EUROPEAN UNION

Committee of the Regions

The future of Common Agricultural Policy as seen by regions and cities

Photos: Thinkstock, Committee of the Regions archives, European Union

© European Union, 2012

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Printed in Belgium

Catalogue number: QG-30-12-661-EN-C

ISBN: 978-92-895-0612-0

DOI: 10.2863/56198

1

Foreword by Mercedes Bresso and Ramón Luis Valcárcel Siso, President and First Vice-President of the Committee of the Regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

The European Commission proposal of 12 October 2011: The future of our food and our countryside – a strategic choice for Europe Dacian Cioloş, EU Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

The Committee of the Regions’ contribution to the Common Agricultural Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 The CoR’s political position, René Souchon, President of the Auvergne region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

The ongoing debate: the voice of CoR’s members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

•TowardsarenewedCAP:howtorealisethepotentialofareas withapermanentnaturalhandicap?Luis Durnwalder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

•WhatpoliciesdoesEuropehavefortheharmonious developmentofruralareas?Jerzy Zająkała . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

•Createeconomicallyviablelocalfoodsystemsinruralareas, Ossi Martikainen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Comments from European Parliament members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Shape European agriculture according to a vision for the future, Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

SingleCMO:givefarmersandsectorsthemeansforaddressing up-coming challenges, Michel Dantin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Table of contents

Tableofcontents

2 Foreword

3

Ofthethreechallengesthathavebeenidentified for the future common agriculturalpolicy–foodsecurity,theproduction of environmental publicgoods,andbalancedterritorialdevel-opment – it is, of course, the latterthat is at the centre of the Commit-tee of the Regions’ concerns .

Weconsiderthattheeconomic,envi-ronmental and social development of each territory requires an inte-gratedapproachofpublicpolicy.Thatiswhywehaveon several occasionscalledforbettersynergybetweentheEAFRD (European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development) and the other structural funds . The proposal that a CommonStrategicFrameworkbecre-ated for the 2014-2020 programmes isthereforewelcome.Itwillmaketheaction,whichmustinanycaseremainstraightforwardand free fromexces-sive red tape, more effective .

WethinkthatthisFrameworkoffersrural areas and Europe’s regions three things: that the strategic pro-gramming will be better suited tolocal diversity; that the implementa-tionwill bebetter coordinated; andthatthemanagementwillbesimpler.

However, if this is towork in prac-tice, there are several more hurdles toovercome.Forexample,thepos-sibility given to Member States toadopt multi-fund operational pro-

grammes involving the ERDF (Euro-pean Regional Development Fund), the ESF (European Social Fund) or the Cohesion Fund, should also involve the EAFRD for the much-talked-aboutITIs(integratedterrito-rial investments) and not just CLLD (community led local development).If one looks carefully at the list ofareasinwhichthefundscanbeused,overlaps in areas such as energyefficiency and ICT become appar-ent. Inpracticalterms,thedanger isthat such overlaps could encourage managing authorities to go back tosector-by-sector approaches, whichisnotagood thing.Finally,weneedtobesurethatthewayinwhichpart-

nershipcontracts aredrawnupwillenablethoseinvolvedinruraldevel-opmenttobeheardatleastasmuchas other socio-economic actors .

In more general terms, as will beexplainedinthisbrochuresettingoutthe Committee of the Regions’ posi-tion,wearekeentogivethe futureCAP an ambitious role in achievingall the aims of the Europe 2020 strat-egy and in exercising the EuropeanUnion’s new powers in relation tocohesion.This is a very stimulatingchallengethatwe,onbehalfof localand regional authorities and in part-nership with all the interested par-ties,arereadytoface.

