Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EEC) No 338/91 determining the Community standard quality of fresh or chilled sheep carcasses and Regulation (EEC) No 2137/92 concerning the Community scale for the classification of carcasses of ovine animals and determining the Community standard quality of fresh or chilled sheep carcasses
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 30. 05. 1997 COM(97) 250 final REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNCIL REGULATION ( E E C) NO 2137/92 CONCERNING THE COMMUNITY SCALE FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF CARCASSES OF OVINE ANIMALS AND DETERMINING THE COMMUNITY STANDARD QUALITY OF FRESH OR CHILLED SHEEP CARCASSES AND EXTENDING REGULATION ( E E C) NO 338/91 Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION ŒCÏ amending Regulation (EEC) No 338/91 determining the Community standard quality of fresh or chilled sheep carcasses and Regulation (EEC) No 2137/92 concerning the Community scale for the classification of carcasses of ovine animals and determining the Community standard quality of fresh or chilled sheep carcasses (presented by the Commission) 1 ' '' ! ?/! ( '6 F \ ^ t V^ ' t ' '} '? 11 *4V '•,:' '•'ft. O 'Â rl 't,f- " ^ 1. " '^ 'is *. 1 , •«-+•*• ', 1 » »Vl ^ " REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COUNCIL REGULATION ( E E C) NO 2137/92 CONCERNING THE COMMUNITY SCALE FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF CARCASSES OF OVINE ANIMALS AND DETERMINING THE COMMUNITY STANDARD QUALITY OF FRESH OR CHILLED SHEEP CARCASSES AND EXTENDING REGULATION ( E E C) NO 338/91 1. INTRODUCTION The establishment of market prices in the sheep sector is of particular importance as the Community market price is a central element in the calculation of the annual ewe premium, Currently, these prices are recorded weekly at Member State level according to a Community definition of standard quality of sheep carcasses agreed in 1991 and set to apply until the end of 1997 marketing year. They are then translated into the Community average market price. Conscious of the need to improve market transparency, the Council, in 1992, introduced a carcase classification system for sheep. This classification system is a voluntary at Community level. It provides a method of grading carcases according to set criteria and thus establishes the possibility for producers to be paid according to these criteria. At this stage, except in Finland and Sweden, prices recorded in accordance with this classification system are not used in the calculation of the Community average market price. Among the long term objectives for the Community carcase classification scheme was that it should provide the basis for a new definition of standard quality of sheep carcases. With this in mind, Council Regulation (EEC) No 2137/92 concerning the Community scale for the classification of carcasses of ovine animals and determining the Community standard quality of fresh or chilled sheep carcasses and extending Regulation (EEC) No 338/91 determining the Community standard quality of fresh or chilled sheep carcasses, requires the Commission (Article 9) to submit a report to the Council on its implementation by 31 December 1996 at the latest. The scope of this report, therefore, concerns the carcase classification of ovine animals and also to what extent the definition of standard quality for price reporting which is currently in place until the end of the 1997 marketing year, could be improved at the light of experience in carcase classification. Subject to the conclusions of the report, the Council set itself the goal of making the use of the Community grid compulsory for all Community slaughterhouses approved for intra-Community trade, if possible during the 1999 marketing year and in any event before 1 January 2000, without prejudice to the possibility of excluding small slaughterhouses situated in regions where the impact on the market price produced by the volume slaughtered in such slaughterhouses is negligible. The accompanying proposals respond to the conclusions of the report. 2- 2. S T A N D A RD Q U A L I TY The current definition of standard quality contained in Council Regulation (EEC) No 338/91 reads "lamb of less than one year old at slaughter of acceptable fat level with a carcase weight or estimated carcase weight of at least 12 kg. " This definition, introduced following the 1989 reform unifying the regime, has applied from the 1991 to the 1997 marketing years for the purposes of price formation and premium calculation. The practical implementation, of this definition involved the elimination, from price reporting, of lightweight carcasses of between 9 and 11. 9 kg in Spain, Italy, Greece and Portugal. Furthermore, the Commission implementing provisions interpreted the phrase "acceptable fat level", in the absence of carcase classification standards, by the application of different upper weight limits for carcases reflecting Member State production practices. These limits are 16 kg in Spain, Italy, Greece and Portugal, 21. 