Article 153 Statutes of producer organisations
1. The statutes of a producer organisation shall require its producer members, in particular, to: (a) apply the rules adopted by the producer organisation relating to production reporting, production, marketing and protection of the environment; (b) be members of only one producer organisation for any given product of the holding; however Member States may derogate from this condition in duly justified cases where producer members hold two distinct production units located in different geographical areas; (c) provide the information requested by the producer organisation for statistical purposes. 2. The statutes of a producer organisation shall also provide for: (a) procedures for determining, adopting and amending the rules referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1; (b) the imposition on members of financial contributions needed to finance the producer organisation; (c) rules enabling the producer members to scrutinise democratically their organisation and its decisions; (d) penalties for infringement of obligations under the statutes, particularly for non-payment of financial contributions, or of the rules laid down by the producer organisation; (e) rules on the admission of new members, and in particular the minimum period of membership which may not be less than one year; (f) the accounting and budgetary rules necessary for the operation of the organisation. 3. Paragraphs 1 and 2 shall not apply to producer organisations in the milk and milk products sector.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The Commission proposal for the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2021-2027 (the MFF proposal) 1 sets the budgetary framework and main orientations for the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). On this basis, the Commission presents a set of regulations laying down the legislative framework for the CAP in the period 2021-2027, together with an impact assessment of alternative scenarios for the evolution of the policy. These proposals provide for a date of application as of 1 January 2021 and are presented for a Union of 27 Member States, in line with the no tification by the United Kingdom of its intention to withdraw from the European Union and Euratom based on Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union received by European Council on 29 March 2017. The latest reform of the CAP was decided in 2013 and implemented in 2015. Since then, the context in which that reform was forged has shifted significantly. In particular: Agricultural prices have fallen substantially – depressed by macroeconomic factors, geopolitical tensions and other forces. The emphasis of trade negotiations has moved more visibly from multilateral to bilateral deals and the EU has become more open to world markets. The EU has signed up to new international commitments – e.g. concerning climate change mitigation (through COP 21) and broad aspects of international development (through the UN's Sustainable Development Goals – SDGs), as well as efforts to better respond to other geopolitical developments including migration. These shifts have prompted a public debate about whether the 2013 reform goes far enough to help the CAP adequately meet broad ongoing challenges related to the economic health of the farm sector, care for the environment, action over climate change, and a strong and economic and social fabric for the EU's rural areas – especially in view of emerging opportunities for action in the areas of trade, the bioeconomy, renewable energy, the circular economy and the digital economy. The CAP must be modernised to meet these challenges, simplified to do so with a minimum of administrative burden, and made even more coherent with other EU policies to maximise its contribution to the ten Commission Priorities and the Sustainable Development Objectives. Indeed, as the Commission recalled in its recent Communication on the MFF, a modernised Common Agricultural Policy will need to support the transition towards a fully sustainable agricultural sector and the development of vibrant rural areas, providing secure, safe and high-quality food for over 500 million consumers. Europe needs a smart, resilient, sustainable and competitive agricultural sector in order to ensure the production of safe, high-quality, affordable, nutritious and diverse food for its citizens and a strong socio-economic fabric in rural areas. A modernised Common Agricultural Policy must enhance its European added value by reflecting a higher level of environmental and climate ambition and addressing citizens' expectations for their health, the environment and the climate. As foreseen in its Programme of Work for 2017, the Commission consulted widely on the simplification and modernisation of the CAP to maximise its contribution to the Commission's ten priorities and to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This focused on specific policy priorities for the future without prejudice to the financial allocations for the CAP in the next MFF. The process included a large consultation, as well as analysis of available evidence on the performance of the CAP, including the relevant REFIT Platform opinions. The outcome was presented in the Communication adopted on 29 November 2017 and entitled "the Future of Food and Farming". The Communication enables a structured dialogue on the future CAP in EU Institutions as well as with stakeholders. This policy document outlined challenges, objectives and possible avenues for a "future-proof" CAP that needs to be simpler, smarter and modern, and lead the transition to a more sustainable agriculture. In particular, the Commission identified higher environmental and climate action ambition, the better targeting of support and the stronger reliance on the virtuous Research-Innovation-Advice nexus as top priorities of the post-2020 CAP. It also proposed as a way to improve the performance of the CAP a new delivery model (NDM) to shift the policy focus from compliance to performance, and rebalances responsibilities between the EU and the Member State level with more subsidiarity. The new model aims at better achieving EU objectives based on strategic planning, broad policy interventions and common performance indicators, thus improving policy coherence across the future CAP and with other EU objectives.
Revised version (Article 153 Statutes of producer organisations):
The statutes of a producer organisation shall require its producer members, in particular, to: (a) apply the rules adopted by the producer organisation relating to production reporting, production, marketing and protection of the environment; (b) be members of only one producer organisation for any given product of the holding; however Member States may derogate from this condition in duly justified cases where producer members hold two distinct production units located in different geographical areas; (c) provide the information requested by the producer organisation for statistical purposes. The statutes of a producer organisation shall also provide for: (a) procedures for determining, adopting and amending the rules referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1; (b) the imposition on members of financial contributions needed to finance the producer organisation; (c) rules enabling the producer members to scrutinise democratically their organisation and its decisions as well as its accounts and budgets; (d) penalties for infringement of obligations under the statutes, particularly for non-payment of financial contributions, or of the rules laid down by the producer organisation; (e) rules on the admission of new members, and in particular the minimum period of membership which may not be less than one year; (f) the accounting and budgetary rules necessary for the operation of the organisation. 2a. The statutes of a producer organisation may provide for the possibility of producer members being in direct contact with purchasers, provided that such direct contact does not jeopardise the concentration of supply and placing of products on the market by the producer organisation. Concentration of supply shall be deemed to have been ensured if the essential elements of the sales such as price, quality and volume are negotiated and determined by the producer organisation. 3. Paragraphs 1, 2 and 2a shall not apply to producer organisations in the milk and milk products sector.
Article 154 Recognition of producer organisations
1. In order to be recognised by a Member State, the producer organisation applying for such recognition shall be a legal entity or clearly defined part of a legal entity which: (a) fulfils the requirements laid down in points (a), (b) and (c) of Article 152(1); (b) has a minimum number of members and/or covers a minimum volume or value of marketable production, to be laid down by the Member State concerned, in the area where it operates; (c) provides sufficient evidence that it can carry out its activities properly, both over time and in terms of effectiveness, provision of human, material and technical support to its members, and as appropriate concentration of supply; (d) has statutes that are consistent with points (a), (b) and (c) of this paragraph. 2. Member States may decide that producer organisations which have been recognised before 1 January 2014 on the basis of national law and which fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 of this Article are deemed to be recognised as producer organisations pursuant to Article 152. 3. Producer organisations which have been recognised before 1 January 2014 on the basis of national law and which do not fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 may continue to exercise their activities under national law until 1 January 2015. 4. Member States shall: (a) decide whether to grant recognition to a producer organisation within four months of the lodging of an application, accompanied by all the relevant supporting evidence; this application shall be lodged with the Member State where the organisation has its headquarters; (b) carry out, at intervals to be determined by them, checks to verify that recognised producer organisations are complying with this Chapter; (c) in the event of non-compliance or irregularities in the application of the measures provided for in this Chapter, impose on those organisations and associations the applicable penalties they have laid down and, if necessary, decide whether recognition should be withdrawn; (d) inform the Commission by 31 March of each year, of every decision to grant, refuse or withdraw recognition taken during the previous calendar year.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The Commission proposal for the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2021-2027 (the MFF proposal) 1 sets the budgetary framework and main orientations for the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). On this basis, the Commission presents a set of regulations laying down the legislative framework for the CAP in the period 2021-2027, together with an impact assessment of alternative scenarios for the evolution of the policy. These proposals provide for a date of application as of 1 January 2021 and are presented for a Union of 27 Member States, in line with the no tification by the United Kingdom of its intention to withdraw from the European Union and Euratom based on Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union received by European Council on 29 March 2017. The latest reform of the CAP was decided in 2013 and implemented in 2015. Since then, the context in which that reform was forged has shifted significantly. In particular: Agricultural prices have fallen substantially – depressed by macroeconomic factors, geopolitical tensions and other forces. The emphasis of trade negotiations has moved more visibly from multilateral to bilateral deals and the EU has become more open to world markets. The EU has signed up to new international commitments – e.g. concerning climate change mitigation (through COP 21) and broad aspects of international development (through the UN's Sustainable Development Goals – SDGs), as well as efforts to better respond to other geopolitical developments including migration. These shifts have prompted a public debate about whether the 2013 reform goes far enough to help the CAP adequately meet broad ongoing challenges related to the economic health of the farm sector, care for the environment, action over climate change, and a strong and economic and social fabric for the EU's rural areas – especially in view of emerging opportunities for action in the areas of trade, the bioeconomy, renewable energy, the circular economy and the digital economy. The CAP must be modernised to meet these challenges, simplified to do so with a minimum of administrative burden, and made even more coherent with other EU policies to maximise its contribution to the ten Commission Priorities and the Sustainable Development Objectives. Indeed, as the Commission recalled in its recent Communication on the MFF, a modernised Common Agricultural Policy will need to support the transition towards a fully sustainable agricultural sector and the development of vibrant rural areas, providing secure, safe and high-quality food for over 500 million consumers. Europe needs a smart, resilient, sustainable and competitive agricultural sector in order to ensure the production of safe, high-quality, affordable, nutritious and diverse food for its citizens and a strong socio-economic fabric in rural areas. A modernised Common Agricultural Policy must enhance its European added value by reflecting a higher level of environmental and climate ambition and addressing citizens' expectations for their health, the environment and the climate. As foreseen in its Programme of Work for 2017, the Commission consulted widely on the simplification and modernisation of the CAP to maximise its contribution to the Commission's ten priorities and to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This focused on specific policy priorities for the future without prejudice to the financial allocations for the CAP in the next MFF. The process included a large consultation, as well as analysis of available evidence on the performance of the CAP, including the relevant REFIT Platform opinions. The outcome was presented in the Communication adopted on 29 November 2017 and entitled "the Future of Food and Farming". The Communication enables a structured dialogue on the future CAP in EU Institutions as well as with stakeholders. This policy document outlined challenges, objectives and possible avenues for a "future-proof" CAP that needs to be simpler, smarter and modern, and lead the transition to a more sustainable agriculture. In particular, the Commission identified higher environmental and climate action ambition, the better targeting of support and the stronger reliance on the virtuous Research-Innovation-Advice nexus as top priorities of the post-2020 CAP. It also proposed as a way to improve the performance of the CAP a new delivery model (NDM) to shift the policy focus from compliance to performance, and rebalances responsibilities between the EU and the Member State level with more subsidiarity. The new model aims at better achieving EU objectives based on strategic planning, broad policy interventions and common performance indicators, thus improving policy coherence across the future CAP and with other EU objectives.
Revised version (Article 154 Recognition of producer organisations):
In order to be recognised by a Member State, the producer organisation applying for such recognition shall be a legal entity or clearly defined part of a legal entity which: (b) has a minimum number of members and/or covers a minimum volume or value of marketable production, to be laid down by the Member State concerned, in the area where it operates; such provisions shall not prevent the recognition of producer organisations which are dedicated to small-scale production; (c) provides sufficient evidence that it can carry out its activities properly, both over time and in terms of effectiveness, provision of human, material and technical support to its members, and as appropriate concentration of supply; 1a. Member States may, on request, decide to grant more than one recognition to a producer organisation operating in several sectors referred to in Article 1(2) provided the producer organisation fulfils the conditions referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article for each sector for which it seeks recognition. 2. Member States may decide that producer organisations which have been recognised before 1 January 2018 and which fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be deemed to be recognised as producer organisations pursuant to Article 152. 3. Where producer organisations have been recognised before 1 January 2018 but do not fulfil the conditions set out in paragraph 1 of this Article, Member States shall withdraw their recognition no later than 31 December 2020. 4. Member States shall: (a) decide whether to grant recognition to a producer organisation within four months of the lodging of an application, accompanied by all the relevant supporting evidence; this application shall be lodged with the Member State where the organisation has its headquarters; (b) carry out, at intervals to be determined by them, checks to verify that recognised producer organisations are complying with this Chapter; (c) in the event of non-compliance or irregularities in the application of the measures provided for in this Chapter, impose on those organisations and associations the applicable penalties they have laid down and, if necessary, decide whether recognition should be withdrawn; (d) inform the Commission by 31 March of each year, of every decision to grant, refuse or withdraw recognition taken during the previous calendar year.
Article 155 Outsourcing
Member States may permit a recognised producer organisation or a recognised association of producer organisations in the sectors specified by the Commission in accordance with point (f) of Article 173(1) to outsource any of its activities other than production, including to subsidiaries, provided that the producer organisation or association of producer organisations remains responsible for ensuring the carrying out of the outsourced activity and overall management control and supervision of the commercial arrangement for the carrying out of the activity.
Article 156 Associations of producer organisations
1. Member States may, on request, recognise associations of producer organisations in a specific sector listed in Article 1(2) which are formed at the initiative of recognised producer organisations. Subject to the rules adopted pursuant to Article 173, associations of producer organisations may carry out any of the activities or functions of producer organisations. 2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, Member States may, on request, recognise an association of recognised producer organisations in the milk and milk products sector if the Member State concerned considers that the association is capable of carrying out effectively any of the activities of a recognised producer organisation, and that it fulfils the conditions laid down in Article 161(1).
