Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on The Commission's legislative proposals for the post-health check common agricultural policy
Date: 2008-10-08
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: climate change, common agricultural policy, distribution of aid, human nutrition, investment, rural development

C 325/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.12.2008

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on ‘The Commission's legislative proposals for the
post-health check common agricultural policy’

(2008/C 325/05)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

— expresses concern about the lack of financial means for rural development. For further investing in
the New Challenges, the scope should not only be on the resources of Pillar 1 and therefore urges to
relate this concern to other EU policies, especially cohesion policy;

— strongly suggests that synergies be fostered between rural development policy and other EU policies,

particularly cohesion policy;

— supports the growing call to invest in research on agricultural issues and to apply research outcome,

welcomes the suggestion of the EC to seek synergy with the Knowledge Framework;

— feels that in order to meet the new challenges, Europe must aim for a closed circle economy and

therefore stimulate and support innovating agriculture as a whole;

— feels that in order to fight climate change, integrated food strategies should be encouraged;

— feels that when it lowers their carbon footprint, regions should be encouraged to develop and

promote locally produced food and food-related products;

— suggests that the proposed increase of milk quota should already be raised to 2 % annually, but also
suggests that the Commission should secure the position of farmers in vulnerable areas, might this
position be harmed as a result of these increased milk quota;

— feels that Europe has the social responsibility to put maximum effort into the anchoring of the

People, Planet and Profit principles into the outcome of current and future WTO negotiations;

— wishes to state that local and regional bodies in most EU Member States have gained considerable
experience and expertise in rural development, and would welcome an invitation to accept broader
responsibilities for implementing and targeting the EU policy for Agriculture and Rural Development.

19.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 325/29

Rapporteur: Ms Lenie DWARSHUIS–VAN DE BEEK (NL/ALDE), Member of the Executive Council of the

Province of South Holland

Reference documents

Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing common rules for direct support schemes for farmers
under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers

Proposal for a Council Regulation on modifications to the common agricultural policy by amending
Regulations (EC) No 320/2006, (EC) No 1234/2007, (EC) No 3/2008 and (EC) No […]/2008

Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 on support for rural devel-
opment by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)

Proposal for a Council Decision amending Decision 2006/144/EC on the Community strategic guidelines
for
(presented by the Commission)
{SEC(2008) 1885} — {SEC(2008) 1886}

(programming period 2007 to 2013)

rural development

COM(2008) 306 final — 2008/0103 (CNS) — 2008/0104 (CNS) — 2008/0105 (CNS) —
2008/0106 (CNS)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Opinion's key points

5.
recommends that the proposals on increasing quotas in
preparation for the end of the quota system be reconsidered in
view of the current situation on the milk market; suitable instru-
ments should be selected and the financial resources for them
made available to the extent necessary, as these may prevent
some of the enormous disadvantages caused by the abolition of
quotas in less competitive and naturally disadvantaged regions;

looks at the strategic importance of farming and agri-food
1.
industries for Europe, considers the highly multinational sphere
of action of companies and subscribes to quality production in
all regions, agrees with the European Commission (EC) on the
importance of a Common Agricultural Policy;

2.
agrees that equipping ourselves with a system that guaran-
tees the European population a certain level of self-sufficiency in
food requires crisis management when necessary; recognises
that in the case of food production, the market cannot always
reconcile the issue of
incomes with total public
demand, which justifies the Common Agricultural Policy;

farmers'

3.
with respect to the recommendations already incorporated
in the legislative proposals, stresses that many of the recommen-
dations made in its outlook opinion on The Common Agricultural
Policy Health Check (CdR 197/2007) are still valid; however,
further simplification is necessary in addition to the legislative
proposals submitted, in order to achieve actual relief from red
tape for the regional authorities responsible for implementing
the CAP and for farmers; here in particular, greater simplifica-
tion in the area of cross compliance is necessary; in this context
any extension of Annex III documentation must not lead to
greater burdens; furthermore, when implementing the individual
measures concerning the individual standards in accordance
with Annex III, account should be taken of regional and natural
conditions, which may be very different; attention should also
be paid to existing regulations;

contrary to what is outlined in its outlook opinion, pleads
4.
for the abolition of compulsory set-aside to be accompanied by
optional environmental protection measures for certain areas
within Pillar II;

6.
Thinks that the CAP Health Check cannot merely extend
the 2003 reform without addressing the new international food
situation; calls for caution to be exercised so that, during the
Health Check, existing market
the
instrument of compulsory set-aside) are not irreversibly abol-
ished. Given the current volatility of worldwide food markets, it
should be possible to reactivate these instruments even if they
are not currently in use;

instruments (except

for

7.
Agrees on the importance of the New Challenges and
agrees that a powerful incentive is needed in all Member States
in order to succeed in launching New Challenges operations;

8.
however fears that the form of modulation proposed by
the Commission means that in general farmers' incomes could
be significantly reduced, depending on the region;

feels that the Commission should not underestimate the
9.
importance of the reliability of the agreed financial framework
of the CAP until 2013;

10.
suggests that some of the freed-up resources could also
be invested in other measures besides the ones to be created for
the New Challenges, like in new Pillar I support measures for
the Community sheep and goat sector which is of such great
social, economic and environmental importance, and which is
currently at serious risk of a drastic reduction in livestock
numbers across Europe, and also in existing farm-related Pillar II
to help
in various new Pillar II measures meant
measures,

C 325/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.12.2008

farmers adapt to the new Pillar I situation, or in other new
Pillar II measures, meant
the various
to meet
measures of multifunctional agriculture for the general public;

the costs of

I. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

Common Agricultural Policy

11.
feels that the balance between objectives and measures
could differ for regions which up to now have already imple-
mented many measures for coping with New Challenges or have
already used their resources to a large extent in accordance with
the New Challenges;

feels that if European agricultural policy is to respect the
12.
fundamental aspects of European policy,
the application of
modulation must first be based on the conditions of production
before global criteria for competition can be studied as a
priority;

