Nothing new in the European Wine market

This week, after much hard bargaining, the EU agricultural ministers left much as it was, blocking reforms proposed by the EU Commission. German, and other northern country’s, vintners may continue to add sugar during the fermentation process, which is a centuries old practice. Southern countries may continue to add, subsidised, grape-must. The EU Commission wanted to forbid these practices. In relatively cool Germany the addition of sugar helps to increase the alcohol content of much wine. There is nothing particularly wrong about ‘fortifying’ wine during the fermentation except that the EU sees the sugar (cheap) versus grape-must (three times more expensive) issue as one of competitive (dis)advantage. Logically, the addition of grape-must (origin unknown) should be forbidden and the use of sugar left to the vintners. When clearly marked on the label, the consumer could then decide whether to buy sugared wine or ‘pure’ wine.

In order to keep their sugar, however, the Germans accepted the continuation of 500 to 800 million Euro spent annually on the destruction (converting into industrial alcohol) of the EU wine-lake filled by southern countries. (The EU proposal was to pay for the destruction of vines.) Also, the southern countries will keep the grape-must subsidies. Furthermore, the German agricultural minister blocked the proposal to at least have it mentioned on the label when sugar is added.

And, Apfelwein, subject for a later posting. Some months ago there was a fight, led by Hessen, with the EU when the Commission wanted to ban the use of the term ‘Apfelwein’ (Apple wine is very dry cider that for centuries has been an immensely popular drink in Frankfurt and the Odenwald.) The Commission lost.