n

Mercedes Bresso (PES/IT) President of the Committee of the Regions

Foreword

Ramón Luis Valcárcel Siso (EPP/ES) First Vice-President

of the Committee of the Regions

Foreword

4 Thefutureofourfoodandourcountryside–astrategicchoiceforEurope

The European Commission proposal of 12 October 2011

WeareataturningpointinoneofthebiggestpoliciesoftheEuropeanUnion:the Common Agricultural Policy. Wemustproducemoreandbetter,yetwithfewer resources and in more difficultconditions thaneverbefore -adaptingtotheeffectsofglobalisation,mitigatingthe impact of climate change, address-ing the demographic challenges . During this period of economic downturnand budgetary austerity, the agri-foodindustryinEuropecanprovideamajorboost for jobs and growth.To ensurethis,farmersneedsupport,needstabil-ity, need a coherent tool-box to fighteconomic turmoil and price volatility.Moreover, theEUhasawiderangeoftypesoffarms,andtypesofagriculture,with specific inherent advantages anddisadvantages, with islands and moun-tains,withabroadvarietyoftraditionsand agricultural practices . The Common Agricultural Policy has to take intoaccountthenewrealitiesandthediver-sityoffarmingacrossEurope.This is the starting point of the propos-als for the newCommonAgriculturalPolicy. Its objective is to promote aresilient, competitive and diverse Euro-pean farming sector . The new CAP will continue to sup-portfarmer’sincome,whichisstillwellbelow the average inother sectorsoftheeconomy.Wecanno longer justifydirectpaymentsbasedonhistoric ref-erencesthatgobackadecadeago.Thisiswhyweproposetomovetowardsaflat-rate payment per hectare in eachregionormemberstate.Thisapproachwill also reduce discrepancies in thesubsidies received by farmers in dif-

ferent member states or in differentregions, putting this policy on a fairer,forward-lookingbasis.One of the lessons learnt over yearsis that support for farmers needs to be better tailored to objective needs.Foryears,theCAPhasbeencriticisedfor giving disproportionate subsidiesfrompublicmoneytoeconomicopera-tionsthatmaynotreallyneed it.Withthe economic crisis, with taxpayersshoulderingheavyburdens throughoutEurope,thisargumentisbecomingevenmore acute . Our support to our farm-ershastobesociallyacceptable.WiththereformoftheCAP,weproposetointroduce tighter rules on capping and active farmers . The idea is to limit the large, unconditional payments or tohavebettertargetedpaymentstowards,for example, innovation and othermeasures increasing competitiveness . The CAP reform aims at strengthening the competitiveness and sustainabilityof agriculture in the European Union . We remain committed to a market-oriented agriculture – building on theprogress made in the past 20 years.Thedecouplingofsubsidiesremainsatthecoreofourpolicy.Ofcourse,therestill will be investment grants avail-ableunderRuralDevelopment.Wearestrengthening our FarmAdvisory Ser-vices, tohelp farmersrespondtonewchallenges, such as adapting to climate change.WewillhaveaRuralDevelop-ment policy which will address thechallenge of innovation more than ever before,aswellascontinuinginvestmentandstructuralchange.Foryoungfarm-

Dacian Cioloş EU Commissioner for Agriculture

and Rural Development

The future of our food and our countryside – a strategic choice for Europe

5

ers, therewill be a higher direct pay-mentfornewentrants,aswellasstart-up grants.We will have an improvedorganisationof themarketsbutalsoamore rapid response mechanism, and measurestoboostproducerorganisa-tions.Thesearekeyelementstoensurethe competitiveness of agriculture in the longer term .Butsustainabilitymeansalsotakingourresponsibilityfortheprotectionofenvi-ronment and management of natural resources . The European Commission proposed that 30% of the direct paymentsreceived by farmers will be linked torespecting certain agricultural practices beneficialfortheclimateandtheenvi-ronment . Crop diversification, maintain-ing permanent pastures, maintaining an ecological focus area, have benefi-cial effects on the quality of the soil,retentionofwaterandorganicmatter,carbon sequestration , preserving bio-diversity andbetterusing theexistent

landscapefeatures.Thekeypointwiththeseagriculturalpractices linkedwithdirectpaymentsistohavearealimpactat European level.Andwe can have itonlyifweaskeverysinglefarmerintheEUtoemploythesepractices.Otherwise, the cost of doing noth-ingwouldbetoohigh.Wearealreadylosing 275 hectares of soil per day intheEUbecauseofsoilsealingandasso-ciate land intake.Thismeansthatover100,000hectaresperyearare lost forfarming. Soil biodiversity is threatenedby soil acidification, which is modify-ing the soil ecosystem and reducingcrop yields. Intensive use of irrigation– beyond related problems of waterscarcity – accelerates the salinisationofthesoils,therebyaffectingagainsoilproductivity. The application of theseenvironmentally friendly agriculturalpracticesbyall farmers in theEU is along-term investment in a sustainablecompetitiveness . ButtomaketheCAPworkbetter,we

