Pat Deering (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 32: To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his plans to consult with the stakeholders in the farming industry here in relation to the negotiations on the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38944/11]

Frank Feighan (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 42: To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views on the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38931/11]

Pat Deering (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 48: To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his priorities in the negotiations on the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38932/11]

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 55: To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the steps which he is taking to construct an alliance at member state level to support Ireland's case for reform of the Common Agricultural Policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39014/11]

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 32, 42, 48 and 55 together.

I would refer colleagues to the statement I made to this House in October last following the launch of the CAP reform proposals. This set out in detail my views on the package and my priorities in the negotiations. To summarise the position, my priorities in these negotiations are:

· To ensure that the negotiations on the next EU budget framework deliver a well- resourced CAP to support sustainable food production in the EU.

· To retain Ireland's funding both for direct payments and for rural development in any redistribution of CAP funds between Member States;

· To obtain flexibility for Member States in relation to payment models and transition arrangements for distribution of single payment funds to farmers;

· To ensure that rural development policy includes appropriate targeted measures to support competitiveness and sustainability; and finally,

· To keep CAP processes as simple and as effective as possible and to minimise unnecessary bureaucracy for the farmer and costs for the State.

Turning to the details, first of all on overall funding, the parallel proposal on the multiannual financial framework for the next EU budget, which was presented by the Commission last June, maintains, at least in nominal terms, the current level of CAP funding. This is a reasonable starting point in the negotiations and compares favourably with the pressure for severe cuts to the CAP from certain elements of the Commission and a good number of Member States earlier this year.

As regards the distribution of CAP funds between Member States, the proposal to use a pragmatic basis to redistribute Pillar 1 Direct Income supports between Member States is broadly positive. But I continue to believe that it would be best to use this approach for the distribution of pillar 1 and pillar 2 funds combined. Realistically we cannot agree to an allocation of pillar 1 funds until we see exactly what is proposed for pillar 2.

Another serious concern relates to distribution of Direct Payments within Member States. I have a major problem with the proposal to impose uniform national or regional payment rates. This would cause large transfers in Ireland from the more productive farms to more marginal and lower productivity holdings. I believe that it will also cause difficulties in other Member States. I will be looking for the maximum flexibility for Member States to design the payment model that suits their own conditions, provided of course that this does not interfere with competition. This is a key point for me. The transition process proposed by the Commission is also much too abrupt and front loaded. Any transition process to a new payment model, whatever that model may be, should be gradual and back-loaded to avoid sudden adjustments and to give farmers time to adjust.

I have related concerns about the proposal to assign 30% of the Direct Payment to a greening component. I am not opposed to greening of the CAP. Indeed Ireland actively promotes sustainable and carbon efficient agricultural production. However, I have issues with the Commission proposal. It will hasten the movement to flat rates of payment, double administration effort adding to bureaucracy and there are also issues with the individual greening criteria proposed. We need to look at less bureaucratic and simpler means of further greening the CAP, building on what we have already achieved through cross compliance and GAEC. There is a huge variation in agro-ecological conditions and farming systems throughout the EU. In these circumstances it does not seem realistic to impose the same three criteria in all cases. Flexibility for Member States in the form of a menu approach would be more realistic and would allow member states to adapt the green payment to their own conditions and to their own level of environmental ambition – subject to some minimum default requirements.

The proposal to use 2014 as a reference year for establishing new entitlements has generated much comment. I continue to have concerns about the effects this may have on the land market between now and then. My office has outlined these concerns in some detail to the Commission. This is an issue that will need to be clarified and sorted out in the detailed discussions to come.

On a positive note, I am very pleased at the inclusion of the provision on payments to young farmers in pillar 1. It is very important that we support our young farmers and encourage structural change through both the first and second pillars of the CAP. There is also a proposed scheme for small scale farmers who, as an alternative to tiered direct payments, may opt for lump sum payments of between €500 and €1,000. At first sight this seems more geared to the subsistence type holdings found in some of the southern Member States that to the size of holdings we would consider small in Irish terms. For that reason, I am not sure whether there is much of interest for us in this proposal but we will consider it in consultation with the farming organisations and other stakeholders. There are further options for Member States to use part of their national ceilings to support areas of natural handicap and for coupled payments. Overall I believe there is merit in having a series of flexible and voluntary options available to Member States to gear their payments best to their own farming conditions.

