Brussels, 19/07/2016 (Agence Europe) - Several MEPs on the European Parliament's agriculture committee expressed doubts in Brussels on Tuesday 19 July over the effectiveness expected of the new €500 million aid plan for crisis-hit farmers (EUROPE 11596).
The new package was keenly awaited but it brought a range of reactions within the committee. Some MEPs regretted that, in the reduction of milk production section, there was nothing compulsory in the programme (worth €150 million). Others feared a repatriation of the common agricultural policy (CAP) resulting from the differences between countries over the sectors and the measures chosen under cash-flow relief (with an envelope of €350 million) and national top-ups that can be made to complement European measures.
Impossibility of imposing a binding programme. After the MEPs had spoken, European Agriculture Commissioner Phil Hogan said he felt that balance was little by little returning to milk markets, “more slowly than we had hoped but we are on the right track”. He said that he could act only within the present legal framework: the Commission cannot impose any binding constraints, he said, action has to be voluntary. He underlined the need to retain a balance between the demands of those facing financial difficulties (loss of 30% of income because of milk) and the need to reform structures. “We have to avoid sprinkling the money around without any reforms, otherwise it's not sustainable. The €350 million can be used to ensure that the other production adjustment scheme is effective”, said the commissioner. The envelope of €350 million can be used to help, in particular, small farmers in countries where there have been significant falls in milk prices.
Budgetary constraints. Hogan highlighted the budgetary constraints, complaining that MEPs “have an insatiable appetite”. Supply and demand have to be brought back into balance so that prices can rise, said Luke Ming Flanagan (GUE/NGL, Ireland).
Contractualisation. Some MEPs drew attention to Article 148 of the common organisation of the market, which allows voluntary negotiation on contracts between countries or cooperatives to adjust supply and demand. Germany is considering using these provisions and hopes to mobilise €175 million or even €200 million at Länder level to try to regulate production, the commissioner said.
Bringing pressure to bear on countries that are over-producing. Hogan said that the scheme to reduce milk production would last from 1 October until the end of December 2016. If, in comparison to 2015, production is reduced, money will be returned to farmers. The Commission has yet to determine how much: discussions are due to take place with the member states on Wednesday 20 July “to make a reasonably attractive offer and to allow the member states to top up the sum to make the scheme even more attractive”, said the commissioner. He confirmed that it will be for farmers to submit a request after discussions with cooperatives, producer organisations and national authorities. Farmers will be required to prove that production has been reduced, with a sales point that can be monitored “to ensure that production really is coming down”, Hogan stressed.
The commissioner gave assurances, to Diane Dodds (non-attached, UK), for example, that the Commission would “put pressure” on the six EU countries (which include Ireland, the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark) which are responsible for the over-production. Speaking about the €350 million package, “we will try to make sure that one initiative does not undermine the other”.
Mid-term review of MAFF. Responding to a question from Paolo De Castro (S&D, Italy) on the need to resolve the problem within the framework of the mid-term review of the current (2014-2020) multi-annual financial framework (MAFF), Hogan acknowledged that improvement had to be brought to the way in which income stabilisation tools and risk management measures operate. “We will try, for example by means of an omnibus regulation, to make the income stabilisation instruments and the tools for managing price volatility more attractive.”
Co-financing. Responding to comments by James Nicholson (ECR, UK), Hogan stated that there were two quite separate schemes: a European scheme (worth €150 million in Community funding, with no co-financing) but, if member states wish, they can adopt the same scheme with national funding.
Crisis in livestock farming? “We don't want people to slaughter their herds of dairy cattle to bring about this adjustment in the dairy sector. Otherwise, we could face the risk of a negative impact on the beef sector”, the commissioner replied in response to fears expressed by, for instance, Michel Dantin (EPP, France). Dantin is fearful that 50,000 cattle could be slaughtered in France with a consequent crisis in the meat sector.
Agricultural markets task force. Hogan stated that he had given the agricultural markets task force more time to complete its work (its report was due to be published in October). He hopes that the report will now be published by December and he intends to organise a seminar with the European Parliament on this issue in December.
Pig meat. In the pig meat sector, balance has been restored between supply and demand, Hogan said, proving that the pigmeat sector had been reformed.
Maria Lidia Senra Rodriguez (GUE/NGL, Spain) was highly critical, lambasting “yet another failure because we have no public milk policy”. She reproached the commissioner of favouring the industrial system.
Martin Hausling (Greens/EFA, Germany) said he was “very disappointed” by the package which provides “no prospects”. For so long as the scheme remains voluntary it will have no impact on the market, he predicted. Germany's losses are estimated at €3.2 billion; the €58 million allocated to it is, then, “a drop in the ocean”, Hausling said. Jan Huitema (ALDE, Netherlands) advocated measures other than these provisional solutions, measures such as administrative simplification of the CAP or better legislation. He highlighted the risks of distortions of competition as a result of the top-ups and coupled aid. Marc Tarabella (S&D, Belgium) argued that the proposed package is designed in such a way that the efforts being made by some (to cut production) could be nullified by the actions of others (who persist in increasing production). (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)