have to reach yet another objective:simplification. In all the measures andtools that we are proposing with thenew CAP, we take into account theneedtosimplifytheimplementationofthispolicy.Togive justanexample, forthedirectpaymentsweput forwardasimple tool, for administrations and for farmersalike,thatisasinglenewsystemwith simplifiedmanagement and a flatratepaymentforsmallfarmers.This would be just in a few lines anoverview of a few elements we putforwardwithin theCAP reformpack-agepresentedinOctoberlastyear.Thedebate isongoingand IappreciatetheCommittee of the Regions’ involvement in thisdebate.At theendof theday, Iam convinced that with the involve-ment of all stakeholders, we will findthe right balance between the threestrategicgoalsforEuropeanagriculture:economic sustainability, environmentalsustainabilityandsocialacceptability.

n

Thefutureofourfoodandourcountryside–astrategicchoiceforEurope

6 The CoR’s political position

René Souchon (PES/FR), President of the Auvergne Region,

Rapporteur of the Committee of the Regions on the future of CAP after 2013

The Committee of the Regions believes that while some of the proposals on the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) adopted on 12 October 2011 for 2014-2020 are a step in the right direction, it still seems a long way from the in-depth reform which was expected and which is essential for maintaining European agri-culture and rural areas.

This legislative package is a politicalpriority for the Committee of theRegions, since rural development is an important tool for achieving the territorial cohesion goal enshrined intheLisbonTreaty.ThisexplainstheCommittee of the Region’s strong response to reform of the CAP, which has been gaining in intensitysince its own-initiative opinion onthefutureCAPwasdraftedin2010,followedby its response in2011 tothe Commission’s communication on theCAP2020and,finally,theadop-

tion of an opinion on the European Commission’s legislative proposals on4May2012.

The Committee of the Regions is arguing for the European Union to reformtheCAPwithoutreducingitsscope . This means, first and foremost, maintaining a budget that reflectsthegoalssetbytheEuropeanCom-mission for the CAP, in terms of sustainable management of naturalresources,foodsecurity,themainte-nance of farming across Europe, the competitiveness of European farming and the simplification of the CAP .

Overandabovefinancial considera-tions, the Committee of the Regions alsointendstoputforwardtheviewsof local and regional authorities on the followingpoints,which are like-wiseatthecentreofongoingdiscus-sions at the European Parliament and theCouncil:

The CoR’s political position

The Committee of the Regions’ contribution to the future of the CAP after 2013

7

• A fairer CAP . The current unfair distribution of support betweenfarmers, but alsobetween regionsand Member States, is creating asense of injustice that is damaging thesocialacceptabilityoftheCAP.The Committee of the Regions callsfor:

• a re-balancing of support forlivestock-rearingareas,areaswithnatural constraints, and newlyestablishedandsmallfarmers;

• a reduction in the degressivitythreshold and cap to EUR 100 000andEUR200000respectively,including the 30% support for greening, given that the thresholds currently proposed would onlyallow1.3%ofthebasicpaymentsto be redistributed within theEuropeanUnion;

• steps to speed up the timetablefor the convergence of support betweenMemberStates.

• A proper market regulation policy. The market regulationmeasuresputforwardbytheCom-missionareverydisappointingandmayproveineffectivebecausetheydo not address the real causes of price instability. On the contrary,bysigningnewbilateraltradeagree-ments, the European Union is help-ing to undermine European farm-ingsystems.TheCommitteeoftheRegions feels that the Commission ismakingastrategicerrorinfocus-ing on crisis management after the event instead of an upstream regu-lationthatwouldenablepricevola-tilitytobetackledmoreeffectivelyandatalowercost.Itcallsfor.

• territorial assessment studies on the consequencesofabolishingquotasandproductionrightsbeforegoingany further towards removing thevariousquotasystems;

• efforts to safeguard the Commu-nity preference mechanisms andpromote intervention and storage mechanismswhicharepreferabletodevelopinginsurancesystems;

• steps to make European tradepolicycompatiblewiththemarketstabilisation goals set out in theLisbonTreaty;

• a reform of competition law to

redress the balance of powerwithin the food production chainin favour of producers, in order to achievethefoodsecurityobjectiveestablishedbytheCommission.