I would take issue with the way the Commission is proposing to define an active farmer. I believe this proposed definition may give rise to unnecessary bureaucracy and I will be seeking in the negotiations to have some changes made. The key point in my view is to give Member States sufficient room to define an active farmer in a way suitable to their own conditions. As to the progressive capping foreseen of large payments, the reality is that capping would have very little impact in Ireland. Most of our farms are small family farms and would not come close to the capping threshold proposed.

Turning to Rural Development, I welcome the continuation of the three current objectives and the abolition of axis balance requirement in pillar 2. But I have concerns about the very cumbersome process proposed for co-ordination of priorities and spending between the various EU funds; I will be seeking for it to be streamlined and simplified.

There are some interesting new options in the menu of measures proposed. These include new measures for farm and business development that provide start up aid for young farmers, small farms and non-agricultural activities. The latter provide considerable scope as they are directed at farmers, farm households and SMEs and Micro Enterprises. The new options to facilitate cooperative projects and to address risk management may also be of interest. Producer groups also feature in the menu of measures available. Support for LEADER activities will also be a part of our next programme. We will examine all of these options carefully. Of course, my over-arching priority is to maintain support for on-farm investment, including appropriate support for afforestation, to assist the restructuring necessary to deliver sustainable intensification of food production and a more competitive primary food production system.

As to market supports, I am pleased that the Commission has proposed retention of intervention at safety-net level and private storage aid, although I have some concerns at the additional discretion proposed to be given to the Commission to activate these measures. The important issue now is to ensure that there are adequate funds available and accessible for these measures.

I also strongly support the proposal to abolish sugar quotas from 2015. There is clearly a problem with the supply of sugar across the EU and I firmly believe that we need to move away from supply limiting measures at the earliest possible opportunity. We need to address the realities of the market and ensure there is security of supply for the food industry and consumers.

These proposals will be subject to detailed examination and discussion in the negotiations that will now take place. In that connection, since I took up office earlier this year I have made it a priority to build up alliances with my counterparts in like-minded Member States in order to garner support for my position on the proposed reform of the CAP. I have had formal bilateral meetings with my German, French, UK, Spanish, Estonian and Danish Ministerial colleagues. I have also taken the opportunity to meet with my Ministerial colleagues from the other Member States and the EU Commission at the EU Council of Agriculture Ministers meetings held each month in Brussels or Luxemburg and also at the Informal Ministerial Councils held in Hungary and Poland. Last month I addressed a meeting of the Agricultural Committee of the European Parliament. Over the coming months I plan to intensify these contacts. I have meetings scheduled tomorrow and Friday in Brussels with my Danish and Finnish colleagues. Early in the new year I will meet again with MEPS and I will host a visit to Ireland by the Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development. As negotiations develop, I will continue to interact with my Ministerial colleagues and with the Commission and European Parliament. My intention is to maintain and develop alliances with like-minded Member States to secure the best possible outcome for Ireland.

Of course, my consultations are not confined to my EU counterparts. An initial consultation process was launched with stakeholders by my Department in July 2009 to obtain views on what EU agriculture policies would serve Ireland and the EU best in the years to come. In 2010, a Consultative Committee on the CAP was set up by my Department comprising all the major farming and agriculture related representative organisations as well as a number of academics. The Committee have met on several occasions, most recently in November, and also participated in the Stakeholder event organised by my Department during the visit of Commissioner Ciolos last year. The most recent meeting provided an opportunity for all the stakeholder organisations to give their initial reactions to the formal Commission proposals. My officials and I will continue to consult with farming organisations and stakeholders as the negotiations progress.