The European Parliament has announced a series of compromises on Common Agricultural Policy reforms. The compromises were reached after EU Council talks on the bloc's finances for the next budget period stalled last month.

image expired

The Parliament's agriculture committee has agreed to 100 'compromise amendments' covering almost every area of the forthcoming reforms. The compromises were brokered in response to almost 7,500 amendments to the Commission's proposed reforms, tabled by MEPs in October.

Earlier this month, a European Commission spokesperson acknowledged that the reformed CAP will not be ready to implement by its intended start date of 2014. The scenario had been presaged by farming groups Copa Cogeca and the NFU, who expressed exasperation at the announcement, but welcomed EU authorities' decision to delay the CAP rather than repeat the mistakes of the past; in 2005, mix-ups were caused by the rushed implementation of CAP reforms. 

Although farming groups have welcomed the compromises announced today, having mounted a concerted lobbying campaign with the aim of diluting the commission's greening measures and reducing the impact of bureaucracy and regulation on farmers' activities, environmental groups have expressed fears that such pressure could derail moves to make CAP spending more sustainable, and more acceptable to the European taxpayer.

In the UK, NFU president Peter Kendall said of the compromises, "The MEPs involved in the CAP talks have done a remarkable job making sense of the record-breaking number of amendments tabled earlier this year." He expressed satisfaction that the agreements mean reforms will be "more meaningful, workable and acceptable."

Kendall welcomed changes that reduced bureaucracy associated with the 'active farmers' test, which assesses single payment claimants on their ability to fulfil certain criteria. At present, claimants across Europe benefit from large CAP payments without producing food; the British Royal Family is estimated to receive over £600,000 in subsidies annually. The NFU president said, "We are seeing significant progress… with the bureaucratic active farmer test."

Farmers in Environmental Stewardship agreements are now expected to qualify for greening payments. The NFU also welcomed moves towards setting up "a workable national reserve, accessible to new entrants as well as young entrants" and the introduction of a more "proportionate" penalty system.

Concern persists over dilution of CAP reforms

However, Europe's key wildlife and environmental protection organisations have expressed concerns at the CAP reform process. Warning that cuts to the EU budget may impact on conservation measures and that environmental and social considerations set out in the original CAP proposals have been weakened, the No More Blank Cheques coalition stated last month that, "Despite [the Commission's] welcome and ambitious intent, it now appears that the current destructive business as usual agenda will persist… The original drive for reform is being dangerously weakened."

Views over the future of CAP vary within Europe. The UK government is seeking to gradually do away with subsidy payments to make farming 'more competitive', leaving farmers at the mercy of the markets. To this end, the government has supported measures which would see a degree of flexibility between the two pillars of CAP spending; meaning money could be taken from direct payments and spent on rural development.

Peter Kendall said on Wednesday, "Defra has been lobbying hard for the power to reduce direct payment made to farmers by up to 20 per cent. It's an incredibly hollow victory, but I am relieved that MEPs would limit the amount Defra could transfer in theory to a maximum of 15 per cent and would require that money to be match funded by the Treasury"

He continued, "The ideological policy stance of UK government with regards to the CAP policy should not be allowed to put our farmers at a competitive disadvantage compared to other European farmers."

Next steps for CAP reform

The next stages for reforms in the Parliament are an Agriculture Committee vote in January, followed by a vote by the whole Parliament in March. Once the EU budget is finalised, and the CAP budget with it, Parliament will begin negotiations with the Council over the final reform package.

Arguing that decisions over agricultural spending should be made before the budget is set, WWF, Birdlife International, IFOAM and the European Environmental Bureau, which make up No More Blank Cheques, said ahead of last month's budget meeting, "There is a serious threat that once the financial commitment is made, any meaningful and progressive environmental measures will be stripped away, due to limited resources."

The coalition has expressed concerns that "The future of European agriculture is in the hands of a small group of MEPs and Ministers, who are being cajoled by the agro-industry lobby to fork out the bulk of future payments to intensive farmers with little environmental and long-term socio-economic return. Creating a situation where this policy does not have to commit to delivering tangible benefits before taxpayers' money is allocated only reinforces this negative perception."

MEPs agree to CAP compromises

MEPs on the EU's Agriculture Committee have unveiled a number of compromise amendments, following the submission of an unprecedented number of amendments by the European Parliament to CAP reform proposals earlier this year.

