On Wednesday 29 August, MEPs at the agriculture committee again protested against the Commission proposal to reduce agricultural funding over the 2021/2027 period.
On Wednesday, the European Parliament’s agriculture committee discussed the draft opinion by Peter Jahr (EPP, Germany) on the interim report for the 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) ('Parliament's position in view of an agreement').
The draft opinion is again calling for the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) budget for the 2021-2027 MFF to be maintained “at a budget for the EU-27 in real terms, given the fundamental role of this policy”. The text repeats that agriculture must not suffer any financial disadvantages as a result of political decisions, such as the United Kingdom leaving the Union or the funding of new European policies. The MEPs are therefore opposed to the Commission proposal for the next MFF “which would entail substantial cuts to the CAP”. The draft opinion is particularly critical of the severe cuts envisaged for the second pillar of the CAP (rural development).
Standing in for the rapporteur, Mr Jahr Norbert Lins (EPP, Germany) presented the text “which is very succinct” on the effects of the proposal on the 2021/2027 CAP. He called for constant financial resources to be maintained.
Jan Huitema (ALDE, Netherlands) called for sufficient resources for the CAP but considered that they had to ask the right questions: how should the money be spent and what did the farmers want? According to this MEP, farmers want their work to be acknowledged and legislation is required so that farmers are less reliant on support. Maria Lidia Senra Rodríguez (GUE/NGL, Spain) called for political measures that would enable farmers to be less dependent on public aid.
Karine Gloanec Maurin (S&D, France) pointed out that there were, “many concerns involving the next MFF”. She called for the calculations to be based on constant prices (in an effort to take into account inflation and a midterm review of the MFF).
Clara Eugenia Aguilera García (S&D, Spain) would have liked the draft opinion to have focused more on the damaging effects of the proposal. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)