EU agriculture ministers, meeting on 23 June 2026, debated the future of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) post-2027, revealing significant divergences on the balance between common rules and national flexibility, mandatory versus optional interventions, and budget allocation. The Council also took note of progress on related legislative files, including a fertiliser proposal, organic farming regulation, and a targeted revision of the Common Market Organisation (CMO).
Cyprus Presidency President Maria Panayiotou reported that the organic farming regulation mandate had been agreed, awaiting the European Parliament's position, while trilogues on the CMO targeted revision had concluded, with entry into force expected in July 2026. On the MFF-related CAP proposals, she noted a mature phase with some outstanding issues, expressing optimism for resolution under the incoming Irish Presidency.
EU Agriculture Commissioner Christophe Hansen stressed the need to balance common rules with flexibility, warning that too much flexibility undermines the 'common' character of the CAP. He emphasised targeting support to real farmers, generational renewal, and maintaining a strong budget. France's Annie Genevard called for preserving the CAP's common framework, sufficient resources, and increased co-financing rates, while opposing optional environmental measures. Portugal's Salvador Malheiro pushed back against mandatory support for farm succession and advocated voluntary transition plans. Italy's Luigi D'Eramo highlighted the CAP's strategic role and called for simplification and inclusion of agriculture in EU emergency tools. Greece's Margaritis Schinas argued for a common policy with EU resources and flexibility at national level. Latvia's representative stressed flexibility on interventions like support for areas with natural constraints and small farms, and unresolved external convergence. Belgium's Anne-Catherine Dalcq called for a clear definition of active farmer, ambitious generational renewal, and a coherent framework.
The debate exposed a cleavage between member states favouring strong common rules and those prioritising national flexibility. France and Greece argued for preserving the CAP's common framework with EU resources, while Latvia and Portugal pushed for more voluntary approaches. Commissioner Hansen's warning against excessive flexibility reflected a concern that too much national discretion could fragment the single market and undermine the policy's common character. The impact on stakeholders is significant: EU farmers face uncertainty over mandatory versus optional environmental and generational renewal measures, which could affect compliance costs and support levels. Member states will have varying degrees of autonomy in designing national strategic plans, potentially leading to uneven implementation across the EU. The agri-food sectors, particularly fruit, vegetables, and wine, may be affected by the CMO revision, which aims to strengthen producer organisations and crisis management tools. Next steps: negotiations continue under the Irish Presidency, with key divergences on mandatory vs. optional interventions, targeting criteria, and budget allocation.