The ‘new delivery model’ will be the most contentious issue in the negotiations between EU institutions, on Friday 26 March, on the reform of the common agricultural policy (CAP). As a result, the EPP, S&D and ECR groups in the European Parliament have drafted an internal document, seen by EUROPE, describing what they consider to be “a reasonable compromise” between the Parliament’s mandate and the EU Council’s position (see EUROPE 12682/3).
The European Commission has proposed to shift the focus from a compliance-based approach to a performance-based approach (new implementation model).
The European Parliament had advocated an intermediate system between the two systems, while the EU Council had expressed its support for the new implementation model proposed by the Commission, while allowing for more flexibility. The rapporteur on the Horizontal Regulation, Ms Ulrike Müller (Renew Europe, Germany), was in line with the Commission. The rapporteur’s position differs from the position that the Parliament voted in October, by a large majority, on the new implementation model. It had supported a compromise amendment by the EPP, S&D and ECR.
In their internal document, the EPP, S&D and ECR groups consider that the flexibilities introduced by the EU Council could “weaken the common character of the CAP and make it difficult to assess performance and obtain assurance on the implementation of the CAP”.
For the Parliament, performance and compliance are two different but complementary, not contradictory, key goals, the document explains.
During the trilogues, the European Parliament made it clear that a complete shift from compliance to performance is not acceptable, “as it would not maintain a robust enough assurance system or ensure commonality in the implementation of the policy”.
The EPP, S&D and ECR groups suggest compromises on several issues of the Horizontal Regulation: - paying agencies (these agencies would have to provide an annual performance report, which would not, however, be taken into account for the purposes of annual assurance); - certification bodies (they should certify the legality and regularity of all CAP expenditure); - biennial performance review (suspension of payments could only be made every second year, after the performance review); - single audit principle (the Commission should take into account the Single Audit Principle and proportionality in relation to the level of risk to the EU budget and duplication of audits on the same expenditure declared to the Commission should be avoided); - Member States’ monitoring obligations (the Commission should improve the Arachne data extraction tool for widespread use by Member States); - correction of errors (the principle of correction of errors would be introduced under the CAP to cover error made by final beneficiary in good faith and where no risk to the EU financial interests are at stake).
The compromise presented also concerns the following provisions of the Regulation on Strategic Plans: - performance review (every two years, as requested by the EU Council); - the tolerance levels for deviations from the milestone are set at 35% for financial year 2025 and 25% for financial year 2027.
Following the Agriculture EU Council’s discussions on the post-2020 CAP on 23 March, a ‘super trilogue’ will be held on 26 March, with a view to making progress in the negotiations. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)