While the European Commission has opted for avoidance tactics in WTO negotiations in Geneva, it has launched an attack in Brussels targeting the intervention regime applying to the EU grain market.
On June 30, the European Commission started the attack on the regime with the Advisory Group on cereals and oil & proteinseed crops by focusing on the findings of the study on the joint organisation of the cereal market which it had had done by the British firm, LMC International. The study wrongly concludes that intervention mechanisms are responsible for the increase in public grain stocks in the EU, whereas it is actually the result of inadequate preparation for the enlargement of the Union, when consideration should have been given to infrastructure problems in New Member States.
The fact is that the Commission’s ambition to do away with intervention is because, with the positions it has adopted at the WTO on access to the EU market, it has run the risk of having to cope with a massive increase of European grain in public stocks.
Any genuinely coherent policy defending the interests of European grain farmers would stress the importance of the role played by intervention, not only as the ultimate means of stopping uncontrolled competition and distortion arising from exchange rates, but also as an essential tool for regulating a market that has to meet an ever-increasing number of requirements.
Most EU member states are in favour of this type of coherent approach, as was seen with reactions to the attitude shown by Peter Mandelson, and to the recommendations made by LMC International. ORAMA has working relations with both French and European partners and will make every effort to support these responses and stop any unacceptable decisions being made.
WTO + Intervention – an unacceptable combination