Brussels – Proposed changes to the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) are drawing sharp criticism from labor unions and member states, centering on planned budget reductions and a proposed shift to a unified funding structure. Concerns are mounting that these changes could undermine agricultural production, weaken social protections for farmworkers, and lead to increased competition for dwindling resources. The debate highlights fundamental questions about the future of European agriculture and the EU’s commitment to supporting rural communities.
The core of the dispute lies in the European Commission’s proposal to reduce the CAP budget by 20% and consolidate funding into a single pot distributed to each member state without specific allocations for different spending categories. Fabrizio De Pascale, head of international policies at UILA, the agricultural sector union of UIL, and president of the agricultural sector of EFFAT, the European federation of food, agriculture and tourism trade unions, described the proposals as “unacceptable,” arguing they betray the founding principles of the EU and threaten the entire European production system. He warned of a potential scenario where fragmentation and the renationalization of aid would overshadow agricultural and labor priorities, increasing competition for decreasing funds.
Concerns Over Budget Cuts and Funding Structure
The proposed changes to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) have sparked widespread concern. De Pascale emphasized that the proposed budget cut and the creation of a single European fund are unacceptable choices that undermine the very foundation of the Union, which prioritizes agriculture. The risk, he explained, is a shift towards fragmentation and the renationalization of aid, leading to increased competition for diminishing funds. The European Commission proposed a budget of €1.985 billion for the seven-year programming period, a rise from the previous €1.211 billion, but the agricultural budget is set to decrease from €380 billion to €294 billion, representing a 22% reduction at current prices, potentially reaching 40% when factoring in inflation, according to Confagricoltura.
Court of Accounts Raises Concerns
Adding to the criticism, the European Court of Auditors recently issued a critical assessment of the proposed CAP reform, citing uncertainties, a lack of clarity, and potential complexities that could delay the disbursement of funds to beneficiaries. De Pascale stated that the Court’s judgment confirms existing concerns, arguing that the Commission’s choices are detrimental to both agricultural producers and farmworkers, potentially leading to job losses and a decline in employment quality. He called for EFFAT, alongside Geopa-Copa, which represents European employer associations, to unite and push for changes to the reform.
Social Conditionality Under Threat?
A key point of contention is the potential impact on social conditionality – the principle introduced in 2023 that links EU agricultural subsidies to compliance with labor standards. While the proposed regulation for the CAP 2028-2034 doesn’t directly modify the existing social conditionality system, integrating it into the broader concept of “Responsible Farm Management,” concerns exist within the proposed regulations for the Single Fund. Specifically, Article 62.1 of the regulation proposes excluding farms under ten hectares from the scope of conditionality related to responsible management, including social aspects. De Pascale argues this is ethically unacceptable and doesn’t simplify procedures for small producers, as social conditionality doesn’t impose additional burdens but simply requires adherence to existing labor laws. Approximately 70% of Italian farms fall under this ten-hectare threshold, meaning a majority of the country’s agricultural production could be exempt from these standards.
Another concern revolves around the calculation of penalties for CAP aid recipients who violate conditionality rules, as outlined in Article 62.5 of the regulation. This article stipulates that when calculating a penalty, consideration must be given to sanctions already imposed at the national level for the same violation. Critics argue this is ambiguous, potentially allowing for varying interpretations across member states and potentially leading to a “double sanction” scenario, where farms penalized nationally could also face reduced CAP payments. De Pascale urged for the removal of this provision, stating that penalizing a farm twice for the same infraction is illogical.
The Importance of Social Conditionality
De Pascale emphasized that social conditionality is fundamentally an ethical principle protecting workers, based on the simple premise that those who don’t respect labor rights shouldn’t receive public funds. He highlighted that this marks the first time in EU history that aid is explicitly linked to labor standards, a principle he believes should be universally shared. EFFAT plans to engage with political forces in the European Parliament to advocate for modifications that defend and strengthen social conditionality, and UILA, along with Fai and Flai, will pursue a similar strategy at the national level, urging both political parties and the government to support their position within the Council of Ministers.
Looking ahead, the debate over the future of the CAP is expected to intensify as the European Parliament and Council of Ministers review the Commission’s proposals. The outcome will have significant implications for the agricultural sector, farmworkers, and the broader rural economy across Europe. The coming months will be crucial in determining whether the EU can strike a balance between budgetary constraints and the necessitate to support a sustainable and socially responsible agricultural system.
What are your thoughts on the proposed changes to the CAP? Share your comments below and help us continue the conversation.
