10 Specific measures for agriculture
in the outermost regions
| (31977)
13576/10
+ ADD 1
COM(10) 501
| Commission Report on the impact of the POSEI reform of 2006
|
| (31978)
13575/10
COM(10) 498
| Draft Regulation laying down specific rules for agriculture in the outermost regions of the Union
|
| Legal base | —
Articles 42 and 43 TFEU; co-decision; QMV
|
| Documents originated | 24 September 2010
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 28 September 2010
|
| Department | Environment, Food & Rural Affairs
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 18 October 2010
|
| Previous Committee Report | None
|
| To be discussed in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
10.1 Because of their remoteness, insularity, small size, difficult
topography and climate, and economic dependence on a few products,
it has long been recognised that the outermost regions of the
EU require additional help, and in particular they have benefited
from a specific regime under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)
— the
POSEI scheme (Programmes d'Options Spécifiques a l'Enloignement
et l'Insularité)
— to support local
production and the supply of essential products. At present, nine
regions in three Member States are listed in the relevant EU measure
(Council Regulation (EC) No 247/2006 —
six French overseas departments[28]
(DOMs), the Azores and Madeira, and the Canary Islands. In these
two documents, the Commission has reported upon the operation
of the POSEI programmes since they were last amended in 2006,
and has proposed a new Regulation to incorporate a number of changes
which it considers to be necessary.
The current documents
DOCUMENT (A)
10.2 The Commission notes that the POSEI scheme has
two main elements:
- Specific Supply Arrangements
(SSA), providing for exemptions from import duties on certain
products in order to mitigate the supply costs of those used for
the everyday consumption or the manufacture of essential foodstuffs;
- Measures to maintain or develop support for local
production (SLP) by developing their processing and/or marketing.
It also points out that the EU's budgetary provision
for the Programme for 2011 and subsequent years amounts to €653
million, of which €278 million is allocated to France, €268
million to Spain, and €106 million to Portugal, with €107
million being earmarked for Specific Supply Agreements and the
balance of €546 million being used to support local agricultural
production. It concludes that the Programme has achieved its main
objectives, but notes that, in some cases, the resources allocated
have been exhausted, and in particular that the annual SSA budget
is nearly fully executed in almost all the regions in question.
DOCUMENT (B)
10.3 In the light of this analysis, the Commission
has proposed a new Regulation which would re-cast Council Regulation
(EC) No 247/2006, and in the process simplify some of its provisions
and align it to the new comitology provisions of the TFEU. In
particular, whilst retaining the existing financial allocations,
it would increase by 20% the maximum annual SSA ceilings for France
and Portugal, and it would also seek to reduce the administrative
burden by deferring by two months the deadline by which the three
Member States have to submit to the commission their annual programme
modifications.
The Government's view
10.4 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 18 October
2010 the Minister of State for Agriculture and Food at the Department
for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Mr Jim Paice) says
that the new comitology provisions arising from the TFEU will
require detailed scrutiny, and he also suggests that, although
the direct impact of these measures in the UK are minimal, the
value for money of the POSEI Programme is open to question, not
least in the current climate. In particular, he notes that the
Programme is open-ended, and says that logic suggests that, if
it is achieving its aims, the financial support should diminish
over time as better infrastructure and more sustainable competition
bases are established, notably as regards the supporting of local
production.
Conclusion
10.5 Since the outermost regions as defined here
clearly face particular problems of the sort identified by the
Commission, we accept that there is a case for providing them
with some kind of special assistance, and, as the Minister's Explanatory
Memorandum suggests, the impact of the measures proposed in the
UK is minimal. Having said that, the sums involved each year are
by no means negligible, and we note the Government's view that,
if the measures are achieving their stated aims, the need for
financial support from the EU should diminish over time —
a consideration not reflected in the current proposal. Consequently,
although we do not propose to withhold clearance, we think it
right to draw the proposal to the attention of the House.
28 Guadeloupe, French Guyana, Martinique, Reunion,
Saint-Barthelemy and Saint-Martin. Back
|
