Brussels, 31/05/2012 (Agence Europe) - The meeting of the Special Committee on Agriculture (SCA) on Tuesday 29 May was given over to preparation of the exploratory debate on the rural development component of CAP reform at the next Agriculture Council on 18 June.
To prepare the questionnaire that will provide the framework for the Council debate, the Danish Presidency of the Council of Ministers opened discussions in the SCA on a number of points in the Commission's proposals for rural development.
Recital 28 of the proposed regulation says that member states should have to spend a minimum of 25% of the total contribution from the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) to each rural development programme for climate change mitigation and adaptation and land management, through the agri-environment-climate, organic farming and payments to areas facing natural or other specific constraints measures.
The Presidency asked the delegations if the 25% threshold was appropriate and about measures to be taken into account in this percentage. Several member states, including Spain, Slovakia and Ireland, without opposing the threshold, shared the view of the Council legal department that, since it featured in a recital, it was guidance and not a requirement. Many delegations, which included Germany, France, Poland, Portugal, the Netherlands and Italy, felt that indicating a threshold was not essential and suggested, therefore, removing it from the recitals. These countries argued that each member state should be able to adapt the measures to suit the needs of its regions.
On the other hand, several delegations, such as the Czech Republic, Estonia and the Danish delegation, said they backed the threshold and would prefer it to be included in an article rather than in a recital. Some countries, like Sweden and the United Kingdom, suggested increasing the threshold. Several member states, including Slovenia, Poland, Belgium and Ireland, took the view, further, that measures in the rural development regulation to counter climate change should take account of initiatives on forests and biodiversity, management of Natura 2000 areas and application of the water framework directive.
Article 65 of the regulation sets out the joint-funding levels for rural development initiatives: a single fixed rate of 50% will apply for most measures, though some specific measures will enjoy higher joint-funding levels. Overall, the delegations backed the Commission proposal. Some - France, Spain, Germany, Bulgaria and Ireland notably - expressed the view, however, that environmental measures should have a higher joint-funding rate.
A number of delegations, such as the United Kingdom, Germany and Ireland, broached the issue of the proposed transferring funds from the first pillar (direct aid and market expenditure) to the second pillar (rural development), where measures might receive 100% funding. For some countries, such as Germany and Finland, the idea of a single rate is not really a simplification. Many countries, including Spain, Germany, the United Kingdom and Slovakia, felt that joint-funding levels should be increased for convergence regions.
The Commission's proposal (like the current provisions) provides for submission of programmes such as state aid to Directorate General Agriculture at the Commission for measures relating to rural development and to DG Competition for similar support which falls outside the scope of Article 42 of the Treaty (state aid for less-favoured areas and for economic development). A clear majority of countries, which included Germany, France, the United Kingdom, Spain, Poland, the Netherlands and Ireland, argued for a “one-window” approach which would simplify submission and approval procedures for programmes. The Commission felt that, while simplification would be welcome, it should rather be within the framework of a more general regulation on submission of programmes (various funds). (LC/transl.rt)