5 kg in Great Britain, Ireland and Northern Ireland, 22 kg in France and Austria and 23 kg in Denmark, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Finland and Sweden. Since its introduction in May 1991, price reporting based on standard quality has worked well insofar as its practical operation is concerned (Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1481/86). Except in respect of Italy in 1991 where prices had to be adjusted to align them to standard quality, prices for the lamb weight categories included in it have been recorded without difficulty. The graph in Annex 1 shows the trend in Member State prices since 1981 and the notable convergence which occurred on the introduction of price reporting based on standard quality in 1991. rj Nevertheless, there are still significant differences between prices in the different Member States. These differences arise mainly from variations in production and consumption patterns, seasonality of supply and degree of self-sufficiency between Member States together with qualitative differences in terms of carcase weights, conformation and fat levels. In addition, there appears to be some consumer preference in "importing" Member States for domestic lamb rather than for lamb brought in from another Member State. •o* In effect, then, even within standard quality there are some qualitative price differences between Member States. Elimination of these qualitative differences through the reporting of prices of the same qualities of carcase would increase the transparency of prices reported under standard quality. 3. CARCASE CLASSIFICATION 3. 1 Regulatory aspects Regulation (EEC) No 2137/92 establishes the provisions concerning the Community scale for the classification of sheep carcasses including, in particular, the definition of the carcase, the criteria for classification, price reporting and inspections. It establishes two classification systems: 3 - a system which describes both conformation and degree of fat cover, normally referred to as the "SEUROP grid", - a system which may apply only to lambs under 13 kg and which describes weight, meat colour and fat cover, normally referred to as the "A grid". Commission Regulation (EEC) No 461/93 laying down detailed rules for the Community scale for the classification of carcasses of ovine animals entered into force on 6 March 1993 with provision for price reporting based on classification with effect from 8 April 1993. At the beginning of 1995 the Office for Official Publications of the European Communities published brochures issued, in all Community languages except Swedish and Finnish, by the Commission explaining the Community scales for the classification of sheep and of light lambs. These brochures are available from the office : Ref : SEUROP : CM-84-94-694; A grid : CM 84-94-703. Since its introduction, both carcase classification and price reporting thereon have been voluntary at slaughterhouse level. In accordance with the regulations, control visits have been made to all Member States applying the grids in the period 1993-1995 with a view initially to align grading standards among Member State experts and to ensure that these standards were adhered to in the slaughterhouses visited. 3. 2 Implementation at Member State level (See Annex 2 for details for each Member State) Carcase classification based on the "SEUROP grid" is compulsory in Finland, France, Sweden and Germany. In addition, some classification also takes place in Denmark, Ireland and, to a much lesser extent, in the UK and Greece under this grid. Spain, Portugal, Italy and Greece all indicated their intention to classify carcasses of lambs less than 13 kg weight via the "A grid". To date, however, classification under this grid has taken place to a limited extent only in Spain, Portugal and Greece. Virtually no progress has been made in the implementation of carcase classification in Austria, Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Italy. Several reasons have been put forward for the slow progress in the implementation of carcase classification. Among these are: - in many Member States, producers sell their lambs live in livestock markets or directly off farms to slaughterhouse owners or traders and have no further interest in them. The transaction and payment is on live lambs. In the UK and Spain up to 80% of trade takes place in this form; - where producers do sell directly to slaughterhouses they often sell their lambs in lots based on an agreed price per kg carcase weight. Thus, the producer's interest, with the exception of certain producer groups, in grading may be academic rather than financial; T - in some Member States, slaughterhouses are municipal rather than privately/co-operatively owned so that grading facilities or personnel