13.
believes that decisions on modulation are best taken at
the appropriate devolved level to better reflect the diversity of
local and regional needs. Member States and regions should
have the scope to direct funds to Pillar II measures based on
actual needs;

in this opinion on the legislative proposals expresses
14.
concern about the lack of financial means for rural development
in general and for the new challenges in particular accordingly
states clearly that for further investing in the New Challenges, in
the near future the scope should not only be on the resources
of Pillar 1 and therefore urges to relate this concern to other EU
policies, especially cohesion policy;

in this opinion focuses on the scope of the proposals for
15.
Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 on rural development, aiming
for maximum results on the new challenges;

in this opinion gives an opinion on the future CAP in
16.
global perspective, including issues with WTO relevance, such
as intellectual property and EU quality and energy use labelling;

17.
in this opinion asks the Commission to invite the CoR to
contribute to further debates and policy-making and announces
new CoR initiatives, such as organising a stakeholder conference
and formulating a vision paper
for agriculture and rural
development in Europe, focusing on the impact of regional deci-
sion-making and the ongoing efforts to create better environ-
mental conditions in agriculture;

emphasises the importance of the indigenous European
18.
agri-food industry and the critical significance of food safety
and food security where the EU is now the biggest agricultural
importer in the world;

To provide for a smooth transition from milk quota
19.
expiry in 2015, a ‘soft landing’
is required, the Committee
would favour annual milk quota increases of minimum 2 %, at
least for those regions and countries with greater production
potential. With very significant volume and price fluctuations
now occurring, market management mechanisms should remain
in place until the quota system expires;

feels that the Common Agricultural Policy is important
20.
today and has the potential to remain important in the near
future, as the performance of
the CAP will continue to be
debate in the perspective of increasing global demand for food,
feed, fuels and fibres;

expresses the view that

21.
in an increasingly globalised
world European agriculture cannot do without a powerful
European common policy with market regulation mechanisms
which, whilst taking into account the geographic, social and
economic diversity of the European regions, focuses on strategic
objectives and consumer demand, offers possibilities for regional
opportunity and involvement, especially on the new challenges,
is economically, socially and environmentally sustainable and
contributes to rural prosperity;

shares

the view of

the European Commission that
22.
climate change, bio-energy, water management and biodiversity
represent major challenges for the future — including for agri-
culture; in this context one should examine what contribution
the CAP can make to accompanying the necessary adjustments
positively; asks that appropriate consideration be given in the
Member States and regions to making payments in advance;

is concerned about

dismantling Community

the Commission's proposals

to
23.
continue
intervention measures,
against a backdrop of market instability; considers that it is
important to maintain market intervention instruments financed
through the Community funds currently in existence;

will continue its work to ensure that

24.
the necessary
review of the CAP does not result in any re-nationalisation of
that policy — hereby meaning that although executing and
co-financing of policy can be allocated to the regions and the
Member States, CAP policy itself, including strategy and budget,
must be secured on a common level. Advocates the mainte-
the funding
nance until the end of
the financial period of
ceiling for
the CAP adopted in the 2007-2013 financial
framework;

25.
in the light of the present economic situation and the
serious crisis affecting European countries, which is having a
particularly harmful impact on rural society, recommends that
the Commission avoid taking any steps that might serve to
increase unemployment and intensify the loss of economic
activity;

considers that all direct aid should be linked to main-
26.
taining agricultural activity, although it could be decoupled from
actual production; in this context, the health check should not
serve as an opportunity to further untie direct aid;

19.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 325/31

27.
considers that both the historical and regional models
should gradually move towards uniform, work unit-based aid at
Community level, modulated in line with the goods and services
supplied to society in the context of a multi-functional farming
industry;

38.
in fact supposes a growing discrepancy between the
means available in the second pillar and the impact of the objec-
tives needed to be addressed, being as well the ‘new challenges’
as the ‘current challenges’, related to the economic, social and
environmental quality of rural areas;

that

points out

the Commission's proposal

28.
to set a
threshold under which aid would not be covered could become
a regressive measure in social terms and, taking into account
impact on
regional diversity, could have a major
numerous
simplification
considers
measures should be applied within the internal context of each
Member State;

social
that

therefore,

regions;

29.
in light of the Commission's proposal to present a report
before 30 June 2011 on the conditions for phasing out milk
quotas, considers that any decision on the future of the quota
system should be postponed until that date;

notes

the Commission's own acknowledgement

30.
that
ending the quota system, or simply allowing quotas to increase
gradually, could eventually lead to lower prices;

31.
suggests that in order to provide a safety net in response
to excessive volume and price fluctuations, appropriate market
management mechanisms should remain in place during the
health check, and also after the expiry of the quota system;

39.
believes that the CAP is primarily intended for agriculture
and should not be transformed into just another aspect of terri-
torial cohesion policy. when the CAP takes due regard of
regional specificities and different production systems,
it also
contributes to territorial cohesion; that any proposals for change
as a result of the Health Check must have sufficient regard to
the various regional specificities and production systems that
exist within the European Union;

welcomes the proposal to make Article 69 of Regulation
40.
(EC) No 1782/2003 more flexible, but also considers this
measure inadequate to deal with the dismantling of market
mechanisms proposed by the Commission,
in particular the
implications of ending milk quotas:

puts

41.
forward the view that developing rural areas
towards greater innovation, sustainability and quality of services
for all inhabitants and economic stakeholders, goes far beyond
just the framework of agricultural development;

32.
recommends that for as long as considered useful, also
after 2015, the market instruments for milk and dairy products
should be kept stand-by;

supports the growing call to invest in research on agri-
issues and to apply research outcome, welcomes the
the EC to seek synergy with the Knowledge

42.
cultural
suggestion of
Framework;