Article 157 Interbranch organisations
1. Member States may, on request, recognise interbranch organisations in a specific sector listed in Article 1(2) which: (a) are constituted of representatives of economic activities linked to the production and to at least one of the following stages of the supply chain: the processing of or trade in, including distribution of, products in one or more sectors; (b) are formed on the initiative of all or some of the organisations or associations which constitute them; (c) pursue a specific aim taking account of the interests of their members and of consumers, which may include, in particular, one of the following objectives: (i) improving knowledge and the transparency of production and the market, including by publication of aggregated statistical data on production costs, prices, including, where appropriate, price indices, volumes and duration of contracts which have been previously concluded, and by providing analyses of potential future market developments at regional, national or international level; (ii) forecasting of production potential, and recording public market prices; (iii) helping to coordinate better the way the products are placed on the market, in particular by means of research and market studies; (iv) exploring potential export markets; (v) without prejudice to Articles 148 and 168, drawing up standard forms of contract, compatible with Union rules, for the sale of agricultural products to purchasers and/or the supply of processed products to distributors and retailers, taking into account the need to achieve fair competitive conditions and to avoid market distortions; (vi) exploiting to a fuller extent the potential of the products, including at the level of market outlets, and developing initiatives to strengthen economic competitiveness and innovation; (vii) providing the information and carrying out the research necessary to innovate, rationalise, improve and adjust production and, where applicable, the processing and marketing, towards products more suited to market requirements and consumer tastes and expectations, in particular with regard to product quality, including the specific characteristics of products with a protected designation of origin or a protected geographical indication, and protection of the environment; (viii) seeking ways of restricting the use of animal-health or plant protection products, better managing other inputs, ensuring product quality and soil and water conservation, promoting food safety, in particular through traceability of products, and improving animal health and welfare; (ix) developing methods and instruments for improving product quality at all stages of production and, where applicable, of processing and marketing; (x) taking all possible actions to uphold, protect and promote organic farming and designations of origin, quality labels and geographical indications; (xi) promoting and carrying out research into integrated, sustainable production or other environmentally sound production methods; (xii) encouraging healthy and responsible consumption of the products on the internal market and/or informing about the harm linked to hazardous consumption patterns; (xiii) promoting consumption of, and/or furnishing information concerning, products on the internal market and external markets; (xiv) contributing to the management of by-products and the reduction and management of waste. (c) pursue a specific aim taking account of the interests of their members and of consumers, which may include, in particular, one of the following objectives: (i) improving knowledge and the transparency of production and the market, including by publication of aggregated statistical data on production costs, prices, including, where appropriate, price indices, volumes and duration of contracts which have been previously concluded, and by providing analyses of potential future market developments at regional, national or international level; (ii) forecasting of production potential, and recording public market prices; (iii) helping to coordinate better the way the products are placed on the market, in particular by means of research and market studies; (iv) exploring potential export markets; (v) without prejudice to Articles 148 and 168, drawing up standard forms of contract, compatible with Union rules, for the sale of agricultural products to purchasers and/or the supply of processed products to distributors and retailers, taking into account the need to achieve fair competitive conditions and to avoid market distortions; (vi) exploiting to a fuller extent the potential of the products, including at the level of market outlets, and developing initiatives to strengthen economic competitiveness and innovation; (vii) providing the information and carrying out the research necessary to innovate, rationalise, improve and adjust production and, where applicable, the processing and marketing, towards products more suited to market requirements and consumer tastes and expectations, in particular with regard to product quality, including the specific characteristics of products with a protected designation of origin or a protected geographical indication, and protection of the environment; (viii) seeking ways of restricting the use of animal-health or plant protection products, better managing other inputs, ensuring product quality and soil and water conservation, promoting food safety, in particular through traceability of products, and improving animal health and welfare; (ix) developing methods and instruments for improving product quality at all stages of production and, where applicable, of processing and marketing; (x) taking all possible actions to uphold, protect and promote organic farming and designations of origin, quality labels and geographical indications; (xi) promoting and carrying out research into integrated, sustainable production or other environmentally sound production methods; (xii) encouraging healthy and responsible consumption of the products on the internal market and/or informing about the harm linked to hazardous consumption patterns; (xiii) promoting consumption of, and/or furnishing information concerning, products on the internal market and external markets; (xiv) contributing to the management of by-products and the reduction and management of waste. 2. In duly justified cases, Member States may decide on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria that the condition in point (c) of Article 158(1) is fulfilled by limiting the number of interbranch organisations on a regional or national level if so provided for by national rules in place before 1 January 2014, and where this does not impair the proper functioning of the internal market. 3. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, as regards the milk and milk products sector, Member States may recognise interbranch organisations which: (a) have formally requested recognition and are made up of representatives of economic activities linked to the production of raw milk and linked to at least one of the following stages of the supply chain: the processing of or trade in, including distribution of, products of the milk and milk products sector; (b) are formed on the initiative of all or some of the representatives referred to in point (a); (c) carry out, in one or more regions of the Union, taking into account the interests of the members of those interbranch organisations and of consumers, one or more of the following activities: (i) improving the knowledge and the transparency of production and the market, including by publication of statistical data on the prices, volumes and durations of contracts for the delivery of raw milk which have been previously concluded, and by providing analyses of potential future market developments at regional, national and international level; (ii) helping to coordinate better the way the products of the milk and milk products sector are placed on the market, in particular by means of research and market studies; (iii) promoting consumption of, and providing information on, milk and milk products in both internal and external markets; (iv) exploring potential export markets; (v) drawing up standard forms of contract compatible with Union rules for the sale of raw milk to purchasers or the supply of processed products to distributors and retailers, taking into account the need to achieve fair competitive conditions and to avoid market distortions; (vi) providing the information and carrying out the research necessary to adjust production in favour of products more suited to market requirements and consumer tastes and expectations, in particular with regard to product quality and protection of the environment; (vii) maintaining and developing the production potential of the dairy sector, inter alia, by promoting innovation and supporting programmes for applied research and development in order to exploit the full potential of milk and milk products, especially in order to create products with added value which are more attractive to the consumer; (viii) seeking ways of restricting the use of animal health products, improving the management of other inputs and enhancing food safety and animal health; (ix) developing methods and instruments for improving product quality at all stages of production and marketing; (x) exploiting the potential of organic farming and protecting and promoting such farming as well as the production of products with designations of origin, quality labels and geographical indications; and (xi) promoting integrated production or other environmentally sound production methods. (c) carry out, in one or more regions of the Union, taking into account the interests of the members of those interbranch organisations and of consumers, one or more of the following activities: (i) improving the knowledge and the transparency of production and the market, including by publication of statistical data on the prices, volumes and durations of contracts for the delivery of raw milk which have been previously concluded, and by providing analyses of potential future market developments at regional, national and international level; (ii) helping to coordinate better the way the products of the milk and milk products sector are placed on the market, in particular by means of research and market studies; (iii) promoting consumption of, and providing information on, milk and milk products in both internal and external markets; (v) drawing up standard forms of contract compatible with Union rules for the sale of raw milk to purchasers or the supply of processed products to distributors and retailers, taking into account the need to achieve fair competitive conditions and to avoid market distortions; (vi) providing the information and carrying out the research necessary to adjust production in favour of products more suited to market requirements and consumer tastes and expectations, in particular with regard to product quality and protection of the environment; (vii) maintaining and developing the production potential of the dairy sector, inter alia, by promoting innovation and supporting programmes for applied research and development in order to exploit the full potential of milk and milk products, especially in order to create products with added value which are more attractive to the consumer; (viii) seeking ways of restricting the use of animal health products, improving the management of other inputs and enhancing food safety and animal health; (ix) developing methods and instruments for improving product quality at all stages of production and marketing; (x) exploiting the potential of organic farming and protecting and promoting such farming as well as the production of products with designations of origin, quality labels and geographical indications; and (xi) promoting integrated production or other environmentally sound production methods.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The Financial Regulation 1 sets out the principles and procedures governing the establishment and implementation of the EU budget and the control of the EU funds. Over the last 30 years, the number of general financial rules contained in the Financial Regulation has increased sharply 2 . In addition, a number of sectoral financial rules have emerged: the rules for participation to the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation 3 , the Common Provisions to the European Structural and Investment Funds 4 and the Common Implementing Rules for the External Action 5 . Users of EU funds have repeatedly complained about the proliferation of rules both at general and at sectoral level, their heterogeneity and their complexity due to the fact that they follow the architecture of the programme and multiple layers of controls. In addition, the complexity of the financial set of rules has slowed down implementation of the EU funds, making it costly and prone to errors. A first step towards more coherent and simpler financial rules was achieved in 2012: the Commission tabled proposals for the programmes covered by the MFF 2014-2020 which reduced the number of programmes and instruments, grouped them under a single framework with common rules, simplified procedures for application and declaration of costs by final beneficiaries, facilitated the deployment of innovative financial instruments, enabled EU Trust-Funds and improved the cost-efficiency of controls. Recent revisions have aligned the Financial Regulation on the results of the negotiation to the MFF 2014-2020 (2013 revision) as well as to the new Procurement Directive (2015 revision). However, there is room for further simplification . This is confirmed by the experience gained since 2014 and by the work of the High Level Group of Independent Experts on Monitoring Simplification for Beneficiaries of the European Structural and Investment Funds 6 . The public consultation on the revision of the Financial Regulation 7 also shows stakeholders’ clear expectations in the area. Efforts must therefore continue in order to remove bottlenecks, ensure synergies and complementarities between ESI Funds and the other EU funds and improve efficiency of delivery and control requirements. Simpler and more flexible financial rules will contribute to optimising spending and impact of the MFF 2014-2020 and constitute as such one of the key elements of the Commission's initiative for a Budget Focused on Results (BFOR) which aims at making sure that resources are allocated to priorities and that every action delivers maximum performance and added value 8 . In addition, this will reduce the costs related to implementation of EU rules as well the number of errors. Simpler and more flexible EU financial rules are key in enhancing EU budget’s ability to adapt to changing circumstances and to respond to unexpected developments. The present legislative proposal forms an integral part of the mid-term review/revision of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2014-2020 9 . It contributes to two of its main objectives: simplification and flexibility . The Commission therefore proposes in a single act an ambitious revision of the general financial rules accompanied by corresponding changes to the sectorial financial rules set out in 15 legislative acts concerning multiannual programmes. The inclusion of sectoral changes in the same legislative proposal aims at ensuring a coherent negotiation process as well as at facilitating a speedy adoption by the legislator. The focus is put on the following key areas: 1 . Simplification for recipients of EU funds: many measures aim at simplifying life for recipients of EU funds. They relate to grants (removal of the non-cumulative award check for low-value grants and of the non-profit principle; simpler rules for "contribution in kind" valuation ; recognition of volunteer work ; grant awards without calls for proposal under specific conditions) and simplified forms of grants (Title VIII). 2 . From multi ple layers of controls to cross reliance on audit, assessment or authorisation, and harmonisation of reporting requirements: the aim of these measures is to encourage reliance as far as possible on one single audit, assessment or authorisation (conformity to State aids for instance), when the audit , assessment or authorisation meet s the necessary conditions to be taken into account in the EU system. More generally, rules for implementing partners (international organisations, EIB/EIF, national promotional banks, national agencies, NGOs) will be simplified by relying increasingly on their procedures and policies once assessed positively. Financial f ramework partnership agreements concluded with long term partners will allow progressing in the harmonisation of audit, reporting and other administrative requirements among donors (Title V Articles 122, 123 and 126). 3 . Allowing the application of only one set of rules to hybrid actions or in the case of combination of measures or instruments: the proposal aims at achieving further simplification for the partners of the EU by a number of measures to avoid the parallel application of different rules and procedures, notably through facilitating the combination of European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) funding with financial instruments and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (Title V). 4 . More effective use of financial instruments: optimise use of reflows, ensuring a level playing field among key EU implementing partners, reducing burdensome requirements related to publication of individual data of final recipients or to the exclusion criteria (Title X). 5 . More flexible budget management: the proposal sets out several ways for more budgetary flexibility, in order to allow the Union to respond to unforeseen challenges and new tasks more effectively and to achieve swifter crisis management - among which the creation of a " flexibility cushion" for unforeseen needs and new crises in the external actions geographic instruments budget , a more efficient activation of the solidarity and globalization adjustment funds, and the extension of Trust-Funds to internal policies (Articles 14 and 22 7 ) , the creation of a EU crisis reserve with the reuse of decommitted appropriations, and for the next Multiannual Financial Framework, the possibility that financial operations other than financial instruments generate a contingent liability for the Union exceeding the financial assets provided to cover the financial liability of the Union (Article 203) and the creation of a common provisioning fund holding the resources provisioned for financial operations (Article 2 05 ). R ecent initiatives (such as the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) or the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD)), have indeed shown the need to fully use the leverage of the EU budget by creating non-provisioned contingent liabilities. Title X sets the framework to authorise, manage and control these financial risks. 6 . F ocus on results and streamlining of reporting: a stronger focus on results through lump sums, prizes, payment based on output and results rather than on reimbursement of costs, payment against conditions to be fulfilled (Article 121, Title X III ). This should contribute to further reducing the costs of implementing EU funds as well as the number of errors. On the reporting side, reports are regrouped around the draft budget and the integrated financial reporting package, in order to increase efficiency and transparency both towards the general public and the budgetary authority (Articles 39 and 23 9 -24 5 ). 7. Simpler and leaner EU administration: facilitating agreements or delegations between Institutions or bodies in order to pool the implementation of administrative appropriations in European Offices or within Executive Agencies (Articles 57, 58, 64, 65 and 6 8 ); merging consultative panels competent for financial irregularities (Article 73 (6)) with the EDES panel (Article 139 ) and moving from annual to multiannual financing decisions (Article 10 8 ). 8. Providing possibility for citizen engagement : t he proposal provides a possibility for citizens to be consulted on the implementation of the Union budget by the Commission, Member States and any other entity implementing the Union budget (А rticle 54 ) . In simplifying and making EU financial rules more flexible, the present proposal paves the way for the preparation of the next generation of spending programmes (post-2020).
Revised version (Article 157 Interbranch organisations):
1. Member States may, on request, recognise interbranch organisations in a specific sector listed in Article 1(2) which: (a) are constituted of representatives of economic activities linked to the production and to at least one of the following stages of the supply chain: the processing of or trade in, including distribution of, products in one or more sectors; (b) are formed on the initiative of all or some of the organisations or associations which constitute them; (c) pursue a specific aim taking account of the interests of their members and of consumers, which may include, in particular, one of the following objectives: (i) improving knowledge and the transparency of production and the market, including by publication of aggregated statistical data on production costs, prices, including, where appropriate, price indices, volumes and duration of contracts which have been previously concluded, and by providing analyses of potential future market developments at regional, national or international level; (ii) forecasting of production potential, and recording public market prices; (iii) helping to coordinate better the way the products are placed on the market, in particular by means of research and market studies; (iv) exploring potential export markets; (v) without prejudice to Articles 148 and 168, drawing up standard forms of contract, compatible with Union rules, for the sale of agricultural products to purchasers and/or the supply of processed products to distributors and retailers, taking into account the need to achieve fair competitive conditions and to avoid market distortions; (vi) exploiting to a fuller extent the potential of the products, including at the level of market outlets, and developing initiatives to strengthen economic competitiveness and innovation; (vii) providing the information and carrying out the research necessary to innovate, rationalise, improve and adjust production and, where applicable, the processing and marketing, towards products more suited to market requirements and consumer tastes and expectations, in particular with regard to product quality, including the specific characteristics of products with a protected designation of origin or a protected geographical indication, and protection of the environment; (viii) seeking ways of restricting the use of animal-health or plant protection products, better managing other inputs, ensuring product quality and soil and water conservation, promoting food safety, in particular through traceability of products, and improving animal health and welfare; (ix) developing methods and instruments for improving product quality at all stages of production and, where applicable, of processing and marketing; (x) taking all possible actions to uphold, protect and promote organic farming and designations of origin, quality labels and geographical indications; (xi) promoting and carrying out research into integrated, sustainable production or other environmentally sound production methods; (xii) encouraging healthy and responsible consumption of the products on the internal market and/or informing about the harm linked to hazardous consumption patterns; (xiii) promoting consumption of, and/or furnishing information concerning, products on the internal market and external markets; (xiv) contributing to the management of by-products and the reduction and management of waste. 2. In duly justified cases, Member States may decide on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria that the condition in point (c) of Article 158(1) is fulfilled by limiting the number of interbranch organisations on a regional or national level if so provided for by national rules in place before 1 January 2014, and where this does not impair the proper functioning of the internal market. 3. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, as regards the milk and milk products sector, Member States may recognise interbranch organisations which: (a) have formally requested recognition and are made up of representatives of economic activities linked to the production of raw milk and linked to at least one of the following stages of the supply chain: the processing of or trade in, including distribution of, products of the milk and milk products sector; (b) are formed on the initiative of all or some of the representatives referred to in point (a); (c) carry out, in one or more regions of the Union, taking into account the interests of the members of those interbranch organisations and of consumers, one or more of the following activities: (i) improving the knowledge and the transparency of production and the market, including by publication of statistical data on the prices, volumes and durations of contracts for the delivery of raw milk which have been previously concluded, and by providing analyses of potential future market developments at regional, national and international level; (ii) helping to coordinate better the way the products of the milk and milk products sector are placed on the market, in particular by means of research and market studies; (iii) promoting consumption of, and providing information on, milk and milk products in both internal and external markets; (v) drawing up standard forms of contract compatible with Union rules for the sale of raw milk to purchasers or the supply of processed products to distributors and retailers, taking into account the need to achieve fair competitive conditions and to avoid market distortions; (vi) providing the information and carrying out the research necessary to adjust production in favour of products more suited to market requirements and consumer tastes and expectations, in particular with regard to product quality and protection of the environment; (vii) maintaining and developing the production potential of the dairy sector, inter alia, by promoting innovation and supporting programmes for applied research and development in order to exploit the full potential of milk and milk products, especially in order to create products with added value which are more attractive to the consumer; (viii) seeking ways of restricting the use of animal health products, improving the management of other inputs and enhancing food safety and animal health; (ix) developing methods and instruments for improving product quality at all stages of production and marketing; (x) exploiting the potential of organic farming and protecting and promoting such farming as well as the production of products with designations of origin, quality labels and geographical indications; and (xi) promoting integrated production or other environmentally sound production methods.