The European Parliament has announced a series of compromises on Common Agricultural Policy reforms. The compromises were reached after EU Council talks on the bloc's finances for the next budget period stalled last month.

The Parliament's agriculture committee has agreed to 100 'compromise amendments' covering almost every area of the forthcoming reforms. The compromises were brokered in response to almost 7,500 amendments to the Commission's proposed reforms, tabled by MEPs in October.

Earlier this month, a European Commission spokesperson acknowledged that the reformed CAP will not be ready to implement by its intended start date of 2014. The scenario had been presaged by farming groups Copa Cogeca and the NFU, who expressed exasperation at the announcement, but welcomed EU authorities' decision to delay the CAP rather than repeat the mistakes of the past; in 2005, mix-ups were caused by the rushed implementation of CAP reforms.  http://www.farming.co.uk/news/article/7647

Although farming groups have welcomed the compromises announced today, having mounted a concerted lobbying campaign with the aim of diluting the commission's greening measures and reducing the impact of bureaucracy and regulation on farmers' activities, environmental groups have expressed fears that such pressure could derail moves to make CAP spending more sustainable, and more acceptable to the European taxpayer.

In the UK, NFU president Peter Kendall said of the compromises, "The MEPs involved in the CAP talks have done a remarkable job making sense of the record-breaking number of amendments tabled earlier this year." He expressed satisfaction that the agreements mean reforms will be "more meaningful, workable and acceptable."

Kendall welcomed changes that reduced bureaucracy associated with the 'active farmers' test, which assesses single payment claimants on their ability to fulfil certain criteria. At present, claimants across Europe benefit from large CAP payments without producing food; the British Royal Family is estimated to receive over £600,000 in subsidies annually. The NFU president said, "We are seeing significant progress… with the bureaucratic active farmer test."

Farmers in Environmental Stewardship agreements are now expected to qualify for greening payments. The NFU also welcomed moves towards setting up "a workable national reserve, accessible to new entrants as well as young entrants" and the introduction of a more "proportionate" penalty system.

Concern persists over dilution of CAP reforms

However, Europe's key wildlife and environmental protection organisations have expressed concerns at the CAP reform process. Warning that cuts to the EU budget may impact on conservation measures and that environmental and social considerations set out in the original CAP proposals have been weakened, the No More Blank Cheques coalition stated last month that, "Despite [the Commission's] welcome and ambitious intent, it now appears that the current destructive business as usual agenda will persist… The original drive for reform is being dangerously weakened." http://www.farming.co.uk/news/article/7505

Views over the future of CAP vary within Europe. The UK government is seeking to gradually do away with subsidy payments to make farming 'more competitive', leaving farmers at the mercy of the markets. To this end, the government has supported measures which would see a degree of flexibility between the two pillars of CAP spending; meaning money could be taken from direct payments and spent on rural development.

Peter Kendall said on Wednesday, "Defra has been lobbying hard for the power to reduce direct payment made to farmers by up to 20 per cent. It's an incredibly hollow victory, but I am relieved that MEPs would limit the amount Defra could transfer in theory to a maximum of 15 per cent and would require that money to be match funded by the Treasury"

He continued, "The ideological policy stance of UK government with regards to the CAP policy should not be allowed to put our farmers at a competitive disadvantage compared to other European farmers."

Next steps for CAP reform

 The next stages for reforms in the Parliament are an Agriculture Committee vote in January, followed by a vote by the whole Parliament in March. Once the EU budget is finalised, and the CAP budget with it, Parliament will begin negotiations with the Council over the final reform package.

Arguing that decisions over agricultural spending should be made before the budget is set, WWF, Birdlife International, IFOAM and the European Environmental Bureau, which make up No More Blank Cheques, said ahead of last month's budget meeting, "There is a serious threat that once the financial commitment is made, any meaningful and progressive environmental measures will be stripped away, due to limited resources."

The coalition has expressed concerns that "The future of European agriculture is in the hands of a small group of MEPs and Ministers, who are being cajoled by the agro-industry lobby to fork out the bulk of future payments to intensive farmers with little environmental and long-term socio-economic return. Creating a situation where this policy does not have to commit to delivering tangible benefits before taxpayers' money is allocated only reinforces this negative perception."