Session Documents
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EN European Communities *EP**** * PE * ***** EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT SESSION DOCUMENTS English Edition 9 July 1990 SERIES A DOCUMENT A 3-183/90/C INTERIM REPORT drawn up on behalf of the Temporary Committee to consider the impact of the process of German uni fi cation on the European Community on the implications of German unification for the European Community Rapporteur: Mr A.J. DONNELLY * * * Part C: OPINIONS of the other committees A se.QP~~\.R~ ),~.?JJo9ons for Resolutions, Oral Questions - c Series: Documents recetved from other Institutions (e.g. cfn£JitaJJJ • 0 41 If i n/c Or. En. Cooperation procedure (second reading) which requires the votes of majority of the current Consultatton procedure reqwrmg a smgle reading a ~= Members of Parliament for rBJBCiion or amendment · Parliamentary assent which requires the votes of majOrity of the current Members of Coopera&on procedure (first readtng) a EJ Parliament ., • I • C 0 N T E N T S 1. Opinion of the Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries a~d Rural Development ........ 4 • 2 . Opinion of the Committee on Budgets . 19 3. Opinions of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and Industrial Policy . • . •....... • 6 4. Opinion of the Committee on Energy, Research and Technology 48 5. Opinion of the Committee on External Economic Relations 51 6. Opinion of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Citizens' Rights. 55 7. Opinion of the Committee on Social Affairs, Employment and the Working Environment . ...... 60 8. Opinion of the Committee on Regional Policy ·and Regional Planning . 63 9. Opinion of the Committee on Transport and Tourism . 66 10. Opinion of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection . .•..•....•..... 72 11. Opinion of the Committee on Youth, Culture, Education, the Media and Sport . • , . 78 12. Opinion of the Committee on Development and Cooperation . 82 13. Opinion of the Committee on Budgetary Control 87 14 . Opinion of the Committee on Women's Rights .. 92 • DOC EN\RR\92110 - 3 - PE 141.041/fin./C OPINION (Rule 120 of the Rules of Procedure) of the Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Rural Development Draftsmen : Mr J. DALSASS (agriculture) Mr R. BOGE {fisheries) • At its meeting of 22 and 23 March 1990, the Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Rural Development appointed Mr Dalsass draftsman for the section on agriculture and, at its meeting of 26 and 27 April 1990, it appointed Mr Boge draftsman for the section on fisheries. At its meetings of 26 and 27 April 1990 and 22 and 23 May 1990, the Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Rural Development considered the section of the opinion concerning agriculture. At the last of these meetings, it adopted this section by 33 votes to 3. At its meeting .of 29 and 30 May 1990, it considered and, on a proposal from its Subcommittee on Fisheries, unanimously adopted the section concerning fisheries. I The fo 11 owing took part in the first vote: Co 1 i no Sa 1 amanca, Chairman; Borgo and Graefe zu Baringdorf, Vice-Chairmen; Dalsass, draftsman; Bocklet, Carvalho Cardoso, da Cunha Oliveira, Fantuzzi, Funk, Gaibisso {for F. Pisoni), Garcia, Gorlach, Happart, Keppelhoff-Wiechert, Kofoed, Lulling {for Navarro), McCartin, McCubbin, Marek, S. Martin, Mottola, Nicholson (for Saridakis), Ortiz Climent, Partsch {for Falqui), N. Pisoni, Rothe, Scott-Hopkins {for Spencer), Sierra ·Bardaji, Simmonds (for Howell), Sonneveld, Stevenson, Thareau, Vazquez Fouz, Verbeek, Vohrer and Wilson (for Woltjer). The following took part in the second vote: Colino Salamanca, Chairman; Killilea, Vice-Chairman; Boge, draftsman {for Bocklet); Carvalho Cardoso, Dessylas, Fantuzzi, Funk, Guillaume, Keppelhoff-Wiechert, Miranda da Silva (for Piquet), Mottola, Newens, Saridakis, Sierra Bardaji, Sonneveld, Stevenson and Vazquez Fouz. • • DOC_EN\RR\92110 - 4 - PE 141.041/fin./C Agriculture There are two agri cultural policy aspects to the process of German reunification: firstly, the transition from a planned economy to a market economy, appropriate to all the sectors of the GOR's economy, in common with the other countries of Europe recently liberated from the Communist yoke; secondly, and this is of particular importance to agriculture, the inclusion of East German agriculture in the existing rules of the Common Agri cultura1 Policy without jeopardizing the latter . • 1. The present state of agriculture in East Germany • 1.1. Level of development With 10.8% of the working population (FRG: 5%) 1 , agriculture in the GDR accounts for 10% of the gross domestic product (FRG: 2%). Although East German agri cultura1 output is significant 1 y be 1 ow what one might expect from the potential of the soil if pre-war statistics are compared with statistics for the two Germanys, and although its performance is about 20% lower than that of the FRG, it is still at the level of a Western industrialized country and only slightly below the Community average2 • Labour productivity is substantially lower (circa 30%). Hitherto the GDR has been virtually self-sufficient in food, with output at the same level as that of the most developed countries. The GDR does not differ, then, quantitative 1 y from Western Europe. The fundament a 1 differences - and the source of prob1 ems - lie in the way production is organized, including manning levels, and in the inferior quality of East German products which is considerably aggravated by logistical shortcomings. 