33.
urges the EC to establish an extraordinary Community
budget fund, supplemented if necessary by State resources, with
the aim of improving the viability of farms, situated in less
competitive
or
circumstances;

disadvantaged

naturally

regions

and/or

suggests

that Member States

34.
should be allowed to
support these farms in various ways, like by re-appointing Less
Favoured Areas, by offering Pillar 2 measures and/or by applying
Article 68, thus providing a safety net;

calls for prudence,

35.
to ensure that during the health
check, the market mechanisms for milk and dairy products are
not eliminated; considers that those currently in place should be
maintained;

36.
believes that the impact of agriculture on the environ-
ment is a major challenge and the EU should make greener agri-
culture a priority; would therefore stress the importance of an
ongoing dialogue on environmental conditions in agriculture;

Synergy, complementarity and demarcation of common
policy

37.
is concerned, that attempts to use the ‘rural development’
umbrella to incorporate an ever-growing number of issues could
be problematic and would question whether a number of these
challenges would be best addressed through rural development
programmes;

urges the EC to ensure that the need to encourage inno-
43.
vation and modernisation of farms and other food-related enter-
prises, resulting from the necessity to address the new challenges
related to establish new competitiveness is not hindered by state
aid policy;

44.
strongly suggests that synergies be fostered between rural
development policy and other EU policies, particularly cohesion
policy and would welcome any opportunity to contribute to
upcoming consultations on debates, meant to explore these
synergies;

Stronger appeal to regional decision-making

45.
underlining that the carrying out of all CAP measures
has a local impact, stresses that the regional level is best placed
to create maximum results in implementing a common policy;
however, distortions of competition between Member States and
regions must be avoided;

46.
wishes to state that local and regional bodies in most EU
Member States have gained considerable experience and exper-
tise in rural development, such as the execution of the PRODER
in the last decade and would
and LEADER Programmes
welcome an invitation to accept broader responsibilities for
implementing and targeting the EU policy for Agriculture and
Rural Development;

C 325/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.12.2008

47.
wishes to point out that it is the regional level that is
most appropriate for setting measures to cut the CAP's adminis-
trative costs; considers that the possibility of exempting farmers
who receive aid below a certain threshold from the compulsory
modulation would in some regions represent a significant reduc-
tion in these administrative costs;

that

the shift

points out

from a historic towards a
48.
regional payment model, as encouraged by the Commission,
will call for the need to apply far more geographically deter-
mined criteria and to address regional and local competences,
such as water management, energy supply and spatial planning;

implemented at the regional or State level to regulate the profit
margins of each link in the food chain without this being taken
to represent a change to the rules of competition;

considers that

56.
the CAP must continue to strive to
achieve its objectives of providing EU citizens with quality food
in sufficient quantities, with health guarantees, at fair prices,
and
creating viable
protecting the rural environment and has evolved to meet chal-
lenges and changing needs, whilst at the same time establishing
conditions of fair competition enabling European agriculture to
maintain a strong presence on the world market;

farms, preserving our

rural heritage

49.
expresses the need to back up the implementation of
rural development policy with increased technical and educa-
tional support;

50.
stresses the need for local and regional authorities to
provide more, comprehensive information for producers and
consumers about agricultural issues in order to raise the aware-
ness and sense of responsibility of the various social groups
with regard to the importance of agriculture for our everyday
lives and in order to draw attention to the important role which
agriculture has played, plays and will continue to play in
economic, social and environmental developments;

51.
Suggests that an additional element for classifying enter-
prises under modulation threshold is to be defined and intro-
duced, making it possible to distinct large centrally managed
enterprises from locally but under cooperation managed enter-
prises
to apply supportive
measures, thus creating a soft landing for these cooperations;

and allowing Member States

Global perspective, trade issues and the future of the CAP

52.
notes that a strong increase in the quantitative demand
for agricultural commodities and food, caused by the explosive
increase in the world's population, combined with the increase
of prosperity and purchasing power, will occur in the near
future and be sustained for the years to come;

notes that

53.
the growth in population and purchasing
power will also lead to a strong increase in the demand for high
quality foods, processed foods, meat and dairy foods and that
this in turn will
lead to an increasing scarcity of food crops
including grains, fibres and other agricultural feed stock and raw
materials;

54.
Is concerned that the proposed increase of milk quota by
1 % annually from 2009 to 2013 may not be sufficient and
suggests that the proposed increase should already be raised to
2 % annually, but also suggests that the Commission should
secure the position of farmers in vulnerable areas, might this
position be harmed as a result of these increased milk quota;

55.
Considers there to be a need for Community law to
allow for a more ambitious framing of inter-professional rela-
to be
tions,

things, measures

amongst other

enabling,

urges,

in order to establish an according global

level
57.
that uniform phytosanitary, veterinary and
playing field,
for
standards be applied to food products
environmental
consumption in the EU whether EU-produced or
from
3rd countries and urges that border inspection authorities, the
Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) and the European Food Safety
Authority (EFSA) be provided with the necessary resources;

58.
notes that the production of food remains the focus and
main task of agriculture, notes that the cultivation of energy
plants makes an additional contribution towards achieving the
goals of the Community's energy and climate policy and repre-
sents a potential creation of value for agriculture and rural areas
and suggests that the topic should be readdressed under the
New Challenges;

59.
feels that Europe has the social responsibility to put
maximum effort into the anchoring of the People, Planet and
Profit principles into the outcome of current and future WTO
negotiations;

suggests that the Commission should get an agreement
60.
on intellectual property covering geographical
indications
(acknowledged regional products) before signing an WTO agree-
ment on agriculture;

suggests, that the Commission should define a European

61.
Food Hallmark, based on currently prescribed criteria;

New challenges

62.
wishes to emphasise that the new challenges facing the
CAP cannot be addressed by the CAP alone; all Community
policies must be used to tackle them;

feels that in order to fight climate change,
should be encouraged,

integrated
63.
food strategies
reducing food
mileage, covering waste and energy management and estab-
lishing a labelling system, based on criteria defining origin,
quality and sustainability and indicating the total energy
consumed by the time the product reaches the consumer;

thus

64.
feels that when it lowers their carbon footprint, regions
should be encouraged to develop and promote locally produced
food and food-related products;

