Brussels, 07/02/2013 (Agence Europe) - EU member state experts made some progress on Monday 4 February on certain aspects of common agricultural policy (CAP) reform, including a number of market and rural development measures (risk management).
On the question of risk management tools and the income stabilisation instrument, proposed in the rural development regulation, a large majority of countries (Italy, Spain, United Kingdom, Poland, Germany, Romania, the Netherlands and others) agreed that Articles 38 and 39 provided sufficient flexibility for calculating the 30% cap for losses on an annual basis (calculation by farm of by crop/sector) from which support can be granted. This cap is stipulated by WTO rules and must be respected, stressed the German, British and Danish delegations.
The majority of member states, such as France, Spain, Finland and Austria, said that a reference in the text to the use of indices/index for calculating losses could be a good thing. Some member states (Poland, Slovenia, Portugal) thought that this would allow the specificities of each member state to be taken into account. Others (including Italy and Belgium) said that it had to be ensured that these indices really did help to calculate losses.
SCA experts were divided about the appropriateness of a mid-term review clause to assess risk management measures (particularly with regard to the income management instrument) as proposed by the European Parliament. Some countries (including Italy, Spain, Romania, Czech Republic and Finland) felt that this could help to ensure implementation and efficiency in the new system. Others, however, (France, Germany, the Netherlands, amongst others) indicated, like the Commission, that this intermediary review clause would increase the administrative load and would be superfluous, given the Commission's current obligation to provide a report on the implementation of measures at the end of the programming period.
Single CMO. With regard to the single CMO regulation (Common Market Organisation), two subjects were raised at the SCA: payments to the apiculture sector and recognition of producer organisations association (POAs) and inter-professional associations (IPAs).
On the question of aid to the apiculture sector, the Irish Presidency of the Council of Ministers highlighted the agreement at the SCA, based on its proposal for a technical amendment to the text of the proposal. This would legally strengthen the option for member states to pay complementary national amounts to apiculture programmes (normally 50% is co-funded by the EU budget). This possibility does not feature in Article 52(2) on funding apiculture programmes but refers to Article 150 in the text on the single CMO regulation presented by the Cypriot Presidency.
On the question of voluntary PAO/IPA recognition (except for sectors where recognition is already compulsory) proposed by the Presidency, certain countries (such as France, Spain and Italy) were strongly opposed to this in the beginning but finally accepted the compromise. On the removal of Article 106(1)(d) establishing as a pre-condition for the recognition of the POs that they are not in a dominant position, the “liberal” member states (lioke the United Kingdom and Denmark), which were concerned in previous debates about possible market distortion being created, also supported the compromise. They suggested that reference to there being no abuse of dominant position could be included in the preamble to the single CMO regulation. The Presidency said that removing Article 106(1)(d) did not create a problem insofar as Article 102 of the treaty is applied. This Article prohibits the abuse of dominant position applies (confirmation by the Council's legal service).
Certain EU countries (Spain, France, Italy, Belgium and others) called for discussion of the extension of PO/IP rules (Article 110) to non-members, and of financial contributions to the milk sector. Others, such as Denmark, Sweden and the Czech Republic, thought that this extension was not acceptable. (LC/transl.fl)