1.2. Machinery The level of farm mechanization in the GDR is high but the machinery is not always in the first bloom of youth. Farming methods are based on a high level of utilization of chemical products with scant regard for soil which should be abandoned. Although farm equipment as such is largely obsolete, this is not true of equipment for treatment, storing and canning after harvest . • .. In any comparison it must be borne in mind that farms are organized in the GDR in such a way that workers are regarded as farmers although they would .be included under different headings by Western statisticians 2 The figures are of the same order of magnitude as those of Ireland, but there the comparison ends. The annexes contain comparative data on agriculture in the two Germanys. These data help confirm the conclusions presented below. DOC EN\RR\92110 - 5 - PE 141.041/fin./C 1.3. Organization Collectivization extends to 95% of farms in the GDR. Some products for agricultural use (seed, etc) are handled direct by state enterprises (Volkseigene Guter- VEG). Production is still largely in the hands of the cooperatives (Landwirtschaftliche Produktionsgemeinschaften - LPG) which resulted from the collectivisation in about 1959 of land redistributed to farmers at the time of the 1947 agricultural reform. Farm holdings are very large (an average of 5020 ha for LPGs). Dairy and crop farming are completely separate. The work is organized on an • industrial basis. This type of organization, based on ideological rather than economic • criteria, could have produced significant advantages in terms of economies of scale. To a certain extent this is true: the advantages of large-scale specialized farms with a high degree of mechanization have enabled East German agriculture to supply the country despite the usual drawbacks of the Communist production model: lack of flex1bility in production (rigid plans) and labour (hours of work comparable to industry), stress on quantity with no regard for quality, slow and restricted pace of innovation, no control of costs and no incentive to take decisions locally. Ultra-large production units have also brought their own disadvantages: excessive time spent on transport, lack of synergy between production units, inability to respond to risks, including climatic risks, and in particular ecological disasters. 1.4. Price policy and marketing Production and consumer prices have no logical economic basis: for example there are subsidies fixing the price of bread at a level so low that almost half of production is used to feed cattle. Consumer subsidies impose a very considerable burden on the budget of the GDR, amounting in 1988 to 32 bn Marks. Nevertheless, wages in agriculture are still very much below those in industry: while the minimum salary in industry is 1290 Marks, the average agricultural salary is 1200 Marks. 2. The prospects of reform 2.1. Privatization • Transformation of East Germany's economy will necessarily involve privatization of farms and a breaking up of large holdings, with ., diversification on a human scale. This does not necessarily mean that East German farmers will adopt the full package of the Western model of family-based holdings, since a cooperative approach could well be an advantage in a competitive world. There is therefore a likelihood of long-term coexistence between family holdings and 'reformed' LPGs of a more reasonable size. DOC_EN\RR\92110 - 6 - PE 141.041/fin./C Whatever structure is adopted in East Germanyt there are likely to be major new initiatives in the following areas: 2.2. Training Ending the strict distinction between stock-raising and crop-farming is a matter of urgency. It will require a consi~erable training effort in respect of production methodst principally to give farmers the resources to establish going concerns in a competitive market economy, to improve the quality of their products and to remedy the ecological waste resulting from planned farming . • Farmers used to depending on instructions received from 'above' will not necessarily develop an entrepreneurial mentality. Help in managementt combining training and continuous monitoring, is all the more important in that the Community's Common Agricultural Policy can give farmers the impression that they are still in a rigid system with no personal responsibility. 2.3. Quality As mentioned above, there is a very urgent need for a drastic improvement in the quality of products, not only standards of taste and appearance far in excess of the minimum standards demanded by the EEC consumers, but also veterinary or phytosanitary quality.