Key Benefits:
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 383 /X
" Recommend to the European Parliament the adoption of a set of
measures to be inserted in the Proposal for a Council Regulation laying down rules
common for the direct support scheme for farmers under the CAP and
establishes certain support schemes for farmers "
The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) will be perhaps one of the community policies more
controversial, for being sometimes inductive of inequalities and injustices between countries,
regions and farmers of the European space, but at the same time it is one of the most
important and necessary, given the heterogeneity of territories, the differential of
endogenous potentials in the countries of the Union, the diversity and specificity of productions,
and the differences between the distinct organizational cultures.
The longevity of the CAP also proves its printability, its ability to
adaptation to serve a Community in paulatine growth, in time to
social and economic changes on a global scale.
On the other hand, the competitiveness of European agriculture faces today, new and
complex challenges, which have to do with the security of supplies, the quality
food, environmental sustainability, climate change, renewable energy,
and the maintenance of a dynamic and diversified economy in rural territories, in
coherence with the objectives reaffirmed in the Treaty of Lisbon, and which contributes to the
social and territorial cohesion of the European space.
We still live the vicissitudes of a globalised economy, with a number
significant from emerging countries to present high GDP growth rates,
accompanied by sharp increases in the consumption of raw materials, and that in the sector
agricultural if they have translated into imbalances between supply and demand for goods
food, contributing to a spectacular inflation of the same.
The CAP 'health check' becomes therefore urgent, and a requirement of the new
times, in a European Union to 27, for the CAP to remain a policy of the
present and from the future, able to evaluate your instruments and test the respective
health, identifying the adjustments needed to respond to its
goals and adapt to new challenges.
From this assessment also results in the understanding of the maintenance of some measures, the
its deepening, and also, the suppression of some others.
One of the most controversial and mediatically most discussed aspects of the CAP has to do
with the direct payments, of which the single payment scheme (RPU) is emphasized.
In 2003, direct payments were applied in the sector of arable crops, das
beef and sheep meat, and dairy products, and in 2004, for the olive oil sectors,
of cotton and tobacco, and sugar sectors (2006), fruit and vegetables
(2007).
Direct aids have reshaping diverse forms, along the Agricultural Politics
Common, and they should naturally be the subject of adjustments today.
But it is appropriate to emphasize, at a time of redefinition of policies, that the
direct payments are indispensable, as a basic guarantee of income, no
only in the case of the failing market, as also for the supply of goods
public by farmers, and as compensation for the levels of environmental protection,
food security, traceability, and animal welfare.
But production-indexed aids, have had their time, and they are well known to their
consequences and disturbances. In the markets, in the environment, and later on in the own
income of the producers. Produce excess goods, without market, for the purpose of
allowance, how many times at an expense of the ecossiteme, is model with no return hypothesis.
Dissociating the aids from production, it seems to us without a doubt to correspond to a solution
better suited, through a model that maintains a base support, that allows for more
freedom to the farmer to orient himself towards market objectives, i.e., to produce
what you understand that the market will buy you and do not produce intensively because
there is a matching allowance, even if the product has no market.
But the total shutdown will be all the more correct to the extent that it uses a
instrument that obrives the farmer to be a true farmer and not a mere
owner. That is, the farmer should have to produce, create employment, to receive the
help. It will produce the goods you understand, the goods that correspond to your idea of
business.
CAP should contribute more and more to prevent degradation risks
environmental, ensure the supply of public goods expected by our societies,
since, through conditionality, support for producers now depends on the
respect of standards in the environment, public health, safety and quality
of the food and welfare of the animals.
The
It is also understood as very important the strengthening of the development policy
rural, the 2º pillar of the CAP. A reinforcement that contributes to the protection of the environment and the
rural landscapes, be a source of growth, employment and innovation in rural areas,
in particular in the mountain and outermost regions, depopulated or highly
dependent on agriculture.
Understood by this, the European Commission to propose a set of interim measures
that resulted from the " health examination " already mentioned, measures such that they want to
establish new specific rules, on subjects that are listed
community inserted in the following diplomas:
-Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of September 29, 2003, which
establishes common rules for direct support schemes in the framework of policy
common agricultural and establish certain support schemes for farmers,
-Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of October 22, 2007, which
establishes a common organization of agricultural markets and provisions
specific to certain agricultural products ("Single CMO" Regulation),
For its part, the European Parliament (EP), has been broadly debating the Proposal
of Council Regulation, " which sets out common rules for support schemes
direct to farmers within the framework of the common agricultural policy and establish certain
support schemes for farmers ", which Mrs. European Commissioner of Agriculture
presented, preparing for a debate and final approval in Plenary of the EP.
