Report to the Council on the Report to the Council on the implementation of the cross-implementation of the cross-
compliance systemcompliance system
Aymeric Berling European Commission, DG Agriculture and Rural Development
April 2007
2
Overview :
Cross Compliance in summary Background Political statements Problems identified Some figures Proposals Next steps
3
Cross compliance in summary:
•Statutory Management Requirements (SMRs)
•Good Agricultural and Environmental Condition (GAEC)
4
SMRs: environment
Wild birds
HabitatsGroundwater
Sewage Sludge
Nitrates
Surface water Surface water and and
GroundwaterGroundwater
SoilSoil Nature Nature protectionprotection
5
SMRs: sanitary and veterinary legislation
Animal identification and registration
Plant protection products General Food Law Animal welfare
Hormone banAnimal diseases
notification
Animal Id. Animal Id.
Plant healthPlant healthPublic healthPublic health Animal Animal
health and health and welfarewelfare
6
GAEC: 4 issues, 11 standards
Unwanted vegetation
Olive groves
Minimum soil cover
Soil organic Soil organic mattermatter
Minimum Minimum level level
maintenancemaintenance
Livestock stocking rates
Permanent pasture
Soil structureSoil structureSoil erosionSoil erosion
Retention landscape features
Crops rotations
Arable stubblemanagement
Appropriatemachinery useMinimum land
management
Retain terraces
7
Background Article 8 of Council Regulation (EC) No
1782/2003 : « By 31 December 2007 at the latest, the
Commission shall submit a report on the application of the system of cross-compliance accompanied, if necessary, by appropriate proposals notably with the view of amending the list of statutory management requirements set out in Annex III. »
8
Background
Cross-compliance has started in 2005 During the 2 first years of application a
number of questions have been raised In order to tackle these questions in due
time the decision has been taken to present the report in early 2007 to the Council, under the German presidency
9
Political statements
The report contains a number of political statements, based on the EU legislative framework:– Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003– Commission Regulation (EC) No
796/2004
10
Political statements Definition of cross compliance: “Cross-compliance creates a link between
– the full payment of support, and – compliance with certain rules relating to
agricultural land and to agricultural production and activity in the areas of the environment, public, animal and plant health, animal welfare and good agricultural and environmental condition.”
11
Political statements
Definition of cross compliance: “This link is expressed in concrete terms in
the possibility, if the rules are not respected, of full or partial reductions of certain EU agricultural payments. The reductions shall be based on the severity, the extent, the permanence, the repetition and the intentionality of the non-compliance.“
12
Political statements
Objectives of cross compliance: “The first objective is to contribute to the
development of sustainable agriculture. This is achieved through the respect by the farmer of the rules relating to the relevant aspects of cross-compliance.”
13
Political statements
Objectives of cross compliance: “The second objective is to make the CAP
more compatible with the expectations of society at large. There is now a growing body of opinion that agricultural payments should no longer be granted to farmers who fail to comply with basic rules in certain important areas of public policy.“
14
Political statements
Objectives of cross compliance:
“Achieving these two objectives will help to ensure the CAP's future .“
15
Political statements
Payments concerned by cross compliance:– All direct payments - decoupled or coupled -
under the first pillar of the CAP (the payments listed in Annex I to Council Regulation (EC) N° 1782/2003)
16
Political statements Payments concerned by cross
compliance:– Eight measures under "Axis 2" of the second
pillar of the CAP (listed in Council Regulation (EC) N°1698/2005)
• Agri-environment payments; • Natural handicap payments to farmers in mountain areas; • Payments to farmers in areas with handicaps, other than mountain areas; • Natura 2000 payments on agricultural land and payments linked to Directive
2000/60/EC (the Water Framework Directive); • Animal welfare payments; • First afforestation of agricultural land; • Natura 2000 payments on forestry land; • Forest-environment payments.
17
Political statements
Scope of cross compliance:– Statutory Management Requirements
(SMRs)• They do not create new obligations to
farmers since the legal texts existed previously
• Most of them are Directives which implies a degree of variation in the implementation between Member states
18
Political statements Scope of cross compliance:
– Good Agricultural and Environmental Condition (GAEC) : standards
• The concept and the obligations are not new to many farmers (good farming practices, etc.)
• Member states have to define obligations at farm level, where appropriate, for all standards listed in the EU framework (Annex IV of Regulation No 1782/2003)
19
Political statements
Scope of cross compliance:– Good Agricultural and Environmental
Condition (GAEC) : maintenance of the ratio of permanent pasture
20
Political statements Given the discussion during the start up phase
and the sensitivity of this topic, the Commission is willing to propose immediate solutions to the problems identified so far
There is however no question to water down the system
Every effort should be made to improve the acceptance of cross compliance, for the benefit of all
21
Political statements Subsidiarity is an underlying principle to
address the local risk and constraints and take into account the organisation in each Member state
However there is a need to ensure a level playing field for farmers, through a common legal framework
Striking the appropriate balance is one of the most important challenge of the system
22
Problems identified From the farmers view From the national authorities view From the Commission view
23
Problems identified from the farmer view
Volume and technical nature of the information
Obligations sometimes new Feeling of “double sanction” On-the-spot checks long and burdensome No exemption of reduction for minor non-
compliances
24
Problems identified from the national administrations view Difficulties to inform farmers of their
obligations Difficulties to organise the control system
(co-ordination of bodies, of controls, taking into account existing systems, reporting, etc)
Concept sometimes difficult to handle (what is an infringement, intentionality, etc)
Problems of interpretation of the EU legislation
25
Problems identified from the Commission view Information given to farmer sometimes not
concrete enough Member States choice in the organisation of
controls sometimes raising difficulties, in particular for the designation of the Competent Control Authority
Some obligations were not checked Reduction matrices sometimes designed at a
very low level
26
Some figures (2005, rounded) 5% of farmers receiving direct payments
have been checked on-the-spot (240 898 checks)
12% of these checked farmers have been applied a reduction (mostly for the I&R of animals and the GAEC)
68% of these applied reduction were at the minimum level of 1%
27
Proposals from the Commission
To tackle horizontal problems which can be solved at EU level
Keeping the right balance between a common level playing field between Member states and farmers and the need for flexibility to address the local constraints
31
Proposals from the Commission
Increase of control rates following high level of non-compliances limited to the concerned area of cross compliance (and no other areas)
33
Proposals from the Commission Clarify the selection, the timing, the elements and the reporting of on-the-spot checks
34
Proposals from the Commission
Taking into account the Farm Advisory System (FAS)The FAS is a fundamental tool to implement cross compliance
37
Proposals from the Commission
Phasing-in period for the introduction of SMRs under cross compliance for MS applying the SAPSThe 8 MSs applying the SAPS will introduce the SMRs along the same 3 steps as other MSs, as from 2009BG and RO will introduce the SMRs along the same 3 steps as other MSs, as from 2012
38
Next steps Discussion at the Council and the European
parliament on the report. Conclusions foreseen in June.
39
Next steps Discussion at the Council and the European
parliament on a draft Council Regulation on :– The 10 month rule– The phasing-in of SMRS for MSs applying
SAPS Provisions to be implemented as from 2008
40
Next steps Discussion at the Management Committee for
Direct Payments on implementing rules regarding the management and control.
Provisions to be implemented as from 2008
41
Next steps
Further discussions with the Member States to allow sharing “best practices” and comparing experience
42
Next steps Changes to the scope of cross compliance will
be addressed in the “Health Check” The Commission has committed to foresee a
realistic timetable for the inclusion of any new or changed requirements into the scope of cross compliance