The reforms of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) agreed in 2003 and 2004 included provisions for reports to gauge their effectiveness, and in particular to appraise their impact with respect to their objectives and to analyse their effects on the relevant markets. In this context, the Commission presented a Communication to the European Parliament and Council entitled ‘Preparing for the “Health Check” of the CAP reform’ on 20 November 2007. That Communication and the subsequent discussions of its main elements by the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, as well as numerous contributions arising from public consultation should be taken into account.
(2)
The provisions of the CAP concerning public intervention should be simplified and aligned by extending tendering in order to achieve a harmonised approach insofar as possible. In particular, the respect of maximum quantities and quantitative limits for cereals, butter and skimmed milk powder may require rapid action. In order to provide for this, and since closing buying-in at a fixed price, adopting allocation coefficients and, for common wheat, switching to the tendering procedure, do not involve the exercise of discretion, the Commission should be permitted to do so without the assistance of the Committee.
(3)
In respect of cereals intervention, the system should be adjusted to ensure competitiveness and market orientation for the sector, while keeping the role of intervention as a safety net in the event of market disruptions and facilitating farmers' response to market conditions. Upon adoption by the Council of Regulation (EC) No 735/2007 (4), which reformed the intervention system for maize the Commission undertook to review the cereals intervention system, on the basis of an analysis which revealed some degree of risk for additional barley intervention if prices were low. The present outlook for cereals has, however, since changed significantly, and is characterised by a favourable world market price environment driven by expanding world demand and low global cereal stocks. Within this context, intervention levels should be set at zero for other feed grains. This would allow for intervention without having negative implications for the cereals market as a whole. The favourable outlook for the cereals sector also applies to durum wheat. This means that buying into intervention has currently lost its relevance since market prices are significantly above the intervention price. Therefore, buying into intervention for durum wheat is not currently necessary and intervention levels should be set at zero. Since intervention for cereals should be a safety net rather than an element which influences price formation, the differences in harvesting periods across Member States, which effectively start the marketing years, are no longer relevant since the system will no longer provide for prices reflecting intervention levels plus monthly increments. In the interests of simplification, the dates for cereals intervention should therefore be harmonised across the Community.
(4)
Since the 2003 CAP reform, the competitiveness of the rice sector has increased, with stable production, falling stocks in view of increasing demand both in the Community and on the world market, and with the expected price significantly above the intervention price. Therefore buying into intervention for rice is not currently necessary and intervention levels should be set at zero.
(5)
Pigmeat production and consumption are projected to increase over the medium term, though at a slower pace than in the past decade, due to the competition from poultry meat and higher feed prices. Pigmeat prices are expected to remain significantly above the intervention price. Buying into intervention has not been used for many years for pigmeat and, in the light of the market situation and its perspectives, the possibility of buying into intervention should therefore be abolished.
(6)
Since the current market situation and perspectives suggest that intervention would not, in any case, be applicable to pigmeat, durum wheat and rice in 2009, the changes to or abolition of intervention for these products should be carried out from the 2009/2010 marketing year. For other cereals, in order to allow farmers to adapt, the changes should only apply from the 2010/2011 marketing year.
(7)
The medium-term outlook for the dairy sector is characterised by a continued increase in Community demand for high value added products; a substantial expansion in global demand for dairy commodities, driven by income and population growth in many regions of the world; and by changes in consumer preferences towards dairy products.