19.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 325/33

65.
Is aware that Article 28 and Article 29 of the EC Treaty
prohibit quantitative restrictions on imports, exports or goods
in transit and all measures having equivalent effect between
Member States, but feels that the actions as mentioned under 60
and 61 of the opinion could be allowed, knowing that the
Court of Justice allows actions that are in the common public
interest,
like fighting climate change; and there fore calls for
further studying the options;

self-sufficiency, responsiveness to society, consumers and the
public good where good farming practices, environmental
protection and animal welfare are integral; these contributions
of agriculture are in the public interest and represent a financial
value that is worth promoting, if higher costs are not offset by
fair prices on the open market; particular attention should also
be given in this context to ensuring that the farming community
benefits from economic and social progress;

66.
wishes to add, that aiming for a certain level of regional
self sufficiency for certain products would not contradict with
importing from other countries;

67.
in this respect calls for export subsidies to be granted
only if this is needed to relieve domestic markets and does not
harm the expansion of markets in the developing countries;

68.
emphasises the importance of the indigenous European
agri-food industry and the critical significance of food safety,
food security and R&D capacity of developing sustainability-
linked technology, where the EU is now the biggest agricultural
importer in the world;

that

feels

69.
can pre-eminently
European agriculture
connect both the Lisbon (knowledge, research, innovation) and
the Goteborg (sustainability) objectives and set a worldwide
example;

Rural development
objectives

and implementing

second pillar

70.
feels that the CAP, with a tailored second pillar, must
result in a rural development geared to all economic activities in
rural area and the new farming conditions, as well as to a more
comprehensive rural development covering all rural areas in the
EU, as well as to the most vulnerable areas such as those with
natural handicaps (sparsely populated areas whose location
island and outermost
holds back their development, upland,
areas) as well as to the most dynamic areas, such as periurban
areas responsible for feeding the majority of EU citizens and up
to the challenge of knowledge development, and integrating
them into the major EU geographical groupings;

71.
notes that recent evidence suggests that the majority of
the world's population is living in urbanised areas within city
boundaries and that this population is dependent on rural land
management efficiency for food and fresh water supplies and
notes that urbanised areas in addition present a strong need for
nature reserves and attractive and accessible landscape. If these
are to be maintained in a sustainable way, sufficient support
the farmers who
must be forthcoming for
manage such areas, so that they can be competitive and keep
their farms viable in spite of having to comply with more strin-
gent requirements as a result of Community law;

the income of

emphasises

72.
the multifunctional EU agriculture
model must contribute to combating climate change, embody
the concepts of sustainability, competitiveness, diversity, food

that

73.
calls for the deletion of Article 13(2), which lays down
the obligation that ‘Member States shall give priority to the
farmers who receive more that EUR 15 000 of direct payments
per year’
in line with the conditions for participation in the
farm advisory systems;

notes that climate change necessitates further water
74.
management measures including measures like water storage,
controlling levels, preventing flooding, preventing shortage and
managing fresh water supplies;

75.
feels that Europe must stimulate and support the use and
production of truly renewable energy in agriculture, not only
focusing on (second generation) biocrops and biofuels, but also
on solar energy,, wind energy, hydroelectric power, geothermal
heat and cogeneration;

76.
feels that in order to meet the new challenges, Europe
must aim for a closed circle economy and therefore stimulate
and support innovating agriculture as a whole, not only addres-
sing knowledge
also promoting system,
network and chain innovation and accordingly promoting
modernisation of all enterprises which are a part of the food
production, processing, waste management, transport and distri-
bution chain;

institutions, but

77.
feels that professional land management must be imple-
mented to ensure that fertile agricultural land is kept in good
condition in order to secure sustainable use for food production
for the internal and external market;

78.
feels that specific agricultural areas are of the utmost
importance for preserving and restoring biodiversity and nature
values and that these public interests represent a financial value,
eligible for payments;

79.
feels that specific agricultural areas are of the utmost
importance for offering leisure possibilities and that these public
interests represent a financial value, eligible for payments;

feels that specific agricultural areas are of the utmost
80.
importance for executing water management and that
this
public interest represents a financial value, eligible for payments;

is of

81.
the view that while the CAP has successfully
adapted to different challenges since its inception, considers that
the Commission and its agents must do more to better inform
and engage with citizens about the purpose, achievements and
priorities of the CAP and that this should be a future communi-
cation priority of the Commission;

C 325/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.12.2008

II. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS

Amendment 1

Article 6, and Annex III — 2008/0103 (CNS) — COM(2008) 306 final

Text proposed by the Commission

Article 6

CoR amendment

Article 6

Good agricultural and environmental condition

Good agricultural and environmental condition

1. Member States shall ensure that all agricultural land,
especially land which is no longer used for production
purposes, is maintained in good agricultural and environ-
mental condition. Member States shall define, at national
or regional
level, minimum requirements for good agri-
cultural and environmental condition on the basis of the
framework set up in Annex III, taking into account the
specific characteristics of
including
soil and climatic condition, existing farming systems, land
use, crop rotation, farming practices, and farm structures.

the areas concerned,

1. Member States shall ensure that all agricultural land,
especially land which is no longer used for production
purposes, is maintained in good agricultural and environ-
mental condition. Member States shall define, at national or
regional level, minimum requirements for good agricultural
and environmental condition on the basis of the framework
set up in Annex III, taking into account the specific charac-
teristics of the areas concerned, including soil and climatic
condition, existing farming systems, land use, crop rotation,
farming practices, and farm structures.