may not be present; - slaughterers' and wholesalers sometimes suggest that the Community classification system is not relevant in dealings at the wholesale/retail side of their businesses where a simple grading into first/second/third quality tends to be the norm; - disagreement between slaughterhouses and producers as to who carries out and who pays for the classification; - virtual absence of a. strong slaughter sector in Member States from which there is a traditional important live export trade. However, it is recalled that many producers, and in particular producer groups, are keenly interested in classification, even if occasionally they are reluctant to have payment based upon it. They generally consider that classification, and the rewards relating to payment on good quality lamb, is a useful tool in achieving improvements in the quality of the product sold both for the domestic and export market. In that sense, classification, could in the longer term lead to better producer prices and quality more in line with consumer demand. 4. PRICES AND QUALITY OF PRICE REPORTING BASED ON CLASSIFICATION In Annex 3, price tables for 1995 and 1996 and graphs comparing grid prices and prices based on standard quality and including different grid qualities for 1996 are set down. However, the quality of the prices reported by Member States where classification take place is variable due to several factors. Only prices in Sweden and Finland, where classification is compulsory and where price reporting according to the grid covers most or all lamb production can be considered satisfactory. Indeed, these prices are used in the calculation of the Community weekly market price (Regulation (EEC) No 1841/86) which in turn is used for premium calculation purposes. In France, where classification is compulsory, eight slaughterhouses representing 10% of national production have agreed to report prices paid according to the grid in the framework of a national observatory. Elsewhere the representativity of prices and the geographic representativity of the slaughterhouses concerned is open to question. In Germany, although 14 slaughterhouses take part in price reporting according to classification, only 3% of total German production is concerned. In Ireland. , although 20% of total national throughput is classified, only two slaughterhouses are involved. In Great Britain, only two slaughterhouses representing less than 1% of national slaughterings provide prices. Indeed, the representativity of the throughput in these slaughterhouses in comparison to the national throughput is open to question. It appears that individual producers may sell their better lambs using classification as a payment basis. In addition, there is a tendency for producer groups, normally containing the more quality oriented producers, to use classification. In Spain six volunteer In relation to the "A grid", a similar pattern emerges. slaughterhouses provide prices. In Portugal three slaughterhouses provided information in 1995 but the number of animals classified was small while in Greece just one slaughterhouse provides information. 5. CONCLUSIONS The lack of progress in several Member States in implementing carcase classification and price reporting based thereon over the past four years is disappointing. Carcase classification is widely developed only in Finland, Sweden and France. Elsewhere, with the exception of Germany, it is dependent on the goodwill of producers and slaughterers. For different reasons, including a preference for live markets and for selling lambs to slaughterers at a fixed price per kg, a majority of producers seem to be reluctant to sell lamb via the classification system. Slaughterers, too, seem to be reluctant given the relatively few volunteers in several Member States. This lack of progress raises the question not just as to whether the Council should continue to pursue its goal of making use of the Community grid compulsory before January 2000 but whether it should pursue any such goal at all. It could be argued that, if such a widespread lack of interest in classification exists, then the need for a Community classification scheme is itself questionable. Nevertheless, the Commission points out that, unlike in most other sectors, prices in the sheep sector have a direct bearing on the level of the annual premium and hence on the amount of Community expenditure devoted to the sheep sector each year. Such Thus, it is essential that transparency be evident in reported prices. transparency is greatly increased when qualitative differences are removed from price comparisons. The Commission believes that the goal set itself by the Council of making use of the grid compulsory is not feasible. However, It does not feel that non use of classification, at this stage, in some Member States, should lead to its abandonment. The positive aspects of classification with regard to price transparency and indeed the improvement carcase quality lead the Commission to conclude that classification is of value to the sector and that's its use should be developed. The Commission, therefore, concludes that the inclusion of prices of classified carcasses within price reporting for the establishment of the Community average market price and hence premium calculation is desirable. With regard to standard quality, it is clear, as indicated, that it has worked well in so far as its practical operation is concerned but that important price differences still exist between Member States with part of those differences relating to qualitative factors. 