On Monday 16 December in Brussels, many EU agriculture ministers called for the post-2020 Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to be given sufficient funds to meet environmental and climate challenges, especially in the context of the new ‘European Green Deal’ (see EUROPE 12371/2). The ministers also confirmed their differences on the proposals for the post-2020 CAP.
The ‘Agriculture’ Council will adopt its position on the future CAP after the outcome of the discussions concerning the EU’s multiannual financial framework (MFF) for 2021-2027.
The Finnish Presidency of the EU Council presented its report on the state of discussions concerning the CAP reform dossier to the ‘Agriculture’ Council.
France considers that the debates on the MFF are progressing and that the first half of 2020 will be decisive. The new CAP must have the means to achieve the environmental transition, said French Minister Didier Guillaume. He called for a CAP budget after 2020 that is “strong and that remains at the EU-27 level in constant euros”. France also called for a revaluation of direct aid and a single ceiling of 15% for coupled support (which retains a link with product levels).
Austria, Cyprus, Hungary, Slovenia and others have also called for the future CAP budget to be maintained at its current level.
Lithuania has called for a complete convergence of direct aid to farmers.
Greece has asked to exclude small farmers from the system of controls and sanctions.
Belgium expressed concern about the ongoing negotiations on the EU MFF for 2021-2027. “The CAP must not be used as a bargaining chip in budgetary debates”, according to the Belgian minister.
The Spanish Minister, for his part, defended a single rate of agricultural expenditure for climate and the environment. In addition, he called for flexibility to react in the event of a crisis (review of private storage of olive oil), particularly in the context of American sanctions (see EUROPE 12390/9).
Italy asked for flexibility on climate measures.
Denmark and Sweden have requested a mandatory rate for agricultural expenditure for climate. Denmark expressed opposition to ‘external convergence’ (between countries) for aid.
Estonia was open to suggestions from the Finnish Presidency on capping aid to large companies. German Minister Julia Klöckner spoke out against capping and degressivity of direct aid, as did the Czech Republic.
Germany and the Netherlands have requested a minimum budget for CAP expenditure on the environment.
Hungary has requested an ‘optional eco-regime’ (environmental programme in the first pillar of the CAP), while France wants it to be mandatory.
The Polish minister lamented that “we are not making much progress. There is nothing new”, in the CAP debate. Soil erosion is a major problem, he said.
Agriculture Commissioner Janusz Wojchiechowski said that “all farmers need a better budget”. He defended a budget for the CAP that is “adapted to the challenges” of climate and the environment. The Commissioner also called for the development of organic products (an action plan to “give a boost” to this sector). He expressed his concerns about the concentration of agricultural land (the problem of limited access to land). “I want to review EU legislation in this area”, Janusz Wojchiechowski stressed, calling for measures to facilitate access to land for real farmers.
The Commissioner will also present an initiative on a long-term strategy (2050) for rural development.
To consult the Finnish Presidency's report on the CAP: https://bit.ly/2tr8KYB (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)