2. Member States other than the new Member States
shall ensure that land which was under permanent pasture
at the date provided for the area aid applications for 2003
is maintained under permanent pasture. The new Member
States shall ensure that land which was under permanent
pasture on 1 May 2004 is maintained under permanent
pasture. However, Bulgaria and Romania shall ensure that
land which was under permanent pasture on 1 January
2007 is maintained under permanent pasture.

2. Member States other than the new Member States
shall ensure that land which was under permanent pasture
at the date provided for the area aid applications for 2003
is maintained under permanent pasture. The new Member
States shall ensure that land which was under permanent
pasture on 1 May 2004 is maintained under permanent
pasture. However, Bulgaria and Romania shall ensure that
land which was under permanent pasture on 1 January
2007 is maintained under permanent pasture.

However a Member State may,
in duly justified circum-
stances, derogate from the first subparagraph, provided that
it takes action to prevent any significant decrease in its
total permanent pasture area.

However a Member State may,
in duly justified circum-
stances, derogate from the first subparagraph, provided that
it takes action to prevent any significant decrease in its
total permanent pasture area.

The first subparagraph shall not apply to land under
permanent pasture to be afforested, if such afforestation is
compatible with the environment and with the exclusion of
plantations of Christmas trees and fast growing species
cultivated in the short term.

The first subparagraph shall not apply to land under
permanent pasture to be afforested, if such afforestation is
compatible with the environment and with the exclusion of
plantations of Christmas trees and fast growing species
cultivated in the short term.

The measures mentioned under Annex III are to be
regarded upon as recommended suggestions. To secure
good agricultural and environmental condition, Member
States are invited to put
forward more or different
measures, fitting national, regional or local conditions.

Good agricultural and environmental condition referred to in Article 6

ANNEX III

Issue

Standards

Soil erosion:

— Minimum soil cover

Protect soil through appropriate measures

— Minimum land management

reflecting site-specific

conditions

— Retain terraces

Soil organic matter:

— Standards for crop rotations where applicable

Maintain soil organic matter levels through appropriate
practices

— Arable stubble management

Soil structure:

— Appropriate machinery use

Maintain soil structure through appropriate measures

19.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 325/35

Issue

Standards

Minimum level of maintenance:

— Minimum livestock stocking rates or/and appropriate

Ensure a minimum level of maintenance and avoid the
deterioration of habitats

regimes

— Protection of permanent pasture

— Retention of

landscape

features,

appropriate, hedges, ponds, ditches trees in line,
group or isolated and field margins,

including, where
in

— where appropriate, prohibition of the grubbing up of

olive trees

— Avoiding the encroachment of unwanted vegetation on

agricultural land

— Maintenance of olive groves and vines in good vegeta-

tive condition

Protection and management of water:

Protect water against pollution and run-off, and manage
the use of water

— Establishment of buffer strips along water courses,
— respect of authorisation procedures for using water for

irrigation.

Reason

For reasons of subsidiarity, the European Commission should impose on objectives, but not on measures.
Sub-European levels of government should be allowed to define appropriate effective and efficient measures
themselves.

A specifically inefficient measure — establishing buffer strips along water courses — should already be
taken out of the Annex III.

To protect water courses against pollution and run-off, supportive measures are favoured. Establishment of
buffer strips along water courses could in certain cases be useful in order to reach the GAEC objective.
However, prescribing buffering zones in general for all water courses would not be efficient and would cost
too much productivity.

For example, several Member States use a dense web of small and mainly manmade ditches for drainage and
water level management. Establishing buffer strips here could take up to 50 % of the surface area of the
parcels surrounded by these ditches. Objectives on water and soil quality could be reached in various ways.

Amendment 2

Article 25(3) — 2008/0103 (CNS) — COM(2008) 306 final

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

(3)
Notwithstanding paragraph 1 and in accordance
with the conditions laid down in the detailed rules referred
to in Article 26(1), Member States may decide not to apply
a reduction or exclusion amounting to EUR 100 or less per
farmer and per calendar year, and which includes any
reduction or
exclusion applied to payments under
Article 51(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005.

(3)
Notwithstanding paragraph 1 and in accordance with
the conditions laid down in the detailed rules referred to in
Article 26(1), Member States may decide not to apply a
reduction or exclusion amounting to EUR 100 or less per
support scheme, farmer and per calendar year covered by
the application., and which includes any reduction or exclu-
sion applied to payments under Article 51(1) of Regulation
(EC) No 1698/2005.

Reason

In general, regional and municipal authorities are responsible for carrying out CAP measures. The above
change is needed if genuine administrative simplification of procedures is to be achieved. That is why the
individual support rules should be considered separately.

C 325/36

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.12.2008

Amendment 3

Article 47 — 2008/0103 (CNS) — COM(2008) 306 final

Text proposed by the Commission

Article 47

CoR amendment

Article 47

Regional allocation of

the ceiling referred to in

Regional allocation of

the ceiling referred to in

Article 41

Article 41

1.
single
A Member State having introduced the
payment scheme in accordance with Chapters 1 to 4 of
Title III of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 may decide, by
1 August 2009 at the latest, to apply the single payment
scheme from 2010 at regional level under the conditions
laid down in this section.

1.
single
A Member State having introduced the
payment scheme in accordance with Chapters 1 to 4 of
Title III of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 may decide, by
1 August 2009 at the latest, to apply the single payment
scheme from 2010 at regional level under the conditions
laid down in this section.

2. Member States shall define the regions according to
objective and non-discriminatory criteria such as their insti-
tutional or administrative structure and/or the regional
agricultural potential.

2. Member States shall define the regions according to
objective and non-discriminatory criteria such as their insti-
tutional or administrative structure and/or the regional agri-
cultural potential.

Member States with less than three million eligible hectares
may be considered as one single region.

Member States with less than three million eligible hectares
may be considered as one single region.