6. PROPOSALS With regard to carcase classification, the Commission proposes that the Council set aside the goal it set itself subject to the conclusions of this report of making the use of the Community grid compulsory for all Community slaughterhouses approved for intra Community trade, if possible during the 1999 marketing year and in any event before 1 January 2000. In effect, this means that carcase classification would remain a voluntary tool at Community level to be used Where it is seen to have a benefit for the sheep industry. Against this background, the Commission proposes that the current definition of standard quality be left unchanged in the future. However, the Commission does wish to see carcase classification incorporated into the price reporting mechanism for standard quality in accordance with progress with its implementation in the various Member States and intends within the framework of its own competence to pursue this aim. It believes that this step will assist in making prices more transparent and in explaining differences between market prices in different Member States. The Commission intend, therefore, where possible to include in the price reported for standard quality for each Member State a percentage reserved for prices established according to the Community classification grids. Thus, a relatively small and varying percentage between Member States inclusion of prices of classified carcases is envisaged. In order to achieve this aim, some modification of Commission Regulations (EEC) No 1481/86 on price reporting and (EEC) No 461/93 on the detailed rules for carcase classification will be required in order to incorporatcprice reporting under both classification grids to price reporting for the calculation of Member State and Community market prices used principally for the purposes of premium calculation. In addition, a technical modification of Regulation (EEC) No 2137/92 will be required in order to permit the splitting of carcase category C in the A grid for price reporting purposes. Finally, the Commission signals its intention also of re-examining, within its own competence, the operation of the Community inspection group provided for in Regulation (EEC) No 2137/92 with a view to making it more effective and less costly by reducing its size and by concentrating on Member States where reported prices include prices for classified animals. The Commission intends to finalise its amendments to the above mentioned Commission regulations after discussion of this report and the adoption of the accompanying draft regulation by the Council. The accompanying proposal entrains no financial consequences. Only the Union has power to act as regards the measures proposed. These proposals extend the duration of an existing regulation and modify to a second regulation. Annexes Prix de la viande ovine - Prices of sheepmeat - Preise fur Schaf-Fleisch 650 550 o o 3 O 450 LU 00 <D i a) 350 > 3 O 250 150 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 0) 3 3 X (D • B + DK B GR • • Irl I + NL OO • P ^ FIN • S * UK - UE IMPLEMENTATION OF SHEEP CLASSIFICATION SCALES BY MEMBER STATES ANNEX 2 Summary of statements made at meetings of working party up to and including 2 February 1996 together with updated information provided bv Member States in December 1996. BELGIUM - Classification is not compulsory and no slaughterhouses are systematically classifying. One slaughterhouse may classify on a very limited basis in 1996. - Limited use in promotion campaigns. Some live grading based on carcase classification scale. - Direct sales by producer to consumer make up 50% of total sales. DENMARK - Objective : to extend classification in accordance with the scale to all slaughterhouses but classification is not compulsory. - Producers favourable. - Grid operational (27. 2 % of national slaughterings). - One company paying on classification. Classifiers paid by slaughterhouse. - 22. 