• A European rural develop-ment strategy for re-balancingresources for rural areas whosedevelopmentlevelisstillbelowtheEU average and often well belowpredominantly urban areas.This isallthemoreworryingsincethegapwidened between 2000 and 2007,mainly because the capitals andlargecitiesdevelopedmorequicklyover this period . The challenges faced by rural areas call for a full,balancedpackageofmeasurestobeimplemented to support smart, sus-tainable and also inclusive growth.The Committee of the Regions considersitessential:

•to earmark adequate fundingunder the EAFRD for developing localinfrastructuresinruralareas;

•to put aside 10%of the EAFRDbudget for agronomic innovationto ensure that the production modelcanbechanged;

•toguaranteemunicipalitiesinruralareas access to regional policyfundsintheknowledgethatduringthe previous programming period (2007-2013), EUR 91 billion infunding for rural development came from the ERDF and EUR 85 billioncamefromtheotherstruc-tural funds.The newERDF regu-lation, however, basically focusesonurbanareasanddoesnotevenmention rural areas .

•A new system of governance for the CAP . Rural areas and com-

munitiescannolongerbecontentwithmerelybeingco-financerswith-outbeinginvolvedinthechoiceofpriorities and implementation and managementarrangements.Nowa-daysonlytheycandirectsupportinkeeping with agricultural, environ-mental and regional characteristics and thus allow European funds tobe used more effectively. Imple-mentingaframeworkofmulti-levelgovernance – European, nationaland regional – is a vital conditionfor the successful reformulation of the CAP after 2013 . The Commit-teeoftheRegionscallsfor:

•thefullinvolvementofrepresenta-tives of rural regions in drafting partnershipcontracts;

•a representative of local andregional authorities to sit on the Committee for Rural Develop-ment that will assist the Com-missionwiththeadoptionofdel-egatedacts;

•a review of the compositionof the consultative groups at the Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development in order to ensure that these groups are more representativeofruralareas;

•payments for agricultural climate-andenvironmentally-friendlyprac-ticeswhichcould lead to territo-rial contracts signed jointly byregional authorities and groups of farmers, so that these measures areperfectlyadaptedtolocalagro-nomic, environmental and socio-economic realities on the ground .

n

The CoR’s political position

8 TowardsarenewedCAP:howtorealisethepotentialofareaswithapermanentnaturalhandicap?

Areas that are said to have a “permanent natural handicaps” have climate or geo-graphical constraints that place them at a competitive disadvantage on national, European, and global markets. In fact, these regions, which make up 57% of the agricultural area of the European Union, cannot compete solely in terms of pro-duction costs. However, it is essential to maintain agricultural production poten-tial in these areas with a permanent natural handicap so as to preserve the food production capacity of the Euro-pean Union and safeguard the European model of agriculture in all its diversity.

Do you think that measures pro-posed by the EC will allow the preservation of agriculture in these areas?

Asstatedthroughoutmythreelatestopinionssince2008areaswithnatu-ral handicaps have to face serious disadvantages,butneedtobeconsid-ered at the same time precious ele-ments of European culture and iden-tityfortourism,biodiversityandlivequality ingeneral. Thenewpropos-als of the EU Commission are going in the rightdirectionbecausemoreattention is devoted to areas withnatural and specific constraints and

the measures provided help support-ing farmers in these areas . But there are two major problems for areaswithnaturalandspecificconstraints:

1) The farms in these areas are small-structured and therefore do not receive sufficient support withinthe first pillar, where area basedcriteria are crucial .

2) The costs for administration and administrative controls for these farms are too high in compari-sontothecontributionspaidpersingle farm. In this respect, thesmall farmers scheme is a step in therightdirectionbutstillneedstogofurthertobeeffective.

Do you consider that the new def-inition of areas with natural and specific constraints proposed by the EC is appropriate?

A revision of the current criteria is very important and crucial for thefuture programbut the newdefini-tionproposedbytheECisnotsat-isfactory. Therefore, it should notcomeintoeffectwiththestartofthenewprogramin2014.

n

Towards a renewed CAP: how to realise the potential of areas with a permanent natural handicap?

Luis Durnwalder (EPP/IT), Chairman of the Bolzano Autonomous

Provincial Executive, Rapporteur of the Committee of the Regions

on the CAP towards 2020

The ongoing debate: the voice of CoR’s members

9WhatpoliciesdoesEuropehavefortheharmoniousdevelopmentofruralareas?