(8)
Constrained by the milk quota ceilings, total Community milk production is projected to follow a gradual, though modest decline over the medium term as continued restructuring in the Member States, which were not members of the Community before 1 May 2004, will lead to a decline in subsistence milk production, while production growth remains limited due to the existence of quotas. At the same time, the quantity of milk delivered to dairies for processing is expected to continue to increase over the projected period. In the light of strong internal and external demand, the milk quota system is hence restricting production expansion, as opposed to the situation when quotas were introduced as a response to overproduction. In such a market situation, quotas reduce market orientation because they distort farmers' response to price signals, and prevent efficiency gains in the sector by slowing down restructuring. The quotas are scheduled to end in 2015. Appropriate adjustments should be made by degrees so to allow for a smooth transition by avoiding an excessive adjustment after quotas have ended. The phasing-out of dairy quotas by annual increases of 1 % should therefore be provided per marketing year from 2009/2010 to 2013/2014. Other changes to make the milk quota system more flexible as regards the fat adjustment, by abolishing the adjustment set out in Article 80(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (the Single CMO Regulation) (5), and as regards the quota inactivity rules, by increasing the percentage in Article 72(2) of that Regulation which a producer should use during a twelve-month period and thus making it easier for unused quota to be reallocated, should also be made for the same reasons. In the context of the restructuring of the sector, Member States should be permitted until 31 March 2014 to grant an additional national aid within certain limits. The quota increases decided by Council Regulation (EC) No 248/2008 of 17 March 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards the national quotas for milk (6) and the 1 % annual increase, along with the other changes which reduce the likelihood of the surplus levy being incurred mean that only Italy would be at risk of the levy being incurred on the basis of current production patterns if annual increases of 1 % were applied from the 2009/2010 period until 2013/2014. Therefore, taking into account the current production patterns in all Member States, the increase in quota should be front-loaded for Italy in order to avoid this risk. In order to ensure that in all Member States the quota increases lead to a controlled and smooth transition, the surplus levy system should be strengthened for the next two years and be set at an appropriately dissuasive level. An additional levy should therefore be imposed in cases where increases in deliveries would significantly exceed the 2008/2009 quota levels.
(9)
The cheese market is steadily expanding with increased demand from inside as well as from outside the Community. In general, therefore, prices for cheese have for some time remained constant and have not been significantly influenced by the reduction of the institutional prices for bulk products (butter and skimmed-milk powder). From both an economic and market management point of view, permanent and optional aid for the private storage of a high value, market-driven product like cheese is no longer justified and should therefore be abolished.
(10)
In the context of the dairy reform and the current market situation, the aid for skimmed-milk powder used as animal feed and skimmed milk for casein production is not currently needed. However, should surpluses of milk products build up or be likely to occur, thus creating or likely to create a serious imbalance in the market, such aid could still play a role. The decision should, however, be taken by the Commission based on sound market analysis rather than an obligation to open the scheme every year. The scheme should, therefore, become optional. If applied, the aid should be determined in advance or by tender.
(11)
Disposal aid for butter intended for pastry and ice cream and for direct consumption has been reduced in line with the reduction of the intervention price for butter as from 2004 and was consequently at zero before tenders were suspended due to the favourable market situation. Disposal aid schemes are no longer needed to support the market at intervention price level and should therefore be abolished.
(12)
As was the case with the CAP reform of 2003, with a view to enhancing the competitiveness of Community agriculture and promoting more market-oriented and sustainable agriculture, it is necessary to continue the shift from production support to producer support by abolishing the existing aids in the Single CMO Regulation for dried fodder, flax, hemp and potato starch and integrating support for these products into the system of decoupled income support for each farm. As was the case with the 2003 CAP reform, while decoupling aid paid to farmers will leave the actual amounts paid unchanged, it will significantly increase the effectiveness of the income support.
(13)
The aid for flax and hemp fibre should now be decoupled. However, in order to allow the flax and hemp industry to adapt, integration of this support into the Single Payment Scheme should be carried out during a transitional period. Aid should therefore be provided for long flax fibre, short flax fibre and hemp fibre until 1 July 2012. Maintaining the aid for short flax fibre and hemp fibre, in order to balance the aid in the sector, means that the aid for long flax fibre should be reduced. However, in order to respect the legitimate expectations of growers, this reduction should only take place from the 2010/2011 marketing year.
(14)
The dried fodder regime was reformed in 2003, when part of the aid was given to the industry and the rest was decoupled and integrated into the Single Payment Scheme. In the context of the overall move towards more market orientation, the present outlook in the markets for feed and protein crops and the particular negative environmental impact that the production of dehydrated fodder has recently been found to generate, the transition to full decoupling for the entire sector should be completed by decoupling the remaining aid to the industry. In order to mitigate the effects of ending the payment of aid to the industry, the appropriate adjustments in the price paid to the producers of the raw materials, who will themselves be receiving increased direct aid entitlements as a result of decoupling, should be made. The sector has been restructuring since the 2003 reform, a transitional period until 1 April 2012 should nonetheless be provided for to allow the sector to adjust.
(15)
The system set out in Council Regulation (EC) No 1868/94 of 27 July 1994 establishing a quota system in relation to the production of potato starch (7) will no longer be required once the related aid for starch potato growers laid down in Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 of 19 January 2009 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the Common Agricultural Policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers (8) is abolished. Aid to producers was partially decoupled in 2003 and this aid should now be fully decoupled although a transitional period until 1 July 2012 should be provided to allow farmers to adapt their supply commitments to the potato starch aid scheme. The related minimum price should, therefore, also be extended for the same period. Beyond that date, the quota system related to the direct payment should be removed in parallel with the full integration of that direct payment into the single payment scheme. In the meantime, the provisions concerned should be integrated, as is the case with other aids and quota schemes, into the Single CMO Regulation.