Article 158 Recognition of interbranch organisations
1. Member States may recognise interbranch organisations applying for such recognition, provided that they: (a) fulfil the requirements laid down in Article 157; (b) carry out their activities in one or more regions in the territory concerned; (c) account for a significant share of the economic activities referred to in point (a) of Article 157(1); (d) with the exception of the cases laid down in Article 162, do not, themselves, engage in production, processing or trade. 2. Member States may decide that interbranch organisations which have been recognised before 1 January 2014 on the basis of national law and which fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 of this Article are deemed to be recognised as interbranch organisations pursuant to Article 157. 3. Interbranch organisations which have been recognised before 1 January 2014 on the basis of national law and which do not fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 of this Article may continue to exercise their activities under national law until 1 January 2015. 4. Member States may recognise interbranch organisations in all sectors existing prior to 1 January 2014, whether they were recognised on request or established by law, even though they do not fulfil the condition laid down in point (b) of Article 157(1) or in point (b) of Article 157(3). 5. Where Member States recognise an interbranch organisation in accordance with paragraph 1 or 2, they shall: (a) decide whether to grant recognition within four months of the lodging of an application with all relevant supporting documents; this application shall be lodged with the Member State where the organisation has its headquarters; (b) carry out, at intervals to be determined by them, checks to verify that recognised interbranch organisations are complying with the conditions governing their recognition; (c) in the event of non-compliance or irregularities in the implementation of the measures provided for in this Regulation, impose on those organisations the applicable penalties they have laid down and, if necessary, decide whether recognition should be withdrawn; (d) withdraw recognition if the requirements and conditions for recognition laid down in this Article are no longer met; (e) inform the Commission by 31 March of each year of every decision to grant, refuse or withdraw recognition taken during the previous calendar year.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The Commission proposal for the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2021-2027 (the MFF proposal) 1 sets the budgetary framework and main orientations for the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). On this basis, the Commission presents a set of regulations laying down the legislative framework for the CAP in the period 2021-2027, together with an impact assessment of alternative scenarios for the evolution of the policy. These proposals provide for a date of application as of 1 January 2021 and are presented for a Union of 27 Member States, in line with the no tification by the United Kingdom of its intention to withdraw from the European Union and Euratom based on Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union received by European Council on 29 March 2017. The latest reform of the CAP was decided in 2013 and implemented in 2015. Since then, the context in which that reform was forged has shifted significantly. In particular: Agricultural prices have fallen substantially – depressed by macroeconomic factors, geopolitical tensions and other forces. The emphasis of trade negotiations has moved more visibly from multilateral to bilateral deals and the EU has become more open to world markets. The EU has signed up to new international commitments – e.g. concerning climate change mitigation (through COP 21) and broad aspects of international development (through the UN's Sustainable Development Goals – SDGs), as well as efforts to better respond to other geopolitical developments including migration. These shifts have prompted a public debate about whether the 2013 reform goes far enough to help the CAP adequately meet broad ongoing challenges related to the economic health of the farm sector, care for the environment, action over climate change, and a strong and economic and social fabric for the EU's rural areas – especially in view of emerging opportunities for action in the areas of trade, the bioeconomy, renewable energy, the circular economy and the digital economy. The CAP must be modernised to meet these challenges, simplified to do so with a minimum of administrative burden, and made even more coherent with other EU policies to maximise its contribution to the ten Commission Priorities and the Sustainable Development Objectives. Indeed, as the Commission recalled in its recent Communication on the MFF, a modernised Common Agricultural Policy will need to support the transition towards a fully sustainable agricultural sector and the development of vibrant rural areas, providing secure, safe and high-quality food for over 500 million consumers. Europe needs a smart, resilient, sustainable and competitive agricultural sector in order to ensure the production of safe, high-quality, affordable, nutritious and diverse food for its citizens and a strong socio-economic fabric in rural areas. A modernised Common Agricultural Policy must enhance its European added value by reflecting a higher level of environmental and climate ambition and addressing citizens' expectations for their health, the environment and the climate. As foreseen in its Programme of Work for 2017, the Commission consulted widely on the simplification and modernisation of the CAP to maximise its contribution to the Commission's ten priorities and to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This focused on specific policy priorities for the future without prejudice to the financial allocations for the CAP in the next MFF. The process included a large consultation, as well as analysis of available evidence on the performance of the CAP, including the relevant REFIT Platform opinions. The outcome was presented in the Communication adopted on 29 November 2017 and entitled "the Future of Food and Farming". The Communication enables a structured dialogue on the future CAP in EU Institutions as well as with stakeholders. This policy document outlined challenges, objectives and possible avenues for a "future-proof" CAP that needs to be simpler, smarter and modern, and lead the transition to a more sustainable agriculture. In particular, the Commission identified higher environmental and climate action ambition, the better targeting of support and the stronger reliance on the virtuous Research-Innovation-Advice nexus as top priorities of the post-2020 CAP. It also proposed as a way to improve the performance of the CAP a new delivery model (NDM) to shift the policy focus from compliance to performance, and rebalances responsibilities between the EU and the Member State level with more subsidiarity. The new model aims at better achieving EU objectives based on strategic planning, broad policy interventions and common performance indicators, thus improving policy coherence across the future CAP and with other EU objectives.
Revised version (Article 158 Recognition of interbranch organisations):
1. Member States may recognise interbranch organisations applying for such recognition, provided that they: (a) fulfil the requirements laid down in Article 157; (b) carry out their activities in one or more regions in the territory concerned; account for a significant share of the economic activities referred to in point (a) of Article 157(1); strive for a balanced representation of the organisations in the stages of the supply chain referred to in Article 157(1), point (a), that constitute the interbranch organisation; (d) with the exception of the cases laid down in Article 162, do not, themselves, engage in production, processing or trade. 2. Member States may decide that interbranch organisations which have been recognised before 1 January 2014 on the basis of national law and which fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 of this Article are deemed to be recognised as interbranch organisations pursuant to Article 157. 3. Interbranch organisations which have been recognised before 1 January 2014 on the basis of national law and which do not fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 of this Article may continue to exercise their activities under national law until 1 January 2015. 4. Member States may recognise interbranch organisations in all sectors existing prior to 1 January 2014, whether they were recognised on request or established by law, even though they do not fulfil the condition laid down in Article 157(1), point (b). 5. Where Member States recognise an interbranch organisation in accordance with paragraph 1 or 2, they shall: (a) decide whether to grant recognition within four months of the lodging of an application with all relevant supporting documents; this application shall be lodged with the Member State where the organisation has its headquarters; (b) carry out, at intervals to be determined by them, checks to verify that recognised interbranch organisations are complying with the conditions governing their recognition; (c) in the event of non-compliance or irregularities in the implementation of the measures provided for in this Regulation, impose on those organisations the applicable penalties they have laid down and, if necessary, decide whether recognition should be withdrawn; (d) withdraw recognition if the requirements and conditions for recognition laid down in this Article are no longer met; (e) inform the Commission by 31 March of each year of every decision to grant, refuse or withdraw recognition taken during the previous calendar year.
Article 159 Obligatory recognition
By way of derogation from Articles 152 to 158, Member States shall, on request, recognise: (a) producer organisations in: (i) the fruit and vegetables sector in respect of one or more products of that sector and/or such products solely intended for processing, (ii) the olive oil and table olives sector, (iii) the silkworm sector, (iv) the hops sector; (a) producer organisations in: (i) the fruit and vegetables sector in respect of one or more products of that sector and/or such products solely intended for processing, (ii) the olive oil and table olives sector, (iii) the silkworm sector, (iv) the hops sector; (b) interbranch organisations in the olive oil and table olives sector and the tobacco sector.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The Financial Regulation 1 sets out the principles and procedures governing the establishment and implementation of the EU budget and the control of the EU funds. Over the last 30 years, the number of general financial rules contained in the Financial Regulation has increased sharply 2 . In addition, a number of sectoral financial rules have emerged: the rules for participation to the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation 3 , the Common Provisions to the European Structural and Investment Funds 4 and the Common Implementing Rules for the External Action 5 . Users of EU funds have repeatedly complained about the proliferation of rules both at general and at sectoral level, their heterogeneity and their complexity due to the fact that they follow the architecture of the programme and multiple layers of controls. In addition, the complexity of the financial set of rules has slowed down implementation of the EU funds, making it costly and prone to errors. A first step towards more coherent and simpler financial rules was achieved in 2012: the Commission tabled proposals for the programmes covered by the MFF 2014-2020 which reduced the number of programmes and instruments, grouped them under a single framework with common rules, simplified procedures for application and declaration of costs by final beneficiaries, facilitated the deployment of innovative financial instruments, enabled EU Trust-Funds and improved the cost-efficiency of controls. Recent revisions have aligned the Financial Regulation on the results of the negotiation to the MFF 2014-2020 (2013 revision) as well as to the new Procurement Directive (2015 revision). However, there is room for further simplification . This is confirmed by the experience gained since 2014 and by the work of the High Level Group of Independent Experts on Monitoring Simplification for Beneficiaries of the European Structural and Investment Funds 6 . The public consultation on the revision of the Financial Regulation 7 also shows stakeholders’ clear expectations in the area. Efforts must therefore continue in order to remove bottlenecks, ensure synergies and complementarities between ESI Funds and the other EU funds and improve efficiency of delivery and control requirements. Simpler and more flexible financial rules will contribute to optimising spending and impact of the MFF 2014-2020 and constitute as such one of the key elements of the Commission's initiative for a Budget Focused on Results (BFOR) which aims at making sure that resources are allocated to priorities and that every action delivers maximum performance and added value 8 . In addition, this will reduce the costs related to implementation of EU rules as well the number of errors. Simpler and more flexible EU financial rules are key in enhancing EU budget’s ability to adapt to changing circumstances and to respond to unexpected developments. The present legislative proposal forms an integral part of the mid-term review/revision of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2014-2020 9 . It contributes to two of its main objectives: simplification and flexibility . The Commission therefore proposes in a single act an ambitious revision of the general financial rules accompanied by corresponding changes to the sectorial financial rules set out in 15 legislative acts concerning multiannual programmes. The inclusion of sectoral changes in the same legislative proposal aims at ensuring a coherent negotiation process as well as at facilitating a speedy adoption by the legislator. The focus is put on the following key areas: 1 . Simplification for recipients of EU funds: many measures aim at simplifying life for recipients of EU funds. They relate to grants (removal of the non-cumulative award check for low-value grants and of the non-profit principle; simpler rules for "contribution in kind" valuation ; recognition of volunteer work ; grant awards without calls for proposal under specific conditions) and simplified forms of grants (Title VIII). 2 . From multi ple layers of controls to cross reliance on audit, assessment or authorisation, and harmonisation of reporting requirements: the aim of these measures is to encourage reliance as far as possible on one single audit, assessment or authorisation (conformity to State aids for instance), when the audit , assessment or authorisation meet s the necessary conditions to be taken into account in the EU system. More generally, rules for implementing partners (international organisations, EIB/EIF, national promotional banks, national agencies, NGOs) will be simplified by relying increasingly on their procedures and policies once assessed positively. Financial f ramework partnership agreements concluded with long term partners will allow progressing in the harmonisation of audit, reporting and other administrative requirements among donors (Title V Articles 122, 123 and 126). 3 . Allowing the application of only one set of rules to hybrid actions or in the case of combination of measures or instruments: the proposal aims at achieving further simplification for the partners of the EU by a number of measures to avoid the parallel application of different rules and procedures, notably through facilitating the combination of European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) funding with financial instruments and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (Title V). 4 . More effective use of financial instruments: optimise use of reflows, ensuring a level playing field among key EU implementing partners, reducing burdensome requirements related to publication of individual data of final recipients or to the exclusion criteria (Title X). 5 . More flexible budget management: the proposal sets out several ways for more budgetary flexibility, in order to allow the Union to respond to unforeseen challenges and new tasks more effectively and to achieve swifter crisis management - among which the creation of a " flexibility cushion" for unforeseen needs and new crises in the external actions geographic instruments budget , a more efficient activation of the solidarity and globalization adjustment funds, and the extension of Trust-Funds to internal policies (Articles 14 and 22 7 ) , the creation of a EU crisis reserve with the reuse of decommitted appropriations, and for the next Multiannual Financial Framework, the possibility that financial operations other than financial instruments generate a contingent liability for the Union exceeding the financial assets provided to cover the financial liability of the Union (Article 203) and the creation of a common provisioning fund holding the resources provisioned for financial operations (Article 2 05 ). R ecent initiatives (such as the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) or the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD)), have indeed shown the need to fully use the leverage of the EU budget by creating non-provisioned contingent liabilities. Title X sets the framework to authorise, manage and control these financial risks. 6 . F ocus on results and streamlining of reporting: a stronger focus on results through lump sums, prizes, payment based on output and results rather than on reimbursement of costs, payment against conditions to be fulfilled (Article 121, Title X III ). This should contribute to further reducing the costs of implementing EU funds as well as the number of errors. On the reporting side, reports are regrouped around the draft budget and the integrated financial reporting package, in order to increase efficiency and transparency both towards the general public and the budgetary authority (Articles 39 and 23 9 -24 5 ). 7. Simpler and leaner EU administration: facilitating agreements or delegations between Institutions or bodies in order to pool the implementation of administrative appropriations in European Offices or within Executive Agencies (Articles 57, 58, 64, 65 and 6 8 ); merging consultative panels competent for financial irregularities (Article 73 (6)) with the EDES panel (Article 139 ) and moving from annual to multiannual financing decisions (Article 10 8 ). 8. Providing possibility for citizen engagement : t he proposal provides a possibility for citizens to be consulted on the implementation of the Union budget by the Commission, Member States and any other entity implementing the Union budget (А rticle 54 ) . In simplifying and making EU financial rules more flexible, the present proposal paves the way for the preparation of the next generation of spending programmes (post-2020).
Revised version (Article 159 Obligatory recognition):
By way of derogation from Articles 152 to 158, Member States shall, on request, recognise: (a) producer organisations in: (i) the fruit and vegetables sector in respect of one or more products of that sector and/or such products solely intended for processing, (ii) the olive oil and table olives sector, (iii) the silkworm sector, (iv) the hops sector; (b) interbranch organisations in the olive oil and table olives sector and the tobacco sector.
Article 160 Producer organisations in the fruit and vegetables sector
In the fruit and vegetables sector producer organisations shall pursue at least one of the objectives set out in points (c)(i), (ii) and (iii) of Article 152(1). The statutes of a producer organisation in the fruit and vegetables sector shall require its producer members to market their entire production concerned through the producer organisation. Producer organisations and associations of producer organisations in the fruit and vegetables sector shall be deemed to be acting in the name and on behalf of their members in economic matters within their terms of reference.
Article 161 Recognition of producer organisations in the milk and milk products sector
1. Member States shall recognise as producer organisations in the milk and milk products sector all legal entities or clearly defined parts of legal entities applying for such recognition, provided that: (a) they fulfil the requirements laid down in Article 152(3); (b) they have a minimum number of members and/or cover a minimum volume of marketable production, to be laid down by the Member State concerned, in the area where they operate; (c) there is sufficient evidence that they can carry out their activities properly, both over time and in terms of effectiveness and concentration of supply; (d) they have statutes that are consistent with points (a), (b) and (c) of this paragraph. 2. Member States may decide that producer organisations which have been recognised before 2 April 2012 on the basis of national law and which fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 of this Article are to be considered to be recognised as producer organisations pursuant to Article 152(3). 3. Member States shall: (a) decide whether to grant recognition to a producer organisation within four months of the lodging of an application, accompanied by all the relevant supporting evidence; this application shall be lodged with the Member State where the organisation has its headquarters; (b) carry out, at intervals to be determined by them, checks to verify that recognised producer organisations and associations of producer organisations are complying with the provisions of this Chapter; (c) in the event of non-compliance or irregularities in the implementation of the measures provided for in this Chapter, impose on those organisations and associations the applicable penalties that they have laid down and, if necessary, decide whether recognition should be withdrawn; (d) inform the Commission by 31 March of each year of every decision to grant, refuse or withdraw recognition which they have taken during the previous calendar year.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The Commission proposal for the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2021-2027 (the MFF proposal) 1 sets the budgetary framework and main orientations for the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). On this basis, the Commission presents a set of regulations laying down the legislative framework for the CAP in the period 2021-2027, together with an impact assessment of alternative scenarios for the evolution of the policy. These proposals provide for a date of application as of 1 January 2021 and are presented for a Union of 27 Member States, in line with the no tification by the United Kingdom of its intention to withdraw from the European Union and Euratom based on Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union received by European Council on 29 March 2017. The latest reform of the CAP was decided in 2013 and implemented in 2015. Since then, the context in which that reform was forged has shifted significantly. In particular: Agricultural prices have fallen substantially – depressed by macroeconomic factors, geopolitical tensions and other forces. The emphasis of trade negotiations has moved more visibly from multilateral to bilateral deals and the EU has become more open to world markets. The EU has signed up to new international commitments – e.g. concerning climate change mitigation (through COP 21) and broad aspects of international development (through the UN's Sustainable Development Goals – SDGs), as well as efforts to better respond to other geopolitical developments including migration. These shifts have prompted a public debate about whether the 2013 reform goes far enough to help the CAP adequately meet broad ongoing challenges related to the economic health of the farm sector, care for the environment, action over climate change, and a strong and economic and social fabric for the EU's rural areas – especially in view of emerging opportunities for action in the areas of trade, the bioeconomy, renewable energy, the circular economy and the digital economy. The CAP must be modernised to meet these challenges, simplified to do so with a minimum of administrative burden, and made even more coherent with other EU policies to maximise its contribution to the ten Commission Priorities and the Sustainable Development Objectives. Indeed, as the Commission recalled in its recent Communication on the MFF, a modernised Common Agricultural Policy will need to support the transition towards a fully sustainable agricultural sector and the development of vibrant rural areas, providing secure, safe and high-quality food for over 500 million consumers. Europe needs a smart, resilient, sustainable and competitive agricultural sector in order to ensure the production of safe, high-quality, affordable, nutritious and diverse food for its citizens and a strong socio-economic fabric in rural areas. A modernised Common Agricultural Policy must enhance its European added value by reflecting a higher level of environmental and climate ambition and addressing citizens' expectations for their health, the environment and the climate. As foreseen in its Programme of Work for 2017, the Commission consulted widely on the simplification and modernisation of the CAP to maximise its contribution to the Commission's ten priorities and to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This focused on specific policy priorities for the future without prejudice to the financial allocations for the CAP in the next MFF. The process included a large consultation, as well as analysis of available evidence on the performance of the CAP, including the relevant REFIT Platform opinions. The outcome was presented in the Communication adopted on 29 November 2017 and entitled "the Future of Food and Farming". The Communication enables a structured dialogue on the future CAP in EU Institutions as well as with stakeholders. This policy document outlined challenges, objectives and possible avenues for a "future-proof" CAP that needs to be simpler, smarter and modern, and lead the transition to a more sustainable agriculture. In particular, the Commission identified higher environmental and climate action ambition, the better targeting of support and the stronger reliance on the virtuous Research-Innovation-Advice nexus as top priorities of the post-2020 CAP. It also proposed as a way to improve the performance of the CAP a new delivery model (NDM) to shift the policy focus from compliance to performance, and rebalances responsibilities between the EU and the Member State level with more subsidiarity. The new model aims at better achieving EU objectives based on strategic planning, broad policy interventions and common performance indicators, thus improving policy coherence across the future CAP and with other EU objectives.
