Wine Industry Report

Commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel presented the Commission’s Communication on the reform of the common organisation of the market in wine in Parliament today. The members of the AGRI committee cautiously welcomed the initiative, and offered differing criticisms of the proposed reform process.

Ms. Fischer Boel noted that of the four options the Commission examined (minor changes, full deregulation, reform along the lines of the general CAP reform and a thorough reform tailored to the wine sector), the last would be the most appropriate. She mentioned that the primary goals of the reorganisation would be “to increase competitiveness of the EU’s wine producers, to create a wine regime that operates through clear, simple rules, and to preserve the best traditions of EU wine production.”

The reform can be envisaged as a single-step or a two-step process. Nevertheless, both variants would “abolish restrictions on planting rights”, and get rid of the distillation and alcohol storage programmes, in favor of national budgetary envelopes for alternative measures suited to each region. The difference stems from the fact that the two-step process would first offer a grubbing-up payment to farmers in order to decrease overall production in the Union. This payment would be voluntary, but all Member States would be required to offer it to their farmers.

The Commissioner said the EU should accept wine-making practices that have been agreed by the OIV, but that the Commission would “carefully filter out any techniques which it thought genuinely undesirable.” She also suggested changing labelling rules to bring them into line with existing PGI/PDO regulations in the EU.

MEPs responded with cautious optimism to the Commissioner’s proposals. Elisabeth Jeggle (EPP-ED, DE) praised the Commissioner for “seeing the realities of today” while “maintaining optimism of the future”. She emphasized the need to inform consumers of different wine-making practices and and to reduce the distillation measures. Katerina Batzeli (PES, EL) mentioned that the goal of the EP and the Commission was the same: “to ’sugar the pill’ as much as we can” for the upcoming reforms. She worried that grubbing-up funds would possibly lead to entire regions (and therefore wine varieties) ceasing production altogether.

Willem Schuth (ALDE, DE) said his group’s main priority was to maintain the idea of subsidiarity in this project, while Friedrich-Wilhelm Graefe zu Baringdorf (Greens/EFA, DE) worried about what alternative production would be available to farmers who chose to abandon their vineyards. He also said that “the idea of distillation has always been a crazy idea” and he welcomed efforts to get rid of it. Giusto Catania (UEL/NGL, IT) said that the EU should be much more agressive in fighting for exemptions from WTO rules in the wine sector.

Sergio Berlato (UEN, IT) also suggested focusing more on the effects imports were having on the market. Jean-Claude Martinez (NI, FR) called the Commissioner’s proposal “populist” and disputed the claim that there was overproduction in the EU, saying that there is a global deficit, when one also takes into consideration vermouth and brandy production. He echoed several previous speakers by referring to wine as a “product of civilisation” requiring active protection by the Union.

For the agenda of the meeting, please see: HERE

Next AGRI committee meeting: 12-13 July, 2006, Brussels.