Brussels, 10/09/2013 (Agence Europe) - No question of re-opening the political agreement of the end of June on the reform of the common agricultural policy (CAP) and the final outstanding matters - those related to the EU's multiannual financial framework (MFF) for 2014-2020 (including degressivity of aid, credit transfers between pillars, co-financing for rural development programmes) should be wound up quickly by the end of September. This is what came out of the interinstitutional discussions that took place at the informal meeting of the Agriculture Council in Vilnius on Tuesday 10 September.
“No one questions the political agreement reached between the three institutions in June on the CAP reform”, said European Commissioner for Agriculture Dacian Ciolos after the informal Agriculture Council meeting. However, at the same time, certain aspects were put on hold - those linked to the MFF, while awaiting a political agreement on the financial perspectives. “We now have the agreement on the MFF and these four or five points must be clarified by the end of September so that we are able to endorse the legislative package and are able to make the direct payments in 2014”, Ciolos stated. He reiterated that it was necessary to adopt transitional rules. “I'm fairly confident that we'll be able to clarify these points by the end of September, after one or two trialogues and a working meeting of European agriculture ministers”, Ciolos added.
“We must stick to the political agreement that has been reached”, said Lithuania's Minister for Agriculture Vigilijus Jukna, who chaired the meeting. Admitting that issues remain open, he hoped that, “within a month, two at the most, we will find a final compromise”.
“We have negotiated the CAP for three years, and we have reached an agreement. I don't see how we can re-open the discussions now”, warned France's Minister for Agriculture Stéphane Le Foll. “We have started to work on implementation of the CAP at national level. We can't start questioning everything”, he stressed, supported by his German counterpart, Ilse Aigner, who was equally firm. Germany reiterated that it had already made many concessions as part of the June agreement on the CAP reform. It is out of the question for Germany to re-open the negotiation, especially when a large step has already been made in the European Parliament's direction. The UK and the Netherlands also supported the position of the good compromise not having to be undone.
European Parliament's agriculture committee vote on 30 September. In the view of Paolo De Castro (S&D, Italy), the chair of the European Parliament's agriculture committee, the Parliament did not want to change “a single word” of the political agreement on the CAP reform. However, certain subjects are still in brackets and need negotiating, De Castro stated. “All the points must be negotiated, but we will show the greatest flexibility in this process of negotiation in trialogue so that closure can be made before the vote in the agriculture committee on 30 September”, said De Castro. The plenary vote will take place afterwards, in October.
Next steps. In Strasbourg on 11 September, the coordinators of the political groups of the European Parliament's agriculture committee will discuss the negotiating tactic on the points linked to the MFF suggested by the rapporteur, Luis Capoulas Santos (S&D, Portugal). According to certain information, a trialogue could take place on 17 September. The Agriculture Council on 23 September is due to speak about points linked to the MFF. A second trialogue could be called on 24 September. The agriculture committee vote will take place on 30 September.
Rapporteur's proposals. MEPs do not consider that the negotiations with the Council of the European Union are closed because the CAP reform points linked to the 2014-2020 budgetary framework have not yet been able to be tackled. Capoulas Santos, the rapporteur for direct payments and rural development, proposed amendments to the Parliament's agriculture committee following the difficult compromise reached between the 28 EU ministers in Luxembourg on 25 June (see EUROPE 10875 and 10874).
Degressivity and capping direct aid. The Parliament's rapporteur suggests obligatory degressivity of at least 15% of amounts over €150,000 (as opposed to 5% agreed by the Council) and of at least 25% over €300,000 (not planned by the Council), with a possible derogation for member states dedicating over 15% of the national envelope to redistributive payments for the first hectares (as opposed to 5% for the Council).
Flexibility for transferring funds from second CAP pillar (rural development) to first (direct payments). The European Parliament advocates a possible transfer of 15% of the national rural development envelope for the member states where direct support is below the EU average (as opposed to 25% for the Council) and of 10% for the countries under this average (as opposed by 15% according to the Council agreement).
Co-financing rural development. The European Parliament supports co-financing of 85% for the least developed regions and outermost regions (as opposed to 75% for the Council).
Distribution of rural development funds between member states. The Parliament agrees with the Council compromise if the Council agrees that this distribution comes under a delegated act (rather than an implementing act) and if the Council “commits more generally to show flexibility on the other priorities of the European Parliament”.
Convergence of direct payments between member states, crisis reserve and financial discipline. The Parliament agrees with the Council compromise if the Council accepts “a certain degree of flexibility on the other priorities of the European Parliament” (our translation throughout). (LC/transl.fl)