Revised version (Article 161 Recognition of producer organisations in the milk and milk products sector):
1. Member States shall, on request, recognise as producer organisations in the milk and milk products sector all legal entities or clearly defined parts of such entities, provided that: they are constituted by producers in the milk and milk products sector, are formed on their initiative and pursue a specific aim which may include one or more of the following objectives: (i) ensuring that production is planned and adjusted to demand, particularly in terms of quality and quantity; (ii) concentration of supply and the placing on the market of the products produced by their members; (iii) optimising production costs and stabilising producer prices; (b) they have a minimum number of members and/or cover a minimum volume of marketable production, to be laid down by the Member State concerned, in the area where they operate; (c) there is sufficient evidence that they can carry out their activities properly, both over time and in terms of effectiveness and concentration of supply; 2. Member States may decide that producer organisations which have been recognised before 2 April 2012 on the basis of national law and which fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 are to be considered as recognised producer organisations. 3. Member States shall: (a) decide whether to grant recognition to a producer organisation within four months of the lodging of an application, accompanied by all the relevant supporting evidence; this application shall be lodged with the Member State where the organisation has its headquarters; (b) carry out, at intervals to be determined by them, checks to verify that recognised producer organisations and associations of producer organisations are complying with the provisions of this Chapter; (c) in the event of non-compliance or irregularities in the implementation of the measures provided for in this Chapter, impose on those organisations and associations the applicable penalties that they have laid down and, if necessary, decide whether recognition should be withdrawn; (d) inform the Commission by 31 March of each year of every decision to grant, refuse or withdraw recognition which they have taken during the previous calendar year.
Article 162 Interbranch organisations in the olive oil and table olives and tobacco sectors
For interbranch organisations in the olive oil and table olives and tobacco sectors, the specific aim referred to in point (c) of Article 157(1) may also include at least one of the following objectives: (a) concentrating and co-ordinating supply and marketing of the produce of the members; (b) adapting production and processing jointly to the requirements of the market and improving the product; (c) promoting the rationalisation and improvement of production and processing.
Article 163 Recognition of interbranch organisations in the milk and milk products sector
1. Member States may recognise interbranch organisations in the milk and milk products sector provided that such organisations: (a) fulfil the requirements laid down in Article 157(3); (b) carry out their activities in one or more regions in the territory concerned; (c) account for a significant share of the economic activities referred to in point (a) of Article 157(3); (d) do not themselves engage in the production of, the processing of, or the trade in, products in the milk and milk products sector. 2. Member States may decide that interbranch organisations which have been recognised before 2 April 2012 on the basis of national law and which fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 are to be considered to be recognised as interbranch organisations under Article 157(3). 3. Where Member States make use of the option to recognise an interbranch organisation in accordance with paragraph 1 or 2, they shall: (a) decide whether to grant recognition to the interbranch organisation within four months of the lodging of an application, accompanied by all the relevant supporting evidence; this application shall be lodged with the Member State where the organisation has its headquarters; (b) carry out, at intervals to be determined by them, checks to verify that recognised interbranch organisations are complying with the conditions governing their recognition; (c) in the event of non-compliance or irregularities in the implementation of the measures provided for in this Regulation, impose on those organisations the applicable penalties they have laid down and, if necessary, decide whether recognition should be withdrawn; (d) withdraw recognition if: (i) the requirements and conditions for recognition laid down in this Article are no longer fulfilled; (ii) the interbranch organisation takes part in any of the agreements, decisions and concerted practices referred to in Article 210(4); such withdrawal of recognition shall be without prejudice to any other penalties to be imposed pursuant to national law; (iii) the interbranch organisation fails to comply with the notification obligation referred to in point (a) of the first subparagraph of Article 210(2); (d) withdraw recognition if: (i) the requirements and conditions for recognition laid down in this Article are no longer fulfilled; (ii) the interbranch organisation takes part in any of the agreements, decisions and concerted practices referred to in Article 210(4); such withdrawal of recognition shall be without prejudice to any other penalties to be imposed pursuant to national law; (iii) the interbranch organisation fails to comply with the notification obligation referred to in point (a) of the first subparagraph of Article 210(2); (e) inform the Commission by 31 March of each year of every decision to grant, refuse or withdraw recognition taken during the previous calendar year.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The Financial Regulation 1 sets out the principles and procedures governing the establishment and implementation of the EU budget and the control of the EU funds. Over the last 30 years, the number of general financial rules contained in the Financial Regulation has increased sharply 2 . In addition, a number of sectoral financial rules have emerged: the rules for participation to the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation 3 , the Common Provisions to the European Structural and Investment Funds 4 and the Common Implementing Rules for the External Action 5 . Users of EU funds have repeatedly complained about the proliferation of rules both at general and at sectoral level, their heterogeneity and their complexity due to the fact that they follow the architecture of the programme and multiple layers of controls. In addition, the complexity of the financial set of rules has slowed down implementation of the EU funds, making it costly and prone to errors. A first step towards more coherent and simpler financial rules was achieved in 2012: the Commission tabled proposals for the programmes covered by the MFF 2014-2020 which reduced the number of programmes and instruments, grouped them under a single framework with common rules, simplified procedures for application and declaration of costs by final beneficiaries, facilitated the deployment of innovative financial instruments, enabled EU Trust-Funds and improved the cost-efficiency of controls. Recent revisions have aligned the Financial Regulation on the results of the negotiation to the MFF 2014-2020 (2013 revision) as well as to the new Procurement Directive (2015 revision). However, there is room for further simplification . This is confirmed by the experience gained since 2014 and by the work of the High Level Group of Independent Experts on Monitoring Simplification for Beneficiaries of the European Structural and Investment Funds 6 . The public consultation on the revision of the Financial Regulation 7 also shows stakeholders’ clear expectations in the area. Efforts must therefore continue in order to remove bottlenecks, ensure synergies and complementarities between ESI Funds and the other EU funds and improve efficiency of delivery and control requirements. Simpler and more flexible financial rules will contribute to optimising spending and impact of the MFF 2014-2020 and constitute as such one of the key elements of the Commission's initiative for a Budget Focused on Results (BFOR) which aims at making sure that resources are allocated to priorities and that every action delivers maximum performance and added value 8 . In addition, this will reduce the costs related to implementation of EU rules as well the number of errors. Simpler and more flexible EU financial rules are key in enhancing EU budget’s ability to adapt to changing circumstances and to respond to unexpected developments. The present legislative proposal forms an integral part of the mid-term review/revision of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2014-2020 9 . It contributes to two of its main objectives: simplification and flexibility . The Commission therefore proposes in a single act an ambitious revision of the general financial rules accompanied by corresponding changes to the sectorial financial rules set out in 15 legislative acts concerning multiannual programmes. The inclusion of sectoral changes in the same legislative proposal aims at ensuring a coherent negotiation process as well as at facilitating a speedy adoption by the legislator. The focus is put on the following key areas: 1 . Simplification for recipients of EU funds: many measures aim at simplifying life for recipients of EU funds. They relate to grants (removal of the non-cumulative award check for low-value grants and of the non-profit principle; simpler rules for "contribution in kind" valuation ; recognition of volunteer work ; grant awards without calls for proposal under specific conditions) and simplified forms of grants (Title VIII). 2 . From multi ple layers of controls to cross reliance on audit, assessment or authorisation, and harmonisation of reporting requirements: the aim of these measures is to encourage reliance as far as possible on one single audit, assessment or authorisation (conformity to State aids for instance), when the audit , assessment or authorisation meet s the necessary conditions to be taken into account in the EU system. More generally, rules for implementing partners (international organisations, EIB/EIF, national promotional banks, national agencies, NGOs) will be simplified by relying increasingly on their procedures and policies once assessed positively. Financial f ramework partnership agreements concluded with long term partners will allow progressing in the harmonisation of audit, reporting and other administrative requirements among donors (Title V Articles 122, 123 and 126). 3 . Allowing the application of only one set of rules to hybrid actions or in the case of combination of measures or instruments: the proposal aims at achieving further simplification for the partners of the EU by a number of measures to avoid the parallel application of different rules and procedures, notably through facilitating the combination of European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) funding with financial instruments and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (Title V). 4 . More effective use of financial instruments: optimise use of reflows, ensuring a level playing field among key EU implementing partners, reducing burdensome requirements related to publication of individual data of final recipients or to the exclusion criteria (Title X). 5 . More flexible budget management: the proposal sets out several ways for more budgetary flexibility, in order to allow the Union to respond to unforeseen challenges and new tasks more effectively and to achieve swifter crisis management - among which the creation of a " flexibility cushion" for unforeseen needs and new crises in the external actions geographic instruments budget , a more efficient activation of the solidarity and globalization adjustment funds, and the extension of Trust-Funds to internal policies (Articles 14 and 22 7 ) , the creation of a EU crisis reserve with the reuse of decommitted appropriations, and for the next Multiannual Financial Framework, the possibility that financial operations other than financial instruments generate a contingent liability for the Union exceeding the financial assets provided to cover the financial liability of the Union (Article 203) and the creation of a common provisioning fund holding the resources provisioned for financial operations (Article 2 05 ). R ecent initiatives (such as the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) or the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD)), have indeed shown the need to fully use the leverage of the EU budget by creating non-provisioned contingent liabilities. Title X sets the framework to authorise, manage and control these financial risks. 6 . F ocus on results and streamlining of reporting: a stronger focus on results through lump sums, prizes, payment based on output and results rather than on reimbursement of costs, payment against conditions to be fulfilled (Article 121, Title X III ). This should contribute to further reducing the costs of implementing EU funds as well as the number of errors. On the reporting side, reports are regrouped around the draft budget and the integrated financial reporting package, in order to increase efficiency and transparency both towards the general public and the budgetary authority (Articles 39 and 23 9 -24 5 ). 7. Simpler and leaner EU administration: facilitating agreements or delegations between Institutions or bodies in order to pool the implementation of administrative appropriations in European Offices or within Executive Agencies (Articles 57, 58, 64, 65 and 6 8 ); merging consultative panels competent for financial irregularities (Article 73 (6)) with the EDES panel (Article 139 ) and moving from annual to multiannual financing decisions (Article 10 8 ). 8. Providing possibility for citizen engagement : t he proposal provides a possibility for citizens to be consulted on the implementation of the Union budget by the Commission, Member States and any other entity implementing the Union budget (А rticle 54 ) . In simplifying and making EU financial rules more flexible, the present proposal paves the way for the preparation of the next generation of spending programmes (post-2020).
Revised version (Article 163 Recognition of interbranch organisations in the milk and milk products sector):
1. Member States may recognise interbranch organisations in the milk and milk products sector provided that such organisations: (a) fulfil the requirements laid down in Article 157(3); (b) carry out their activities in one or more regions in the territory concerned; (c) account for a significant share of the economic activities referred to in point (a) of Article 157(3); (d) do not themselves engage in the production of, the processing of, or the trade in, products in the milk and milk products sector. 2. Member States may decide that interbranch organisations which have been recognised before 2 April 2012 on the basis of national law and which fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraph 1 are to be considered to be recognised as interbranch organisations under Article 157(3). 3. Where Member States make use of the option to recognise an interbranch organisation in accordance with paragraph 1 or 2, they shall: (a) decide whether to grant recognition to the interbranch organisation within four months of the lodging of an application, accompanied by all the relevant supporting evidence; this application shall be lodged with the Member State where the organisation has its headquarters; (b) carry out, at intervals to be determined by them, checks to verify that recognised interbranch organisations are complying with the conditions governing their recognition; (c) in the event of non-compliance or irregularities in the implementation of the measures provided for in this Regulation, impose on those organisations the applicable penalties they have laid down and, if necessary, decide whether recognition should be withdrawn; (d) withdraw recognition if: (i) the requirements and conditions for recognition laid down in this Article are no longer fulfilled; (ii) the interbranch organisation takes part in any of the agreements, decisions and concerted practices referred to in Article 210(4); such withdrawal of recognition shall be without prejudice to any other penalties to be imposed pursuant to national law; (iii) the interbranch organisation fails to comply with the notification obligation referred to in point (a) of the first subparagraph of Article 210(2); (e) inform the Commission by 31 March of each year of every decision to grant, refuse or withdraw recognition taken during the previous calendar year.
Article 164 Extension of rules
1. In cases where a recognised producer organisation, a recognised association of producer organisations or a recognised interbranch organisation operating in a specific economic area or areas of a Member State is considered to be representative of the production of or trade in, or processing of, a given product, the Member State concerned may, at the request of that organisation, make binding for a limited period of time some of the agreements, decisions or concerted practices agreed within that organisation on other operators acting in the economic area or areas in question, whether individuals or groups, who do not belong to the organisation or association. 2. For the purposes of this Section, an "economic area" means a geographical zone made up of adjoining or neighbouring production regions in which production and marketing conditions are homogeneous. 3. An organisation or association shall be deemed representative where, in the economic area or areas concerned of a Member State, it accounts for: (a) as a proportion of the volume of production of, or of trade in, or of processing of the product or products concerned: (i) for producer organisations in the fruit and vegetables sector, at least 60 %, or (ii) in other cases, at least two thirds; and (a) as a proportion of the volume of production of, or of trade in, or of processing of the product or products concerned: (i) for producer organisations in the fruit and vegetables sector, at least 60 %, or (ii) in other cases, at least two thirds; and (b) in the case of producer organisations, more than 50 % of the producers concerned. However, where, in the case of interbranch organisations, the determination of the proportion of the volume of production, or of trade in, or of processing of the product or products concerned gives rise to practical difficulties, a Member State may lay down national rules for determining the specified level of representativeness referred to in point (a)(ii) of the first subparagraph. Where the request for an extension of its rules to other operators covers more than one economic area, the organisation or association shall demonstrate the minimum level of representativeness as defined in the first subparagraph for each of the branches it groups in each of the economic areas concerned. 4. The rules for which extension to other operators may be requested as provided for in paragraph 1 shall have one of the following aims: (a) production and market reporting; (b) stricter production rules than those laid down in Union or national rules; (c) the drawing up of standard contracts which are compatible with Union rules; (d) marketing; (e) protecting the environment; (f) measures to promote and exploit the potential of products; (g) measures to protect organic farming as well as designations of origin, quality labels and geographical indications; (h) research to add value to the products, in particular through new uses which do not pose a threat to public health; (i) studies to improve the quality of products; (j) research, in particular into methods of cultivation permitting reduced use of plant protection or animal health products and guaranteeing conservation of the soil and conservation or improvement of the environment; (k) the definition of minimum qualities and definition of minimum standards of packing and presentation; (l) the use of certified seed and monitoring of product quality; (m) animal health, plant health or food safety; (n) the management of by-products. Those rules shall not cause any damage to other operators in the Member State concerned or the Union and shall not have any of the effects listed in Article 210(4) or be otherwise incompatible with Union law or national rules in force. 5. The extension of the rules referred to in paragraph 1 shall be brought to the attention of operators by publication in full in an official publication of the Member State concerned. 6. Member States shall notify the Commission of any decisions taken under this Article.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The Financial Regulation 1 sets out the principles and procedures governing the establishment and implementation of the EU budget and the control of the EU funds. Over the last 30 years, the number of general financial rules contained in the Financial Regulation has increased sharply 2 . In addition, a number of sectoral financial rules have emerged: the rules for participation to the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation 3 , the Common Provisions to the European Structural and Investment Funds 4 and the Common Implementing Rules for the External Action 5 . Users of EU funds have repeatedly complained about the proliferation of rules both at general and at sectoral level, their heterogeneity and their complexity due to the fact that they follow the architecture of the programme and multiple layers of controls. In addition, the complexity of the financial set of rules has slowed down implementation of the EU funds, making it costly and prone to errors. A first step towards more coherent and simpler financial rules was achieved in 2012: the Commission tabled proposals for the programmes covered by the MFF 2014-2020 which reduced the number of programmes and instruments, grouped them under a single framework with common rules, simplified procedures for application and declaration of costs by final beneficiaries, facilitated the deployment of innovative financial instruments, enabled EU Trust-Funds and improved the cost-efficiency of controls. Recent revisions have aligned the Financial Regulation on the results of the negotiation to the MFF 2014-2020 (2013 revision) as well as to the new Procurement Directive (2015 revision). However, there is room for further simplification . This is confirmed by the experience gained since 2014 and by the work of the High Level Group of Independent Experts on Monitoring Simplification for Beneficiaries of the European Structural and Investment Funds 6 . The public consultation on the revision of the Financial Regulation 7 also shows stakeholders’ clear expectations in the area. Efforts must therefore continue in order to remove bottlenecks, ensure synergies and complementarities between ESI Funds and the other EU funds and improve efficiency of delivery and control requirements. Simpler and more flexible financial rules will contribute to optimising spending and impact of the MFF 2014-2020 and constitute as such one of the key elements of the Commission's initiative for a Budget Focused on Results (BFOR) which aims at making sure that resources are allocated to priorities and that every action delivers maximum performance and added value 8 . In addition, this will reduce the costs related to implementation of EU rules as well the number of errors. Simpler and more flexible EU financial rules are key in enhancing EU budget’s ability to adapt to changing circumstances and to respond to unexpected developments. The present legislative proposal forms an integral part of the mid-term review/revision of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2014-2020 9 . It contributes to two of its main objectives: simplification and flexibility . The Commission therefore proposes in a single act an ambitious revision of the general financial rules accompanied by corresponding changes to the sectorial financial rules set out in 15 legislative acts concerning multiannual programmes. The inclusion of sectoral changes in the same legislative proposal aims at ensuring a coherent negotiation process as well as at facilitating a speedy adoption by the legislator. The focus is put on the following key areas: 1 . Simplification for recipients of EU funds: many measures aim at simplifying life for recipients of EU funds. They relate to grants (removal of the non-cumulative award check for low-value grants and of the non-profit principle; simpler rules for "contribution in kind" valuation ; recognition of volunteer work ; grant awards without calls for proposal under specific conditions) and simplified forms of grants (Title VIII). 2 . From multi ple layers of controls to cross reliance on audit, assessment or authorisation, and harmonisation of reporting requirements: the aim of these measures is to encourage reliance as far as possible on one single audit, assessment or authorisation (conformity to State aids for instance), when the audit , assessment or authorisation meet s the necessary conditions to be taken into account in the EU system. More generally, rules for implementing partners (international organisations, EIB/EIF, national promotional banks, national agencies, NGOs) will be simplified by relying increasingly on their procedures and policies once assessed positively. Financial f ramework partnership agreements concluded with long term partners will allow progressing in the harmonisation of audit, reporting and other administrative requirements among donors (Title V Articles 122, 123 and 126). 3 . Allowing the application of only one set of rules to hybrid actions or in the case of combination of measures or instruments: the proposal aims at achieving further simplification for the partners of the EU by a number of measures to avoid the parallel application of different rules and procedures, notably through facilitating the combination of European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) funding with financial instruments and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (Title V). 4 . More effective use of financial instruments: optimise use of reflows, ensuring a level playing field among key EU implementing partners, reducing burdensome requirements related to publication of individual data of final recipients or to the exclusion criteria (Title X). 5 . More flexible budget management: the proposal sets out several ways for more budgetary flexibility, in order to allow the Union to respond to unforeseen challenges and new tasks more effectively and to achieve swifter crisis management - among which the creation of a " flexibility cushion" for unforeseen needs and new crises in the external actions geographic instruments budget , a more efficient activation of the solidarity and globalization adjustment funds, and the extension of Trust-Funds to internal policies (Articles 14 and 22 7 ) , the creation of a EU crisis reserve with the reuse of decommitted appropriations, and for the next Multiannual Financial Framework, the possibility that financial operations other than financial instruments generate a contingent liability for the Union exceeding the financial assets provided to cover the financial liability of the Union (Article 203) and the creation of a common provisioning fund holding the resources provisioned for financial operations (Article 2 05 ). R ecent initiatives (such as the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) or the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD)), have indeed shown the need to fully use the leverage of the EU budget by creating non-provisioned contingent liabilities. Title X sets the framework to authorise, manage and control these financial risks. 6 . F ocus on results and streamlining of reporting: a stronger focus on results through lump sums, prizes, payment based on output and results rather than on reimbursement of costs, payment against conditions to be fulfilled (Article 121, Title X III ). This should contribute to further reducing the costs of implementing EU funds as well as the number of errors. On the reporting side, reports are regrouped around the draft budget and the integrated financial reporting package, in order to increase efficiency and transparency both towards the general public and the budgetary authority (Articles 39 and 23 9 -24 5 ). 7. Simpler and leaner EU administration: facilitating agreements or delegations between Institutions or bodies in order to pool the implementation of administrative appropriations in European Offices or within Executive Agencies (Articles 57, 58, 64, 65 and 6 8 ); merging consultative panels competent for financial irregularities (Article 73 (6)) with the EDES panel (Article 139 ) and moving from annual to multiannual financing decisions (Article 10 8 ). 8. Providing possibility for citizen engagement : t he proposal provides a possibility for citizens to be consulted on the implementation of the Union budget by the Commission, Member States and any other entity implementing the Union budget (А rticle 54 ) . In simplifying and making EU financial rules more flexible, the present proposal paves the way for the preparation of the next generation of spending programmes (post-2020).