What policies does Europe have for the harmonious development of rural areas?

Jerzy Zająkała (UEN-EA/PL), Mayor of Łubianka,

President of the European Alliance Group on the future of the Common Agriculture Policy

In terms of the cohesion of the EU-27, the diversity or heterogeneity of rural areas represents a genuine cause for concern. The fifth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion, which was published in November 2010, in particular has highlighted the socio-economic divergence between Europe’s various regions and the new dynamics at play: despite the degree of catching up achieved by largely rural areas, their level of development still remains below the EU average, and far below that of predominantly urban areas.

Do you think that the new archi-tecture of the second pillar of the CAP proposed by the EC is adapted to the new challenges facing by rural areas?

ItisvitallyimportantthattheEUhasa very strong Common AgriculturePolicy, which ensures ‘food security’,qualityanddiversityoffoodandcreat-inglocalemployment,andwewillcon-tributetodevelopingideastoensurethis is the case . As a representative of the Union of Rural Communes of theRepublicofPolandandPresidentofEAGroup,Iaminfavourofassur-ing sufficient resources for the devel-opment of rural areas.We considerthat it is crucial to reserve sufficient EAFRD funds for the development of local infrastructure in rural areas and to ensure that rural authorities have accesstocohesionpolicyfundsunderthe ERDF as part of a holistic rural development policy. Rural areas areconcentrated inestimable richness, interms of natural resources and cul-tural and historical heritage, as wellas great potential for economic and socialdevelopment.Weshouldbuildontheexperiencestohelpspeedupthe process of evening out the differ-

ences in local development and the living conditions of people in rural areas, a fact of life in a number ofMemberStatesandregions.

Does the creation of the Common Strategic Framework for all struc-tural funds will be enough to guarantee an appropriate fund-ing of rural areas which represent roughly 91% of the territory of Europe and over 56% of the popu-lation of the 27 Member States?

Balanced development means not onlyinvestmentsinbothareasandinregionswithin the countries. It alsomeans an equal empowerment ofthose areas to decide their develop-ment path. Rural-urban links shouldalso be strengthened and a moreintegrated territorial approach devel-oped within EU regions, includingfunctional areas’ strategies.Abetterbalanced and sustainable develop-mentrequiresmorepolicyattentionon the regional level.This requiresa new attitude among politiciansfrom all levels. I am convinced thatit ispossible toovercome theruralareas lagging behind by appropriateuse,empowermentanddevelopmentof their endogenous development potentials by upholding the impor-tance of small rural and agricultural areas as important elements of local economic and social development .

Taking this course of action to mereflects themost sensible approachas it takes into due considerationthesustainabledevelopmentofbothrural andurbanareas.Thebestwayto avoid social and economic prob-lems is to ensure balanced concen-trationofresourcesbetweenUrbanand Rural areas .

n

10 Createeconomicallyviablelocalfoodsystemsinruralareas

Create economically viable local food systems in rural areas

Ossi Martikainen (FI/ADLE), Chairman of Lapinlahti municipal council,

rapporteur on distribution of food products to the most deprived persons in the

Union and ALDE acting coordinator for Commission for Natural Resources

The development of local food sys-tems is particularly relevant for local and regional authorities as local food systems support the local and regional economy by providing employment in agriculture and food production, includ-ing processing, distribution, marketing and sales activities and service. These systems are of the utmost importance in remote rural areas, peri-urban areas, mountainous areas, vulnerable areas and underprivileged areas.

How local and regional authori-ties could be better involved in the drawing up and in the imple-mentation of thematic sub-pro-grammes on local food system under the second pillar?

Itisvitalforlocalandregionalauthor-ities–intheircapacityasco-financers–toplayacentralroleinimplement-ing the Regulation on Rural Develop-ment, and Ibelieve thatanapproachbased on local and regional projectscan ensure the more effective and efficient use of EU funds . Local and regionalauthoritiesshouldbeinvolvedin drafting partnership contracts .

Which others measures could be proposed to insure a real develop-ment of local food systems?