6 % of payments based on classification. - Classification done by slaughterhouse staff with control by the Danish Classification Board. - Presentational difference (removal of kidney and kidney fat) being eliminated by a corrective factor. GERMANY - Classification is compulsory in slaughterhouses with a through put of more than 50 lambs per week. - Only 3% of national production paid on the basis of the grid (60,000 lambs). Producers reticent (lack of confidence vis-a-vis the slaughterhouse and clear preference for flat-rate payment per head or kilogram of carcase). Fourteen volunteer slaughterhouses now in classification but slaughterhouses unhappy at extra costs involved under national law (65 DM per hour for independent graders). Only 23. 4 % of their production (3 % of national production) is paid on the basis of the grid alone. involved Direct sales by producer to consumer make up 50% of total sales. GREECE - Classification is not compulsary - Little interest in SEUROP grid, some interest in BIS grid. - One volunteer slaughterhouse classifies carcases with 2 other slaughterhouses now showing some interest (100,000 lambs classified in 1995). - Price differences mainly determined by weight. - Problems in presentation of carcases. - Problems due to small slaughterhouses. - Problems due to low level of direct sales by producers to slaughterhouses. - Classifiers paid by the State. SPAIN - Classification is not compulsory and the SEUROP grid is not suitable. - Bis grid : six volunteer slaughterhouses which provide prices regularly (good geographical distribution) with interest growing. - 20 % direct sales by producer to slaughterhouse. As trade is in live animals the live price is the most important. FRANCE - Carcase classification is mandatory since 1977. - Grid operational (85 % of national production). - Price collection system by OFIVAL (8 correspondents accounting for 10% of national production) on SEUROP grid. - Payment on SEUROP grid on 617,000 lamb carcases in 1995 especially to better producers (producer groups). - 70 % direct sales by producer to slaughterhouse. - Classification done by abattoir staff. - The criteria for the former National grid (EUROP) used for price reporting under Regulation No 1481/86. - Total payments on classification amount to 50% of national production. IRELAND - Classification not compulsory but this option being considered. - Good progress on use of SEUROP grid for grading with 5 different and varying price levels based on joined grid positions to be operated. - Two slaughterhouses with 20% of national throughput now operating and paying on classification (still some payment problems at certain times of year in one of them) 440,000 lambs classified in 1995. - Classification done by abattoir staff under technical supervision of Department of Agr. ITALY - Classification not compulsory and littleJ enthusiasm by slaughterhouses or producers. - SEUROP grid not relevant. Bis grid is relevant. - Difficulties in working out price paid to producer (lambs are sold in batches). - Producers reticent (they fear that the price will be lower). - 35 % direct sales by producer to slaughterhouse. - Seasonality problems (peak sales, in October-April). - Training courses to be organized for slaughterhouses and producers. - Institution of an observatory envisaged for price collection. -M NETHERLANDS - Classification is not compulsory. - Little interest in slaughterhouses. One slaughterhouse participating with 1% of animals classified and producers paid on classification (4,000 lambs in 1995). - Particular interest in export of live animals 558,000 live exports in 1995 (50% of total production): one group classifies and purchases live animals in accordance with the scale (33,000 heads); cost of classification Dfl. 0. 5 per animal. - 5 % direct sales by producer to slaughterhouse (estimate). - 90 % of lambs for slaughter or export are sold via a trader on the holding. - Bulking of lambs for sale from small producers with sheep as a secondary enterprise makes it difficult to pass classification information to small producers. - Classification done by indépendant company which charges slaughterhouse (207 FL/day plus VAT) or producer (live animals). PORTUGAL - Classification not compulsory. - Producers interested in bis grid. SEUROP grid not relevant. - Three volunteer slaughterhouses but small numbers of animals classified and paid according to grid at present (5% of total). - Classification done by regional body of Ministry of Agriculture with centralized checking. - Weight rather than quality determines price level. - Large percentage of production sold by producers to traders. UNITED KINGDOM - Classification is not compulsory. - Two volunteer slaughterhouses in Great Britain paying according to grid (out of approximately 400) (less than 1% of total slaughterings) (44,000 lambs in 1995). - Two volunteer slaughterhouses in Northern Ireland (10% of total slaughterings) (148,000 lambs in 1995). - Classification done by MLC (paid by slaughterhouse) or by slaughterhouse. Control by MAFF rarely. u - Three problems : 1. 2. 