Brussels, 08/03/2013 (Agence Europe) - Upstream of the European Parliament's final vote on the future of common agricultural policy (CAP), scheduled for Tuesday 13 March in Strasbourg ahead of the start of the trialogue, the WorldWide Fund for Nature (WWF), which is disappointed by the parliamentary agriculture committee's work, fears CAP greening will be the first victim of the parliamentary scuffles. The organisation for the defence of nature therefore calls on the plenary session not to miss the opportunity presented to it for the first time to take a stance on CAP structure and to seize this opportunity to get things back on an even keel, so that agriculture in Europe is sustainable and the environment is duly taken into account by farmers. In so doing, the WWF gives ground to the argument put forward by the European commissioner for the environment, Janez Potocnik, who, when addressing negotiators two days earlier, had appealed to reason in order to get beyond short-sighted interests (see EUROPE 10800).
“The European Parliament has an opportunity to make European agriculture work for society, the economy and the environment. Any last hope of protecting greening will sink faster than the Titanic if the views of the European Parliament agricultural and development committee (COMAGRI) are supported, as they will simply intensify funding of the same polluting farming”, states Tony Long, WWF Director. He believes the vote by the COMAGRI committee rewards large farmers regardless of the impact they have on nature.
Pointing out that MEPs fought in order to have the right to decide on future farm policy in the Lisbon Treaty, Long went on to add: “They now need to prove that they are looking after the best interests of the public and ensure that quality food is produced in ways that protect the environment and help sustain local economies”.
The WWF has many grievances regarding the vote of the parliamentary committee: - COMAGRI supported the reduction of greening measures and took a stance for “illegal double funding for the same environmental measures under both Pillar 1 (greening, direct payments) and Pillar 2 (rural development)”, which could add up to €3 billion of worthless environmental subsidies annually, to the detriment of environmental measures under Pillar 2 which go beyond basic greening requirements and deliver added value; - COMAGRI waters down or entirely deletes half of the existing minimum requirements concerning the environment, food safety, animal and public health from cross compliance (the deletion includes legislation, such as the water framework and the pesticides directive, and public health measures such as the ban on hormones); - COMAGRI does not adequately prioritise high nature value farming or organic farming, and does not include the necessary positive sub-programmes for these sustainable farming systems, which play a crucial role in protecting the natural environment and supporting rural economies; - COMAGRI voted in favour of costly insurance schemes financed by the Rural Development Fund (the income stabilisation tool alone could cost up to €11.4 billion while the rural development budget is only €12.1 billion annually for 2014-2020). According to WWF, this is all profit for the insurance companies and could be an incentive for risk-taking rather than support beneficial farming practices.
The WWF believes that, in order to have agriculture that is to the service of society, the environment and the economy, it is on these key issues that the situation must be redressed. (AN/transl.jl)