Revised version (Article 164 Extension of rules):
1. In cases where a recognised producer organisation, a recognised association of producer organisations or a recognised interbranch organisation operating in a specific economic area or areas of a Member State is considered to be representative of the production of or trade in, or processing of, a given product, the Member State concerned may, at the request of that organisation, make binding for a limited period of time some of the agreements, decisions or concerted practices agreed within that organisation on other operators acting in the economic area or areas in question, whether individuals or groups, who do not belong to the organisation or association. 2. For the purposes of this Section, an "economic area" means a geographical zone made up of adjoining or neighbouring production regions in which production and marketing conditions are homogeneous. 3. An organisation or association shall be deemed representative where, in the economic area or areas concerned of a Member State, it accounts for: (a) as a proportion of the volume of production of, or of trade in, or of processing of the product or products concerned: (i) for producer organisations in the fruit and vegetables sector, at least 60 %, or (ii) in other cases, at least two thirds; and (b) in the case of producer organisations, more than 50 % of the producers concerned. However, where, in the case of interbranch organisations, the determination of the proportion of the volume of production, or of trade in, or of processing of the product or products concerned gives rise to practical difficulties, a Member State may lay down national rules for determining the specified level of representativeness referred to in point (a)(ii) of the first subparagraph. Where the request for an extension of its rules to other operators covers more than one economic area, the organisation or association shall demonstrate the minimum level of representativeness as defined in the first subparagraph for each of the branches it groups in each of the economic areas concerned. 4. The rules for which extension to other operators may be requested as provided for in paragraph 1 shall have one of the following aims: (a) production and market reporting; (b) stricter production rules than those laid down in Union or national rules; (c) the drawing up of standard contracts which are compatible with Union rules; (d) marketing; (e) protecting the environment; (f) measures to promote and exploit the potential of products; (g) measures to protect organic farming as well as designations of origin, quality labels and geographical indications; (h) research to add value to the products, in particular through new uses which do not pose a threat to public health; (i) studies to improve the quality of products; (j) research, in particular into methods of cultivation permitting reduced use of plant protection or animal health products and guaranteeing conservation of the soil and conservation or improvement of the environment; (k) the definition of minimum qualities and definition of minimum standards of packing and presentation; (l) the use of certified seed and monitoring of product quality; (m) animal health, plant health or food safety; (n) the management of by-products. Those rules shall not cause any damage to other operators in the Member State concerned or the Union and shall not have any of the effects listed in Article 210(4) or be otherwise incompatible with Union law or national rules in force. 5. The extension of the rules referred to in paragraph 1 shall be brought to the attention of operators by publication in full in an official publication of the Member State concerned. 6. Member States shall notify the Commission of any decisions taken under this Article.
Article 165 Financial contributions of non-members
Where rules of a recognised producer organisation, a recognised association of producer organisations or a recognised interbranch organisation are extended under Article 164 and the activities covered by those rules are in the general economic interest of economic operators whose activities relate to the products concerned, the Member State which has granted recognition may, after consulting the relevant stakeholders, decide that individual economic operators or groups which are not members of the organisation but which benefit from those activities shall pay the organisation all or part of the financial contributions paid by its members to the extent that such contributions are intended to cover costs directly incurred as a result of pursuing the activities in question.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The Commission proposal for the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2021-2027 (the MFF proposal) 1 sets the budgetary framework and main orientations for the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). On this basis, the Commission presents a set of regulations laying down the legislative framework for the CAP in the period 2021-2027, together with an impact assessment of alternative scenarios for the evolution of the policy. These proposals provide for a date of application as of 1 January 2021 and are presented for a Union of 27 Member States, in line with the no tification by the United Kingdom of its intention to withdraw from the European Union and Euratom based on Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union received by European Council on 29 March 2017. The latest reform of the CAP was decided in 2013 and implemented in 2015. Since then, the context in which that reform was forged has shifted significantly. In particular: Agricultural prices have fallen substantially – depressed by macroeconomic factors, geopolitical tensions and other forces. The emphasis of trade negotiations has moved more visibly from multilateral to bilateral deals and the EU has become more open to world markets. The EU has signed up to new international commitments – e.g. concerning climate change mitigation (through COP 21) and broad aspects of international development (through the UN's Sustainable Development Goals – SDGs), as well as efforts to better respond to other geopolitical developments including migration. These shifts have prompted a public debate about whether the 2013 reform goes far enough to help the CAP adequately meet broad ongoing challenges related to the economic health of the farm sector, care for the environment, action over climate change, and a strong and economic and social fabric for the EU's rural areas – especially in view of emerging opportunities for action in the areas of trade, the bioeconomy, renewable energy, the circular economy and the digital economy. The CAP must be modernised to meet these challenges, simplified to do so with a minimum of administrative burden, and made even more coherent with other EU policies to maximise its contribution to the ten Commission Priorities and the Sustainable Development Objectives. Indeed, as the Commission recalled in its recent Communication on the MFF, a modernised Common Agricultural Policy will need to support the transition towards a fully sustainable agricultural sector and the development of vibrant rural areas, providing secure, safe and high-quality food for over 500 million consumers. Europe needs a smart, resilient, sustainable and competitive agricultural sector in order to ensure the production of safe, high-quality, affordable, nutritious and diverse food for its citizens and a strong socio-economic fabric in rural areas. A modernised Common Agricultural Policy must enhance its European added value by reflecting a higher level of environmental and climate ambition and addressing citizens' expectations for their health, the environment and the climate. As foreseen in its Programme of Work for 2017, the Commission consulted widely on the simplification and modernisation of the CAP to maximise its contribution to the Commission's ten priorities and to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This focused on specific policy priorities for the future without prejudice to the financial allocations for the CAP in the next MFF. The process included a large consultation, as well as analysis of available evidence on the performance of the CAP, including the relevant REFIT Platform opinions. The outcome was presented in the Communication adopted on 29 November 2017 and entitled "the Future of Food and Farming". The Communication enables a structured dialogue on the future CAP in EU Institutions as well as with stakeholders. This policy document outlined challenges, objectives and possible avenues for a "future-proof" CAP that needs to be simpler, smarter and modern, and lead the transition to a more sustainable agriculture. In particular, the Commission identified higher environmental and climate action ambition, the better targeting of support and the stronger reliance on the virtuous Research-Innovation-Advice nexus as top priorities of the post-2020 CAP. It also proposed as a way to improve the performance of the CAP a new delivery model (NDM) to shift the policy focus from compliance to performance, and rebalances responsibilities between the EU and the Member State level with more subsidiarity. The new model aims at better achieving EU objectives based on strategic planning, broad policy interventions and common performance indicators, thus improving policy coherence across the future CAP and with other EU objectives.
Revised version (Article 165 Financial contributions of non-members):
Where rules of a recognised producer organisation, a recognised association of producer organisations or a recognised interbranch organisation are extended under Article 164 and the activities covered by those rules are in the general economic interest of economic operators whose activities relate to the products concerned, the Member State which has granted recognition may, after consulting the relevant stakeholders, decide that individual economic operators or groups which are not members of the organisation but which benefit from those activities shall pay the organisation all or part of the financial contributions paid by its members to the extent that such contributions are intended to cover costs directly incurred as a result of pursuing one or more of the activities in question. Any organisation which receives contributions from non-members under this Article, if requested by a member or a non-member that contributes financially to the activities of the organisation, shall make available those parts of its yearly budget which relate to the pursuit of activities listed in Article 164(4).
Article 166 Measures to facilitate the adjustment of supply to market requirements
In order to encourage action by the organisations referred to in Articles 152 to 163 to facilitate the adjustment of supply to market requirements, with the exception of action relating to withdrawal from the market, the Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 227 concerning measures in the sectors listed in Article 1(2): (a) improving quality; (b) promoting better organisation of production, processing and marketing; (c) facilitating the recording of market price trends; (d) permitting the establishment of short and long-term forecasts on the basis of the means of production used.
Article 167 Marketing rules to improve and stabilise the operation of the common market in wines
1. In order to improve and stabilise the operation of the common market in wines, including the grapes, musts and wines from which they derive, producer Member States may lay down marketing rules to regulate supply, particularly by way of decisions taken by interbranch organisations recognised under Articles 157 and 158. Such rules shall be proportionate to the objective pursued and shall not: (a) relate to any transaction after the first marketing of the produce concerned; (b) allow for price fixing, including where prices are set for guidance or recommendation; (c) render unavailable an excessive proportion of the vintage that would otherwise be available; (d) provide scope for refusing to issue the national and Union certificates required for the circulation and marketing of wines where such marketing is in accordance with those rules. 2. The rules provided for in paragraph 1 shall be brought to the attention of operators by being published in full in an official publication of the Member State concerned. 3. Member States shall notify the Commission of any decisions taken under this Article.
Article 168 Contractual relations
1. Without prejudice to Article 148 concerning the milk and milk products sector and Article 125 concerning the sugar sector, if a Member State decides, in respect of agricultural products from a sector listed in Article 1(2), other than milk and milk products and sugar: (a) that every delivery in its territory of those products by a producer to a processor or distributor must be covered by a written contract between the parties; and/or (b) that the first purchasers must make a written offer for a contract for the delivery in its territory of those agricultural products by the producer, such a contract or such an offer for a contract shall fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraphs 4 and 6 of this Article. 2. Where the Member State decides that deliveries of the products covered by this Article by a producer to a processor must be covered by a written contract between the parties, it shall also decide which stage or stages of the delivery shall be covered by such a contract if delivery of the products concerned is made through one or more intermediaries. Member States shall ensure that the provisions that they adopt under this Article do not impair the proper functioning of the internal market. 3. In the case described in paragraph 2, the Member State may establish a mediation mechanism to cover cases in which there is no mutual agreement to conclude such a contract, thereby ensuring fair contractual relations. 4. Any contract or offer for a contract referred to in paragraph 1 shall: (a) be made in advance of the delivery; (b) be made in writing; and (c) include, in particular, the following elements: (i) the price payable for the delivery, which shall: — be static and be set out in the contract, and/or — be calculated by combining various factors set out in the contract, which may include market indicators reflecting changes in market conditions, the quantities delivered and the quality or composition of the agricultural products delivered, (ii) the quantity and quality of the products concerned which may or must be delivered and the timing of such deliveries, (iii) the duration of the contract, which may include either a definite duration or an indefinite duration with termination clauses, (iv) details regarding payment periods and procedures, (v) arrangements for collecting or delivering the agricultural products, and (vi) rules applicable in the event of force majeure. (c) include, in particular, the following elements: (i) the price payable for the delivery, which shall: — be static and be set out in the contract, and/or — be calculated by combining various factors set out in the contract, which may include market indicators reflecting changes in market conditions, the quantities delivered and the quality or composition of the agricultural products delivered, (i) the price payable for the delivery, which shall: — be static and be set out in the contract, and/or — be calculated by combining various factors set out in the contract, which may include market indicators reflecting changes in market conditions, the quantities delivered and the quality or composition of the agricultural products delivered, (ii) the quantity and quality of the products concerned which may or must be delivered and the timing of such deliveries, (iii) the duration of the contract, which may include either a definite duration or an indefinite duration with termination clauses, (iv) details regarding payment periods and procedures, (v) arrangements for collecting or delivering the agricultural products, and (vi) rules applicable in the event of force majeure. 5. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, a contract or an offer for a contract shall not be required where the products concerned are delivered by a producer to a purchaser which is a cooperative of which the producer is a member if the statutes of that cooperative or the rules and decisions provided for in, or derived from, these statutes contain provisions having similar effects to the provisions set out in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 4. 6. All elements of contracts for the delivery of agricultural products concluded by producers, collectors, processors or distributors, including those elements referred to in point (c) of paragraph 4, shall be freely negotiated between the parties. Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, one or both of the following shall apply: (a) where a Member State decides to make written contracts for the delivery of agricultural products compulsory in accordance with paragraph 1, it may establish a minimum duration, applicable only to written contracts between a producer and the first purchaser of the agricultural products. Such a minimum duration shall be at least six months and shall not impair the proper functioning of the internal market; (b) where a Member State decides that the first purchaser of agricultural products must make the producer a written offer for a contract in accordance with paragraph 1, it may provide that the offer must include a minimum duration for the contract, set by national law for this purpose. Such a minimum duration shall be at least six months and shall not impair the proper functioning of the internal market. The second subparagraph shall be without prejudice to the producer's right to refuse such a minimum duration provided that he does so in writing. In this case, the parties shall be free to negotiate all elements of the contract, including those elements referred to in point (c) of paragraph 4. 7. Member States which make use of the options referred to in this Article shall ensure that the provisions set in place do not impair the proper functioning of the internal market. Member States shall notify the Commission of how they apply any measures introduced under this Article. 8. The Commission may adopt implementing acts laying down the measures necessary for the uniform application of points (a) and (b) of paragraph 4 and paragraph 5 of this Article and measures relating to notifications to be made by the Member States in accordance with this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 229(2).
