abuser de sa position dominante et il est aujourd'hui urgent que la Commission se saisisse de cette question pour éviter que le consommateur européen ne soit l'otage d'un système inéquitable et dangereux.

  Mariann Fischer Boel, Member of the Commission. Mr President, I will try to respond to some of the questions raised.

First of all, I agree with those who say that it is nice and very satisfactory to see that the market is now working, that the reforms we have been making are working. That was the whole idea behind all the work done to reform our agricultural sector, so now the farmers can actually respond to the market, and that – from the farmer point of view – is what we really want to do.

It is also important to realise that this increase in prices is not a European phenomenon, it is a global phenomenon – and that is the reason why it is very difficult for us to take certain measures.

I would just like to respond to the idea of introducing export refunds. I think it could send the wrong signal to the sector to continue production and thereby prolong the pain to the point where we see an increase in prices – here I am talking specifically about the pigmeat sector. But there will be pressure on prices as long as we have overproduction compared to demand. We see that prices are going down on carcases; we know that it is part of the cycle and we know as well that in autumn there is always pressure on pigmeat prices.

Let me just mention biofuels, which, under the mandatory targets that the Commission presented on 10 January 2007, will represent 10% of our fuel transport sector by 2020. We never intended that this would be exclusively European production: we will need imports. However, it is very important that we start on the first generation and thereby encourage our research institutions to try to find the golden solution for the second generation that will not be produced exclusively or mainly on cereals but on straw, woodchips and residues from slaughterhouses. We therefore have potential, and we estimate that, by 2020, between 20% and 30% will be coming from the second generation, and we might be able to do better if we push the research investments.

Concerning GMOs, I can fully assure you that the Commission is aware of the problem posed by asynchronous authorisation. You can see the consequences in the Directorate General for Agriculture’s recently published report – which you can find on the internet – where there are three different scenarios. The Commission is currently reflecting on the best way to address this situation without any compromise on our high level of risk assessment, with regard to both the environment and human health.

Important improvements have already been made in reducing the procedure or the time line – the time necessary – for authorising GMOs. I would like to mention, just as an example, the recent commitment by the European Food Safety Authority to perform the completeness check within six weeks, compared with a much longer period previously. I also expect that stronger support from the Member States will help the Commission in further shortening the time line of the authorising process. Steps in this direction have been taken to increase Member States’ support in the authorising process.

I am strongly committed to workable implementation of our rules to ensure that trade in animal feed is not disrupted, with clearly negative consequences for our farmers. But I am also committed to ensuring the highest level of safety when it comes to placing new GM products on the market, and of course our trading partners know the specific rules that we have within the European Union.

Just two days ago I came back from Argentina and Brazil. They told me clearly that they will be able to deliver non-GM products, soybean and maize mainly, and the types of GM products that have been authorised in Europe. But they said that we have to be aware that this is more costly. If we are prepared to pay the price they will deliver but we have to remember that they have other customers out there, and here they mentioned China as a big customer.

So I am quite sure that we will come back to this issue. I feel certain that we will before too long.

  Przewodniczący. Otrzymałem sześć projektów rezolucji⁽¹⁾złożonych zgodnie z art. 108(5) Regulaminu.

Zamykam debatę.

Głosowanie odbędzie się w czwartek, 25 października 2007 r.

(1) Patrz protokół