Brussels, 22/04/2013 (Agence Europe) - In Luxembourg on Monday 22 April, some EU countries, like Spain, Italy and Portugal, showed themselves to be somewhat intransigent on certain areas of the common agricultural policy (CAP) reform - particularly on the internal convergence of direct aid (redistribution of payment between farmers within the same country). The Agriculture Council reviewed the state of negotiations with the European Parliament after six of the 36 trilogues that have been planned. The objective remains that of reaching a political agreement between the institutions of the EU on the CAP post-2013. France, Germany and the United Kingdom preferred not to give their opinion at this stage.
“The negotiations (between the Council and the Parliament) continue in a very good atmosphere”, said Irish Minister for Agriculture Simon Coveney. He stressed the need “to prepare the ground” for an agreement on the most difficult subjects. The ministers will be able to tackle the reform at the informal Agriculture Council in Dublin on 27-28 May, and the Agriculture Council in June will mark a “turning point” for seeing whether a political agreement is possible. The Irish Presidency of the EU Council of Ministers will follow the mandate it is given, Coveney assured. He nonetheless called on the member states to show flexibility because “the Presidency will perhaps have to modify the mandate” ahead of a final agreement.
European Commissioner for Agriculture Dacian Ciolos believed that “the Council's (general) approach is a starting point for the final negotiation and not an end destination”. Like the other institutions, the Council will have to budge on several subjects, he said.
Ciolos considered that the young farmers' scheme is part of the list of subjects on which the Council's general approach “does not constitute a balance”, as the Council is opting for an optional regime. “Only an obligatory approach, open to all young Europeans, is able to respond to the challenge of installation”, Ciolos argued (he enjoys the Parliament's support on this subject).
On the issue of small farms, the Commission also argues for a compulsory system.
Another subject on which much work remains to be done is the greening of aid. The most important points have not yet been tackled in the trilogue, but this will soon come. Ciolos intends to be “very careful that the equivalence system we set up is credible, without double financing”. In Ciolos' opinion, internal convergence is a necessary development for guaranteeing the fairness of the income support system in the long term. “We won't be able to afford to choose the lowest bidder option on this”, he told the Council. “Transparently, we will have to set a clear objective to reach by 2019, with the implementation of a credible minimum threshold, and not a cosmetic one. The Commission will not compromise on this point, and I have the feeling that the European Parliament will be just as firm”.
Lastly, Ciolos supported the capping or gradual decrease of aid.
“All the parties will have to budge a bit”, said the Danish minister. She argued for aid to young farmers and small farms to be optional, and opposes to an obligatory negative list on the definition of active farmers. She refuses any compromise on what has been decided by the European Council (particularly external convergence and financial discipline).
The Commission's position on internal convergence “is not acceptable” said the Spanish minister, Miguel Arias Canete. Portugal also raised this issue (need for flexibility) and argued for the same approach to both internal and external convergence. Portugal believes that the countries that lost their sugar quotas should again be allowed to produce it. And on the issue of milk, the disappearance of quotas in 2015 concerns the Portuguese minister. He called for a clear response for an alternative process (to quotas).
The Italian minister said that internal convergence was “a very thorny” issue. He recommended “the greatest flexibility” on this point.
Internal convergence is a very important issue, the Greek minister said. “Any dramatic change would be harmful for producers.” He recommended finding a good balance between the Commission's strategic approach and the pragmatic policy of the Spanish minister. According to Greece, the adaptation must be progressive but a precise objective must be defined in order to avoid too much flexibility.
With regard to financial discipline, Italy, Greece and Cyprus especially called for maintaining €5,000 as the application threshold for financial discipline (reduction of aid when there is no longer any margin in the budget). Latvia backed the Parliament's amendment 139 on direct payments. Cyprus drew the Council's attention to the expected decrease of 30% in credits under the rural development programme, although the average decrease is of 13%.
The Netherlands signalled that it could not go further on greening and direct payments. What are we being asked for more flexibility on, wondered the Dutch minister. “We can see about the young farmers' scheme”, she concluded. (LC/transl.fl)