‘The European Union is going to have to do a lot more to make the CAP fit for the 21st century if it is to be capable of delivering real benefits for the countryside.’

This was the reaction today (Tuesday) of CPRE’s [1] farming campaigner Ian Woodhurst to the proposals announced by the European Commission as part of its Health Check of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). [2].

CPRE welcomes the proposal to increase the amount of funding that will be transferred from farm payments across the EU to pay for rural development initiatives [3], including green farming schemes. However, CPRE remains concerned that not enough is being done to retain the environmental benefits of set aside which is to be abolished. [4].

Ian Woodhurst continued:

‘Over the years the public has paid a lot of money to farmers to leave land fallow, which it is now widely recognised has unintentionally benefited wildlife and added to the diversity of some landscapes. We are disappointed that the proposals from the Commission to retain these benefits are lacking in vision. If we are to take this as an indicator of the extent of the Commission’s ambition for the CAP then the opportunity to make it really deliver for the environment isn’t going to make it beyond the farm gate.’

Ian Woodhurst concluded:

‘The next major reforms of the CAP will be in 2013. By then the Governments of the EU must meet their responsibility to ensure the CAP is properly equipped with the measures and funding required to reward farmers for delivering a wide range of environmental benefits.’

– END –

NOTES FOR EDITORS

1. CPRE, the Campaign to Protect Rural England, is a charity which promotes the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of rural England. We advocate positive solutions for the long-term future of the countryside. Founded in 1926, we have 60,000 supporters and a branch in every county. President: Bill Bryson. Patron: Her Majesty The Queen.

2. The European Commission has published its proposals for the ‘CAP Health Check’. The Health Check will consider how the reforms of the CAP that were introduced in 2003 are being implemented. Key issues that are being examined include: making the Single Payment more effective, efficient and simple, including the requirements of cross compliance; further separation of payments to farmers from the need to produce certain crops and commodities; the ending of the set-aside scheme, the roles of Pillar I and Pillar II and transferring of funds between the two funding streams; climate change challenges; the growth in biofuels and management of water resources.

3. The Common Agricultural Policy is divided into two pillars. These are effectively two different funding streams. The ‘first pillar’ is made up of direct payments to farmers, which in the UK is known as the Single Payment. The ‘second pillar’ is made up of funding for rural development measures, known in England as the Rural Development Programme for England. It includes green farming schemes and funding for economic and social measures that contribute to rural development objectives. As well as having some core funding money is also transferred to the RDPE, or in technical terms ‘modulated,’ from Pillar I of the CAP to Pillar II to pay for rural development measures. The amount of money transferred is set by the EU at a certain percentage. The UK Government voluntarily transfers additional funding from Pillar I to Pillar II to fund rural development measures including important green farming schemes.

4. Set aside was introduced to prevent over production of food by taking agricultural land out of production. This land could then be managed to produce environmental benefits. For example, by providing areas of feeding habitat for wildlife and by preventing water courses becoming contaminated by agricultural sprays. Areas of set aside also added to the diversity of the landscape by creating patches of non-cultivated land. While agreeing that set aside should be phased out, now the CAP no longer requires farmers to produce particular crops to receive farming payments, CPRE believes that alternative measures need to be introduced to prevent the loss of the environmental benefits accrued while set aside existed.