After the European Member States reached an agreement on the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) on October 23, the European Parliament also voted a few days later. The decision was a loss for several 'green' parties. That is why they continue to call for a review of the CAP today.
The so-called 'trilogue negotiations' between the European agricultural ministers, the European Parliament and the European Commission on the renewed Common Agricultural Policy started on Monday, November 9. These appear to be tough weeks, given the reports that the European Commission wants to go further than the European Council and the European Parliament. "I am somewhat disappointed that the Council and Parliament do not have more ambitions and that they are sticking to an agricultural policy that is not sustainable," European Commissioner Frans Timmermans told media channel ARD earlier this week.
'Little room for greening'
European Commissioner Timmermans is supported by a group of 12 Dutch nature and environmental organizations, including Milieudefensie, Natuurmonumenten and Greenpeace. That's why they gave him one on Tuesday, November 10 open letter sent. In it, the parties write that in the renewed CAP, for which an annual budget of €59 billion is reserved, too little room is made for greening. They want the future CAP to be better aligned with the Green Deal that the European Commission previously presented. "With the arrival of your Green Deal, you gave us hope. The hope that Europe will finally choose to take 'the green path'," the parties write.
"Unfortunately, the agriculture ministers and the European Parliament have deeply disappointed us. Their commitment to a new CAP has made it painfully clear that no room is being made for the necessary greening," the parties continue. The nature and environmental organizations write that efforts are being made to intensify and that farmers are being forced to ignore biodiversity. "That is at odds with the plans in the Green Deal." This conclusion is also drawn by GroenLinks. "The European Commission previously said that it has the Green Deal as its main priority. If they take these words seriously, there must be a serious green agricultural policy," says Bas Eickhout. Both GroenLinks and the nature organizations argue that it is impossible to achieve all set climate and biodiversity goals in this way.
Where the 12 environmental and nature organizations turn to Timmermans, throws Green Left it takes a different tack. They, together with 39 'green' MEPs, address the President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen. "The agricultural sector urgently needs to become more sustainable. That is why it is crucial that agricultural money is used optimally. There are good basic requirements that farmers must meet in order to receive a subsidy, such as creating space for nature and minimal use of crop protection products."
What is the chance of change?
What is clear is that the wedge between 'pro' and 'anti' has grown considerably after the agreement of the European member states. But the chance that the green parties will get their way seems very small. The European Commission has already announced that it will not reverse the reform of the CAP (and the agreements concluded within it). Agriculture Minister Carola Schouten also believes that it is a step in the right direction. "The Netherlands would have liked to go further and I do not hide the fact that I had hoped for more ambition, but as so often in Europe, you have to make compromises." And that is something that the aforementioned parties seem to have difficulty with.
The only 'real' point of discussion is the allocation of the direct income support. The European member states advocate that 20% of this income support be reserved for farmers who make efforts to benefit the environment, climate or nature. Parliament wants the percentage to be set at 30%. In short: if the green parties want to make some gains somewhere, it is in this area. However, the ideal of reserving 50% of subsidies for eco schemes that contribute to ecological recovery appears to be and will remain a dream scenario.