---

Dept for Environment Food and Rural Affairs

Answer

Mr. Hood: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the outcome was of the Agriculture and Fisheries Council on 22 and 23 November; what the Government's stance was on the issues discussed, including its voting record; and if she will make a statement. [199752] Margaret Beckett: My hon. Friend the Under- Secretary and I represented the United Kingdom at a meeting of the Agriculture and Fisheries Council in Brussels on 22 and 23 November 2004. The Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish Ministers with responsibility for agriculture and fisheries were also present. The Council opened on the first day in office of the new Commission. The Council welcomed Commissioners Mariann Fischer-Boel, Markos Kyprianou and Joe Borg to their new posts. The Presidency secured qualified majority support for a political agreement on a compromise text updating the current rules on the welfare of animals during transport. I supported the proposal, which contains significant improvements to the current rules, including a strengthening of the enforcement rules in Europe, stricter rules for journeys of more than eight hours and new rules for the transport of horses. The proposal also sets out a clear timetable for the review of the new rules together with a commitment to address the issue of journey times, space allowances and rest periods no later than four years after they have come into effect. The Council had a lengthy exchange of views on reform in the sugar sector, based on the Commission's communication of July 2004. The Commission indicated that it would not make formal proposals until May or June next year when the result of the EU's appeal against a WTO panel ruling on the sugar regime had been received. The Commission would press for political agreement before the WTO Ministerial scheduled for Hong Kong in December 2005. A majority of member states were critical of the Commission's approach thus far and argued for minimal change, principally aimed at maintaining production in all those areas of the EU where it is currently found. I argued that the current regime was unsustainable and that reform was inescapable. The EU needed to honour its external obligations and I welcomed the Commission's commitment to bringing forward a draft action plan for assistance to the ACP countries by the end of the year. In a brief discussion of the rural development and CAP financing proposals, there was general support for the rural development measures, although concerns were expressed on a number of specific issues such as the proposed structure for the new regulation and the treatment of less favoured areas. I stressed the importance of further transfers to Pillar 2 measures, the case for a more objective allocation of funds and the need for equitable treatment of the non-euro member states. Discussion will continue at official level. The Presidency drew attention to its initiative for member states to co-operate on agricultural research in order to avoid duplication and to maximise value for money. I supported this initiative and expressed our readiness to co-operate with Luxembourg in taking it forward next year. Under Other Business, Estonia described its problems relating to a Russian ban on imports of plant material, Spain called for collaboration with Morocco in the field of animal health, Germany asked the Commission to bring forward legislation on the marketing of seeds of plant varieties of conservation importance, and Slovakia requested funding under the natural disasters heading following gales in the High Tatras national park. The Commission reported progress in the bilateral negotiations on a 2005 fisheries agreement with Norway. Good progress had been made in a first round of negotiations on 15-19 November, including provisional agreement on some of the more contentious issues. My hon. Friend and other member states congratulated the Commission on progress so far while underlining the importance of concluding the negotiations rapidly so that EU fishermen are able to fish in Norway waters from 1 January. The Council had a first debate on the Commission's proposals for a European Fisheries Fund (to replace the existing fund for structural improvements in the fisheries sector from 2007). My hon. Friend made clear that the proposal from certain other member states that this should provide for subsidies for fleet renewal would mean going back on a key plank of the 2002 reform of the Common Fisheries Policy and was not acceptable. Discussions will continue next year. The Council reached agreement by qualified majority on a proposal to allocate quotas to deep sea species to certain new member states, based on a presidency compromise tabled at the meeting. Although the compromise went some way towards requests from the United Kingdom and others that new allocations should be on the same basis as allocation to the EU15, the UK abstained in the vote because the proposal had not cleared Parliamentary Scrutiny and because the Government have concerns about the management regime for deep sea species. The Council held a discussion on management measures for fisheries in the Baltic Sea.

Secondary information

Type

Written question

Reference

428 c509-10W; 199752

Session

2004-05

Subjects

Animal welfare Common fisheries policy Agriculture Fishery agreements EU action Fish Norway Voting behaviour Transport Reform Research Subsidies Common agricultural policy Quotas EU Agriculture and Fisheries Council Common sugar regime

Link

View this Written question on www.publications.parliament.uk