3. Member States shall subdivide the ceiling referred to
in Article 41 between the regions according to objective
and non-discriminatory criteria.

3. Member States shall subdivide the ceiling referred to
in Article 41 between the regions according to objective
and non-discriminatory criteria.

4. Member States shall do as stated in sub 1, 2 and 3 in
consultation with its sub-national levels of government.

Reason

Speaks for itself

Amendment 4

Article 68 — 2008/0103 (CNS) — COM(2008) 306 final

Text proposed by the Commission

Article 68

General rules

CoR amendment

Article 68

General rules

1. Member States may decide by 1 August 2009 at the
latest to use from 2010 up to 10 % of their national ceil-
ings referred to in Article 41 to grant support to farmers:

1. Member States may decide by 1 August 2009, 2010
or 2011 at the latest to use from 2010, 2011 or 2012 up
to 10 % of their national ceilings referred to in Article 41
to grant support to farmers:

(a) for:

(a) for:

(i) specific types of farming which are important for
the environ-

the protection or enhancement of
ment,

(ii) for improving the quality of agricultural products,

or

(i) specific types of farming which are important for
the protection or enhancement of the environment,
including animal welfare,

(ii) for improving the quality of agricultural products,

or

(iii) for

improving

the marketing of

agricultural

products;

(b) to address specific disadvantages affecting farmers in
the dairy, beef, sheep and goatmeat and rice sectors in
economically vulnerable or environmentally sensitive
areas,

(iii) for

improving

the marketing of

agricultural

products;

(b) to address specific disadvantages affecting farmers in
the dairy, beef, sheep and goatmeat, potatoe starch, flax
and rice sectors in economically vulnerable or environ-
mentally sensitive areas,

(c) in areas subject to restructuring and/or development
programs in order to avoid abandoning of land and/or
in order to address specific disadvantages for farmers in
those areas,

(c) in areas subject to restructuring and/or development
programs in order to avoid abandoning of land and/or
in order to address specific disadvantages for farmers in
those areas,

19.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 325/37

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

(d) in the

form of

to crop insurance
contributions
premiums in accordance with the conditions set out in
Article 69,

(d) in the

form of

to crop insurance
contributions
premiums in accordance with the conditions set out in
Article 69,

(e) mutual funds for animal and plant diseases in accord-

(e) mutual funds for animal and plant diseases in accord-

ance with the conditions set out in Article 70.

ance with the conditions set out in Article 70.

Support for measures referred to in paragraph 1(a)

2.
may only be granted:

Support for measures referred to in paragraph 1(a)

2.
may only be granted:

(a) if

(a) if

(i) as regards support for the specific types of farming
referred to in its point (i), it respects the require-
ments for agri-environment payments set out in
the first subparagraph of Article 39(3) of Regu-
lation (EC) No 1698/2005,

(i) as regards support for the specific types of farming
referred to in its point (i), it respects the require-
ments for agri-environment payments set out in
the first subparagraph of Article 39(3) of Regu-
lation (EC) No 1698/2005,

(ii) as

for

regards

support

improving the quality
of agricultural products referred to in its point (ii),
is consistent with Council Regulation (EC)
it
No
(EC)
Council
(EC)
Council
No
No 834/2007 and Chapter I of Title II of Part II of
Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 and

509/2006,
510/2006,

Regulation
Regulation

(ii) as

for

regards

support

improving the quality
of agricultural products referred to in its point (ii),
is consistent with Council Regulation (EC)
it
(EC)
Council
No
(EC)
Council
No
No 834/2007 and Chapter I of Title II of Part II of
Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 and

509/2006,
510/2006,

Regulation
Regulation

(iii) as regards support for improving the marketing of
agricultural products referred to in its point (iii), it
respects the criteria laid down in Articles 2 to 5 of
Council Regulation (EC) No 3/2008 and

(b) only for coverage of

the additional costs actually
incurred and income foregone in order to fulfil the
objective concerned.

(iii) as regards support for improving the marketing of
agricultural products referred to in its point (iii), it
respects the criteria laid down in Articles 2 to 5 of
Council Regulation (EC) No 3/2008 and

(b) only for coverage of

the additional costs actually
incurred and income foregone in order to fulfil the
objective concerned.

Support for measures referred to in paragraph 1(b)

3.
may only be granted:

Support for measures referred to in paragraph 1(b)

3.
may only be granted:

(a) upon full

implementation of

single payment
scheme in the sector concerned in accordance with
Articles 54, 55 and 71.

the

(a) upon full implementation or towards full implementa-
tion within three years, of the single payment scheme
in the sector concerned in accordance with Articles 54,
55 and 71.

(b) to the extent necessary to create an incentive to main-

tain current levels of production.

(b) to the extent necessary to create an incentive to main-

tain current levels of production.

Support under

4.
the measures referred to in para-
graph 1(a), (b) and (e) shall be limited to 2.5 % of the
national ceilings referred to in Article 41 Member States
may set sub-limits per measure.

4.
Support under the measures referred to in paragraph 1
(a), (b) and (e) shall be limited to 2.5 % of the national ceil-
ings referred to in Article 41 Member States may set
sub-limits per measure.

5.

Support for measures referred to:

5.

Support for measures referred to:

(a) in paragraph 1(a) and (d) shall take the form of annual

additional payments,

(a) in paragraph 1(a) and (d) shall take the form of annual

additional payments,

(b) in paragraph 1(b) shall take the form of annual addi-
tional payments such us headage payments or grassland
premia,

(b) in paragraph 1(b) shall take the form of annual addi-
tional payments such us headage payments or grassland
premia,

(c) in paragraph 1(c) shall take the form of an increase of
the farmer's

the number of

the unit value and/or
payment entitlements,

(c) in paragraph 1(c) shall take the form of an increase of
the farmer's

the number of

the unit value and/or
payment entitlements,

(d) in paragraph 1(e) shall take the form of compensation

payments as specified in Article 70.

