Flexible SFP and 2012 reference year on the cards
“But we will not sign off on that now,” he said.
Mr Coveney told the Dáil he has been telling farmers for the last two years they should not assume a 2014 reference year. “Now, we have the option to use 2012 as the reference year, should that be accepted in the negotiations with the parliament and the commission.
“Hopefully, it will cool off the rental market. It badly needs cooling, because people are involved in a land grab, essentially, for rented land on the assumption that 2014 will be the reference year.”
Mr Coveney said the strong qualified majority when he recently presided over the EU agriculture ministers agreement on CAP reform puts the Irish EU presidency in a strong position in upcoming negotiations on the reform, with the parliament and the commission.
The ministers want options of a 2012, 2013, 2014 or 2015 reference year. The commission proposed only one reference year, 2011, and the parliament wants 2009, 2010 or 2011 options, or 2013 for incoming EU member, Croatia.
DIRECT PAYMENTS
On direct payments in general, Mr Coveney said, “There are many voluntary options available to countries in terms of how they wish to reshape and redistribute payments, and this country will have to make political decisions once we know what the full tool box is, hopefully at the end of June.”
He said distribution of payments within member states was the key outstanding issue for Ireland, at the council of agriculture ministers. “I am very pleased that the council endorsed the principle of flexibility that I sought, and agreed to the inclusion of the Irish model of partial convergence to a flat rate system. This increases the prospect of significantly lower transfers of payments between farmers than would be the case under the commission’s flat rate proposal. As regards the redistributive payment, we are not making any decisions at this stage on whether we will use that option, but it is important to have it. Therefore, when we conclude our negotiations in the co-decision process, there is the option of a top-up payment for either the average farm size or up to the first 30 hectares on a farm. There is no mandatory minimum payment.”
Reacting to the council agreement, EU commissioner for agriculture Dacian Çiolos said there were “areas where we don’t think the council has done the right thing”. But he didn’t mention distribution of direct payments within member states — instead highlighting slower convergence between farmers in eastern and western Europe.
Up to now, the commissioner has supported absolute minimum goals for convergence within and between member states, condemning that one farmer can get only €60 per hectare and his immediate neighbour €600, for the same type of land and work.
The commission proposed a flat-rate €1,000 for very small farms, and increasing support for a farm’s first hectares (which now seems sure to be an option in the CAP reform).
The parliament want payments rebalanced across member states slightly faster than proposed by the commission (no member state’s farmers should receive less than 65% of the EU average).
Of more interest to Ireland (which is near the average for farmer payments per member state) is the parliament’s policy to slightly relax the commission’s demand of uniform payments per hectare within a member state by 2019. MEPs say payments should be allowed deviate from the average by up to 20%, to avoid sudden sharp falls in support. Where payments are reduced, by 2019, they should not be more than 30% below 2014.
COUPLED PAYMENTS
Mr Çiolos said the council seems to be closer to the commission than the parliament on limiting coupled payments, which the commission has been trying to phase out since 2003.
Ministers ended up agreeing 7% for countries like Ireland that had decoupled, and 12% for others that still have coupled payments.
Parliament wants member states allowed to couple 15% of direct payments in all sectors, not just a few as proposed by the commission,
Mr Coveney told the Dáil, “If we chose to reintroduce coupled payments for certain vulnerable sectors, this proposal gives us an option of having a significant chunk of money available.”
YOUNG FARMERS
The commission wants to top-up the first five years of income support for young farmers by 25%. Mr Çiolos said the ministers’ support for extra payments for young farmers to be voluntary is contrary to the objectives of generational renewal and dynamic rural economies.
Here, Macra na Feirme also said ministers fell short, by offering up to 2% (not a minimum of 2%) SFP top-up for young farmers. Also, young farmers have lost their status as a stated priority in the national reserve, they stated.
Parliament also has approved an additional 25% payment for young farmers (under 40 years old), but for up to 100 hectares (rather than an average-sized holding). Member states would have to use 2% of their national budgets to fund young farmers — not up to 2%, as proposed by the commission.
MEPs also said producers of fruit, vegetables and vines, seed, ware potatoes and ornamental crop growers should be allowed apply for SFPs.
They said member states will be able to transfer up to 15% of their annual national ceilings for direct payments, in order to support rural development — which is 5% more than the commission envisaged.
MEPs said member states in severe financial difficulty could be eligible for up to 95% co-financing of funds they transfer from direct payments to rural development.
Farmers getting less than €1,500 in direct payments must be automatically included if member states opt to support small farmers, said MEPs (a commission proposal would oblige small farmers to apply to join).
