EU agriculture ministers made some progress on Monday 21 September in Brussels on the ‘green architecture’ and ‘delivery model’ aspects of the post-2020 Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). They hope to reach a ‘general approach’ on the future CAP in October, with a view to launching negotiations with the European Parliament to reach a full agreement.
Julia Klöckner, the Agriculture Minister of Germany, which is the current President of the EU Council, noted after Monday’s debate that there were “many points of agreement” on the main aspects of the CAP. She noted that delegations supported the proposed timetable (general approach in October) and the high level of ambition on the green architecture of the CAP.
Janusz Wojciechowski, the European Commissioner for Agriculture, said after the ministers’ debate: “We are coming closer to a compromise” on the CAP. An effective CAP is needed, one that achieves its objectives, especially in terms of climate, he added. “We must remain flexible in implementation, taking care not to remove the common aspect of the CAP”, he added.
Green architecture. Several EU countries (France, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, the Scandinavian countries) supported the German Presidency’s ideas for mandatory environmental programmes for Member States and for allocating a minimum share of the direct payment budget to environmental programmes. The Presidency presented a two-tiered approach aimed at defining a minimum budget and including a first ‘pilot phase’ during which a mechanism is proposed to avoid loss of funds. Several countries supported the idea of a two-year ‘learning’ phase.
France stressed the need to maintain a “common framework” on environmental requirements.
Denmark asked for clear environmental targets, taking into account the whole period to allow the country to “catch up” when dealing with the minimum percentage. This country suggested using the model followed for young farmers (minimum percentage applied to the first and also to the second pillar of the CAP).
Sweden also supported the allocation of a minimum share of direct payments to environmental programmes.
Italy, on the other hand, is against a minimum direct aid budget for eco-schemes. “There must be maximum flexibility in the allocation of resources”, the Italian minister said. Luxembourg is also against a minimum percentage, as is Finland.
For Romania, it is the Member States that should decide on the minimum budget.
Slovakia considered that environmental programmes should not be mandatory.
The Polish minister asked that small farmers be excluded from cross-compliance.
Some countries, such as Poland and Romania, have called for an increase in so-called ‘coupled’ aid.
France argued for a mandatory redistributive payment.
Implementation model. Finland and Denmark welcomed the German Presidency’s suggestions on the new implementation model.
France, on the other hand, expressed “reservations” and suggested, with Spain, that a working group between EU countries and the Commission be established to simplify the ‘performance framework’. An overly rigid framework would lead to limiting environmental ambition for fear of financial penalties, the French minister said.
Transitional measures. A number of countries have asked, as part of the CAP’s transitional measures, to be able to use Recovery Plan funds intended for farmers as early as 2021 and 2022. The European Parliament and EU Council have yet to agree on this point. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)