CAP simplification EESC, NAT section meeting 2 September 2015 Jerzy PLEWA Director-General DG Agriculture & Rural Development

Outline 2 A.Simplification – the overall context B.What has happened so far? C.Next steps

3  Political context  Mandate Commissioner Hogan  AGRI context A. Simplification – the overall context

2013 comprehensive reform  Certain elements more complicated as a result of political compromise  Increased flexibility for MS  Political context 4

5 Net result = total transfer from pillar I to pillar II of EUR 3 billion over 6 years (possible review in 2017 for the years 2018 and 2019) Flexibility between pillars 9 MS to cap (100% reduction) the amounts of basic payments at max amounts ranging from KEUR 150 to KEUR MS to only apply the minimum reduction of 5% on amounts above KEUR MS will subtract the salaries actually paid by farmers before applying the reduction of payments' mechanism Reduction of payments Share of DP envelope for basic payment at EU-28 level estimated at 55% The 10 MS currently applying the SAPS will maintain it until MS to regionalise the BPS (EL, ES, FI, DE, UK, FR) Basic Payment All MS but DE to implement VCS MS' plans for VCS = 10% of total DP envelope for EU 28 in 2015; 18 sectors; 258 measures Sectors mostly supported: Beef and veal, Milk and dairy products, Sheep and goatmeat, Protein crops Voluntary Coupled support 9 MS to implement the redistributive payment (6 of them will not apply the reduction of payments) Only 1 MS (DK) to implement the 1st pillar payment for ANC 15 MS to implement the SFS but only 2 in the form of a lump-sum equal for all farmers (LV, PT) Other voluntary schemes Implementation MS - Direct payments

6 Implementation MS – Direct payments (2) Share of DP envelope left for basic payment at EU-28 level in 2015 = 55%

Food chain organisation, animal welfare, risk management Food chain organisation, animal welfare, risk management Farm viability competitiveness, sustainable forest management Farm viability competitiveness, sustainable forest management Ecosystems in agriculture and forestry Resource efficiency, low carbon and climate resilience Resource efficiency, low carbon and climate resilience Social inclusion, poverty reduction, economic development Knowledge Transfer and Innovation (cross cutting) Technical Assistance Share of funds per RD priority

Select simplification features in RD Simplified Cost Options: Lump-sums Unit cost Flat rate Simpler mechanisms for applications, payments and controls (both pillars) CLLD – multifund approach

9 Commissioner Hogan's Mission letter:  Simplification key priority  Reviewing potential for simplification on direct payments (particular on greening), rural development, fruit and vegetables scheme and quality policy screening of agricultural acquis active involvement stakeholders  Mandate Commissioner Hogan

10  Direct payments/CMO versus Rural Development  Simplification framework  AGRI context

11 Simplification Framework 3 guiding principles:  Respect 2013 political decisions  Ensure sound financial management  Concentrate on simplification for farmers

12 Internal screening exercise of the entire agricultural acquis MS, EP and stakeholders contributed to the exercise Council - adoption of Council conclusions COMAGRI Civil dialogue groups B. What has happened so far ?

13  Direct payments and IACS: Greening (see next slide), IACS, active farmers, young farmers scheme, small farmers scheme, cross-compliance,  CMO: fruit and vegetable sector, marketing standards, safeguard measures, trade mechanism, reporting requirements, …  Rural Development: programming and approval of RDP's,, double funding, controls, simplified cost options, reporting,  Horizontal issues: reporting, audits, error rates, financial corrections. Proposals

14  Greening: controls, sanctions/penalties, thresholds  EFA: EFA layer, management conditions, conversion and weighting factors  Crop diversification: abolish requirement, simplify control requirements (crop diversification periods, more types of evidence)  Permanent grassland: abolishment, share of permanent grassland Greening

15  Against 3 guidance principles  proposals of internal screening and proposals MS/stakeholders simplification actions  Distinction between amendments at the level of DA/IA and amendments at level of Basic Act Assessment of proposals

16 Our actions so far - 1 Adoption of two regulations  delay of application date for of aid applications  flexibility for Voluntary Coupled Support DA: ethyl alcohol - objection EP

17 Our actions so far - 2 Changes to current guidelines on direct payments Only need to map declared EFA elements Flexibility as regards the identification of certain EFA elements in the EFA layer Allow hedges or wooded strips with gaps to 4 meters Certain flexibility with regard to adjacent EFA Reduced requirements for identification of some specific types of permanent grassland in LPIS Compensation of missing EFA by another EFA

18 C. Next steps (short term)  market measures: align the Commission level rules to the new CMO Regulation – autumn 2015  changes on DA/IA on direct payments (except greening)– autumn 2015  greening: review rules on greening, including Ecological Focus Area (EFA) – spring 2016

19 C. Next steps (Rural Development)  Stocktaking & Analysis after approval of RDPs (2015)  Continuous updating of guidance  Explore ways of simplifying the structure of RDPs  Common ESIF simplification study (2016)  High Level Group on Simplification for ESI funds

20 Opening of Basic Acts? C. Next steps (longer term)

Thank you for your attention 21