(16)
Developments in domestic and international cereal and starch markets render the starch production refund no longer relevant with respect to its initial objectives, and it should therefore be abolished. The market situation and perspectives are such that the aid has been set at zero for some time and this is expected to continue, which means that abolition may take place rapidly without any negative effects for the sector.
(17)
Producer organisations can serve a useful role in grouping supply in sectors where there is an imbalance in the concentration of producers and purchasers. Member States should therefore be able to recognise producer organisations on a Community level in all sectors.
(18)
Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of 29 September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers (9) provides for Member States to retain part of the component of national ceilings corresponding to the hops area payments and use them, in particular, to finance certain activities of recognised producer organisations. That Regulation is being repealed and in Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 the hops area payment is being decoupled from 1 January 2010, which means that under the provision the last payment to producer organisations will be made in 2010. In order to allow the hop producer organisations to continue their activities as before, a specific provision should be made for equivalent amounts to be used in the Member State concerned for the same activities with effect from 1 January 2011.
(19)
The Single CMO Regulation provides for amounts withheld from the aid for olive groves under Article 110i(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 to be used to finance work programmes of operator organisations. Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 is being repealed. In the interests of clarity and legal certainty, specific provision should be made to set out the amounts to be used in the Member States concerned for the work programmes.
(20)
In the interests of legal certainty, and simplicity it is appropriate to clarify and harmonise the provisions on the non-application of Articles 87, 88 and 89 of the Treaty to payments made by Member States in conformity with Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 or Council Regulation (EC) No 247/2006 of 30 January 2006 laying down specific measures for agriculture in the outermost regions of the Union (10), Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 of 20 February 2006 establishing a temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry in the Community (11), Council Regulation (EC) No 1405/2006 of 18 September 2006 laying down specific measures for agriculture in favour of the smaller Aegean islands (12), Council Regulation (EC) No 3/2008 of 17 December 2007 on information provision and promotion measures for agricultural products on the internal market and in third countries (13) and Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 of 29 April 2008 on the common organisation of the market in wine (14). In this context, the provisions of those Regulations which otherwise would or might, under certain circumstances, fall within the notion of State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the Treaty should be excluded from the application of State aid rules. The provisions concerned contain appropriate conditions for the granting of support to prevent the undue distortion of competition.
(21)
Regulations (EC) No 247/2006, (EC) No 320/2006, (EC) No 1405/2006, (EC) No 1234/2007, (EC) No 3/2008 and (EC) No 479/2008 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(22)
The following acts are obsolete and should therefore, in the interests of legal certainty, be repealed: Council Regulation (EEC) No 1883/78 of 2 August 1978 laying down general rules for the financing of interventions by the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, Guarantee Section (15), Council Regulation (EEC) No 1254/89 of 3 May 1989 fixing, for the 1989/90 marketing year, inter alia, certain sugar prices and the standard quality of beet (16), Council Regulation (EEC) No 2247/89 of 24 July 1989 on an emergency measure for the free supply of certain agricultural products to Poland (17), Council Regulation (EEC) No 2055/93 of 19 July 1993 allocating a special reference quantity to certain producers of milk and milk products (18) and Council Regulation (EC) No 1182/2005 of 18 July 2005 adopting autonomous and transitional measures to open a Community tariff quota for the import of live bovine animals originating in Switzerland (19). The following acts will become obsolete with effect from 1 May 2009 and, for the same reasons, should therefore be repealed with effect from that date: Council Regulation (EC) No 2596/97 of 18 December 1997 extending the period provided for in Article 149(1) of the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden (20) and Council Regulation (EC) No 315/2007 of 19 March 2007 laying down transitional measures derogating from Regulation (EC) No 2597/97 as regards drinking milk produced in Estonia (21).
(23)
This Regulation should, as a general rule, apply from the date of its entry into force. However, in order to ensure that the provisions of this Regulation do not interfere with certain aids payable for the 2008/2009 or 2009/2010 marketing years, a later date of application should be provided for in respect of those provisions directly affecting the operation of schemes in sectors for which marketing years are envisaged. This Regulation should in such cases only apply as from the start of the later marketing years,
