The Portuguese Minister of Agriculture, Maria do Céu Antunes, believes that March will be “crucial” in the negotiation process on the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), “because we are now closer to the agreement phase”. In a written interview afforded to EUROPE on Tuesday 2 March, the current President of the Agriculture Council announces the scheduling of a ‘super trilogue’ (between the three EU institutions) in March on the three texts of the CAP reform (Interview by Lionel Changeur)
Agence Europe - In negotiations on the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), European Parliament rapporteurs regret the lack of room for manoeuvre in the EU Council to negotiate on strategic plans. How do you intend to lead the debates in order to make progress on this issue?
Maria do Céu Antunes - The Portuguese Presidency of the EU Council intends to complete the CAP negotiation, which requires a demanding schedule of debates to reach an interinstitutional agreement in the spring. An adequate timetable for the implementation of the Strategic Plans of the CAP in each Member State, starting in January 2023.
As the representative of all Member States’ interests, the Portuguese Presidency of the EU Council is always available to promote an approximation of Parliament’s political positions and of the European Commission, which requires a spirit of commitment from all parties and responsibility.
I stress that March will be crucial in planning the negotiation process, as we are now closer to the agreement phase. I will promote a set of initiatives. I am going to meet with the President of the European Parliament’s Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, with the Commissioner for Agriculture. I plan to schedule a ‘super trilogue’ for the three Regulations after the Agriculture Council meeting in March.
Do you still plan to conclude the trilogues on the CAP under your Presidency?
We are working on this, with technical meetings and trilogues between the three institutions for a comprehensive and systematic assessment of the three Regulations that make up the CAP reform. In this pandemic context, I underline the three institutions’ commitment that promoted more than 45 meetings.
I am optimistic that March is a decisive month for boosting the negotiations, which will reveal each party’s commitment to the approximation of positions and, thus, reaching the political agreement, it is hoped, in May.
It is essential that this agreement be concluded in the short term. Only then will the conditions be created for this CAP reform to materialise and for the necessary predictability to be given to European farmers.
This reform is fundamental for the environmental and digital transition, promoting greener and more resilient agriculture, contributing to the development of rural areas and the structural strengthening of the European agri-food system and guaranteeing our strategic autonomy.
What do you think of the Commission’s recommendations (country by country) on future strategic plans? Are they feasible?
The European Commission has developed the ‘Structured Dialogue’ in which, at the end of 2020, it issued a set of recommendations on all the Specific Objectives of the Strategic Plan of each Member State.
This exercise of dialogue and alignment of the general objectives of the European Green Deal with the specific reality of each Member State seems to us to be an effective and realistic option.
The debates on the new CAP delivery model are difficult. How do you intend to facilitate a compromise?
The ‘performance model’ is an essential element of the CAP reform, assuming a shift from policy control based on compliance to assessing the policy centred on its results.
In this context, we are working together to improve (the implementation model), but without compromising the principles for which the model was conceived, taking as a principle a global vision for the CAP as a common policy.
Do you think the EU should broaden the range of instruments available to manage agricultural crises?
The CAP has a wide range of instruments to assist the volatility inherent in the sector and to support the maintenance of farmers’ income, such as market measures and direct payments, in the first pillar (direct aids), and risk management tools in the second pillar (rural development). These instruments enable the implementation of risk prevention measures and loss compensation measures.
The financial resources allocated to the CAP, in the 1st pillar, confer the fundamental role that direct payments have in stabilising agricultural income.
Current crisis management measures can always be improved, but the creation of new instruments or their expansion would imply a reassessment of the distribution of financial resources already allocated to the CAP.
You recently indicated to Parliament that you will discuss with your EU counterparts the issue of maritime transport of live animals to third countries. What initiatives will be taken?
As I mentioned in Parliament, the EU Council encouraged the Commission to review and update Regulation (EC) No 1/2005.
The Portuguese Presidency is contributing to this review through an exhaustive questionnaire, particularly aimed at identifying opportunities for improvement in long-distance maritime transport of live animals to third countries.
This questionnaire was sent to the competent authorities of the Member States at the beginning of February. Based on the results of the questionnaire and the corresponding follow-up debates in the EU Council’s preparatory bodies, we will be able to define possible lines of action.
The trade agreement with Mercosur has recently been criticised by Copa-Cogeca and some EU countries. Why then is it necessary to complete the ratification process of an agreement that weakens certain sectors of the EU already in difficulty?
The application of an ‘additional instrument’ that focuses on the environmental area and accompanies the Agreement is being analysed. It aims to provide additional security in this area.
Our priority is to see how the Agriculture Council can create the necessary conditions to make this agreement acceptable to the Member States, for example, by asking the other party to provide the necessary safeguards for the correct application of development agendas and food security.