How should controls be improved and related red tape cut? 

Updated: 
 
Created:   
 

From the outset of the debate on the future of CAP, MEPs argued that the policy shift to better tailor the EU’s farm policy to the needs of individual member states must make the CAP more flexible without increasing bureaucracy for farmers, including in the area of controls. They wanted to make controls more efficient, increase sanctions for repeated non-compliance, ensure high performance of national controls and complaints systems and introduce more transparency into where EU funds end up to avoid their misuse.

More transparency to tackle misuse of EU funds and dealing with unfair treatment

Throughout the negotiations, MEPs pushed for spending of EU funds to be more transparent and a tougher approach against those beneficiaries who misuse them. As a result, member states will get access to the EU data-mining tool Arachne to look into risks linked to projects, beneficiaries and contractors and avoid circumventing of EU rules. By 2025, the Commission should report back on how this tool has helped to better protect EU funds and if need be, present a proposal that could lead to its compulsory use in all EU states.

Negotiators also agreed that the Commission should take all necessary steps to make national governments respond to complaints about EU subsidies from farmers or rural beneficiaries if national authorities fail to properly examine and deal with them when lodged.

Remedies rather than penalties for missing targets

Negotiators agreed on a shift towards auditing how results set out in national strategic plans are being achieved. The focus should be more on a farmer’s performance rather than on compliance with EU rules. Nevertheless, they also stressed that to ensure a level-playing field across the European Union, compliance with EU rules should also continue to be checked.

To this end, they want to give member states more options to avoid financial consequences if they do not progress sufficiently in achieving targets set out in the strategic plan. National government should be allowed to submit an action plan specifying how it aims to achieve the missed targets within a realistic timeframe (not longer than one year).

Tougher penalties for recurring non-compliance with EU rules

If beneficiaries repeatedly fail to comply with the conditionality rules (i.e. with legal requirements on environment and animal welfare) they should, on MEPs’ insistence, lose 10% of their entitlements (up from today’s 5%). Beneficiaries will continue to lose at least 15% of the amount they are entitled to if they intentionally flout the rules.

If need be, the Commission may carry out checks in member states on its own.

.