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The Financial Regulation 1 sets out the principles and procedures governing the establishment and implementation of the EU budget and the control of the EU funds. Over the last 30 years, the number of general financial rules contained in the Financial Regulation has increased sharply 2 . In addition, a number of sectoral financial rules have emerged: the rules for participation to the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation 3 , the Common Provisions to the European Structural and Investment Funds 4 and the Common Implementing Rules for the External Action 5 . Users of EU funds have repeatedly complained about the proliferation of rules both at general and at sectoral level, their heterogeneity and their complexity due to the fact that they follow the architecture of the programme and multiple layers of controls. In addition, the complexity of the financial set of rules has slowed down implementation of the EU funds, making it costly and prone to errors. A first step towards more coherent and simpler financial rules was achieved in 2012: the Commission tabled proposals for the programmes covered by the MFF 2014-2020 which reduced the number of programmes and instruments, grouped them under a single framework with common rules, simplified procedures for application and declaration of costs by final beneficiaries, facilitated the deployment of innovative financial instruments, enabled EU Trust-Funds and improved the cost-efficiency of controls. Recent revisions have aligned the Financial Regulation on the results of the negotiation to the MFF 2014-2020 (2013 revision) as well as to the new Procurement Directive (2015 revision). However, there is room for further simplification . This is confirmed by the experience gained since 2014 and by the work of the High Level Group of Independent Experts on Monitoring Simplification for Beneficiaries of the European Structural and Investment Funds 6 . The public consultation on the revision of the Financial Regulation 7 also shows stakeholders’ clear expectations in the area. Efforts must therefore continue in order to remove bottlenecks, ensure synergies and complementarities between ESI Funds and the other EU funds and improve efficiency of delivery and control requirements. Simpler and more flexible financial rules will contribute to optimising spending and impact of the MFF 2014-2020 and constitute as such one of the key elements of the Commission's initiative for a Budget Focused on Results (BFOR) which aims at making sure that resources are allocated to priorities and that every action delivers maximum performance and added value 8 . In addition, this will reduce the costs related to implementation of EU rules as well the number of errors. Simpler and more flexible EU financial rules are key in enhancing EU budget’s ability to adapt to changing circumstances and to respond to unexpected developments. The present legislative proposal forms an integral part of the mid-term review/revision of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2014-2020 9 . It contributes to two of its main objectives: simplification and flexibility . The Commission therefore proposes in a single act an ambitious revision of the general financial rules accompanied by corresponding changes to the sectorial financial rules set out in 15 legislative acts concerning multiannual programmes. The inclusion of sectoral changes in the same legislative proposal aims at ensuring a coherent negotiation process as well as at facilitating a speedy adoption by the legislator. The focus is put on the following key areas: 1 . Simplification for recipients of EU funds: many measures aim at simplifying life for recipients of EU funds. They relate to grants (removal of the non-cumulative award check for low-value grants and of the non-profit principle; simpler rules for "contribution in kind" valuation ; recognition of volunteer work ; grant awards without calls for proposal under specific conditions) and simplified forms of grants (Title VIII). 2 . From multi ple layers of controls to cross reliance on audit, assessment or authorisation, and harmonisation of reporting requirements: the aim of these measures is to encourage reliance as far as possible on one single audit, assessment or authorisation (conformity to State aids for instance), when the audit , assessment or authorisation meet s the necessary conditions to be taken into account in the EU system. More generally, rules for implementing partners (international organisations, EIB/EIF, national promotional banks, national agencies, NGOs) will be simplified by relying increasingly on their procedures and policies once assessed positively. Financial f ramework partnership agreements concluded with long term partners will allow progressing in the harmonisation of audit, reporting and other administrative requirements among donors (Title V Articles 122, 123 and 126). 3 . Allowing the application of only one set of rules to hybrid actions or in the case of combination of measures or instruments: the proposal aims at achieving further simplification for the partners of the EU by a number of measures to avoid the parallel application of different rules and procedures, notably through facilitating the combination of European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) funding with financial instruments and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (Title V). 4 . More effective use of financial instruments: optimise use of reflows, ensuring a level playing field among key EU implementing partners, reducing burdensome requirements related to publication of individual data of final recipients or to the exclusion criteria (Title X). 5 . More flexible budget management: the proposal sets out several ways for more budgetary flexibility, in order to allow the Union to respond to unforeseen challenges and new tasks more effectively and to achieve swifter crisis management - among which the creation of a " flexibility cushion" for unforeseen needs and new crises in the external actions geographic instruments budget , a more efficient activation of the solidarity and globalization adjustment funds, and the extension of Trust-Funds to internal policies (Articles 14 and 22 7 ) , the creation of a EU crisis reserve with the reuse of decommitted appropriations, and for the next Multiannual Financial Framework, the possibility that financial operations other than financial instruments generate a contingent liability for the Union exceeding the financial assets provided to cover the financial liability of the Union (Article 203) and the creation of a common provisioning fund holding the resources provisioned for financial operations (Article 2 05 ). R ecent initiatives (such as the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) or the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD)), have indeed shown the need to fully use the leverage of the EU budget by creating non-provisioned contingent liabilities. Title X sets the framework to authorise, manage and control these financial risks. 6 . F ocus on results and streamlining of reporting: a stronger focus on results through lump sums, prizes, payment based on output and results rather than on reimbursement of costs, payment against conditions to be fulfilled (Article 121, Title X III ). This should contribute to further reducing the costs of implementing EU funds as well as the number of errors. On the reporting side, reports are regrouped around the draft budget and the integrated financial reporting package, in order to increase efficiency and transparency both towards the general public and the budgetary authority (Articles 39 and 23 9 -24 5 ). 7. Simpler and leaner EU administration: facilitating agreements or delegations between Institutions or bodies in order to pool the implementation of administrative appropriations in European Offices or within Executive Agencies (Articles 57, 58, 64, 65 and 6 8 ); merging consultative panels competent for financial irregularities (Article 73 (6)) with the EDES panel (Article 139 ) and moving from annual to multiannual financing decisions (Article 10 8 ). 8. Providing possibility for citizen engagement : t he proposal provides a possibility for citizens to be consulted on the implementation of the Union budget by the Commission, Member States and any other entity implementing the Union budget (А rticle 54 ) . In simplifying and making EU financial rules more flexible, the present proposal paves the way for the preparation of the next generation of spending programmes (post-2020).
Revised version (Article 168 Contractual relations):
1. Without prejudice to Article 148 concerning the milk and milk products sector and Article 125 concerning the sugar sector, if a Member State decides, in respect of agricultural products from a sector listed in Article 1(2), other than milk and milk products and sugar: (a) that every delivery in its territory of those products by a producer to a processor or distributor must be covered by a written contract between the parties; and/or (b) that the first purchasers must make a written offer for a contract for the delivery in its territory of those agricultural products by the producer, such a contract or such an offer for a contract shall fulfil the conditions laid down in paragraphs 4 and 6 of this Article. 2. Where the Member State decides that deliveries of the products covered by this Article by a producer to a processor must be covered by a written contract between the parties, it shall also decide which stage or stages of the delivery shall be covered by such a contract if delivery of the products concerned is made through one or more intermediaries. Member States shall ensure that the provisions that they adopt under this Article do not impair the proper functioning of the internal market. 3. In the case described in paragraph 2, the Member State may establish a mediation mechanism to cover cases in which there is no mutual agreement to conclude such a contract, thereby ensuring fair contractual relations. 4. Any contract or offer for a contract referred to in paragraph 1 shall: (a) be made in advance of the delivery; (b) be made in writing; and (c) include, in particular, the following elements: (i) the price payable for the delivery, which shall: — be static and be set out in the contract, and/or — be calculated by combining various factors set out in the contract, which may include market indicators reflecting changes in market conditions, the quantities delivered and the quality or composition of the agricultural products delivered, (ii) the quantity and quality of the products concerned which may or must be delivered and the timing of such deliveries, (iii) the duration of the contract, which may include either a definite duration or an indefinite duration with termination clauses, (iv) details regarding payment periods and procedures, (v) arrangements for collecting or delivering the agricultural products, and (vi) rules applicable in the event of force majeure. 5. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, a contract or an offer for a contract shall not be required where the products concerned are delivered by a producer to a purchaser which is a cooperative of which the producer is a member if the statutes of that cooperative or the rules and decisions provided for in, or derived from, these statutes contain provisions having similar effects to the provisions set out in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 4. 6. All elements of contracts for the delivery of agricultural products concluded by producers, collectors, processors or distributors, including those elements referred to in point (c) of paragraph 4, shall be freely negotiated between the parties. Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, one or both of the following shall apply: (a) where a Member State decides to make written contracts for the delivery of agricultural products compulsory in accordance with paragraph 1, it may establish a minimum duration, applicable only to written contracts between a producer and the first purchaser of the agricultural products. Such a minimum duration shall be at least six months and shall not impair the proper functioning of the internal market; (b) where a Member State decides that the first purchaser of agricultural products must make the producer a written offer for a contract in accordance with paragraph 1, it may provide that the offer must include a minimum duration for the contract, set by national law for this purpose. Such a minimum duration shall be at least six months and shall not impair the proper functioning of the internal market. The second subparagraph shall be without prejudice to the producer's right to refuse such a minimum duration provided that he does so in writing. In this case, the parties shall be free to negotiate all elements of the contract, including those elements referred to in point (c) of paragraph 4. 7. Member States which make use of the options referred to in this Article shall ensure that the provisions set in place do not impair the proper functioning of the internal market. Member States shall notify the Commission of how they apply any measures introduced under this Article. 8. The Commission may adopt implementing acts laying down the measures necessary for the uniform application of points (a) and (b) of paragraph 4 and paragraph 5 of this Article and measures relating to notifications to be made by the Member States in accordance with this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 229(2).
Article 169 Contractual negotiations in the olive oil sector
1. A producer organisation in the olive oil sector which is recognised under Article 152(1) and which pursues one or more of the objectives of concentrating supply, the placing on the market of the products produced by its members and optimising production costs, may negotiate on behalf of its members, in respect of part or all of the aggregate production of their members, contracts for the supply of olive oil. A producer organisation fulfils the objectives mentioned in this paragraph provided that the pursuit of those objectives leads to the integration of activities and such integration is likely to generate significant efficiencies so that the activities of the producer organisation overall contribute to the fulfilment of the objectives of Article 39 TFEU. This could be realised provided that: (a) the producer organisation carries out at least one of the following activities: (i) joint distribution, including joint selling platform or joint transportation; (ii) joint packaging, labelling or promotion; (iii) joint organising of quality control; (iv) joint use of equipment or storage facilities; (v) joint processing; (vi) joint management of waste directly related to the production of olive oil; (vii) joint procurement of inputs; (a) the producer organisation carries out at least one of the following activities: (i) joint distribution, including joint selling platform or joint transportation; (ii) joint packaging, labelling or promotion; (iii) joint organising of quality control; (iv) joint use of equipment or storage facilities; (v) joint processing; (vi) joint management of waste directly related to the production of olive oil; (vii) joint procurement of inputs; (b) these activities are significant in terms of volume of olive oil concerned and in terms of cost of the production and placing of the product on the market. 2. The negotiations by the recognised producer organisation may take place: (a) whether or not there is a transfer of ownership of the olive oil in question by the producers to the producer organisation; (b) whether or not the price negotiated is the same as regards the aggregate production of some or all of the members; (c) provided that, for a particular producer organisation, the volume of olive oil production covered by such negotiations which is produced in any particular Member State does not exceed 20 % of the relevant market; for the purpose of calculating that volume, a distinction shall be made between olive oil for human consumption and olive oil for other uses; (d) provided that, for the volume of olive oil covered by such negotiations, the producer organisation concentrates supply and places the product of its members on the market; (e) provided that the producers concerned are not members of any other producer organisation which also negotiates such contracts on their behalf; (f) provided that the olive oil in question is not covered by an obligation to supply arising from the producer's membership of a cooperative, which is not itself a member of the concerned producer organisation, in accordance with the conditions set out in the cooperative's statutes or the rules and decisions provided for in or derived from these statutes; and (g) provided that the producer organisation notifies the competent authorities of the Member State in which it operates of the volume of olive oil production covered by such negotiations. 3. For the purposes of this Article, references to producer organisations shall also include associations of such producer organisations recognised under Article 156(1). 4. For the purposes of applying point (c) of paragraph 2, the Commission shall publish, by such means as it considers appropriate, the volume of olive oil production in Member States. 5. By way of derogation from point (c) of paragraph 2, even where the threshold set out therein is not exceeded, the competition authority referred to in the second subparagraph of this paragraph may decide in an individual case that a particular negotiation by the producer organisation should either be reopened or should not take place at all if it considers that this is necessary in order to prevent competition being excluded or if it finds that the objectives of Article 39 TFEU are jeopardised. For negotiations covering more than one Member State, the decision referred to in the first subparagraph shall be taken by the Commission without applying the procedure referred to in Article 229(2) or (3). In other cases, that decision shall be taken by the national competition authority of the Member State to which the negotiations relate. The decisions referred to in this paragraph shall not apply earlier than the date of their notification to the undertakings concerned. For the purposes of this Article, the definition of "national competition authority" in point (a) of Article 149(7) shall apply. 6. The Member States in which negotiations take place in accordance with this Article shall notify the Commission of the application of point (g) of paragraph 2 and paragraph 5.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The Financial Regulation 1 sets out the principles and procedures governing the establishment and implementation of the EU budget and the control of the EU funds. Over the last 30 years, the number of general financial rules contained in the Financial Regulation has increased sharply 2 . In addition, a number of sectoral financial rules have emerged: the rules for participation to the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation 3 , the Common Provisions to the European Structural and Investment Funds 4 and the Common Implementing Rules for the External Action 5 . Users of EU funds have repeatedly complained about the proliferation of rules both at general and at sectoral level, their heterogeneity and their complexity due to the fact that they follow the architecture of the programme and multiple layers of controls. In addition, the complexity of the financial set of rules has slowed down implementation of the EU funds, making it costly and prone to errors. A first step towards more coherent and simpler financial rules was achieved in 2012: the Commission tabled proposals for the programmes covered by the MFF 2014-2020 which reduced the number of programmes and instruments, grouped them under a single framework with common rules, simplified procedures for application and declaration of costs by final beneficiaries, facilitated the deployment of innovative financial instruments, enabled EU Trust-Funds and improved the cost-efficiency of controls. Recent revisions have aligned the Financial Regulation on the results of the negotiation to the MFF 2014-2020 (2013 revision) as well as to the new Procurement Directive (2015 revision). However, there is room for further simplification . This is confirmed by the experience gained since 2014 and by the work of the High Level Group of Independent Experts on Monitoring Simplification for Beneficiaries of the European Structural and Investment Funds 6 . The public consultation on the revision of the Financial Regulation 7 also shows stakeholders’ clear expectations in the area. Efforts must therefore continue in order to remove bottlenecks, ensure synergies and complementarities between ESI Funds and the other EU funds and improve efficiency of delivery and control requirements. Simpler and more flexible financial rules will contribute to optimising spending and impact of the MFF 2014-2020 and constitute as such one of the key elements of the Commission's initiative for a Budget Focused on Results (BFOR) which aims at making sure that resources are allocated to priorities and that every action delivers maximum performance and added value 8 . In addition, this will reduce the costs related to implementation of EU rules as well the number of errors. Simpler and more flexible EU financial rules are key in enhancing EU budget’s ability to adapt to changing circumstances and to respond to unexpected developments. The present legislative proposal forms an integral part of the mid-term review/revision of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2014-2020 9 . It contributes to two of its main objectives: simplification and flexibility . The Commission therefore proposes in a single act an ambitious revision of the general financial rules accompanied by corresponding changes to the sectorial financial rules set out in 15 legislative acts concerning multiannual programmes. The inclusion of sectoral changes in the same legislative proposal aims at ensuring a coherent negotiation process as well as at facilitating a speedy adoption by the legislator. The focus is put on the following key areas: 1 . Simplification for recipients of EU funds: many measures aim at simplifying life for recipients of EU funds. They relate to grants (removal of the non-cumulative award check for low-value grants and of the non-profit principle; simpler rules for "contribution in kind" valuation ; recognition of volunteer work ; grant awards without calls for proposal under specific conditions) and simplified forms of grants (Title VIII). 2 . From multi ple layers of controls to cross reliance on audit, assessment or authorisation, and harmonisation of reporting requirements: the aim of these measures is to encourage reliance as far as possible on one single audit, assessment or authorisation (conformity to State aids for instance), when the audit , assessment or authorisation meet s the necessary conditions to be taken into account in the EU system. More generally, rules for implementing partners (international organisations, EIB/EIF, national promotional banks, national agencies, NGOs) will be simplified by relying increasingly on their procedures and policies once assessed positively. Financial f ramework partnership agreements concluded with long term partners will allow progressing in the harmonisation of audit, reporting and other administrative requirements among donors (Title V Articles 122, 123 and 126). 3 . Allowing the application of only one set of rules to hybrid actions or in the case of combination of measures or instruments: the proposal aims at achieving further simplification for the partners of the EU by a number of measures to avoid the parallel application of different rules and procedures, notably through facilitating the combination of European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) funding with financial instruments and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (Title V). 4 . More effective use of financial instruments: optimise use of reflows, ensuring a level playing field among key EU implementing partners, reducing burdensome requirements related to publication of individual data of final recipients or to the exclusion criteria (Title X). 5 . More flexible budget management: the proposal sets out several ways for more budgetary flexibility, in order to allow the Union to respond to unforeseen challenges and new tasks more effectively and to achieve swifter crisis management - among which the creation of a " flexibility cushion" for unforeseen needs and new crises in the external actions geographic instruments budget , a more efficient activation of the solidarity and globalization adjustment funds, and the extension of Trust-Funds to internal policies (Articles 14 and 22 7 ) , the creation of a EU crisis reserve with the reuse of decommitted appropriations, and for the next Multiannual Financial Framework, the possibility that financial operations other than financial instruments generate a contingent liability for the Union exceeding the financial assets provided to cover the financial liability of the Union (Article 203) and the creation of a common provisioning fund holding the resources provisioned for financial operations (Article 2 05 ). R ecent initiatives (such as the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) or the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD)), have indeed shown the need to fully use the leverage of the EU budget by creating non-provisioned contingent liabilities. Title X sets the framework to authorise, manage and control these financial risks. 6 . F ocus on results and streamlining of reporting: a stronger focus on results through lump sums, prizes, payment based on output and results rather than on reimbursement of costs, payment against conditions to be fulfilled (Article 121, Title X III ). This should contribute to further reducing the costs of implementing EU funds as well as the number of errors. On the reporting side, reports are regrouped around the draft budget and the integrated financial reporting package, in order to increase efficiency and transparency both towards the general public and the budgetary authority (Articles 39 and 23 9 -24 5 ). 7. Simpler and leaner EU administration: facilitating agreements or delegations between Institutions or bodies in order to pool the implementation of administrative appropriations in European Offices or within Executive Agencies (Articles 57, 58, 64, 65 and 6 8 ); merging consultative panels competent for financial irregularities (Article 73 (6)) with the EDES panel (Article 139 ) and moving from annual to multiannual financing decisions (Article 10 8 ). 8. Providing possibility for citizen engagement : t he proposal provides a possibility for citizens to be consulted on the implementation of the Union budget by the Commission, Member States and any other entity implementing the Union budget (А rticle 54 ) . In simplifying and making EU financial rules more flexible, the present proposal paves the way for the preparation of the next generation of spending programmes (post-2020).
