Brussels, 11/06/2009 (Agence Europe) - Following on from debate at the Brno meeting (see EUROPE 9913), the Czech Presidency hopes to get the Agriculture Council of 22 June 2009 to adopt a conclusions document on the future of direct farm payments and get the ministers to say that the historic reference system is out-of-date and a new form of aid has to be introduced for post-2013. Some new member states want a single surface area payment for all farmers but the matter is far from settled, particularly because the real bargaining will start when EU leaders start negotiating the EU's post-2013 budget.
Preparatory work at the Special Agriculture Committee (SAC) is advancing well but some areas of the document still need rewording. The SAC will discuss the issue again on Monday 15 June 2009. The Czech Presidency hopes to win unanimous support for the document in order that it be turned into Council conclusions. If any one country refuses to approve the document, it will be called “Presidency conclusions” rather than “Council conclusions”. Ministers are expected to stress that the new direct payments system should be fair, effective, simple to apply, sufficiently flexible and, above all, possible to justify to taxpayers; a new method should be considered to replace the historic periods system (used to calculate the size of aid); income support aid should be balanced against aid for public interest measures (maintaining landscapes, preventing abandonment of the land, etc); and individual situations should be taken into account in order to aid those who most need it.
Under the French Presidency last year, the focus was on the future of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) post-2013 and a rather general document won the backing of 24 countries (see EUROPE 9793). The Swedish Presidency, which takes over on 1 July 2009, is expected to focus debate on the second pillar of the CAP, in other words rural development. The EU Council of Ministers is highly divided on the question of allocation of EU aid between the first pillar (direct aid and market spending) and the second (rural development). (L.C./transl.fl)