Outgoing European Commissioner for Agriculture Phil Hogan has warned member states against backsliding on targets for climate and environment spending in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).

The Finnish presidency of the European Council of Agricultural Ministers had proposed that countries spend at least 30% of all CAP funds on climate and environment measures. This spending could be across direct payments or rural development measures.

It is in contrast to Commission proposals that 30% of rural development programmes, excluding payments for disadvantaged areas, be used for climate spending. Overall, a country would then have to spend 40% on climate and the environment.

Consequences

At a press conference in Brussels, Commissioner Hogan said a common percentage might have the unintended consequence of leading to less spending on the environment.

He said this had to be avoided, as such spending would ensure farmers were part of the solution to climate issues and income supports were maintained and justified to the European taxpayers.

“We have to be concrete in terms of the targets that we're setting, so that it can be very transparent the way that we are actually meeting those targets and milestones that we are setting out in our proposal.”

Hogan earlier told agricultural ministers that the 30% minimum threshold in agri-environment spending would ensure existing approaches were built on and improved.

Eco-schemes

He said the approach of having eco-schemes in place of greening would move the EU away from a one-size-fits-all approach and allow countries design interventions specific to them. This would ensure measures “make a real difference and not measures simply used to tick off spending targets”.

Minister for Agriculture Michael Creed also addressed his fellow agriculture ministers in Brussels today. He said that Ireland accepted increased conditionality as “we cannot have economic sustainability for agriculture if we do not ensure environmental sustainability”.

Budget

Minister Creed welcomed work in adjusting the definition of an eligible hectare that could “maximise environmental gain”. He also expressed concerns about funding loss if there was not enough demand from farmers to enter eco-schemes in pillar one.

He concluded by stressing the need for a CAP budget to match a policy with more ambitious targets.

Read more

Finnish proposals could radically alter farm payments

Farmer schemes safe from CAP cuts for 2020