Revised version (Article 169 Contractual negotiations in the olive oil sector):
1. A producer organisation in the olive oil sector which is recognised under Article 152(1) and which pursues one or more of the objectives of concentrating supply, the placing on the market of the products produced by its members and optimising production costs, may negotiate on behalf of its members, in respect of part or all of the aggregate production of their members, contracts for the supply of olive oil. A producer organisation fulfils the objectives mentioned in this paragraph provided that the pursuit of those objectives leads to the integration of activities and such integration is likely to generate significant efficiencies so that the activities of the producer organisation overall contribute to the fulfilment of the objectives of Article 39 TFEU. This could be realised provided that: (a) the producer organisation carries out at least one of the following activities: (i) joint distribution, including joint selling platform or joint transportation; (ii) joint packaging, labelling or promotion; (iii) joint organising of quality control; (iv) joint use of equipment or storage facilities; (v) joint processing; (vi) joint management of waste directly related to the production of olive oil; (vii) joint procurement of inputs; (b) these activities are significant in terms of volume of olive oil concerned and in terms of cost of the production and placing of the product on the market. 2. The negotiations by the recognised producer organisation may take place: (a) whether or not there is a transfer of ownership of the olive oil in question by the producers to the producer organisation; (b) whether or not the price negotiated is the same as regards the aggregate production of some or all of the members; (c) provided that, for a particular producer organisation, the volume of olive oil production covered by such negotiations which is produced in any particular Member State does not exceed 20 % of the relevant market; for the purpose of calculating that volume, a distinction shall be made between olive oil for human consumption and olive oil for other uses; (d) provided that, for the volume of olive oil covered by such negotiations, the producer organisation concentrates supply and places the product of its members on the market; (e) provided that the producers concerned are not members of any other producer organisation which also negotiates such contracts on their behalf; (f) provided that the olive oil in question is not covered by an obligation to supply arising from the producer's membership of a cooperative, which is not itself a member of the concerned producer organisation, in accordance with the conditions set out in the cooperative's statutes or the rules and decisions provided for in or derived from these statutes; and (g) provided that the producer organisation notifies the competent authorities of the Member State in which it operates of the volume of olive oil production covered by such negotiations. 3. For the purposes of this Article, references to producer organisations shall also include associations of such producer organisations recognised under Article 156(1). 4. For the purposes of applying point (c) of paragraph 2, the Commission shall publish, by such means as it considers appropriate, the volume of olive oil production in Member States. 5. By way of derogation from point (c) of paragraph 2, even where the threshold set out therein is not exceeded, the competition authority referred to in the second subparagraph of this paragraph may decide in an individual case that a particular negotiation by the producer organisation should either be reopened or should not take place at all if it considers that this is necessary in order to prevent competition being excluded or if it finds that the objectives of Article 39 TFEU are jeopardised. For negotiations covering more than one Member State, the decision referred to in the first subparagraph shall be taken by the Commission without applying the procedure referred to in Article 229(2) or (3). In other cases, that decision shall be taken by the national competition authority of the Member State to which the negotiations relate. The decisions referred to in this paragraph shall not apply earlier than the date of their notification to the undertakings concerned. For the purposes of this Article, the definition of "national competition authority" in point (a) of Article 149(7) shall apply. 6. The Member States in which negotiations take place in accordance with this Article shall notify the Commission of the application of point (g) of paragraph 2 and paragraph 5.
Article 170 Contractual negotiations in the beef and veal sector
1. A producer organisation in the beef and veal sector which is recognised under Article 152(1) and which pursues one or more of the objectives of concentrating supply, the placing on the market of the products produced by its members and optimising production costs may negotiate on behalf of its members, in respect of part or all of the aggregate production of their members, contracts for the supply of live cattle of genus Bos taurus for slaughter falling within CN codes ex 0102 29 21 , ex 0102 29 41 , ex 0102 29 51 , ex 0102 29 61 , or ex 0102 29 91 : (a) aged less than 12 months; and (b) aged from 12 months and older. A producer organisation fulfils the objectives mentioned in this paragraph provided that the pursuit of those objectives leads to the integration of activities and such integration is likely to generate significant efficiencies so that the activities of the producer organisation overall contribute to the fulfilment of the objectives of Article 39 TFEU. This could be realised provided that: (a) the producer organisation carries out at least one of the following activities: (i) joint distribution, including joint selling platform or joint transportation; (ii) joint promotion; (iii) joint organising of quality control; (iv) joint use of equipment or storage facilities; (v) joint management of waste directly related to the production of live cattle; (vi) joint procurement of inputs; (a) the producer organisation carries out at least one of the following activities: (i) joint distribution, including joint selling platform or joint transportation; (ii) joint promotion; (iii) joint organising of quality control; (iv) joint use of equipment or storage facilities; (v) joint management of waste directly related to the production of live cattle; (vi) joint procurement of inputs; (b) these activities are significant in terms of quantity of beef and veal concerned and in terms of cost of the production and placing of the product on the market. 2. The negotiations by the recognised producer organisation may take place: (a) whether or not there is a transfer of ownership by the farmers to the producer organisation; (b) whether or not the price negotiated is the same as regards the aggregate production of some or all of the members; (c) provided that, for a particular producer organisation, the quantity of beef and veal production covered by such negotiations which is produced in any particular Member State does not exceed 15 % of the total national production of each product referred to in (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 of that Member State expressed in carcass weight equivalent; (d) provided that, for the quantity of beef and veal covered by such negotiations, the producer organisation concentrates supply and places the product of its members on the market; (e) provided that the producers concerned are not members of any other producer organisation which also negotiates such contracts on their behalf; (f) provided that the product in question is not covered by an obligation to supply arising from the producer's membership of a cooperative, which is not itself a member of the concerned producer organisation, in accordance with the conditions set out in the cooperative's statutes or the rules and decisions provided for in or derived from these statutes; and (g) provided that the producer organisation notifies the competent authorities of the Member State in which it operates of the quantity of beef and veal production covered by such negotiations. 3. For the purposes of this Article, references to producer organisations shall also include associations of such producer organisations recognised under Article 156(1). 4. For the purposes of applying point (c) of paragraph 2, the Commission shall publish, by such means as it considers appropriate, the quantity of beef and veal production in Member States expressed in carcass weight equivalent. 5. By way of derogation from point (c) of paragraph 2, even where the thresholds set out therein are not exceeded, the competition authority referred to in the second subparagraph of this paragraph may decide in an individual case that a particular negotiation by the producer organisation should either be reopened or should not take place at all if it considers that this is necessary in order to prevent competition being excluded or it finds that the product covered by the negotiations forms part of a separate market by virtue of the specific characteristics of the product or its intended use and that such collective negotiation would cover more than 15 % of the national production of such market, or if it finds that the objectives of Article 39 TFEU are jeopardised. For negotiations covering more than one Member State, the decision referred to in the first subparagraph shall be taken by the Commission without applying the procedure referred to in Article 229(2) or (3). In other cases, that decision shall be taken by the national competition authority of the Member State to which the negotiations relate. The decisions referred to in this paragraph shall not apply earlier than the date of their notification to the undertakings concerned. For the purposes of this Article, the definition of "national competition authority" in point (a) of Article 149(7) shall apply. 6. The Member States in which negotiations take place in accordance with this Article shall notify the Commission of the application of point (g) of paragraph 2 and paragraph 5.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The Financial Regulation 1 sets out the principles and procedures governing the establishment and implementation of the EU budget and the control of the EU funds. Over the last 30 years, the number of general financial rules contained in the Financial Regulation has increased sharply 2 . In addition, a number of sectoral financial rules have emerged: the rules for participation to the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation 3 , the Common Provisions to the European Structural and Investment Funds 4 and the Common Implementing Rules for the External Action 5 . Users of EU funds have repeatedly complained about the proliferation of rules both at general and at sectoral level, their heterogeneity and their complexity due to the fact that they follow the architecture of the programme and multiple layers of controls. In addition, the complexity of the financial set of rules has slowed down implementation of the EU funds, making it costly and prone to errors. A first step towards more coherent and simpler financial rules was achieved in 2012: the Commission tabled proposals for the programmes covered by the MFF 2014-2020 which reduced the number of programmes and instruments, grouped them under a single framework with common rules, simplified procedures for application and declaration of costs by final beneficiaries, facilitated the deployment of innovative financial instruments, enabled EU Trust-Funds and improved the cost-efficiency of controls. Recent revisions have aligned the Financial Regulation on the results of the negotiation to the MFF 2014-2020 (2013 revision) as well as to the new Procurement Directive (2015 revision). However, there is room for further simplification . This is confirmed by the experience gained since 2014 and by the work of the High Level Group of Independent Experts on Monitoring Simplification for Beneficiaries of the European Structural and Investment Funds 6 . The public consultation on the revision of the Financial Regulation 7 also shows stakeholders’ clear expectations in the area. Efforts must therefore continue in order to remove bottlenecks, ensure synergies and complementarities between ESI Funds and the other EU funds and improve efficiency of delivery and control requirements. Simpler and more flexible financial rules will contribute to optimising spending and impact of the MFF 2014-2020 and constitute as such one of the key elements of the Commission's initiative for a Budget Focused on Results (BFOR) which aims at making sure that resources are allocated to priorities and that every action delivers maximum performance and added value 8 . In addition, this will reduce the costs related to implementation of EU rules as well the number of errors. Simpler and more flexible EU financial rules are key in enhancing EU budget’s ability to adapt to changing circumstances and to respond to unexpected developments. The present legislative proposal forms an integral part of the mid-term review/revision of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2014-2020 9 . It contributes to two of its main objectives: simplification and flexibility . The Commission therefore proposes in a single act an ambitious revision of the general financial rules accompanied by corresponding changes to the sectorial financial rules set out in 15 legislative acts concerning multiannual programmes. The inclusion of sectoral changes in the same legislative proposal aims at ensuring a coherent negotiation process as well as at facilitating a speedy adoption by the legislator. The focus is put on the following key areas: 1 . Simplification for recipients of EU funds: many measures aim at simplifying life for recipients of EU funds. They relate to grants (removal of the non-cumulative award check for low-value grants and of the non-profit principle; simpler rules for "contribution in kind" valuation ; recognition of volunteer work ; grant awards without calls for proposal under specific conditions) and simplified forms of grants (Title VIII). 2 . From multi ple layers of controls to cross reliance on audit, assessment or authorisation, and harmonisation of reporting requirements: the aim of these measures is to encourage reliance as far as possible on one single audit, assessment or authorisation (conformity to State aids for instance), when the audit , assessment or authorisation meet s the necessary conditions to be taken into account in the EU system. More generally, rules for implementing partners (international organisations, EIB/EIF, national promotional banks, national agencies, NGOs) will be simplified by relying increasingly on their procedures and policies once assessed positively. Financial f ramework partnership agreements concluded with long term partners will allow progressing in the harmonisation of audit, reporting and other administrative requirements among donors (Title V Articles 122, 123 and 126). 3 . Allowing the application of only one set of rules to hybrid actions or in the case of combination of measures or instruments: the proposal aims at achieving further simplification for the partners of the EU by a number of measures to avoid the parallel application of different rules and procedures, notably through facilitating the combination of European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) funding with financial instruments and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (Title V). 4 . More effective use of financial instruments: optimise use of reflows, ensuring a level playing field among key EU implementing partners, reducing burdensome requirements related to publication of individual data of final recipients or to the exclusion criteria (Title X). 5 . More flexible budget management: the proposal sets out several ways for more budgetary flexibility, in order to allow the Union to respond to unforeseen challenges and new tasks more effectively and to achieve swifter crisis management - among which the creation of a " flexibility cushion" for unforeseen needs and new crises in the external actions geographic instruments budget , a more efficient activation of the solidarity and globalization adjustment funds, and the extension of Trust-Funds to internal policies (Articles 14 and 22 7 ) , the creation of a EU crisis reserve with the reuse of decommitted appropriations, and for the next Multiannual Financial Framework, the possibility that financial operations other than financial instruments generate a contingent liability for the Union exceeding the financial assets provided to cover the financial liability of the Union (Article 203) and the creation of a common provisioning fund holding the resources provisioned for financial operations (Article 2 05 ). R ecent initiatives (such as the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) or the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD)), have indeed shown the need to fully use the leverage of the EU budget by creating non-provisioned contingent liabilities. Title X sets the framework to authorise, manage and control these financial risks. 6 . F ocus on results and streamlining of reporting: a stronger focus on results through lump sums, prizes, payment based on output and results rather than on reimbursement of costs, payment against conditions to be fulfilled (Article 121, Title X III ). This should contribute to further reducing the costs of implementing EU funds as well as the number of errors. On the reporting side, reports are regrouped around the draft budget and the integrated financial reporting package, in order to increase efficiency and transparency both towards the general public and the budgetary authority (Articles 39 and 23 9 -24 5 ). 7. Simpler and leaner EU administration: facilitating agreements or delegations between Institutions or bodies in order to pool the implementation of administrative appropriations in European Offices or within Executive Agencies (Articles 57, 58, 64, 65 and 6 8 ); merging consultative panels competent for financial irregularities (Article 73 (6)) with the EDES panel (Article 139 ) and moving from annual to multiannual financing decisions (Article 10 8 ). 8. Providing possibility for citizen engagement : t he proposal provides a possibility for citizens to be consulted on the implementation of the Union budget by the Commission, Member States and any other entity implementing the Union budget (А rticle 54 ) . In simplifying and making EU financial rules more flexible, the present proposal paves the way for the preparation of the next generation of spending programmes (post-2020).