(d) in paragraph 1(e) shall take the form of compensation

payments as specified in Article 70.

6.
The transfer of payment entitlements with increased
unit values and of additional payment entitlements referred
to in paragraph 5(c) may only be allowed if the transferred
entitlements are accompanied by the transfer of an equiva-
lent number of hectares.

6.
The transfer of payment entitlements with increased
unit values and of additional payment entitlements referred
to in paragraph 5(c) may only be allowed if the transferred
entitlements are accompanied by the transfer of an equiva-
lent number of hectares.

C 325/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.12.2008

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

7.
Support for measures referred to in paragraph 1 shall
be consistent with other Community measures and poli-
cies.

8. Member States shall raise the funds needed to cover
the support referred to:

7.
Support for measures referred to in paragraph 1 shall
be consistent with other Community measures and policies.

8. Member States shall raise the funds needed to cover
the support referred to:

(a) in paragraph 1(a),

(c) and (d) by proceeding to
linear reduction of the entitlements allocated to farmers
and/or from the national reserve,

(b),

(a) in paragraph 1(a),

(c) and (d) by proceeding to
linear reduction of the entitlements allocated to farmers
and/or from the national reserve,

(b),

(b) in paragraph 1(e) by proceeding, if necessary, to linear
reduction of one or several of the payments to be made
to the beneficiaries of the relevant payments in accord-
ance with this title and within the limits set out in para-
graphs 1 and 3.

(b) in paragraph 1(e) by proceeding, if necessary, to linear
reduction of one or several of the payments to be made
to the beneficiaries of the relevant payments in accord-
ance with this title and within the limits set out in para-
graphs 1 and 3.

The Commission, in accordance with the procedure
9.
referred to in Article 128(2), shall define the conditions for
the granting of the support referred to under this section,
in particular with a view to ensure consistency with other
Community measures and policies and to avoid cumulation
of support.

The Commission, in accordance with the procedure
9.
referred to in Article 128(2), shall define the conditions for
the granting of the support referred to under this section,
in particular with a view to ensure consistency with other
Community measures and policies and to avoid cumulation
of support.

10. When deciding on the use from 2010 up to 10 %
of their national ceilings, Member States shall do so in
consultation with its sub-national levels of government.

Reason

Article 68 is still under a lot of discussion. Many Member States and regions would need more time to
decide upon the level and the way they would want to implement it. Also they might want to add more
objectives under the general rules. Finally, to make further decoupling less painful, a more gradual change,
including supportive measures should be possible under Article 68.

Amendment 5

Article 1, (6), 2.b — 2008/0105 (CNS) — COM(2008) 306 final

Text proposed by the Commission

CoR amendment

b) Pursuant to the conditions laid down in the detailed
rules referred to in paragraph 4 of this Article, Member
States may decide not to apply a reduction or cancella-
tion amounting to EUR 100 or less per farmer and per
calendar year, and which includes any reduction or
exclusion applied to direct payments under Article 25
of Regulation (EC) [No XXXX/2008 (new Regulation on
direct support schemes)].

b) Pursuant to the conditions laid down in the detailed
rules referred to in paragraph 4 of this Article, Member
States may decide not to apply a reduction or cancella-
tion amounting to EUR 100 or less per farmer, per
measure and per calendar year covered by the applica-
tion., and which includes any reduction or exclusion
applied to direct payments under Article 25 of Regu-
lation (EC) [No XXXX/2008 (new Regulation on direct
support schemes)].

Reason

In general, regional and municipal authorities are responsible for carrying out CAP measures. The above
change is needed if genuine administrative simplification of procedures is to be achieved. That is why the
individual support rules should be considered separately.

19.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 325/39

Amendment 6

ANNEX II — 2008/0105 (CNS) — COM(2008) 306 final

ANNEX II

Indicative types of operations related to priorities referred to in Article 16a

Types of operations

Articles and measures

Potential effects

Priority: Climate change

Improve efficiency of nitrogen fertiliser
use (for ex. reduced use, equipment,
precision agriculture), improvement of
manure storage

Article 26: modernisation of agri-
cultural holdings

Reduction of methane
nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions

(CH4)

and

Article 28: Adding value to agri-
cultural and forestry products

Article 29: Cooperation for develop-
ment of new products, processes and
technologies in the agriculture and
food sector and in the forestry sector

Article 39: agri-environment payments

Improvement of energy efficiency

Article 26: modernisation of agri-
cultural holdings

Reduction of carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions by saving energy.

Article 28: Adding value to agri-
cultural and forestry products

Article 29: Cooperation for develop-
ment of new products, processes and
technologies in the agriculture and
food sector and in the forestry sector

Reducing foodmiles

Article 26: modernisation of agri-
cultural holdings

Reduction of carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions by saving energy.

Article 28: Adding value to agri-
cultural and forestry products

Article 29: Cooperation for develop-
ment of new products, processes and
technologies in the agriculture and
food sector and in the forestry sector

Article
53:
non-agricultural activities

diversification

into

Article 54: support for business crea-
tion and development

Article 56: basic services
economy and rural population.

for

the

Soil management practices
(for ex.
tillage methods, catch crops, diversified
crop rotations)

Article 39: agri-environment payments Reduction of nitrous oxide

carbon sequestration.

(N2O);

Land Use change (for ex. conversion of
arable land to pastures, permanent set
aside,
of
organic soils)

use/restoration

reduced

Article 39: agri-environment payments Reduction nitrous oxide (N2O); carbon

sequestration.

C 325/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.12.2008

Priority: Climate change

Types of operations

Articles and measures

Potential effects

Extensification of
reduction stocking density,
grazing)

livestock (for ex.
increase

Article 39: agri-environment payments Reduction of methane (CH4).