Having still taken into consideration the " PROTOCOL ON THE ROLE OF
NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION ", published in the Journal
Official of the European Union on 12/16/2004, which is grounded in the desire to encourage
a greater participation of the National Parliaments in the activities of the European Union and
strengthen their ability to express their views on draft acts
European legislatures and other issues that for them may rewear special interest,
the Assembly of the Republic understand duty to take a position in the form of Project
of Resolution to be sent to the European Parliament, about this interim review of the CAP,
of vital importance for the future of sustainable Portuguese agriculture.
II
Taking all these desiderata into consideration, it matters to make the point of the situation of the
Reform of CAP 2003, appreciate the diagnosis contained in your "health check" and
contribute to a better fine-tuning of the instruments that the EP and the European Council
prepare to approve, of which it stands out:
1-Single payment scheme-RPU
Simplification. One of the priorities has been to improve and simplify legislation. The
PAC tried to varnish by this route by transferring most of the direct payments
to farmers for the single-payer scheme, managing to partially reduce the
bureaucracy. It is noted, however, that simplification is still very much needed,
both in the issue of conditionality, and in the partial shutdown.
Conditionality. The CAP reform of 2003 introduced conditionality in the RPU,
conditioning such payment to environmental legislation, safety of the
food and animal welfare.
Also in this field the simplification becomes important, needing better what is
priority in environmental matters, such as the water issue for example, and the conditions
environmental of agricultural land in production phase or not, and should still be included
as an element of conditionality the issue of hygiene and safety at the site of
work.
Dissociated Support. The payment of direct aid by values indexed to the historical
of 3 years of reference, chosen without prior knowledge of the farmer, constitutes
a bureaucratic, random measure, which in many cases penalises the farmer. The
passage to a territorial base model can make the system fairer,
especially if you are added the employment factor.
Supplementary payments. Granting Member States the possibility to use
up to 5% additional of its national maximum limits to finance insurance of
harvests and mutual funds, so as to ensure proper financing of the system
of risks and crises.
Modulation . With the reform of 2003, a mandatory modulation has been agreed for
all EU Member States-15, starting in 2005 a at a rate of 3%,
increased to 4% in 2006 and 5% as of 2007. A further introduction was also introduced
plateau of EUR 5000, below which no reduction is applied
direct payments.
Modulation is justifiable as an instrument of financing development
rural. The progressive modulation to be applied according to a progressive rate, has
also full justification since it is only fair that beneficiaries who receive the most
contribute to that goal.
It seems to us however that the limit in force of the 5000 euros should be reviewed and
updated upwards, as well as the creation of a maximum roof for the payment of
aid, given the competitive ability of organisations with a dimension to enjoy
direct aid of 300,000, 400,000 or 500,000 euro.
The criterion for redistribution of monies from the new progressive modulation,
is expected to be in line with what is applied to the mandatory modulation already in place.
Minimum limits. The Commission proposes the establishment of a minimum limit of
250€/ano or of 1ha from which small farmers are prevented from receiving
direct supports, invoking the high costs and the bureaucracy associated with the
processing of the supports.
It is incomprehensible this provision. Exclude small and very small farmers, the
great custodians of the environment and biodiversity, farmers of products
traditional, generally affections to varieties of endogenous genetic heritage, is a
unjustifiable error.
We are still adding to the fact that we are entering a new paradigm of goods production
essential food, to remain the rarefaction of supply in international markets,
which will inevitably bring, in less developed economies, the revaluation of the
small and very small family farming, as a producer of goods
for themselves and for the local community, and promoter of the maintenance of people in the
rural territories.
It is recalled that the farmers receiving up to 250 € represent about 31% of the
total universe to which corresponds to only 0.84% of the payments.
With all the administrative agility they will be able to spend equal amounts or
lower than 500€/ano, paid out of 2 in 2 years, with payment in the first year.
2-Common Market Organization
Mechanisms of Intervention in the Market . Which should be kept whenever it is
judged necessary, to provide security, to avoid speculation, and an abrupt low of the
prices, not least in some commercially more sensitive agricultural products, such as the
soft wheat, for example.