Revised version (Article 170 Contractual negotiations in the beef and veal sector):
1. A producer organisation in the beef and veal sector which is recognised under Article 152(1) and which pursues one or more of the objectives of concentrating supply, the placing on the market of the products produced by its members and optimising production costs may negotiate on behalf of its members, in respect of part or all of the aggregate production of their members, contracts for the supply of live cattle of genus Bos taurus for slaughter falling within CN codes ex 0102 29 21 , ex 0102 29 41 , ex 0102 29 51 , ex 0102 29 61 , or ex 0102 29 91 : (a) aged less than 12 months; and (b) aged from 12 months and older. A producer organisation fulfils the objectives mentioned in this paragraph provided that the pursuit of those objectives leads to the integration of activities and such integration is likely to generate significant efficiencies so that the activities of the producer organisation overall contribute to the fulfilment of the objectives of Article 39 TFEU. This could be realised provided that: (a) the producer organisation carries out at least one of the following activities: (i) joint distribution, including joint selling platform or joint transportation; (ii) joint promotion; (iii) joint organising of quality control; (iv) joint use of equipment or storage facilities; (v) joint management of waste directly related to the production of live cattle; (vi) joint procurement of inputs; (b) these activities are significant in terms of quantity of beef and veal concerned and in terms of cost of the production and placing of the product on the market. 2. The negotiations by the recognised producer organisation may take place: (a) whether or not there is a transfer of ownership by the farmers to the producer organisation; (b) whether or not the price negotiated is the same as regards the aggregate production of some or all of the members; (c) provided that, for a particular producer organisation, the quantity of beef and veal production covered by such negotiations which is produced in any particular Member State does not exceed 15 % of the total national production of each product referred to in (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 of that Member State expressed in carcass weight equivalent; (d) provided that, for the quantity of beef and veal covered by such negotiations, the producer organisation concentrates supply and places the product of its members on the market; (e) provided that the producers concerned are not members of any other producer organisation which also negotiates such contracts on their behalf; (f) provided that the product in question is not covered by an obligation to supply arising from the producer's membership of a cooperative, which is not itself a member of the concerned producer organisation, in accordance with the conditions set out in the cooperative's statutes or the rules and decisions provided for in or derived from these statutes; and (g) provided that the producer organisation notifies the competent authorities of the Member State in which it operates of the quantity of beef and veal production covered by such negotiations. 3. For the purposes of this Article, references to producer organisations shall also include associations of such producer organisations recognised under Article 156(1). 4. For the purposes of applying point (c) of paragraph 2, the Commission shall publish, by such means as it considers appropriate, the quantity of beef and veal production in Member States expressed in carcass weight equivalent. 5. By way of derogation from point (c) of paragraph 2, even where the thresholds set out therein are not exceeded, the competition authority referred to in the second subparagraph of this paragraph may decide in an individual case that a particular negotiation by the producer organisation should either be reopened or should not take place at all if it considers that this is necessary in order to prevent competition being excluded or it finds that the product covered by the negotiations forms part of a separate market by virtue of the specific characteristics of the product or its intended use and that such collective negotiation would cover more than 15 % of the national production of such market, or if it finds that the objectives of Article 39 TFEU are jeopardised. For negotiations covering more than one Member State, the decision referred to in the first subparagraph shall be taken by the Commission without applying the procedure referred to in Article 229(2) or (3). In other cases, that decision shall be taken by the national competition authority of the Member State to which the negotiations relate. The decisions referred to in this paragraph shall not apply earlier than the date of their notification to the undertakings concerned. For the purposes of this Article, the definition of "national competition authority" in point (a) of Article 149(7) shall apply. 6. The Member States in which negotiations take place in accordance with this Article shall notify the Commission of the application of point (g) of paragraph 2 and paragraph 5.
Article 171 Contractual negotiations for certain arable crops
1. A producer organisation which is recognised under Article 152(1) and which pursues one or more of the objectives of concentrating supply, the placing on the market of the products produced by its members and optimising production costs, may negotiate on behalf of its members, in respect of part or all of the aggregate production of their members, contracts for the supply of one or more of the following products not intended for sowing and in the case of barley not intended for malting: (a) common wheat falling within CN code ex 1001 99 00 ; (b) barley falling within CN code ex 1003 90 00 ; (c) maize falling within CN code 1005 90 00 ; (d) rye falling within CN code 1002 90 00 ; (e) durum wheat falling within CN code 1001 19 00 ; (f) oats falling within CN code 1004 90 00 ; (g) triticale falling within CN code ex 1008 60 00 ; (h) rapeseed falling within CN code ex 12 05 ; (i) sunflower seed falling within CN code ex 1206 00 ; (j) soya beans falling within CN code 1201 90 00 ; (k) field beans falling within CN codes ex 07 08 and ex 07 13 ; (l) field peas falling within CN codes ex 07 08 and ex 07 13 . A producer organisation fulfils the objectives mentioned in this paragraph provided that the pursuit of those objectives leads to the integration of activities and such integration is likely to generate significant efficiencies so that the activities of the producer organisation overall contribute to the fulfilment of the objectives of Article 39 TFEU. This could be realised provided that: (a) the producer organisation carries out at least one of the following activities: (i) joint distribution, including joint selling platform or joint transportation; (ii) joint promotion; (iii) joint organising of quality control; (iv) joint use of equipment or storage facilities; (v) joint procurement of inputs: (a) the producer organisation carries out at least one of the following activities: (i) joint distribution, including joint selling platform or joint transportation; (ii) joint promotion; (iii) joint organising of quality control; (iv) joint use of equipment or storage facilities; (v) joint procurement of inputs: (b) these activities are significant in terms of quantity of the product concerned and in terms of cost of the production and placing of the product on the market. 2. The negotiations by the recognised producer organisation may take place: (a) whether or not there is a transfer of ownership by the producers to the producer organisation; (b) whether or not the price negotiated is the same as regards the aggregate production of some or all of the members; (c) provided that, for each product referred to in paragraph 1 and for a particular producer organisation, the quantity of production covered by such negotiations which is produced in any particular Member State does not exceed 15 % of the total national production of that product in the Member State concerned; (d) provided that, for the quantity of products covered by such negotiations, the producer organisation concentrates supply and places the product of its members on the market; (e) provided that the producers concerned are not members of any other producer organisation which also negotiates such contracts on their behalf; (f) provided that the product in question is not covered by an obligation to supply arising from the producer's membership of a cooperative, which is not itself a member of the concerned producer organisation, in accordance with the conditions set out in the cooperative's statutes or the rules and decisions provided for in or derived from these statutes; and (g) provided that the producer organisation notifies the competent authorities of the Member State in which it operates of the quantity of production for each product covered by such negotiations. 3. For the purposes of this Article, references to producer organisations shall also include associations of such producer organisations recognised under Article 156(1). 4. For the purposes of applying point (c) of paragraph 2, the Commission shall publish for the products referred to in paragraph 1, by such means as it considers appropriate, the quantity of production in Member States. 5. By way of derogation from point (c) of paragraph 2, even where the thresholds set out therein are not exceeded, the competition authority referred to in the second subparagraph of this paragraph may decide in an individual case that a particular negotiation by the producer organisation should either be reopened or should not take place at all if it considers that this is necessary in order to prevent competition being excluded, or it finds that the product covered by the negotiations forms part of a separate market by virtue of the specific characteristics of the product or its intended use and that such collective negotiation would cover more than 15 % of the national production of such market, or if it finds that the objectives of Article 39 TFEU are jeopardised. For negotiations covering more than one Member State, the decision referred to in the first subparagraph shall be taken by the Commission without applying the procedure referred to in Article 229(2) or (3). In other cases, that decision shall be taken by the national competition authority of the Member State to which the negotiations relate. The decisions referred to in this paragraph shall not apply earlier than the date of their notification to the undertakings concerned. For the purposes of this Article, the definition of "national competition authority" in point (a) of Article 149(7) shall apply. 6. The Member States in which negotiations take place in accordance with this Article shall notify the Commission of the application of point (g) of paragraph 2 and paragraph 5.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The Financial Regulation 1 sets out the principles and procedures governing the establishment and implementation of the EU budget and the control of the EU funds. Over the last 30 years, the number of general financial rules contained in the Financial Regulation has increased sharply 2 . In addition, a number of sectoral financial rules have emerged: the rules for participation to the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation 3 , the Common Provisions to the European Structural and Investment Funds 4 and the Common Implementing Rules for the External Action 5 . Users of EU funds have repeatedly complained about the proliferation of rules both at general and at sectoral level, their heterogeneity and their complexity due to the fact that they follow the architecture of the programme and multiple layers of controls. In addition, the complexity of the financial set of rules has slowed down implementation of the EU funds, making it costly and prone to errors. A first step towards more coherent and simpler financial rules was achieved in 2012: the Commission tabled proposals for the programmes covered by the MFF 2014-2020 which reduced the number of programmes and instruments, grouped them under a single framework with common rules, simplified procedures for application and declaration of costs by final beneficiaries, facilitated the deployment of innovative financial instruments, enabled EU Trust-Funds and improved the cost-efficiency of controls. Recent revisions have aligned the Financial Regulation on the results of the negotiation to the MFF 2014-2020 (2013 revision) as well as to the new Procurement Directive (2015 revision). However, there is room for further simplification . This is confirmed by the experience gained since 2014 and by the work of the High Level Group of Independent Experts on Monitoring Simplification for Beneficiaries of the European Structural and Investment Funds 6 . The public consultation on the revision of the Financial Regulation 7 also shows stakeholders’ clear expectations in the area. Efforts must therefore continue in order to remove bottlenecks, ensure synergies and complementarities between ESI Funds and the other EU funds and improve efficiency of delivery and control requirements. Simpler and more flexible financial rules will contribute to optimising spending and impact of the MFF 2014-2020 and constitute as such one of the key elements of the Commission's initiative for a Budget Focused on Results (BFOR) which aims at making sure that resources are allocated to priorities and that every action delivers maximum performance and added value 8 . In addition, this will reduce the costs related to implementation of EU rules as well the number of errors. Simpler and more flexible EU financial rules are key in enhancing EU budget’s ability to adapt to changing circumstances and to respond to unexpected developments. The present legislative proposal forms an integral part of the mid-term review/revision of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) 2014-2020 9 . It contributes to two of its main objectives: simplification and flexibility . The Commission therefore proposes in a single act an ambitious revision of the general financial rules accompanied by corresponding changes to the sectorial financial rules set out in 15 legislative acts concerning multiannual programmes. The inclusion of sectoral changes in the same legislative proposal aims at ensuring a coherent negotiation process as well as at facilitating a speedy adoption by the legislator. The focus is put on the following key areas: 1 . Simplification for recipients of EU funds: many measures aim at simplifying life for recipients of EU funds. They relate to grants (removal of the non-cumulative award check for low-value grants and of the non-profit principle; simpler rules for "contribution in kind" valuation ; recognition of volunteer work ; grant awards without calls for proposal under specific conditions) and simplified forms of grants (Title VIII). 2 . From multi ple layers of controls to cross reliance on audit, assessment or authorisation, and harmonisation of reporting requirements: the aim of these measures is to encourage reliance as far as possible on one single audit, assessment or authorisation (conformity to State aids for instance), when the audit , assessment or authorisation meet s the necessary conditions to be taken into account in the EU system. More generally, rules for implementing partners (international organisations, EIB/EIF, national promotional banks, national agencies, NGOs) will be simplified by relying increasingly on their procedures and policies once assessed positively. Financial f ramework partnership agreements concluded with long term partners will allow progressing in the harmonisation of audit, reporting and other administrative requirements among donors (Title V Articles 122, 123 and 126). 3 . Allowing the application of only one set of rules to hybrid actions or in the case of combination of measures or instruments: the proposal aims at achieving further simplification for the partners of the EU by a number of measures to avoid the parallel application of different rules and procedures, notably through facilitating the combination of European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) funding with financial instruments and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (Title V). 4 . More effective use of financial instruments: optimise use of reflows, ensuring a level playing field among key EU implementing partners, reducing burdensome requirements related to publication of individual data of final recipients or to the exclusion criteria (Title X). 5 . More flexible budget management: the proposal sets out several ways for more budgetary flexibility, in order to allow the Union to respond to unforeseen challenges and new tasks more effectively and to achieve swifter crisis management - among which the creation of a " flexibility cushion" for unforeseen needs and new crises in the external actions geographic instruments budget , a more efficient activation of the solidarity and globalization adjustment funds, and the extension of Trust-Funds to internal policies (Articles 14 and 22 7 ) , the creation of a EU crisis reserve with the reuse of decommitted appropriations, and for the next Multiannual Financial Framework, the possibility that financial operations other than financial instruments generate a contingent liability for the Union exceeding the financial assets provided to cover the financial liability of the Union (Article 203) and the creation of a common provisioning fund holding the resources provisioned for financial operations (Article 2 05 ). R ecent initiatives (such as the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) or the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD)), have indeed shown the need to fully use the leverage of the EU budget by creating non-provisioned contingent liabilities. Title X sets the framework to authorise, manage and control these financial risks. 6 . F ocus on results and streamlining of reporting: a stronger focus on results through lump sums, prizes, payment based on output and results rather than on reimbursement of costs, payment against conditions to be fulfilled (Article 121, Title X III ). This should contribute to further reducing the costs of implementing EU funds as well as the number of errors. On the reporting side, reports are regrouped around the draft budget and the integrated financial reporting package, in order to increase efficiency and transparency both towards the general public and the budgetary authority (Articles 39 and 23 9 -24 5 ). 7. Simpler and leaner EU administration: facilitating agreements or delegations between Institutions or bodies in order to pool the implementation of administrative appropriations in European Offices or within Executive Agencies (Articles 57, 58, 64, 65 and 6 8 ); merging consultative panels competent for financial irregularities (Article 73 (6)) with the EDES panel (Article 139 ) and moving from annual to multiannual financing decisions (Article 10 8 ). 8. Providing possibility for citizen engagement : t he proposal provides a possibility for citizens to be consulted on the implementation of the Union budget by the Commission, Member States and any other entity implementing the Union budget (А rticle 54 ) . In simplifying and making EU financial rules more flexible, the present proposal paves the way for the preparation of the next generation of spending programmes (post-2020).
Revised version (Article 171 Contractual negotiations for certain arable crops):
1. A producer organisation which is recognised under Article 152(1) and which pursues one or more of the objectives of concentrating supply, the placing on the market of the products produced by its members and optimising production costs, may negotiate on behalf of its members, in respect of part or all of the aggregate production of their members, contracts for the supply of one or more of the following products not intended for sowing and in the case of barley not intended for malting: (a) common wheat falling within CN code ex 1001 99 00 ; (b) barley falling within CN code ex 1003 90 00 ; (c) maize falling within CN code 1005 90 00 ; (d) rye falling within CN code 1002 90 00 ; (e) durum wheat falling within CN code 1001 19 00 ; (f) oats falling within CN code 1004 90 00 ; (g) triticale falling within CN code ex 1008 60 00 ; (h) rapeseed falling within CN code ex 12 05 ; (i) sunflower seed falling within CN code ex 1206 00 ; (j) soya beans falling within CN code 1201 90 00 ; (k) field beans falling within CN codes ex 07 08 and ex 07 13 ; (l) field peas falling within CN codes ex 07 08 and ex 07 13 . A producer organisation fulfils the objectives mentioned in this paragraph provided that the pursuit of those objectives leads to the integration of activities and such integration is likely to generate significant efficiencies so that the activities of the producer organisation overall contribute to the fulfilment of the objectives of Article 39 TFEU. This could be realised provided that: (a) the producer organisation carries out at least one of the following activities: (i) joint distribution, including joint selling platform or joint transportation; (ii) joint promotion; (iii) joint organising of quality control; (iv) joint use of equipment or storage facilities; (v) joint procurement of inputs: (b) these activities are significant in terms of quantity of the product concerned and in terms of cost of the production and placing of the product on the market. 2. The negotiations by the recognised producer organisation may take place: (a) whether or not there is a transfer of ownership by the producers to the producer organisation; (b) whether or not the price negotiated is the same as regards the aggregate production of some or all of the members; (c) provided that, for each product referred to in paragraph 1 and for a particular producer organisation, the quantity of production covered by such negotiations which is produced in any particular Member State does not exceed 15 % of the total national production of that product in the Member State concerned; (d) provided that, for the quantity of products covered by such negotiations, the producer organisation concentrates supply and places the product of its members on the market; (e) provided that the producers concerned are not members of any other producer organisation which also negotiates such contracts on their behalf; (f) provided that the product in question is not covered by an obligation to supply arising from the producer's membership of a cooperative, which is not itself a member of the concerned producer organisation, in accordance with the conditions set out in the cooperative's statutes or the rules and decisions provided for in or derived from these statutes; and (g) provided that the producer organisation notifies the competent authorities of the Member State in which it operates of the quantity of production for each product covered by such negotiations. 3. For the purposes of this Article, references to producer organisations shall also include associations of such producer organisations recognised under Article 156(1). 4. For the purposes of applying point (c) of paragraph 2, the Commission shall publish for the products referred to in paragraph 1, by such means as it considers appropriate, the quantity of production in Member States. 5. By way of derogation from point (c) of paragraph 2, even where the thresholds set out therein are not exceeded, the competition authority referred to in the second subparagraph of this paragraph may decide in an individual case that a particular negotiation by the producer organisation should either be reopened or should not take place at all if it considers that this is necessary in order to prevent competition being excluded, or it finds that the product covered by the negotiations forms part of a separate market by virtue of the specific characteristics of the product or its intended use and that such collective negotiation would cover more than 15 % of the national production of such market, or if it finds that the objectives of Article 39 TFEU are jeopardised. For negotiations covering more than one Member State, the decision referred to in the first subparagraph shall be taken by the Commission without applying the procedure referred to in Article 229(2) or (3). In other cases, that decision shall be taken by the national competition authority of the Member State to which the negotiations relate. The decisions referred to in this paragraph shall not apply earlier than the date of their notification to the undertakings concerned. For the purposes of this Article, the definition of "national competition authority" in point (a) of Article 149(7) shall apply. 6. The Member States in which negotiations take place in accordance with this Article shall notify the Commission of the application of point (g) of paragraph 2 and paragraph 5.