ANNEX: Outcome of Agriculture Council on 18-19
March
Single Common Market Organisation Regulation
The outcome was good for the UK, in that the Council
has agreed to continue on the road of reform and market orientation,
maintaining a genuine safety net for producers against pressure
to increase market intervention, and agreeing end dates to quota
systems for sugar and wine, albeit later than planned.
The UK was able to fend off calls to review or increase
reference prices, which could have increased the use of market
intervention and seen more money taken from direct payments to
extend the safety net for producers. It is also content with the
final package of measures on producer organisations, which includes
the option for Member States to formally recognise those in new
sectors, and enables the extension of their rules and fees to
non-members to remain at the discretion of Member States.
A compromise proposal was agreed to end the sugar
beet regime in 2017, two years later than previously agreed, but
ahead of the 2020 end date proposed by some other Member States
(although the UK was disappointed that no commitment was made
on cane imports, and will continue to press for fair treatment
for refiners).
A new transitional system for authorisations of vine
plantings was agreed, due to run from January 2019 to the end
of 2024, but will not apply to the UK's small but growing wine
industry.
The Council also confirmed that exceptional measures
should only be used when other measures in the Regulation
are insufficient, making it clear that normal market management
instruments are separated from measures to be taken in a crisis.
Direct Payments Regulation
The UK was successful in securing important flexibility
to deliver Greening through a national scheme, thus giving scope
to consider how to deliver environmental outcomes in a way which
is straightforward for farmers and secures value for money for
UK taxpayers.
The Young Farmers scheme remains voluntary, and similarly
the optional nature of the Small Farmers scheme has been confirmed
(although it is disappointing that Council has agreed that participants
should be exempted from cross compliance controls).
The UK succeeded in securing the option to roll over
existing entitlements in England, providing a potentially useful
alternative to undertaking a reallocation exercise, and the competitiveness
of the largest farms has been protected by ensuring that the capping
of large claims is at the discretion of the Member State.
The biggest disappointment was the outcome on coupled
payments, which had previously been has successfully phased out
for most commodities. Although the UK had some limited success
in restricting the expansion of coupled payments to new sectors,
the Council position allows for the percentage ceiling for coupled
payments to be raised to 7% for Member States (such as the UK)
which have largely decoupled, and 12% those which have not. Whilst
short of the Parliament's proposed 18%, this is above the original
Commission proposal and not at a common level for all Member States,
and a significant number of Member States are expected to apply
pressure during the 'trilogue' process to raise the percentage
ceiling beyond 12% and closer to the Parliament's position.
It was also disappointing that Council rejected the
Commission's proposal for internal convergence which would have
meant a full move away from historic payments by 2019, but it
was possible, on behalf of the Devolved Administrations, who have
not yet moved from historic to area payments, to secure flexibility
for a smoother transition, with an initial minimum step of 10%
rather than 40%. In addition, the inclusion of heather in the
definition of permanent grassland is important for Scotland, as
is the inclusion of text which allows the granting of reserve
entitlements to new as well as young farmers.
Rural Development Regulation
The Council agreement represents a balanced position,
which will enable Member States to safeguard and enhance the rural
environment, to foster competitive and sustainable rural business,
and to support thriving rural communities.
The UK secured important changes on mapping Areas
facing Natural Constraints (ANC) to better identify land that
is truly constrained, and Member States will also have an extra
two years until 2016 to prepare for ANC designation, thus addressing
a number of concerns expressed by the Devolved Administrations.
However, the UK was in a minority in arguing against
double funding of greening activities, allowing farmers to be
paid twice under both Pillars for delivering the same activities,
and was disappointed that a minimum spend for environmental activities
was not secured.
Also, the Irish Presidency mistakenly removed from
its proposed compromise on the Regulation wording which is relevant
to the calculation of a portion of the UK's rebate, and, although
this was corrected in the compromise changes tabled subsequently,
the article was put in square brackets and referred it for resolution
in the framework of the Council deliberation on the EU Own Resource
Decision, following objections from a few Member States. However,
at UK insistence, it was also made it clear that this issue needed
to be resolved before the Rural Development Regulation could be
agreed.
Finance and Controls (Horizontal) Regulation
Overall, the Council agreement was a good result,
with the Council focussing on reducing costs and burdens, and
a more proportionate approach to disallowance procedures being
particularly welcome. The UK also strongly welcomed the transition
period for paying agencies to develop the appropriate control
systems for Greening, but was disappointed there is no provision
to enable farmers to refrain from applying for a Greening payment
without an additional penalty being imposed.
The UK welcomed the removal of the new standard on
protection of carbon rich soils under cross compliance, as it
did not consider the requirement proposed would have had sufficient
demonstrable environmental benefits to justify the increased administrative
burdens. It was however disappointed that some elements of the
Commission's cross compliance proposal, such as the removal of
a ban on hedge-cutting during bird breeding season, have been
watered down, and it would also have liked to see more changes,
particularly aimed at allowing a more proportionate treatment
of minor breaches of animal ID rules.
A key priority has been to secure a new specific
provision on regionalisation in order to clearly recognise the
role of regional administrations in delivering the CAP, and this
has been secured with the inclusion of a new article (subject
to clarification that this refers to the whole of the CAP).
Finally, the UK were pleased to see the retention
of Commission proposals on the publication of beneficiaries' data,
and, with the European Parliament voting in favour of increased
transparency, it is confident that opposition to these proposals
has now been removed.
| 
