The original spirit of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) was to think of agriculture as a sector unfolding in time, subject to natural hazards, including actors, both farmers and the population that is fed, having interests on which national states shall ensure.
The spirit of the new Common Agricultural Policy is different, even opposite, which explains the length of its gestation. Indeed, competition becomes the principle guarantor of innovation, fair prices for consumers and competitiveness of the European agricultural industry facing global competition, which leads to assist agricultural enterprises, to worry about products quality, away from the subtraction of these products of the principle of competition.
The political agreement was reached in 2013, the basic technical texts were completed in 2013 for the new apparatus be applicable to January 1, 2014, including a Regulation of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in argricultural products (CMO).
It points out that the agricultural sector is subject to competition law only if the Community legislature didn't stipulate differently
On 15 January 2015 the European Commission launches a consultation on the "joint salling of olive oil, beef and veal livestock and arable crops, cases covered by the Regulation.
How the new balance will be between competition and regulation?
It is likely that future guidelines will be the place of expression of this balance.
In accordance with Article 42 TFEU, the provisions of the TFEU concerning competition apply to the production of and trade in agricultural products only to the extent determined by Union legislation within the framework of Article 43(2) TFEU and in accordance with the procedure laid down therein.
In view of the specific characteristics of the agricultural sector and its reliance on the good functioning of the entire food supply chain, including the effective application of competition rules in all related sectors throughout the whole food chain, which can be highly concentrated, special attention should be paid to the application of the competition rules laid down in Article 42 TFEU. To that end, there is a need for close cooperation between the Commission and the competition authorities of Member States. Moreover, guidelines adopted, where appropriate, by the Commission are a suitable instrument to provide guidance to undertakings and other stakeholders concerned.
It should be provided that the rules on competition relating to the agreements, decisions and practices referred to in Article 101 TFEU and to abuse of a dominant position apply to the production of, and the trade in, agricultural products, provided that their application does not jeopardise the attainment of the objectives of the CAP.
A special approach should be allowed in the case of farmers' or producer organisations or their associations, the objective of which is the joint production or marketing of agricultural products or the use of joint facilities, unless such joint action excludes competition or jeopardises the attainment of the objectives of Article 39 TFEU.
Without prejudice to the regulation of supply for certain products, such as cheese and ham benefitting from a protected designation of origin or a protected geographic indication, or wine, which is governed by a specific set of rules, a special approach should be taken as regards certain activities of interbranch organisations on the condition that they do not lead to the partitioning of markets, affect the sound operation of the CMO, distort or eliminate competition, entail the fixing of prices or quotas, or create discrimination.
V. d'une façon générale, Frison-Roche, Regulation versus Concurrence, 2011 ; d'une façon plus particulière, Appliquer le droit de la régulation au secteur agricole, 2005.
Indeed, it is to establish guidelines on how the cartels and anticompetittive dominant positions L aw will be applied in agriculture. Design exceptions is an indirect ways to regulate. Indeed today, agriculture is regulated
Here, the object of the regulation is very various. This may be of particular products: olive oil and products of cattle. But there are also the "crop", which refers less to a product than as a way of producing. More so, It includes the "joint salling", which refers to the concern that the Regulation of 17 December 2013 expressed that it needed a "special approach" when professional organizations allow joint actions.
I. THE INDUSTRIAL POLICY ORIENTATION: CARE ESSENTIAL FACILITIES BY PROFESSION
Through consultations, the author of the norm draft expresses it conception equally as those who respond to the consultation. In the CAP system, the European Commission has many delegated regulatory powers.
On the one picked so, the Commission stresses that producers can organize themselves (that is to say, agree structurally) from the moment that it "significantly improves the efficiency of farmers by providing services support. "
It will mainly be services for: storage, transport or distribution.
II. HELPING BY THE SUPPORT SERVICES TO AGRICULTURAL PRODUCER
First, the decrease of competition no longer operate to the benefit of the product but of the producer's profit. Although sometimes difficult to see the difference between the producer of olive oil and olive oil ...
Through this producer, the texts still refer to as the "farmer" but it is the farm business that is referred.
Second, the accepted measures are no longer protective measures, that is to say pure subtraction competition. These measures aim to "stimulate investment" and provide "efficiencies" to the farmer.
Thus, it isn't to allow rents to benefit farmers, who would be a endangered species, but on the contrary to enhance the performance of European agricultural economy in global competition.
This is why the "crops" are the first to have benefit.
Thus, it is "performance against performance," performance of private collective support services in a cooperative economy against competitive market performance where everyone fight against each.
III. LIMIT IN PRODUCTION VOLUME
Trace probably of the first CAP, the text of a more regal method, says this private regulated system should not benefit to a high volume production (it comes back to the product and technical thresholds).
Indeed, it should not be, first, that under cover of a more caring and innovative vision of an economy regulated by incentives to private support, we may return to the same unfortunate results of the state economy .
Secondly and most importantly, the support services provided by powerful private communities are intended primarily to benefit small and medium-sized agricultural enterprises, made more efficient. Their existence may encourage young farmers to enter the market.
This would show that the regulation is also a way to competition. This is its first direction.
Frison-Roche, M.-A., Appliquer le droit de la régulation au secteur agricole, 2005.