Afforestation

Articles 43 and 45: first afforestation
of agricultural and non-agricultural
land

Reduction of nitrous oxide
carbon sequestration.

(N2O);

Forest fire prevention

Article 48: restoring forestry potential
and introducing prevention actions

Carbon sequestration in forests and
avoid carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.

Priority: Renewable energies

Types of operations

Articles and measures

Potential effects

Biogas production — anaerobic diges-
tion plants using animal waste (on
farm and local production)

Article 26: modernisation of agri-
cultural holdings

Substitution of fossil fuel; reduction of
methane (CH4)

Article 28: Adding value to agri-
cultural and forestry products

Article 29: Cooperation for develop-
ment of new products, processes and
technologies in the agriculture and
food sector and in the forestry sector

Article
53:
non-agricultural activities

diversification

into

Perennial energy crops (short rotation
coppice and herbaceous grasses)

Article 26: modernisation of agri-
cultural holdings

Substitution of
sequestration;
oxide (N2O).

fossil

fuels;
carbon
reduction of nitrous

Processing of agricultural/forest bio-
mass for renewable energy

Article 28: adding value to agri-
cultural and forestry products

Substitution of fossil fuels.

Article 29: Cooperation for develop-
ment of new products, processes and
technologies in the agriculture and
food sector and in the forestry sector

Installations/infrastructure for
able energy using biomass

renew-

Article 28: Adding value to agri-
cultural and forestry products

Substitution of fossil fuels.

Article 29: Cooperation for develop-
ment of new products, processes and
technologies in the agriculture and
food sector and in the forestry sector

53:
Article
non-agricultural activities

diversification

into

Article 54: support for business crea-
tion and development

Article 56: basic services
economy and rural population

for

the

19.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 325/41

Priority: Renewable energies

Types of operations

Articles and measures

Potential effects

Improvement of waste management
related to reuse of materials

Article 26: modernisation of agri-
cultural holdings

Substitution of fossil fuels.

Article 28: Adding value to agri-
cultural and forestry products

Article 29: Cooperation for develop-
ment of new products, processes and
technologies in the agriculture and
food sector and in the forestry sector

Article
53:
non-agricultural activities

diversification

into

Article 54: support for business crea-
tion and development

Article 56: basic services
economy and rural Population

for

the

Usage and production of solar energy,
wind energy, geothermal heat
and
cogeneration

Article 26: modernisation of agri-
cultural holdings

Substitution of fossil fuels

Article 28: Adding value to agri-
cultural and forestry products

Article 29: Cooperation for develop-
ment of new products, processes and
technologies in the agriculture and
food sector and in the forestry sector

Article
53:
non-agricultural activities

diversification

into

Article 54: support for business crea-
tion and development

Article 56: basic services
economy and rural population

for

the

Priority: Water Management

Types of operations

Articles and measures

Potential effects

Water
storage

saving

technologies, water

Article 26: modernisation of agri-
cultural holdings

Improve the capacity to use water
more efficiently.

Water saving production techniques

Article 28: Adding value to agri-
cultural and forestry products

Article 29: Cooperation for develop-
ment of new products, processes and
technologies in the agriculture and
food sector and in the forestry sector

Article 30: infrastructure

C 325/42

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.12.2008

Priority: Water Management

Types of operations

Articles and measures

Potential effects

Managing flooding risks

Article 28: Adding value to agri-
cultural and forestry products

Improve the capacity to use water
more efficiently.

Article 29: Cooperation for develop-
ment of new products, processes and
technologies in the agriculture and
food sector and in the forestry sector

Article 39: agri-environment payments

Article 41: non-productive
ments

Invest-

Wetland restoration

Article 39: agri-environment payments

Conservation
of
bodies; protection of quality water.

high-value water

Conversion of agricultural
forest/agro-forestry systems

land into

Article 41: non-productive
ments

invest-

Article 43 and 45: first afforestation
of agricultural and non-agricultural
land

Development of
bodies

semi-natural water

Article 57:
grading of the rural heritage

conservation and up-

Conservation
of
bodies; protection of quality water.

high-value water

Soil management practices
catch crops)

(for ex.

Article 39: agri-environment payments Contributing to the reduction of losses
to water,

compounds

of different
including phosphor.

Priority: Biodiversity

Types of operations

Articles and measures

Potential effects

No application of fertiliser and pesti-
cides on high nature value agricultural
land

Integrated and organic production

Article 39: agri-environment payments

Article 28: Adding value to agri-
cultural and forestry products

Article 29: Cooperation for develop-
ment of new products, processes and
technologies in the agriculture and
food sector and in the forestry sector

Perennial field and riparian boundary
strips

Articles 38 and 46: Natura 2000
payments

Construction/management of biotopes/
habitats within and outside Natura
2000 sites

Article 39: agri-environment payments

Article 41: non-productive
ments

invest-

Land Use Change (extensive grassland
management, conversion of cropland
to pasture, long-term set aside)

Article 47:
ments

forest-environment pay-

Management of high nature value
perennials

Article 57:
grading of the rural heritage

conservation and up-

Conserved
vegetation
species-rich
types, protection and maintenance of
grasslands.

Protected birds and other wildlife and
reduced
improved biotope network;
entry
in
of
bordering habitats.

substances

harmful

Conservation of genetic diversity

Article 39: agri-environment payments Conserved genetic diversity.

19.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 325/43

Reason

The New Challenges will become an important and possibly lucrative part of the farming business.

In order to stimulate farmers to take the lead in making their enterprises both competitive and sustainable,
finding solutions for sustainable farming and taking an active role in executing new environmental measures,
they should have the opportunity to apply all relevant existing EAFRD measures, also the measures meant
to enhance innovation, develop new technologies and develop new strategies. These are not enlisted by the
Commission yet. Enlisting them will encourage member states to put them forward.

Brussels, 8 October 2008.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Luc VAN DEN BRANDE