An olive oil producer whose export market is suddenly hit by tariffs could soon redirect its EU-funded campaign to another country. A key Parliament committee wants the bloc’s food promotion scheme to become simpler, more flexible, and easier for small farms to tap.
Producers who win EU money to market their food should get far more room to adapt. They should be able to switch products, move money, or target another export market when economic or geopolitical conditions change. That is the central demand of a report on the EU’s agri-food promotion policy by Salvatore De Meo (EPP/ITA). The European Parliament’s Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI) backed it on 5 October by 37 votes to seven, with one abstention. The report is not binding and now heads to a vote of the full Parliament.
The proposals pay particular attention to small farms, cooperatives, and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Lawmakers say these should face simpler procedures when they apply for support. The scheme co-finances campaigns that market EU food and drink at home and abroad, and the Commission set aside a record €205m for it in 2026. The committee also wants it to become more commercially focused, while still showcasing European food standards and regional products.
Room to change course
Crucially, the committee wants producers to keep the freedom to change course even after a campaign has won approval. That matters because programmes can run for up to three years, and markets can turn in far less time. Lawmakers say the change could make EU-backed campaigns more responsive to sudden shifts in international markets.
Lawmakers also want money to move more easily between programmes and sectors when demand changes. The committee points to organic promotion. Funds earmarked for organic products can go unused, while other sectors attract more applications than the budget can cover. Under the committee’s plan, the unspent money could flow to where the demand is. At the same time, MEPs want the overall budget to stay predictable.
Red tape is the other big target. The report calls for less burdensome and more proportionate paperwork, especially for small farms, SMEs, and organisations in rural or disadvantaged areas. The Commission has already taken a first step. In July, it doubled the deadline for signing contracts to 180 days and raised the maximum pre-financing rate to 30 per cent.
The committee also wants bolder multi-country campaigns and more funding for joint projects. These should put more stress on quality, traceability, sustainability, and geographical indications, the EU labels that protect regional specialities such as Parma ham. Ultimately, lawmakers believe that more effective EU-funded promotion, both at home and abroad, will make European agriculture more competitive.
European brand, national flavour
The proposals also address how European food presents itself to shoppers abroad. MEPs want producers to pair the EU’s ‘Enjoy, it’s from Europe’ slogan with labels naming the country of origin on packaging for foreign markets. The idea is to combine Europe’s reputation for food with the national and regional identities that help individual products stand out.
We have also upheld a fundamental principle: to ensure fair treatment for all eligible agricultural sectors and products, including meat and wine, without discrimination or demonisation. — Salvatore De Meo, rapporteur
The report also touches on a more politically sensitive question: which products should benefit from EU promotion money. Mr De Meo left no doubt where he stands. “We have also upheld a fundamental principle: to ensure fair treatment for all eligible agricultural sectors and products, including meat and wine, without discrimination or demonisation, as these products are integral to Europe’s agri-food heritage and identity,” he said.
The quarrel is not new. In its 2021 Beating Cancer Plan, the Commission pledged to review the scheme’s support for alcohol and for red and processed meat. During committee talks in June, Tilly Metz (Greens/EFA, LUX) called for phasing out promotion money for processed meat and alcoholic drinks, citing their impact on public health.
Mr De Meo presented the final text as a careful compromise. “The approved text is the result of serious negotiations that struck the right note on sensitive issues such as geographical balance, origin labelling, and the need to maintain a promotion policy that is flexible, inclusive, and capable of showcasing the quality and diversity of the European agri-food model,” he said.
Devil in the detail
The committee’s proposals point towards a promotion policy that gives producers more freedom to react to changing markets and makes EU support easier for smaller businesses to reach. But much remains open. It is not yet clear how flexible funding would work in practice, or how much money each new initiative would get. Those details will decide how much the changes mean for farmers and food producers.
Even if the full Parliament backs the report, the Commission is under no obligation to follow it. A more immediate test is already at hand. The Commission expects to confirm the budget for next year’s promotion programme this month.