The European Commission should adopt definitions of “Local Food Products”and“LocalFoodSystems”,andintroduceanewlogoandidentifyacommonsymbolandschemeiden-tity for local products, to be addedto the Agriculture Product Qual-ityPolicy regulation;ECshould alsoexplorewhetherArticle26ofDirec-tive 2004/18/EC on the coordina-tionofproceduresfortheawardofpublic contracts could be amendedsuch that“locally produced” can bea standard selection criterion in ten-ders for the supply of food to, forinstance, schools, nursing homes and public facilities. In general, I believe,thatweneedamoreambitious leg-islation and practices that provide accurate information on the origin ofallfoodproducts.Thiswouldhelpthe consumers and local authorities intheirdecisionmaking.

n

11Shape European agriculture according to a vision for the future

Europe is living exceptional timeswhich reflect into the economic,financial,andenvironmentalcontextsand that demand a political response at all levels . Agriculture and the rural world is one of the levels: a boldreworking isneeded if thecommonpoliciesinquestionaretorespondtopresent and future challenges .

European farmers must continue to have the means of ensuring that citi-zenscanenjoythenecessarydegreeof self-sufficiency and hence obtainenough foodstuffs and commodities of acceptable quality at affordableprices .

This implies a need to reconcile farming with sustainable produc-tion and shape European agriculture according to a vision for the future, in which competitiveness must gohand inhandwithsustainability,and,moreover, to the idea that sustain-abilitydoesnotboildownsolely tothe environmental component, butalso has to do with the long-termeconomicandsocialviabilityofagri-culture as such.To that extent, thetransition to more environment-

friendly agriculture in Europe is asinequanon condition for the sec-tor’sviability.

The new policy for agriculture andthe rural world in Europe has tobe based on the three-prongedapproach of‘legitimacy, fairness, andefficiency’, that is to say, resourcesmustbeassignedtoendsrecognisedtobevaluablebytaxpayersandsoci-ety, shared out as fairly as possibleamongfarmers,regions,andMemberStates, and put to the most effective use in terms of achieving the desired results .

Taking intoaccount the greatdiver-sity of European agriculture, whichshouldbepreserved,andtheneedtomaintain a common legislative frame-workwithinwhichtoimplementagri-culturalandruraldevelopmentpolicy,subsidiarityhastoembodytherightbalancebetweenthesetwodynamics.Furthermore,andwithoutdetractingfrom the imperatives of rigour in the use of public money, simplificationmustbereflectedasfullyaspossiblein all the regulations .

n

Shape European agriculture according to a vision for the future

Comments from European Parliament members

Luis Manuel Capoulas Santos (S&D/PT),

Rapporteur of the European Parliament for the first and second pillar of CAP

12 SingleCMO:givefarmersandsectorsthemeansforaddressingup-comingchallenges

Michel Dantin (EEP/FR), Rapporteur of the European Parliament on single Common Market Organisation

Give farmers and sectors the means for addressing the challenges of volatile agricultural prices by allow-ing them to be more effective interms of crisis management and prevention and also allowing themto create organisations to achieve a more effective dialogue within thefoodchainandafairerdistributionofadded value .

This is the logic I have followedin drawing up my draft report onreform of the single CMO .

This desire to put the professional stakeholdersbackattheheartofouragricultural policy seems absolutelyessential at a timewhen the publicauthoritieshaveconfirmedtheirwishto step back from the“day-to-day”management of agriculturalmarketsandprovidenomorethana“safety-

net”.Thisclearlyrequiresasubstan-tialstrengtheningoftheresponsibili-ties of producer organisations and a broadeningofthetasksentrustedtointer-branchorganisations

This approach also calls for the fun-damentalandthornytopicofapply-ing competition law to farming andagrifoodactivitiestobediscussed.

It is therefore a question of givingsubstance to theTreaty which hasrecognised the specific position of agriculture as regards competition law since 1957 without respondingwith any concrete measures untilnow.The paradigms of competitionshould take greater account of thespecific characteristics of the farming and agrifood sectors .

n

Single Common Market Organisation: give farmers and sectors the means for addressing up-coming challenges

Rue Belliard/Belliardstraat 101 _ 1040 Bruxelles/Brussel _ BELGIQUE/BELGÏETel. +32 2/282 22 11 _ Fax +32 2/282 23 25

www.cor.europa.eu

July 2012

Edited by the Committee of the regions

QG

-30-

12-6

61-E

N-C