3. Slaughterhouses not interested in payment on classification (see no benefit). Slaughterhouse owners are not convinced that notifying prices paid to producers is in their interest (in particular vis-a-vis their main competitors and commercial contacts). Lack of cooperation between slaughterhouses and the Ministry mainly for commercial reasons. - 20 %direct sales by producer to slaughterhouse, the rest sold mainly via auction markets. „ - Continuing efforts to find volunteer slaughterhouses but little success. SWEDEN - Classification compulsory, producers paid on classification (2. 1001 in 1995). - Direct trade from farm to slaughterhouse (producers favourable). - Classification done by slaughterhouse staff with control by Board of Agriculture. - Classification according to the grid. The Class S is not used. - Presentational difference (removal of kidney and kidney fat) being eliminated by a corrective factor. - The grid is the basis for the carcase trade. Q FINLAND - Classification is compulsory. - Classification done by slaughterhouse staff with control by Ministry. - All sheep classified with no distinction between categories (ewes, lambs, rams). - Presentational difference (removal of kidney and kidney fat) being eliminated by a corrective factor. - Classification of over 90% of all animals with prices paid and reported on them. 1% AUSTRIA - Classification is not compulsory. - Direct marketing of sheep at live markets. - Slaughterhouses small with only 14% of total slaughterings (287,000) going through the 30 slaughterhouses in Austria. - Direct sales between producers and consumers account for; 80 - 90 % of total production. 1+ Annexe 3 Prix selon la grille de classement et selon la qualité type pour 1995 et 1996 et graphiques comparatifs entre les prix selon la grille et selon la qualité type pour 1996. Classification grid and standard quality prices for 1995 and 1996 and comparative graphs between classification grid and standard quality prices for 1996. Preise 1995 und 1996 gemâss Handelsklassenschema und Standardqualitâtspreisen sowie Grafiken zum Vergleich der Preise gemass Handelsklassenschema mit den Preisen der Standardqualitât fur 1996. r* isas. Prix - Prices - Preise D 386. 9 391. 0 388. 6 361. 6 338. 1 388,7 386,1 381. 1 360,5 339. 0 371. 7 378. 5 370,3 349. 8 314. 1 356,4 364,8 364. 7 343. 0 320,6 266,5 272. 0 245. 0 F 511. 7 484,3 398,9 363,1 355. 5 471. 7 457. 3 368. 3 335. 9 348,5 443. 6 420,2 344. 6 325,2 317. 4 369. 8 386. 1 327. 6 302,4 294. 9 330,8 315. 6 IRL 318. 1 333. 9 322. 6 324,6 304,0 272,6 332. 4 317. 7 322. 5 307. 3 303,4 313. 0 319. 0 302. 5 248. 7 278,4 290,4 314. 6 299,8 277. 1 237,8 Fin 291,3 242,2 250,9 229,7 186,3 207. 7 229,3 183,4 145. 3 124,4 188. 6 198,4 168. 6 127. 4 134. 2 130. 6 96. 6 76. 6 43. 1 S 289. 1 428. 7 308,9 402,3 367,1 243. 9 175. 7 303. 1 335. 4 307. 9 207. 6 151. 8 229,0 287,4 279. 6 182. 5 143. 6 115,5 146,6 139. 9 DK 402,0 374,3 339,2 342,9 295,3 302,8 247,2 273. 8 137,4 128. 9 E U R O 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 S 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 P 1 2 3. 4 5 0 SEUROP GB 348. 9 275. 7 311. 8 VW4btO 274,1 319,9 296,7 299. 1 271,8 - 259. 9 290. 8 271. 6 eCU/100 kg IRLN 331. 6 304,3 325,4 322,8 305,3 269. 6 328. 0 326,0 304. 4 281,9 270. 9 323. 5 293. 7 304,8 364,5 421,5 314,1 186,3 289,6 295,3 318,2 0 Qualité typa - Standard quality - Standardqualititt 270,6 358,6 380,2 308,4 186,3 289,6 336,7 310,1 Quantités en % • Quantity in % - Mengein% DK 0. 0 0,6 2,1 0,0 0. 0 0,0 4. 9 19. 9 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 15. 2 38,5 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 11. 7 6. 9 0. 0 '•"* 0. 0 0. 0 0. 1 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 E U R 0 P 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 6 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 0 0. 3 0. 6 1. 2 0,2 0. 1. 0. 7 2. 2 4. 7 0,9 0. 1 3. 4 10,3 27. 1 7. 5 1,3 6. 5 12. 1 16. 0 2. 2 0. 1 2. 1 0. 4 0. 1 0. 0 0. 0 F 0. 0 0. 1 0,2 0. 0 0,0 0. 0 4. 4 17. 2 1. 3 0. 0 0. 3 15. 6 39. 6 3. 9 0. 1 0. 6 2,3 13. 2 0. 9 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0,0 0. 0 0. 0 IRL. FIN 0. 0 0,0 0. 2 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 1. 5 17. 7 3. 4 0. 2 0. 0 8. 9 55,1 3. 1 3,0 0,0 3,3 2. 5 0. 0 0. 0 0. 1 0. 9 0. 0 0,0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0,0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 3 0. 1 0. 0 0. 0 0. 1 6. 2 3. 1 0. 2 0. 0 2,6 51,4 9. 5 0. 6 0. 0 5. 4 17. 1 0. 8 0,0 0. 0 97. 7 S 0. 0 0,0 0,0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0,2 0. 1 0. 0 0. 0 0. 5 23,0 13. 0 0. 9 0. 0 6. 1 43. 6 8. 9 0. 4 0. 0 1. 7 1. 4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 GB 0. 0 0. 0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0. 0 2. 3 21. 4 7. 1 0. 1 0. 0 6. 4 42. 9 13,0 0,3 0. 0 3,7 2. 9 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0,0 0,0 0,0 IRLN 0,0 0,0 1. 8 0. 2 0. 0 0. 0 1. 5 15. 9 8. 3 0,7 0. 0 6. 1 35. 8 14,0 1. 3 0. 0 2. 1 11. 4 0. 9 0. 0 0,0 0,0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 /fc 1995 Prix - Prices - Preise F IRL S GB ecu/100 kg IRLN 441. 