Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 8 May 2013
4. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the progress made to date in the discussions on the Common Agricultural Policy between the EU Commission, the EU Parliament and the Council of Ministers; the mains issues agreed to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21657/13]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe negotiations on CAP reform have moved to discussions between the EU institutions and an intensive schedule of trilogue discussions with the European Parliament and European Commission commenced on 11 April. Up to today, 11 trilogues have taken place - three each on direct payments and rural development, four on the single CMO and one on the horizontal and financial management proposal. As holder of the Presidency, Ireland is representing the European Council of Ministers in the negotiations.
On the direct payments dossier, we have had a run though of proposals for the basic payment scheme, including the various options for internal convergence, the national reserve and the redistributive payment. We have also discussed the scope and definitions, the provisions on active farmers, coupled support and the schemes for young and small farmers. On Monday we started looking at the provisions on capping and transfers between pillars.
As to the single CMO, we have looked at the introductory provisions, trade issues and school schemes. We have also commenced an examination of specific sectoral rules, starting with olive oil, hops, apiculture, fruit and vegetables and wine, as well as PGI provisions. Yesterday there was a first discussion on market intervention, exceptional measures and the crisis reserve.
Moving to rural development, we have had a first discussion on the objectives and priorities and have started a more detailed discussion on individual measures. We have examined general and financial management provisions in the horizontal regulations.
In terms of where we go from here, we have planned 34 trilogues between now and the end of June, when we hope to finalise a political agreement between the three institutions on CAP reform. The Deputy will be familiar with most of the key political issues. Significant political decisions are not made in the trilogues. We are working through and setting aside key issues on which the Council of Ministers must make a decision in terms of updating my mandate for negotiation. The Parliament must make its own decision, as must the Commission. That is how it works and this is a tedious and incredibly complex political process. It involves 27 countries, soon to be 28, and three institutions, all of which are contributing for the first time to a trilogues process to try to have a complex CAP reform package agreed. We are making good progress and on schedule to have a final agreement before the end of June.
Will the Minister confirm a new CAP will not be in place until 2015? If he can confirm this, how many farmers will be left in the agri-environment options scheme and the REPS in 2014? The third related question concerns whether, allowing for the fact that many people depended on the new REP or agri-environment options scheme coming into operation in 2014, the Minister will introduce new one-year agri-environment options scheme in 2014 for those who had a legitimate expectation that such a scheme would be in place in 2014 and were depending on it for a basic income. How many countries are opposed to the concept of a minimum payment under the single farm payment scheme?
The schedule for implementation is that we will try to reach political agreement by June on what the new CAP reform package will look like for the next seven years. The Commission will then spend the second half of the year turning it into regulations to make it real and implementable. Countries will put together plans for their own CAP reform package given the toolbox and the flexibility they will have from the political agreement such as, for example, internal convergence and greening measures-----
Will the Minister answer the question?
I am answering it.
The Minister can answer "Yes" or "No".
Countries will be given 12 months to put new systems in place in order that the new CAP can begin in 2015. The schedule has been in place for the past eight months. If the Deputy had been following what had been happening, he would know that and would not have to ask.
I have been.
There is no surprise for farmers. We knew for about eight months that the new CAP would not be up and running until 1 January 2015. The Commission has accepted this. I do not want to be accused of not answering the question. In the past two weeks the Commission has brought forward a proposal on how things will work in 2014, essentially under the old CAP policy but on the basis of a new budget. It will be a bridging year before 2015.
Will the Minister confirm that there will be a bridging agri-environmental scheme in 2014 for those who were involved in environmental schemes but are not involved in one now? Can the Minister tell me how many countries were opposed to the concept of a minimum payment under the single farm payment scheme? How many countries support the Minister's approach to the concept of greening on an individual basis as opposed to flat application? All farmers have an equal responsibility in that regard. If the proposal is accepted by the Commission as an option, will the Minister have to provide justification for it on environmental grounds before it approves it?
Which option?
I will ask the questions.
I need to understand them. Which greening option is the Deputy talking about?
The question is simple. The Minister has an individual option whereby he will pay farmers operating on very good land much higher greening payments than those operating on marginal land. He wants the greening payment to match the existing single farm payment. Would it not be hard to support lower greening payments per hectare on Natura 2000, SPA and SAC sites, compared to the payment made on the best quality non-designated land and land with lower ecological value? Is it difficult to justify the approach of making the lowest greening payment on the land with the highest ecological value in the country?
Does the Deputy expect me to answer all of those questions in one minute? If so, I will try.
Twenty questions in one.
With regard to what the position will be in 2014, we must look at what we can afford to do with the available budget. I will make those decisions around budget time. There will be a new rural development scheme post-2015 that will involve environmental schemes and others. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív always sees this in simple terms of just giving out money and being as popular as he can in doing so.
That is how farmers see it.
No, that is how the Deputy sees it. We must act strategically with public money and get value for money in how we spend it, whether it be on environmental or other schemes.
With regard to minimum payment, there is an agreed Council position. All 27 countries signed up to providing an option for countries that would not include a compulsory minimum payment. The Commission wants a minimum payment and the European Parliament has a view that is somewhere between the views of the Commission and the Council. We will work out a compromise eventually. Countries such as Portugal, Spain, Italy, Denmark, Austria and Luxembourg-----
That is six.
With the exception of Slovenia and Slovakia, 25 countries supported our alternative option for countries. That is the position, regardless of how the Deputy tries to undermine it. He should look at some of the debates that take place in the Council so he can understand the different positions countries have taken. We have a Council position that is representative of what the countries, through their Ministers, want. We must now find a compromise with the European Parliament and the Commission on all of these issues. That is what we are trying to do.
Is the Minister saying they are all opposed to a minimum payment except two?
I am defending a position that the Council agreed, which was a compromise among Ministers.
