Discussions will continue in the Special Committee on Agriculture (SCA) on simplifying certain agriculture rules (see other article).
The Maltese Presidency of the Council of Ministers of the EU wants to finalise the omnibus agriculture text at the April Council meeting. This package may be adopted by qualified majority. A first compromise text was put to the SCA experts on 27 February. Progress was made in some areas.
Notion of active farmer. The proposal to make application optional has the support of quite a wide majority in Council.
50-50 rule. The Commission proposes that the provision under which sums not recovered for certain agricultural payments are borne equally by the Community and the member state should be reviewed. The Commission wants to make the member state responsible for all of the monies not recovered. This move has not been welcomed by numerous countries as it would increase the pressure on national budgets. There is, therefore, a very wide majority in Council which supports the status quo. Many countries are not keen to return to major policy issues that were agreed in the 2013 reform.
Income stabilisation tool. In general terms, the Commission proposal to put a specific income stabilisation tool in place for each sector (applicable at national and regional levels) has majority support in Council. Debate continues on arrangements for triggering this instrument. It would, the Commission says, cover up to a maximum of 70% of losses in the event of a drop of over 20% (compared with 30% under current rules) in a farmer’s average annual income. Discussions continue in Council over the 20% or 30% threshold but most delegations would appear to be leaning towards 20%.
Greening. The Presidency suggestion on permanent grasslands is the one that has most chance of success (optional approach). Land given over to growing grass and not part of the crop rotation system for a period of five years or more will be deemed to be permanent grassland. That is the general rule; some delegations (Germany, Austria and Finland) want the period of time to be seven years. Leaving it up to the member states would seem, then, to offer the best possibility.
Progress has not been as swift on the other chapters of the omnibus text. The financial regulation provisions, the centrepiece of the Commission proposal have moved particularly slowly. (see EUROPE 11714 and 11711). (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)