4 431. 0 326. 6 280. 6 351. 2 419. 2 409. 7 313. 7 292. 7 327. 3 388,4 379. 4 280. 8 281. 6 260,2 344. 3 350. 8 260. 3 265. 1 277. 4 320. 1 313. 6 250. 9 277. 2 236. 0 275. 6 280. 7 270. 7 272. 1 255. 4 265. 4 "277,1 250. 9 269,7 224,0 263,3 261. 7 294. 5 218. 4 242. 6 250. 2 226. 9 286. 1 360,0 339,5 295. 0 318. 8 283,8 176,9 95,4 237. 6 276. 2 256. 6 ° 157. 9 93. 2 137. 0 142. 0 108,2 15. 6 327. 8 267. 2 263. 5 253,7 218. 7 267. 0 264,9 262. 5 224,2 247. 6 248. 1 288. 3 280. 4 245. 1 273. 1 270. 3 252. 7 216,9 274. 0 273,0 252. 9 •225. 0 233. 1 262. 8 240,1 216,6 OK 325. 0 319. 1 303,0 300,4 255,5 270,0 229,7 225,2 211. 7 126. 0 100,6 E U R 0 P 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 D 349,6 351. 1 349,3 334. 0 334. 5 349. 1 650. 4 348. 8 336. 1 316. 3 343. 9 340,6 341. 8 327,5 308. 9 338. 4 336. 1 337. 1 323,8 308,5 306,8 312,8 318,2 354. 0 343. 7 0*SEUROP 256,2 343,2 374,5 273,2 277,2 254,4 265,9 0 Qualité type - Standard quality - Standardqualltât 256,4 335,0 328,6 257,1 277,2 284,4 258,2 Quantités en % - Quantity in % - Menge in % DK 0. 0 0. 1 0. 1 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 3. 3 10,4 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 17. 1 38. 3 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 18. 4 12. 1 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 3 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 E U R 0 P 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 D 0. 2 0,7 1. 1 0. 2 0,1 0. 7 2. 0 4. 7 1. 1 0. 4 3. 1 12. 9 26. 3 8. 2 2. 9 4. 1 8. 7 16. 2 3. 8 0. 9 0. 8 0. 8 0. 2 0,0 0. 0 F 0. 0 0. 2 0. 2 0. 0 0,0 0. 1 5. 2 15. 4 1. 3 0. 0 0,8 12,4 40. 5 4. 6 0. 1 0. 6 1. 7- 15. 9 0. 9 0. 0 0. 0 0. 1 0,0 0,0 0. 0 IRL 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0,0 1. 0 16. 5 1. 5 0. 0 0. 0 5. 6 58. 2 1. 1 6,6 0,0 5. 4 3. 8 0. 0 0. 0 0. 1 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 S 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 2 0. 1 0. 0 0. 0 0. 5 23. 0 14. 0 1. 0 0. 0 4. 9 42. 2 11. 1 0. 6 0. 0 1. 2 1. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 GB 0,0 0. 0 0. 0 0,0 0. 0 0. 0 2,8 10. 5 10. 3 0. 0 0. 0 9. 7 39. 9 15. 9 0. 0 0. 0 6. 0 4. 7 0. 2 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 IRLN 0,0 0. 0 1. 3 0. 1 0,0 0. 0 1. 7 18. 6 8. 9 0. 6 0. 0 6. 6 37. 3 12. 0 0. 7 0. 0 1. 8 10. 1 0,2 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 R3 1995 + Dk _. D • F -A-(ri «S • GB _ IrIN _i_i_. 1. J_l_Li_ J J-J_L _. 1_ t_l_. LJ_t. _LJ_l_l_L_Ui_ J_L_L I M 1 I I I 1 I I l_I_. t_J-J. _J- 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 Semaines - Weeks - Wochen 520 t 480 440 400 «> o 360 o g 320 280 240 200 160 520 480 440 400 360 320 280 240 200 160 _ o o O LU 02 1995 + Dk • D *F • Irl • S • GB • IrIN LI I I I l_l-J-J_L 21 Semaines - Weeks - Wochen 26 31 Danmark 1996 Qualité type - Standard quality - Standardqualitat Grille - Grid - Schema 500 CO __ o o D O LU 400 300 200 L_Jl_J_J I—I LLJ. LJ-J. J-J-l—LL—-L_. _LJ I I_LJ. _LJ_. LJ_L1_LL. LJ. J_. J_. J. _Ll. i_l_J_. L_L 6 11 16 21 Semaines - Weeks - Wochen 31 26 36 41 46 51 CO _: o o 3 O LU (s* 500 400 300 200 Deutschland 1996 Qualité type - Standard quality - Standardqualitat Grille - Grid - Schema i ii i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i I I I LL 11 16 26 21 Semaines - Weeks - Wochen 31 36 41 46 51 France 1996 500 400 CO _£ O O D O LU £ 300 h Qualité type - Standard quality - Standardqualitât Grille - Grid - Schema 200 i i i i i i i i i i i i J i i i i i i i i i l_L_LJ_i. J_ _L_ J_ 1_ L J_ - J-J _ J _ L. LL 11 16 21 Semaines - Weeks - Wochen 26 31 36 41 46 ' 51 CO _ o o 3 O LU 500 400 300 200 6 11 16 Ireland 1996 mm Qualité type - Standard quality - Standardqualitât — Grille - Grid - Schema _ J - L J - J -I I I I I I I I I I-I I I I I I I I I J_LLJJ. _LLJ. _L_L 21 Semaines - Weeks - Wochen 26 31 36 41 46 51 Finland/Suomi 1996 Sverige 1996 CO _: o o 3 O LU *4> 500 400 300 200 Qualité type - Standard quality - Standardqualitât Grille - Grid - Schema w *%». ^r^l />r^u. p !'""' \ , *^ £\ ±_l_l_i. ± _ L J - i _. -. L l J. J _ L J — L - L - LJ I I——_l I I I I. I I I I I I J. J. J. J_J_J„. J_ I_L. I _L_L_LJ_ 11 16 21 Semaines - Weeks - Wochen 26 31 36 41 46 51 Great Britain 1996 Qualité type - Standard quality - Standardqualitat Grille - Grid - Schema 500 400 300 CO _: o o 3 O LU N ^ 200 I I l _L I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 16 21 Semaines - Weeks - Wochen 31 26 36 41 46 51 £ co. _ o o 3 o LU 500 400 h 300 200 Northern Ireland 1996 Qualité type - Standard quality - StandardqualitSt Grille - Grid - Schema i i i i i i i i -J _LJ. _LJ_LJ. _l_J_J_L_l_J_L I I I J—L l I I I I J_l I I I 1-L. 11 16 21 Semaines - Weeks - Wochen 26 31 36 41 i 46 51 850 800 750 700 650 co _? 