On Monday 22 June, rapporteur Elsi Katainen (Renew Europe, Finland) stated that there has been progress in the negotiations on transitional measures for the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), but differences have arisen between the Council of the EU and the European Parliament on internal convergence with respect to aid (standardising the level of direct payments at national or regional level). It is hoped that there will be an interinstitutional agreement on this matter by the end of June (see EUROPE 12494/13).
The European Parliament Committee on Agriculture received an update on the results of the second trilogue on transitional measures held on 16 June between the Council of the EU, the European Parliament and the European Commission. The transitional measures are needed before the new CAP enters into force. An agreement on the post-2020 CAP is not expected before October 2020.
Katainen referred to agreements in the trilogue on transitional arrangements with regard to the climate and organic products.
With respect to internal convergence of direct payments, the European Parliament would like to see compulsory commitments made during the transition, while the Council of the EU and the Commission want to stay with voluntary arrangements. The European Parliament notes “the lack of movement” by the other two parties with regret, Katainen said.
The European Parliament has reportedly been successful with regard to market actions linked to Covid-19: national measures, new marketing rules for olive oil, and a lower ceiling for triggering risk management tools. The other institutions do not accept the European Parliament's requests for an increase in cofinancing rates for a number of programmes, particularly in the wine sector.
With regard to the length of the transition period, Katainen reported that the Council of the EU and Parliament had agreed on a two-year transition period, although they still differ on whether or not to extend rural development programmes during the transition period. The rapporteur reported, however, that the Commission, which had proposed a one-year period, “was not able to take a position and decide on a two-year period”. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)