“Today, in Brussels, at the Agri Committee of the European Parliament, I listened to the European Commissioner for Agriculture Janusz Hansen and felt a deep disappointment. The Commission’s proposal to merge CAP, rural development, cohesion funds, fisheries, and environment into a single fund for prosperity, economic, and territorial security is a choice I consider gravely wrong in substance and unacceptable in method,” declared Nicola Caputo, Agriculture Councillor of the Campania Region in Brussels at the margins of the European Parliament’s Agriculture Committee meeting.
“For the first time,” continues the regional Councillor, “all political groups in the European Parliament have clearly expressed their opposition to this approach. A unanimous dissent that shows how distant this reform is from the real needs of territories and rural communities. Yet, the Commission proceeds without any real dialogue with the Parliament, with the Regions, with agricultural organizations, and with those who work the land every day.”
The “concerning” contents of the request
It is a top-down decision, responding to a technocratic and centralist logic, far from the principles of subsidiarity and participation on which the European Union is founded. In substance, the proposal’s contents are profoundly concerning.
The second pillar of the CAP, dedicated to rural development (EAFRD), which has been the key instrument in recent years to support inner areas, multifunctionality, young farmers, short supply chains, innovative enterprises, and projects related to agri-environment and climate, would be eliminated.
All funds — CAP, Cohesion, Fisheries, Environment — would be channeled into a single national envelope, managed through a unified strategic plan, with the real risk of losing the specific and strategic vision of the agricultural sector. Agriculture would be treated as just another sector, no longer a priority.
Less power to the Regions
A centralized governance is foreseen, weakening the role of the Regions, reducing the possibility of interventions tailored to local needs, and erasing the bottom-up approach that has always characterized rural development.
The multi-year certainty of agricultural funding disappears, with serious consequences on the capacity of investment planning by agricultural enterprises and administrations. Moreover, there is no guarantee of maintaining current resources for direct payments or environmental measures, which risk being sacrificed in the name of flexibility that, in fact, is “only uncertainty and arbitrariness.”
On the financial level, centralization of power
Even on the financial level, the proposal raises strong concerns. The idea of creating a single national envelope, fueled by the merger between CAP funds and structural funds, not only complicates programming and makes the allocation of resources opaque but opens the door to disguised cuts and a concentration of managerial power in the hands of member states.
In the new system:
▪️ There is no clear distribution between agriculture, environment, cohesion, and fisheries, and there are no legal guarantees that the resources currently allocated to the CAP — particularly the second pillar — will be effectively maintained in the future.
▪️ The absence of a clear discipline on the pre-allocated binding of agricultural resources jeopardizes over 50 billion euros per year, currently destined for the sustainability and competitiveness of the European agri-food system.
▪️ The Regions would be completely marginalized: the new model assigns programming and management almost exclusively to central states, erasing the principle of subsidiarity and nullifying the fundamental role that Regions have always had in managing the CAP and structural funds.
Caputo, worried, states: “For realities like Italy and, in particular, for the Mezzogiorno, this would represent a dramatic institutional setback, with a direct impact on the ability to intervene promptly and targeted in the territories. Without the involvement of the Regions, the democratic and technical oversight of rural territories is lost.”
Other statements from Caputo
Caputo states: “It is unacceptable that Europe faces the future by weakening the financial lever and the multi-level governance that have ensured food, social cohesion, and environmental transition. Any approval of this proposal would have very serious repercussions on regional agricultural budgets, on the stability of rural policies, and on farmers’ incomes.”
And again: “The CAP is not just a budget item. It is the pillar of Europe that produces, that oversees territories, that ensures food security and environmental sustainability. Without an autonomous and recognizable CAP, the pact between agriculture and society, between institutions and territories, is broken.”
“We want a Europe that listens”
The regional Councillor continues to reiterate: “For this reason, today I am in Brussels, alongside farmers, to firmly say that this proposal represents a historic setback. This is not the Europe we want. We want a Europe that listens, that governs with communities, that improves — but does not dismantle — its founding policies.”
“The CAP can and must be reformed, but with courage, vision, and respect for its roots. Not with bureaucratic shortcuts that erase its identity and value. The European Parliament and farmers,” concludes Nicola Caputo, “today speak with one voice. The Commission should listen. The CAP is untouchable.”
© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
This article is automatically translated