Brussels, 15/11/2011 (Agence Europe) - Several EU agriculture ministers, meeting in Brussels on Monday 14 November, were critical of the proposals on the overhaul of the system of direct payments to farmers, and in particular of the arrangements for greening aid and of the new allocation of aid among countries. The Council held an exchange of views on the direct payments strand of the legislative proposals on the reform of the common agricultural policy (CAP). At their meeting on 15-16 December, ministers will discuss the rural development chapter of the reform proposals.
The overwhelming majority of delegations took the view that the new procedures for direct payments seemed to run counter to the key objective of simplifying the CAP. The Spanish minister was particularly outspoken. “We are against the basic payment proposed. It will have a negative impact and will harm the social legitimacy of the CAP”, she said.
The re-distribution of direct payments among member states (convergence), as proposed by the Commission, was very coolly received by the countries which would lose out in the change. The Commission has proposed that, for those countries which receive less than 90% of the EU average, direct payments per hectare will be increased by one third of the difference between what they currently receive and 90% of the EU average. Germany, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, Ireland and Luxembourg see these payments as part of national budgetary allocations and want Community rural development funding (second pillar of the CAP) taken into account in calculations. Conversely, the countries which joined the EU in 2004 and 2007 feel that the catch-up proposals do not go far enough. France, Ireland and Italy in particular called for greater flexibility on the proposed convergence of payments in member states. The Commission sought to provide reassurance, indicating that no member state will see its level of direct aid fall by more than 6% over the seven years
Several countries, such as France, Germany, Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Portugal and Luxembourg, criticised the proposal to green 30% of direct aid. Germany, Slovakia, the Czech Republic and the United Kingdom in particular complained about the requirement that at least 7% of land be used as ecological reservoirs or as part of the landscape. Sweden welcomed the proposals on greening.
Several ministers including those of Romania, Austria and the United Kingdom, criticised the proposed definition of “active farmer”.
Measures proposed to help small farmers and young farmers were rather well received. Some ministers would prefer these aid schemes to be optional (for example, the Belgian minister with regard to the regime for small farmers). The Netherlands and Sweden were unhappy that production-linked payments were to be retained. On the other hand, France called for the Commission proposal in this area not to be watered down.
Several countries, such as Slovenia and the Czech Republic, criticised the proposal to cap direct aid.
At a press conference after the Council, European Agriculture Commissioner Dacian Diolos said that the discussion had demonstrated that “the debate will focus on a limited number of points”. Discussion will continue under the Danish Presidency of the European Council, from 1 January to 31 June 2012, with a view to “reaching a draft compromise”. The commissioner suggested that the greening of aid was an idea that had “quite strong support” within the Council. Discussion was about “how to apply the greening to take account of the specific situations”, he stated. Some countries are calling for greater flexibility in implementing direct payments (with regard particularly to convergence within countries), while others feel that convergence among member states does not go far enough, the commissioner acknowledged. He noted, too, that countries have found the payment system too complex. “The measures tabled mean that various specific situations in the EU can be treated in a uniform way: supporting farmers' basic income and encouraging them to use practices that help manage natural resources, dealing with the issues of young farmers and small farms, helping less-favoured areas and providing for coupled payments for specific produce in certain regions”, he said. (LC/transl.rt)