WRITTEN QUESTION E-0820/03

by Karl-Heinz Florenz (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 March 2003)

Subject: Compulsory set-aside of land under the reform of the CAP

The Commission's proposals for agricultural reform include a significant change to the set-aside obligation. In future, each holding for which an application is made under the single payment scheme would have to set aside from production 10 % of its surface area for 10 years. This change would prevent the production of renewable raw materials and the beneficial use of farm manure, currently practised on some 900 000 ha of land, from continuing on set-aside areas. A compulsory fixed set-aside of 10 % flatly contradicts the aim of the reform to bring about greater market orientation in the agricultural sector.

What implications does the Commission expect the introduction of a fixed set-aside to have for the production of renewable raw materials?

Why does the Commission intend to endanger current production of renewable raw materials by introducing a compulsory 10-year fixed set-aside, despite the fact that it is encouraging the increased use of biomass in the energy and industry sectors?

How does the Commission explain the fact that it aims to increase market orientation in the agricultural sector, while at the same time prescribing an inflexible set-aside period of 10 years?

How is this 10-year fixed set-aside to be implemented on purely tenant holdings where the lease has less than 10 years to run or where the lessor forbids the fixed set-aside of land?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 2003)

Set-aside was introduced as a important means of restricting production and hence regulating markets. Production of renewable raw materials is not its primary aim. In fact only some 900 000 hectares (ha) is used each year, most of this for oilseeds for converting into energy products. Less than 50 000 ha is devoted to other non-food crops.

Under the reformed common agricultural policy aid of EUR 45/ha would be granted on energy crops grown on land not set aside. There would be a restriction to 1,5 million ha, an area in fact more than 50 % greater than that of the set-aside land at present used for these crops. This aid would serve to expand production of renewal raw materials without targeting any particular crop.

In conjunction with the Commission's biofuel initiatives this new aid would support production of renewable energy crops without falling foul of the Blair House Agreement restriction on oilseeds, i.e. the 1 million tonne limit on by-products for food or animal feed use (corresponding to roughly 1 million ha).

Under the reform proposals set-aside, as a general rule non-rotational, would continue its production curbing role and also discharge environmental and biodiversity functions.

Under the new arrangements the non-energy crops at present grown on set-aside land can be grown on land not set aside for which there is entitlement to the decoupled farm payment, and with the double advantage of freedom from all the checks required under the present system and a compulsory contract and of a clearly market-directed orientation.

A farmer subject to the set-aside obligation who occupies all or part of his land under a tenancy agreement is required to withdraw 10 % of the arable crop area. Under the Commission's proposal this area becomes non-rotational from 1 January 2004 unless the Member State authorises rotation for environmental reasons, and it can no longer be used for any agricultural purpose, requirements that will continue to apply if the land is given up.

However, following ongoing debate on these matters the Commissioner for Agriculture stated at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council meeting on 8 April that the Commission was prepared to examine the possibility of a return to rotational set-aside and retention of the option of planting non-food crops on set-aside land, provided the control issue could be satisfactorily resolved.