Brussels, 02/06/2010 (Agence Europe) - The informal meeting of European agriculture ministers on 30 May - 1 June in Mérida, confirmed that almost all the different countries recognise the central role than the common agricultural policy (CAP) should play in the 2020 strategy for smart and sustainable growth (EUROPE N.0150). Traditional divergences, however, rose to the surface about how the objectives in this strategy should be reached. Whilst the majority of countries (France, Ireland, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Luxembourg, Poland and Hungary) called for instruments regulating the market and supporting farmers to be maintained, some of the so-called “liberal” countries, such as the United Kingdom, Denmark and Sweden called for the gradual disappearance of direct aid and the implementation of new instruments based on research and innovation to compensate the lack of competitiveness in European agriculture.
At the end of the year, the European Commission will launch the debate on the post-2013 CAP (in light of a communication on this theme), shortly after discussions on the re-examination of the EU budget (income and spending). Legislative proposals on the post-2013 CAP will arrive in the middle of 2011, almost at the same time as proposals on the future multi-annual EU financial framework.
Agriculture budget. A majority of member states (Germany, France, Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Poland etc) gave their support to maintaining a strong post-2013 CAP (when the current EU multiannual financial framework expires) with a budget that is more or less at its current level. According to figures for 2009, France is the main beneficiary of EU agricultural funds, with €9.49 billion, ahead of Germany (€6.37 billion), Spain (€6.21 billion) and Italy (€5.15 billion). The United Kingdom, Sweden and Denmark, on the other hand, have called for agricultural spending to be decreased.
The German minister, Ilse Aigner, stated that they cannot talk about reform of the CAP without mentioning money. She highlighted the importance of budgetary aspects in reform and the need to at least keep the budget stable. She indicated that the agriculture budget provoked “a lot of envy … I cannot tell my farmers that we are going to begin negotiations by immediately accepting a reduction in expenditure”.
Gerda Verburg, the Dutch minister for agriculture (€1.19 billion in agricultural funds received in 2009) also highlighted the need to maintain “at least, a stable budget … we must find a way of paying farmers, who are the guardians of the regions”. She indicated that she was “flexible” about how funds should be distributed but underlined the fact that the system for distributing direct payments was based on historical reference points that are no longer appropriate.
Bruno Le Maire, the French minister, said that he wanted to work for an “ambitious” reform of the CAP and explained that France wanted to keep a strong CAP. France also insisted that current instruments in force be made more efficient (diversity, environment, soil care). According to France, instruments should be well-adapted and others should, perhaps, be created so that farmers were not left alone to deal with the market.
Bruno Le Maire indicated that he would like closer links with Germany (a common position between Paris and Berlin on the post-2013 CAP will be ready in the autumn of this year, according to Le Maire) and Poland (€2 billion in agricultural funds in 2009). He explained that “when you take agriculture in these three countries, you get something important in the total balance”.
France and Germany are more or less on the same wavelength when it comes to maintaining the agricultural budget of the two countries but divergences exist between them on market regulation modalities. The German minister indicated that she would not accept a return to market regulation.
The Danish minister, Henrik Borge Hoegh, highlighted the fact that his country wanted a second pillar (rural development) in a strong CAP, particularly for fighting against climate change.
Fairer distribution of direct aid. France and Poland are attempting to smooth out their differences with regard to what changes should be introduced to modalities for distributing aid. Most delegations from the new member states want to keep the CAP as it is at but also repeated that they want aid to be rebalanced in their favour. The Polish, like the majority of new Union member states, believe that they are losing out under current support criteria. They would like to put an end to historical references as from 2014, while France defends the idea of moving forward at each different stage. Bruno Le Maire will soon be debating this question with his Polish counterpart, Marek Sawicki.
Dacian Cioloº, European Commissioner for Agriculture, called for more transparent criteria for distributing direct aid. He indicated that “direct aid allocation criteria must be reviewed because there are differences between the categories of farmers, which is no longer justified”. The commissioner added that direct aid must “stimulate the production of public environmental goods more transparently” through agriculture.
Research, innovation. Many ministers highlighted the need to place research, innovation and competitiveness at the heart of the new CAP. The United Kingdom, Denmark and Sweden called for implementation of new instruments based on research and innovation to compensate for the lack of competitiveness in European agriculture. (L.C./transl.fl)