Latest news with #SingleNationalPlan
Euractiv
19 hours ago
- Business
- Euractiv
Five things to know about the EU's next farm fund
The European Commission's planned revamp of the EU's long-term budget is stirring uncertainty across many sectors, but especially among farmers, who remain the biggest recipients of EU money. Here's what we know so far about how the budget, known as the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), will influence the next Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), with an announcement expected on 16 July. The two-pillar structure Early drafts of the EU budget reform explored merging CAP funds into a flexible "Single National Plan" alongside cohesion instruments. But EU Agriculture Commissioner Hansen said on Wednesday that the Commission's intention to maintain income support for farmers – the policy's first pillar – remains very clear. Farmers' main concern has been that rural development money – the second pillar – would be forced to compete with cohesion funds. According to Jan Olbrycht, a special adviser to EU Budget Commissioner Piotr Serafin, that risk now appears off the table. 'We have the CAP, which probably will be separated with the two pillars… The plot that the rural development can go to cohesion policy is over, is finished,' he said at the Committee of the Regions last week. The real uncertainty now is how much money will go into the second pillar and whether it will be ring-fenced or remain vulnerable to reallocation. Hansen has repeatedly defended preserving the current two-pillar structure. At a meeting with EU agriculture ministers in Warsaw and again this week at the Committee of the Regions, he made it clear that scrapping the two-pillar setup would be a mistake. 'It would be unwise to throw overboard this toolbox,' he said. More power to the capitals Since the last CAP reform, national governments have taken on a bigger role in shaping farm policy through their own strategic plans – a role that's expected to grow after 2027. Speaking at an event this week, Gijs Schilthuis, director for sustainability at the Commission's Directorate-General for Agriculture (DG AGRI), said the Commission wanted to give member states more flexibility to tailor green rules and incentives to local realities. The Commission's May simplification package already proposed giving national governments more room to revise their CAP national plans. Dedicated but decimated? While the overall MFF remains under pressure, the CAP is still expected to receive a 'dedicated budget,' Hansen told Euractiv on Wednesday. According to Olbrycht , the CAP budget will "for sure not be bigger," and farming policy is unlikely to be spared from cuts. Sources consulted by Euractiv suggest that CAP funding could fall by 15-20%, depending on how the budget reallocation is handled. With limited options – raising national contributions, creating new EU own resources, or cutting programmes – some pressure on agricultural funding seems inevitable. Timing There's also uncertainty around timing. The current CAP is implemented through three regulations: the national strategic plans, the Common Market Organisation (CMO), and the horizontal regulation. Last year, Hansen proposed targeted changes to the CMO to boost farmers' bargaining power in the food chain. Work on the file is still ongoing. Meanwhile, the recently proposed CAP simplification package includes amendments to both the national strategic plans and the horizontal regulation – and these, too, are still being discussed. It remains unclear how the Commission intends to launch a broader CAP reform while parts of the existing legislation are being negotiated. According to multiple sources, the 16 July MFF package will likely include a regulation on the single fund, with a CAP chapter outlining basic new elements in the national strategic plans and horizontal regulation. CMO amendments could follow later in autumn. In that case, a full-blown overhaul of the CAP looks increasingly unlikely. From sticks to carrots With the Green Deal and Farm to Fork effectively buried, environmental conditions are no longer expected to be central to the post-2027 CAP. Many of the eco-requirements once placed on farmers were scaled back or scrapped in 2024 in an effort to reduce red tape. Hansen has made no secret of the shift. The next CAP, he said, will focus on incentives rather than penalties – a pivot from stick to carrot. It's not a revolution, he said at the Committee of the Regions, but an "evolution" – likely building on the May simplification package. In his view, CAP funds should target 'those most in need' – namely young, new, and small farmers. But shifting more money toward these groups would require cuts elsewhere, he added. The solution, he argues, would be to cap payments to the largest farms and introduce stronger 'degressivity' – where payouts decrease as the amount of farm aid increases. His proposal is already dividing the EU's main farming groups. Jeremias Lin contributed reporting. (adm, de)
Euractiv
a day ago
- Politics
- Euractiv
Von der Leyen's centralisation will kill the European project
This year marks the 75th anniversary of the Schuman declaration: "Europe will not be made all at once, or according to a single plan. It will be built through concrete achievements which first create a de facto solidarity." Those words still resonate today for those working to make the European Union project a beacon of hope, trust, and confidence in a better future. As social democrats, we believe that this vision is at stake. The new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), expected in two weeks, will determine whether the European Union remains a project of unity, a project that brings together and closer all the different parts of our continent, a project built on multi-level governance, subsidiarity and partnership—or whether it drifts toward centralisation and top-down control, ultimately alienating the Union from its people and territories. The MFF is not just a budget. It is the blueprint of Europe's political ambition. This is why, as leaders of the progressive groups in the two European institutions that represent the people – the European Parliament and the European Committee of the Regions –we have communicated to the President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen our deep concerns over the governance of the next MFF. This is not merely a technical exercise, it is about the very essence of our European Union project. The way we will govern the EU's long-term budget speaks volume about the kind of Union we want to be. Whether regions get the funding they need, whether workers are supported, whether no one is left behind - all of this depends on how the EU chooses to design and govern its long-term budget. Simplification and flexibility are welcome, but they must not lead to further recentralisation or renationalisation of European policies. We will not accept any change to the successful multilevel governance management of EU structural funds. While the language has evolved since the internal documents leaked in October last year, from a "Single National Plan" to "National and Regional Partnership Plans", improved semantics do not reduce the risks. If regions lose their role, Europe loses its uniqueness and the reason why this project has remained strong. In the upcoming long-term budget, the role of regions in managing future cohesion policy and rural development funds remains unclear. If future regulations strip sub-national authorities of their ability to manage regional programs under shared management, this jeopardizes the place-based approach in the cohesion policy and the future common agricultural policy that is essential to their success. We understand the need of flexibility and simplification. However, we firmly believe that they must not lead to further recentralisation or renationalisation of European policies. It is also crucial that these changes are paired with predictability for managing authorities and beneficiaries to preserve the added value of cohesion policy, which is intrinsically linked to its long-term perspective. For the future cohesion policy, we could support a new common provision regulation that covers all funds under shared management, but regions need to know beforehand how much support they will receive to build their strategies. Pre-allocated funds are essential for the long-term dimension of cohesion policy. If the new National and Regional Partnership Plans are to work, they should include regional or sub-national programmes' chapters, while managing authorities must be empowered to negotiate directly with the European Commission. Their territorial expertise is essential to designing effective, place-based policies. Also, the reforms associated with these programs should be directly tied to investment made at local and regional level to enhance their effectiveness. We must learn from the failures of the recentralisation of European policies. When local and regional authorities are ignored, investment becomes blind to territorial realities and people's concrete needs. Rather than portraying single national plans per member state and payment against reforms as the model to follow, we should be honest about its shortcomings and build something better: European policies that are built for people's needs, wherever they live. The post-2027 budget is not just another cycle; it is Europe's moment of truth. In an era of polycrises, growing discontent and mistrust, we must show that the European Union can listen, evolve, and deliver. We remain firm in our commitment to a European Union that is shaped by the people and for the people, that brings people and places together, not just in words but in action. That was the spirit of the Schuman Declaration. That must be the spirit of Europe's future. Luca Menesini is the President of the Party of the European Socialists Group in the European Committee of the Regions, and Iratxe García Pérez is the President of the S&D Group in the European Parliament.
