1. water.europa.eu 3) a. Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Water Directors’ meeting Budapest, 26 & 27 May 2011 Nicolas ROUYER European Commission DG Environment Water unit

2. Questions for the Water Directors:  Do you see any technical obstacles to the inclusion of the WFD into cross compliance?  Do you see the green component as an opportunity for water protection?  Do you see a European standard on buffer strip width as a workable option? Slide 2 / 17

3. Overview presentation: 1. CAP reform: where we are now 2. WFD in cross compliance 3. The green component of the CAP Slide 3 / 17

4. Slide 4 / 17 April/May 2010: public consultation (the Water Directors contributed) 18 Nov. 2010: Communication on CAP reform Second half of 2011: legal proposal with impact assessment 1. CAP reform: where we are now 1. CAP reform: where we are now

5. Slide 5 / 17 Water protection issues was clearly identified in the Communication COM(2010)672: Water quantity Water quality Ecosystems (hydromorphology) Extreme events (droughts, floods) Different CAP mentioned tools to address water: WFD in cross compliance the green component the rural development regulation 1. CAP reform: where we are now 1. CAP reform: where we are now

6. Direct payments Cross compliance Markets Rural development Income Structural adjustment Public goods Pillar I Pillar II Green component The Common Agricultural Policy: The Common Agricultural Policy:

7. Slide 7 / 17 (1) Are WFD provisions relevant for cross compl.? Water protection is identified as a major concern for the European citizens (Flash Eurobarometer, 2008 & 2009) Pressures by agriculture on the water resources are very high (review of the draft RBMP, 2010) 2. WFD in cross compliance 2. WFD in cross compliance

8. Slide 8 / 17 (2) Do WFD provisions have a direct link with the agricultural activity? WFD provisions regulate: how & how much water is used the conditions to discharge used water the activities that may give rise to diffuse pollution the hydro-morphological aspects such as the conservation of the riparian areas. 2. WFD in cross compliance 2. WFD in cross compliance

9. Slide 9 / 17 (3) Do the WFD provisions relate to actions attributable to individual farmers? Examples of failures to follow the rules: abstraction of water without a permit (WFD art. 11.3.e) discharging waste water directly to water courses without a permit (WFD art. 11.3.g & j) application of pesticides not in accordance with the rules (WFD art. 11.3.h) modification of a riparian area of a water body without authorisation (WFD art. 11.3.i) 2. WFD in cross compliance 2. WFD in cross compliance

10. Slide 10 / 17 (4) Are the WFD provisions controllable at reasonable costs and quantifiable? Water policy is not new in the EU: in every MS, well developed system of water management (with controls, inspections & sanctions) on which the WFD implementation builds Cross compliance can make full use of the existing control mechanisms without implying additional costs 2. WFD in cross compliance 2. WFD in cross compliance

11. Slide 11 / 17 (5) Does the WFD create undue discrepancies between farmers, beyond what is required to take into account local needs? The environment is very diverse, as well as the characteristics & intensity of the activities that put pressures on it. There is a strong baseline that has to be complied with in all cases, and the flexibility to define additional measures that are needed to take into account local circumstances. 2. WFD in cross compliance 2. WFD in cross compliance

12. Slide 12 / 17 (6) Does the timeline of the WFD implementation match with the 2014 CAP reform? All the RBMP are expected to be in place in early 2012 (currently >80% of the EU covered) Many important mandatory WFD measures are already in place at farm level The other obligations must be specified by the end of 2012 (WFD art. 11.7) 2. WFD in cross compliance 2. WFD in cross compliance

13. Slide 13 / 17 A European standard on buffer strip width? Scientific evidences show that buffer strips have a positive impact on water According to EEA calculation, the impact on the arable land surface would be low (e.g. 0.24% with a 5 meter standard) A national 5 meter standard currently applies with success in one MS where the farming conditions are extremely diverse 2. WFD in cross compliance 2. WFD in cross compliance

14. Direct payments Cross compliance Markets Rural development Income Structural adjustment Public goods Pillar I Pillar II Green component 3. The green component of the CAP 3. The green component of the CAP

15. Slide 15 / 17 A tool to enhance a large scale uptake of the measures, but there are some concerns: risks of a « menu-approach » the combination with cross compliance (& RDR) the share of green measures in 1st pillar the necessity to reward public goods 3. The green component of the CAP 3. The green component of the CAP

16. Slide 16 / 17 Different technical measures are considered: permanent pasture green cover crop rotation ecological set-aside All are relevant for water protection but there must be a real added value 3. The green component of the CAP 3. The green component of the CAP Source: DG ENV/B1

17. Questions for the Water Directors:  Do you see any technical obstacles to the inclusion of the WFD into cross compliance?  Do you see the green component as an opportunity for water protection?  Do you see a European standard on buffer strip width as a workable option? Slide 17 / 17