Brussels, 18/03/2013 (Agence Europe) - On subjects such as convergence, the greening of direct aid, and the support regime for young farmers, “we cannot content ourselves with laying down principles and looking either for the lowest common denominator or an à la carte policy”, said Agriculture Commissioner Dacian Ciolos in Brussels on Monday 18 March, referring to the compromise texts of the Irish Presidency of the EU Council of Ministers on the reform of the common agriculture policy (CAP). This Tuesday 19 March, the Agriculture Council (see other article) hopes to reach a general approach on the reform (Presidency's mandate) to start the intensive phase of negotiations between the Council and the European Parliament on 11 April.
“I note that we do not all agree on the major principles, on the broad outlines of the reform. However, I am not on the same wavelength on several key points of the document as presented by the Presidency at this stage”, said Ciolos. If the Council is to play its part in full, “you should define an ambitious position which goes beyond the stage of making wish lists”, he added, stressing six points:
1) Fairness. The end of historical references is no longer a matter for debate and is a positive point, the Commissioner argues. “But it is astonishing that the Council has laid down a lower level of ambition for internal convergence (reducing gaps within a single country between the levels of payments between farmers) than what was decided upon by the European Council for rebalancing support between the member states (external convergence)”. “The minimum level of ambition has not been reached either as regards the degree of convergence or with the notion of voluntary degression, which goes considerably beyond what the European Council took position in favour of”, Ciolos said.
2) Additional tools. Young farmers: setting up is a European challenge and therefore requires a European approach, the commissioner stated; - a simplified regime for very small farms is important, and the commissioner is also in favour of the idea of a “first hectares” bonus; - least-favoured areas. Ciolos believes that farming should be maintained on all of our territory with coherent and explicable mechanisms.
3) Ciolos supports the European Parliament's idea of a rapid suspension of reimbursements when serious management and control problems are detected and not dealt with properly.
4) On greening, Ciolos refuses to “give in to the temptation of greenwashing or approximate measures which would have a questionable effect and would be highly complex, leading to unacceptable error rates”. On this point, “much remains to be done”, in his view. He warned the Council that the EP has said no, both to double funding and the principle of “green by definition”.
In addition, Ciolos agrees with the principle of an equivalence of certain agri-environmental practices with the three greening measures proposed (maintaining permanent pastures, diversification of crops and maintaining “surface areas of ecological interest”), “on three conditions”: that the alternative measures are as effective and locally relevant as these three measures, that the system remains simple and that all farmers are involved. Furthermore, he takes the view that greening should include a credible sanctions regime, “which goes beyond the loss of 30%”. He notes with satisfaction that the mandate prepared on this “goes in the right direction”.
5) Ciolos noted that the Council shares the opinion that sugar quotas have no future. When the sugar quotas system ends, coherence must be maintained: the countries which benefited from the restructuring funds cannot claim that nothing had been allocated to them. In the wine sector, the high-level group on planting rights has sketched out future areas for work on the basis of the concept of authorisations. The commissioner observed that the Presidency had taken inspiration from this, but “we cannot be in favour of a new organisation of the evolution in production by authorisations and call for the 300,000 ha currently in reserve which can be planted at any time to remain available until 2019. This is simply incoherent and unacceptable”.
6) Transparency of support under CAP: “we must document the compromise which we have reached allowing us to guarantee both legal security and ensure a high level of transparency”, said Ciolos. (LC/transl.fl)