Suppression of the Withdrawal From Lands of Production . It is the situation of the market that the
advises. They should however be placed at the disposal of Member States
appropriate instruments to ensure that the current environmental benefits of withdrawal,
can be kept.
Milk Quotas . Its suppression constitutes one of the most polemical measures and the
same time, difficult, for the defence of national interests, in the context of the forums
Europeans, currently dominated by a liberalizing trend.
In 1984, milk quotas were introduced as a response to overproduction. The
current situation is different. The market has already experienced grace periods of
offer, and there are a significant number of countries that do not occupy their quota.
The Commission, giving as it acquired the end of quotas in 2015, by imperative
previously approved regulatory, suggests progressive transitional measures of
quota suppression so as to arrive at a market without quotas in 2015.
Given the specificities of the sector in our country, the constraints derived from the
higher context costs in our dairy regions, with no conditions for a
total mitigation, with particular emphasis on the Autonomous Region of the Azores, the attitude
should be another.
Monitor the evolution of the European and world dairy market, implement increases
of quota 1% per year, provided that the supply / demand ratio allows it to, in a way to avoid
disturbances in the sustainability of the Portuguese dairy sector, and finally make a
new point of the situation in 2010.
Private Storage. It's a measure that makes perfect sense given the randomness of the
market, support a storage mechanism that includes the milk powder, butter,
production of casein, as well as veal, and other meats, according to the
evolution of markets.
Restitution to Export of Cereals . Taking into consideration the current situation of the
market and the outlook for the coming years, it makes sense to suppress this subsidy,
as a way to strengthen the European supply, and solidarity with the
countries in development routes.
Management of Risks and Crises. The system of risks and crises proposed by the Commission rests
in crop insurance and mutualistic funds, being important for their character
preventative.
3-Rural Development Policy.
New Challenges. With budgetary limitations set until 2013, the reinforcement of the
appropriations allocated to rural development programmes will have to be fed to the
mandatory modulation.
Climate change, renewable energy, water management and biodiversity
should be mandatory references to accompany the enhancement of employability and the
rural social fabric in the development of rural territories, the funding of which should
come from the additional funds arising from the new modulation, plafonment, and the
new mechanism introduced in Article 68º.
Additional measures regarding the use of solar, wind and solar energy are still proposed
geothermal, improvement of waste management and reuse of materials, management of risks
of floods, promotion of innovation and transfer of knowledge.
Reinforcement to the First Installation of Young Farmers. Given the ageing of the
active agricultural population and the depopulation to which it is seen in many regions
european, and still taking into consideration the paradigm shift in the role that the
agriculture will play in the coming times, as an indispensable activity for
the production of increasingly scarce food goods, for the defence of the environment, of the
ecosystems and biodiversity, it is essential to attract youth to the production
agricultural, being adjusted to increase support for the first installation of young farmers.
III
Taking into consideration the above exposed, the Assembly of the Republic resolves, under
of the regimental and regulatory normatives in force, recommend to Parliament
European, which in the interim review of the CAP:
a) Valorize the respect for compliance with the standards of hygiene and safety in the
work, and the employability factor in the allocation of direct aid.
b) Isent of the application of the beneficiaries modulation receiving less than 7,000
euro, set a ceiling on direct aid allocation, and establish a
rate of progressive modulation indexed to the financial amount receivable.
c) Keep the criteria for redistribution of the monies resulting from the new
progressive modulation, similar to those that apply in modulation
mandatory
d) Keep the aid to farmers with less than 1 ha, or less than 250 € /
year.
e) Permits the retention up to 10% of the national envelopes by the States-
Members, to use in specific support programmes for sectors in
difficulty, and to transfer part of these monies to rural development
without recourse to co-financing.
f) Permits retention up to 5% of national envelopes to finance systems of
risk management and crises, and may transfer to the 2º pillar the monies
remnants, without co-financing.
g) Monitor the evolution of the dairy markets, increase the quotas by 1% per
year, if the offer ratio / seeks to recommend it, and prepare a reassessment of the
policy measures for the milk sector, for 2010.
h) Obrig Member States to use at least 50% of the monies
transferred from the 1º to the 2º pillar, in actions related to the new challenges:
climate change, biodiversity, renewable energy, resource management
water.
i) Eleve from 55,000 to 75,000 € the amount to be allocated for the installation of
young farmers ..
Lisbon, September 26, 2008
THE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIALIST PARTY