600 o o 550 3 S 500 lu o 450 400 350 300 250 Elias 1996 m Qualité type - Standard quality - Standardqualitât a-i Grille bis - A Grid - Schema a ii i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 6 11 16 21 Semaines - Weeks - Wochen 26 31 36 41 46 51 Prix - Prices - Preise Qualité type - Standard quality - Standardqualitàt O) _: 1° g 320 UJ 240 200 160 Jan Fév Mars Avril Mai Juin Juil Août Sep Oct Nov Dec 1996 • DK -é-D e Gr *7 E A FIN • F • Irl • S • UK • U. E Prix - Prices - Preise Qualité type - Standard quality - Standardqualitàt 435 O) I 335 D O UJ Vu I •o 5 1 235 o c < 135 l__ Jan Fév Mars Avril _L Mai Juin Juil Août Sep Oct Nov Dec 1995 520 480 440 400 360 O tu 3 0) 320 £ 0) | 3 O 280 240 200 160 • DK *D B Gr * E -h FIN • F • M • S « UK • U. E Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION ŒO amending Regulation (EEC) No 338/91 determining the Community standard quality of fresh or chilled sheep carcasses and Regulation (EEC) No 2137/92 concerning the Community scale for the classification of carcasses of ovine animals and determining the Community standard quality of fresh or chilled sheep carcasses THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3013/89 of 25 September 1989 on the common organization of the market in sheepmeat and goatmeat ', as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1589/96 2, and in particular Article 4 (2) thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 338/91 of 5 February 1991, determining the Community standard quality of fresh or chilled sheep carcasses 3, as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1278/94 4, applies until the end of the 1997 marketing year, pending the setting up of Community carcase classification standards; Whereas sufficient progress has not been made to permit the replacement of the current Community standard quality by the standards in question; whereas the current standard quality should therefore be retained; Whereas in view of the conclusions of the Commission report on the implementation of Regulation (EEC) No 2137/92 5, as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 1278/94 the goal set itself by the Council of making the use of the Community grid compulsory for all Community slaughterhouses approved for intra-Community trade, if possible during the 1999 marketing year and in any event before 1 January 2000 without prejudice to the possibility of excluding small slaughterhouses situated in regions where the impact on the market price produced by the volume slaughtered in such slaughterhouses is negligible, should no longer be pursued. Whereas in order to facilitate price reporting, Member States should be authorised to subdivide category C in Annex III of Regulation (EEC) No 2137/92 into two subcategories; 1 OJ No L 289, 7. 10. 1989, p. I 2 OJ No L 206, 16. 8. 1996, p. 25 3 OJNoL41, 14. 2. 1991, p. 1 4 OJ No L 140, 3. 6. 1994, p. 5 5 OJ No L 214, 30. 7. 1992, p. 1 2</- VI-D-2 HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION : Article 1 The second subparagraph of Article 2 of Regulation (EEC) No 338/91 shall be deleted. Article 2 Regulation (EEC) No 2137/92 is hereby amended as follows : 1. The following subparagraph is added to Article 3 (3) "Member States making use of the classification system provided for in Annex III shall be authorized to subdivide category C into two subcategories" 2. Article 9 is deleted. Article 3 This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable to all Member States. Done at Brussels, For the Council 3S FINANCIAL STATEMENT BUDGET HEADING: B1 -2220 APPROPRIATIONS: ECU 1 656. 4m TITLE: Council Regulation amending Reg. 338/91 determining the Community standard quality of fresh or chilled sheep carcases and Reg. 2137/92 concerning the Community scale for the classification of carcases of ovine animals and the Community standard quality of fresh or chilled sheep carcases DATE: 9. 4. 1997 LEGAL BASIS: Art. 4 of Council Reg. 3013/89 AIMS - To extend the definition of Community standard quality - To repeal Art. 9 of Reg. 2137/92 (compulsory application of Community scale) - To adapt the use of Annex m to Reg. 2137/92 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS (in ECU million) PERIOD OF 12 MONTHS CURRENT FINANCIAL YEAR (97) FOLLOWING FINANCIAL YEAR (98) 5. 0. 5. 1. EXPENDITURE CHARGED TO: -EC BUDGET (REFUNDS/INTERVENTION) - NATIONAL AUTHORITIES -OTHSR REVENUE - OWN RESOURCES OF THE EC - (LEVIES/CUSTOMS DUTIES) -NATIONAL 5. 0. 1. ESTIMATED EXPENDITURE 5. 1. 1. ESTIMATED REVENUE 1999 2000 2001 2002 5. 2. 6. 0. 6. 1. METHOD OF CALCULATION: CAN THE PROJECT BE FINANCED FROM APPROPRIATIONS ENTERED IN THE RELEVANT CHAPTER OF THE CURRENT BUDGET? YES/NO CAN THE PROJECT BE FINANCED BY TRANSFER BETWEEN CHAPTERS OF THE CURRENT YES/NO BUDGET? 6. 2. IS A SUPPLEMENTARY BUDGET NECESSARY? 6. 3. WILL FUTURE BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS BE NECESSARY? YES/NO YES/NO OBSERVATIONS: 34 ISSN 0254-1475 COM(97) 250 final DOCUMENTS EN 03 Catalogue number : CB-CO-97-239-EN-C ISBN 92-78-20153-7 Office for Official Publications of the European Communities L-2985 Luxembourg if