Euro cash gaffe
A diplomatic gaffe by the country's EU negotiators in Brussels has cost the budget millions of euros. It came during the closing of the accession agreements reached in Brussels. Officials had gone to the concluding discussions with extra cash that they were sure the Polish delegation would insist on receiving for farmers.
A source close to the talks informed the Business Journal that the government's tough stance at the Copenhagen Summit led them to expect a final confrontation over agriculture. Brussels officials will not reveal the exact amount.
"They received a pledge that they would get the €1 billion drawdown offered by Gerhard Schröder at Copenhagen without having to furnish the usual criteria to the commission on how it would be spent," the source said. "It seems they were so pleased to get the money, that was it. The talks were closed.
"Unfortunately, the Polish side did not demand more money for agriculture which the commission had available, but was keeping quiet about. Now, of course, the Poles want to return to the table, but the commission is saying it's too late, the talks are closed."
The special lump sum payment of €443 million in 2004, however, was confirmed. The overall €1 billion agreed at the summit is not new money, and the offset lies in a reduction of money for rural development next year from 35% to 23.3% and in structural and cohesion spending from 3% to 2%.
A one-year transition period was agreed to for a year during which the special rates of reduced duty can be maintained on biofuels. The reduced rate of 7% VAT on housing can stay until the end of 2007, so long as it excludes actual building materials.
A pledge was agreed that taking into account the "specific problems of the agricultural sector in Poland," measures adopted by the commission in future would include monitoring trade flows between the country and other member states. In Euro-language, this is a sop to the PSL minority coalition partner over the sensitive issue of food imports. But it falls well short of allowing any reinstatement of quotas or other kinds of border controls.
A decision was deferred on whether to introduce a crop support scheme for tobacco growers. The farm subsidies top-up permissible from the government's own resources can range between 55% and 65% to 2006, or it can select a different mechanism of direct income supports on a product basis.
A source close to the talks informed the Business Journal that the government's tough stance at the Copenhagen Summit led them to expect a final confrontation over agriculture. Brussels officials will not reveal the exact amount.
"They received a pledge that they would get the €1 billion drawdown offered by Gerhard Schröder at Copenhagen without having to furnish the usual criteria to the commission on how it would be spent," the source said. "It seems they were so pleased to get the money, that was it. The talks were closed.
"Unfortunately, the Polish side did not demand more money for agriculture which the commission had available, but was keeping quiet about. Now, of course, the Poles want to return to the table, but the commission is saying it's too late, the talks are closed."
The special lump sum payment of €443 million in 2004, however, was confirmed. The overall €1 billion agreed at the summit is not new money, and the offset lies in a reduction of money for rural development next year from 35% to 23.3% and in structural and cohesion spending from 3% to 2%.
A one-year transition period was agreed to for a year during which the special rates of reduced duty can be maintained on biofuels. The reduced rate of 7% VAT on housing can stay until the end of 2007, so long as it excludes actual building materials.
A pledge was agreed that taking into account the "specific problems of the agricultural sector in Poland," measures adopted by the commission in future would include monitoring trade flows between the country and other member states. In Euro-language, this is a sop to the PSL minority coalition partner over the sensitive issue of food imports. But it falls well short of allowing any reinstatement of quotas or other kinds of border controls.
A decision was deferred on whether to introduce a crop support scheme for tobacco growers. The farm subsidies top-up permissible from the government's own resources can range between 55% and 65% to 2006, or it can select a different mechanism of direct income supports on a product basis.
