Wildlife and conservation groups in the UK have urged UK and EU leaders to do everything in their power to ensure upcoming reforms of the Common Agriculture Policy are more geared towards environmental measures, after the European Budget was branded "A regressive deal for wildlife."

image expired

Following two day talks at the end of last week which ran on into the night, EU heads of state managed to agree on the broad elements of the next EU Budget deal; the agreed deal sets out spending for the period 2014-2020. In the wake of the agreement, which saw cuts of €70 billion from the European Commission's initial proposals, Commission president José Manuel Barroso said "The levels agreed today by the Heads of State and Government are below what the Commission considers desirable given the challenge of promoting growth and jobs across the European Union in the coming years."

He added that the package is "not perfect but it offers a basis for negotiations with the European Parliament."

The Parliament, which will now hold negotiations based on the Council's budget proposals, will be more eager to maintain spending. The Commission and environmental groups across Europe have placed their hope in MEPs, who they believe can secure a better deal for the environment, after the Council's reforms further weakened controversial 'greening' measures.

The Council's alterations relating to agriculture spending include reversing the decision that a small percentage of land should be taken out of production for regeneration and suggesting that 'capping' of the largest payments to rich farmers and landowners should be voluntary at Member State level. Overall, agriculture spending is facing a cut of around 10 percent.

Although in voting on amendments to CAP reform proposals the Parliament's Agriculture Committee recently weakened greening commitments, which were introduced under the Commission's CAP proposals, the wider Parliament will also have the opportunity to vote on these reforms in March. Reacting to the Committee's agreements last month, German social democrat Dagmar Roth-Behrendt added "the views of [of the agriculture committee] are light years apart" from those held by the rest of the Parliament.

A combination of a diluted 'greening' element in the reformed CAP, which would make a certain amount of farmers' Pillar one single payment dependant on their upholding certain environmental standards, and the Agriculture Committee's insistence that farmers in agri-environment schemes receiving support under CAP pillar 2 should be entitled to keep their extra payments, has sparked criticism from some conservation groups who argue that this amounts to farmers being paid twice for the same thing.  

Farming groups including NFU and European lobby group Copa Cogeca welcomed moves to make greening more 'flexible', though they remain critical of plans which would allow individual states to shift between 15 and 25 per cent of their agriculture funding pot between pillars one and two. In the UK this would likely mean money would be taken from direct payments and put into rural development, though the government is unlikely to cap payments for larger farms.

However, the RSPB called on the UK government to use the new rules to benefit wildlife and promote environmental regeneration. Overall, the RSPB said, changes agreed last week by the Council will potentially lead to "huge cuts for payments for wildlife-friendly farming."  

RSPB conservation director Martin Harper said the budget deal had cut money available for conservation work by €11 billion. He also complained that the license to shift a certain percentage of funding between CAP pillars would also see funds in some states siphoned from development spending into "untargeted" subsidy payments.  

He urged UK leaders to "make good on their environmental promises," adding, "This means using the flexibility to shift as much funding as possible from direct payments into Rural Development, the bit of the CAP that can really drive more sustainable farming."

Mr Harper concluded, "Wildlife across Europe will pay a heavy price for this terribly regressive deal, and we’re bound to see further declines in some species whose numbers have crashed. Since the 1980s Europe has lost 300 million farmland birds, how many more will we lose over the next seven years?"