Dr. Pierre-Marie Aubert:

The most important aspect of the new CAP, being discussed at the moment, is the new delivery model. What does that mean? It means that under the new CAP, if the European Commission's proposal is approved, subsidies will be allocated on the basis of a strategic plan designed at the member state level but which will have to be approved by the European Commission. All in all, there will be much responsibility in the hands of member states. That is my first point.

My second point is to ask if it will be enough to go in the direction mentioned by Deputy Sherlock. There are two safeguards in that regard. One is that in the European Commission's proposal, there is the necessity that 40% of the subsidies allocated by a member state go for climate action, under either Pillar 1 or Pillar 2. The second safeguard is that under Pillar 1, each member state will be asked to devise an eco scheme but the boundaries, the amount of money and the type of practices that could be awarded through this eco scheme are still a bit blurred and under discussion.

There are opportunities in this new delivery model. We should not overlook that. In the meantime, there are also huge risks. Where member states are competing with each other in both the internal market and the export market, there is a risk of a type of race to the bottom in environmental and social requirements. If it is up to the member states to devise and design the criteria for subsidy eligibility, then there is a temptation to lower the environmental and social requirements to minimise production costs to be more competitive both in the internal market and the export market. We do not know exactly what will be the European Commission's position and its capacity to make sure that member states, in their strategic plan, will raise environmental and social ambitions rather than lowering them.