The Green Hand
Rural Property Management and Consulting
4980b40f-635d-4cd1-b0e5-246fd9ffadc2.jpg

Newsroom

All the latest news put down in green on white.

The legislative proposals on the future CAP: a difficult compromise

On the 20th October 2020, Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) voted in favour of the compromise legislative proposals on the future Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) as put forward last year by Rapporteurs Peter Jahr from the European People’s Party (EPP), Ulrike Müller from Renew Europe, and Eric Andrieu from the Socialists & Democrats (S&D).

The three groups’ proposals go much further for the environment than the Commission’s 2018 legislative proposal on the future of the CAP. Most notably, 30% of Pillar I (direct payments) will be ring-fenced for the eco-schemes, instead of letting Member States decide discretionary on their allocated budget. In addition, up to 35% of Pillar II (rural development), rather than 30%, will be earmarked for green spending, therefore raising the budget dedicated to activities of most direct value for the environment and climate.

More specifically, with regard to Pillar I:

  • 60% of the funds will have to be devoted to the financing of basic income support, redistributive aid (with a minimum of 6%), coupled aid and operational programmes;

  • 30% of the funds will have to be allocated over the period to the new green measures of Pillar I (eco-schemes). These will have to meet ecological transition objectives while at the same time aiming to improve the economic situation of farms;

  • Member States will be able to use 10% of Pillar I for coupled aid and 3% for measures in operational programmes outside the traditional sectors;

  • The sectorial programmes for the wine, fruit and vegetables and olive sectors are kept, and wine planting authorisations are proposed to be extended to 2050;

  • The ceiling for direct aid is set at €100.000 per farm (excluding eco-schemes and young farmers aid as well as wage costs);

  • Possible transfers from Pillar I to Pillar II are limited to 12% and should be allocated to environmental actions in Pillar II.

About Pillar II:

  • 35% of the funds should be devoted to environmental measures (40% of the compensatory allowance for permanent natural handicaps aid could be counted in this framework);

  • 30% of the funds would be dedicated to measures financing investments and risk management tools, and improvement of risk management tools;

  • A multiannual crisis reserve of at least 400 millions which can increase to €1.5 billion to finance exceptional measures and to take over risk management tools.

Overall, against a European Commission’s proposal which seemed to move towards the splitting of the CAP into 27 national policies with a higher risk of renationalisation and market distortions, through this vote the European Parliament sought to promote a real common agricultural policy for all the territories of the European Union, reconcile the economy and the environment, and increase investments in the European rural areas.

Despite the positive reception of the coalition’s proposals by a majority of MEPs, criticism was raised by MEPs from the Greens and the Agriculture Commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski. Also many environmental activists, notably including Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg, raised concerns that the compromise amendments would rather water down the green ambitions of the CAP instead of supporting them. As mentioned above, the freshly approved deal proposes indeed to count 40% of subsidies for mountainous and other hardy terrains as green spending, therefore playing an accounting trick that the European Commission had committed to put an end to. The compromise deal also states that farmers should keep 10% of their land out of production but this provision only applies to land used to grow crops and grasslands, without including all kinds of agricultural terrains.

While EPP and S&D MEPs, such as MEP Herbert Dorfmann and MEP Paolo De Castro, hailed the vote on their Twitter channels as a step forward towards a more resilient and ecological CAP, environmental activists and conservationists, including experts from Greenpeace, called the compromise “greenwashing of the worst kind”. Among mounting debates, what is for sure is that no policy change will occur until 2023 since the CAP 2014-2020 transition phase will go through 2021 and last until 2022.

Gaspar Van Cutsem