Criticism is mounting against the European Commission’s proposals for the new EU budget. During the ongoing session of the European Parliament, farmers staged protests outside the Strasbourg building, rejecting plans to reform the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). They warn that merging agricultural funds with cohesion policy would reduce support for rural areas, expose Europe to food security risks, and widen disparities between Member States.
“The European Commission is dismantling the Common Agricultural Policy by effectively shutting down its second pillar, which enabled agricultural development and modernisation. Merging CAP with cohesion policy creates uncertainty for beneficiaries — local communities and farmers will be forced to fight for the same funds despite having entirely different needs,”
said Siegfried Mureşan, Romanian MEP, Vice-Chair of the European People’s Party (EPP), and co-rapporteur for the EU’s Multiannual Financial Framework, in an interview with Newseria.
What is at stake?
In the current 2021–2027 financial framework, the CAP accounts for over €386 billion, roughly one quarter of the entire EU budget. It is built on three pillars:
- Direct payments to farmers
- Market stabilisation mechanisms
- Rural development (CAP Pillar II) — funding farm modernisation, irrigation systems, digitalisation, renewable energy, and rural public services
Under the Commission’s new proposal, CAP funding would be cut to €300 billion, with just €6.3 billion reserved for emergency market disruptions. Parliamentary critics warn that merging agricultural funds with cohesion funds may jeopardise ongoing long-term projects, especially in Central and Eastern Europe, where EU financing remains vital.
Farmers’ organisations sound the alarm
COPA-COGECA, Europe’s largest agricultural lobby, declared that the Commission has “crossed too many red lines.” The organisation called this “the first time in history that European agriculture is united in saying: this is unacceptable.” They warn that a 20% CAP budget cut threatens the food security of 450 million Europeans.
“Instead of ensuring Europe-wide security for farmers, Brussels wants to hand decision-making to national governments, forcing agriculture to compete directly with cohesion priorities. In countries near the Ukrainian border, like Romania or Poland, this would be strategically dangerous,”
warns Siegfried Mureşan.
Risk of geopolitical dependency — “You can’t import food in a crisis”
Critics also point out that shifting reliance to global food imports — including from Mercosur, India, Mexico, or Australia — creates structural risk.
“If Europe starts relying on imported food, the next crisis — like COVID-19 or the war — could disrupt supply chains. We’ve already seen shortages of medicines and industrial parts. But food insecurity would be unacceptable,”
said Waldemar Buda, Polish MEP from the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR).
They argue that the EU must modernise agriculture — but not weaken its financial foundations. Instead of cutting the CAP, they call for a competitiveness-oriented reform, which enforces equal environmental standards on third-country imports.
“European farmers face constantly growing regulatory and climate adaptation costs — they will need more support in the coming years, not less,”
emphasises Mureşan.
