Late on Monday 11 June, MEPs on the European Parliament agriculture committee criticised several aspects of the proposals on Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) post-2020 (see EUROPE 12033, 12032).
The European commissioner for agriculture, Phil Hogan, said the proposal was ambitious, balanced and realistic. “I consider that my specific duty is to give our farmers certainty, stability and predictability that they both deserve and need”, he stressed, seeking to give reassurance.
Hogan acknowledged that one of the main challenges was the budget, given that there will be €12 billion less due to the United Kingdom’s withdrawal. Hence the Commission proposal is deemed prudent: a drop of 5% (in current prices) in the total volume of the farm budget for 2021 to 2027, or a drop of 12% in constant prices, Hogan said. He underlined that the Commission’s priority was to safeguard direct payments.
Too much red tape. “My fear is that we are going to get more bureaucracy”, said Albert Dess (EPP, Germany), saying that such proposals could drive young farmers out of the farming sector.
Eric Andrieu (S&D, France) opined: “Your proposal is neither ambitious nor balanced, nor is it realistic, and it does not take global changes into account”. The proposal, he said, is not sufficiently ambitious when it comes to crisis management tools.
Several MEPs slammed a plan for renationalisation of the CAP.
The next CAP should “give farmers flexibility and tools to meet the challenges that lie ahead of them”, said James Nicholson (ECR, UK). He was critical of the budget cuts and trade deals that might, he said, drive some farmers out of business.
Ulrike Müller (ALDE, Germany) spoke of the potential consequences of not coming to a compromise on the EU budget and of the negative effects of enforcing capping on aid payments.
“The only way that we can adequately address (farmers’ support) inequality is to put an upper limit cap on payments that can be received”, said Matt Carthy (GUE/NGL, Ireland). He stressed that 80% of EU direct payments go to 20% of farmers. Fairer payments should be a priority, he said, going on to add that the proposal on aid capping “is riddled with loopholes”.
Martin Häusling (Greens/EFA, Germany) felt speeches were fine but the policy remains the same. He added that there will never be capping because of opposition from five member states. He asked Hogan to withdraw his proposal on the CAP post-2020 and to put a new one forward.
John Stuart Agnew (EFDD, UK) protested against the proposals on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
In response to MEPs’ questions, Hogan argued in favour of the new implementation model for CAP (strategic plans) and vowed there would not be more bureaucracy. The Commission hopes to make risk management tools binding and will make proposals on market transparency. The EU should decide whether capping should be compulsory or optional, said Hogan. He took the view that greening was not working well, hence the need to replace it with conditionality.
By way of conclusion, Hogan said he hoped that countries other than France would voice opposition to lowering the CAP budget (see related article). (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)