17 Publication of information on
CAP beneficiaries
| (34282)
14314/12
COM(12) 551
| Amendment to the Commission proposal for a Regulation of the Regulation of the European Parliament and Council on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy
|
| Legal base | Article 43(2) TFEU; co-decision; QMV
|
| Document originated | 25 September 2012
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 4 October 2012
|
| Department | Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 12 October 2012
|
| Previous Committee Report | None, but see footnote
|
| Discussion in Council | No date set
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
BACKGROUND
17.1 As we noted in our Report of 23 November 2011, the Commission
put forward in October 2011, as part of its package of proposals
for the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), a draft
Regulation[72] to replace
Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 on the financing of the CAP.
In doing so, it noted that, although the latter Regulation had
originally included provisions regarding the publication of details
of recipients of payments under the European Agricultural Guarantee
Fund (EAGF) and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development
(EAFRD), the European Court of Justice had ruled in November 2010[73]
that the application of those provisions to natural persons was
invalid.[74] A subsequent
Commission Regulation (No 410/2011) had accordingly removed that
requirement.
THE CURRENT
DOCUMENT
17.2 At the same time, the Commission also said that the adoption
of any new rules taking account of the opinion of the Court should
be preceded by an in-depth assessment in order to find the best
way of reconciling a beneficiary's right to the protection of
personal data with the need for transparency, and, having carried
out such an assessment, it has now proposed this amendment[75]
to its earlier proposal.
17.3 This would require Member States to publish the name
of each beneficiary; the municipality and post code; the amount
of payment under each CAP measure (including any co-financing
contribution from national funds); and the nature and a description
of the measures themselves. However, there would be an exception
under which beneficiaries receiving less than an amount determined
by each Member State in respect of the "small farmer"
exemption, established in the Commission's proposal for a new
regulation on direct payments, would not be named, but would instead
be identified by a unique code. The proposal also envisages that
detailed rules would be being established by the Commission by
way of implementing acts.
THE GOVERNMENT'S
VIEW
17.4 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 12 October 2012, the
Minister of State for Agriculture and Food (David Heath) says
that the proposal is broadly consistent with the Government's
position on transparency in the use of public funds, with the
UK having supported the original implementation of this principle
in Regulation No 1290/2005, and complied in full with the publication
requirements. He also says that, since the Court's judgement in
2010, it has been pressing the Commission to bring forward a proposal
which would maximise transparency, particularly as regards beneficiaries
who are natural persons, commensurate with that judgement.
17.5 At the same time, the Minister says that the Government
has two concerns about the proposal. The first is the exemption
under which the names of "small farmers" (however defined)
would not be published, where he says it is not clear that this
stems from any justifiable difference in terms of their right
to privacy between those beneficiaries (both natural and legal
persons) and beneficiaries receiving higher levels of support,
and that it could also create an unnecessary layer of complexity
for Paying Agencies. The second concern is that the Commission
is proposing this provision as part of the CAP reform package,
which may not come into force until 2014, whereas it could alternatively
be presented as an amendment to the current financing Regulation
(1290/2005) on a potentially shorter timescale, UK policy on transparency
being a return to maximal transparency in the use of CAP funds
at the earliest opportunity.
CONCLUSION
17.6 Whilst this document does not break any new ground, it
does touch upon the balance to be struck between the need for
transparency regarding payments made from public funds and the
privacy rights of beneficiaries. Consequently, although we are
content to clear it, we think it right to draw it to the attention
of the House.
72 (33257) 15426/11: see HC 428-xliii (2010-12), chapter
18 (23 November 2011). Back
73
Cases C-92/09 and C-93/09. Back
74
The Court argued that this was because it is not proportionate
to publish personal data without drawing a distinction based on
relevant criteria, such as the periods during which aid was received,
or its frequency, nature and amount. Back
75
The proposal also contains some minor amendments to Regulation
No 1290/2005 to reflect the accession of Croatia. Back
|
