*** CLAUDE BLUMANN, MARC BLANQUET, DANIELLE CHARLES LE BIHAN, ANNIE CUDENNEC, CHRISTIAN MESTRE, YVES PETIT, NATHALIE VALDEYRON: Politique agricole commune et politique commune de la pêche. Editions de l'Université de Bruxelles (26 av. Paul Héger, B-1000 Brussels. Tel: (32-2) 6503799 - fax: 6503794 - Email: editions@ulb.ac.be - Internet: http://www.editions-universite-bruxelles.be ). "Commentaire J. Mégret" series. 2011, 688 pp, €90. ISBN 978-2-8004-1505-5.
The books contained within the prestigious "Commentaires Jacques Mégret” series are in no way the kind of book that one would choose to lazily browse through coming back from the beach. Nonetheless, some vacationers might be inspired to put this weighty tome in their suitcase because the theme of the Common Agricultural Policy and to a lesser extent, that of common fishing policy, is in danger of poisoning their lives many long months after they get back to work. This seventh volume of the third edition of "Commentaires Jacques Mégret” was written by university specialists in this field. It comprehensively tackles these two similarly ambitious policies, even though they are today quite distinct. The policies are located in the context of the internal market. 16 pages in this book, together with the summary, confirm the extraordinarily dense and wide-ranging character of this collectively written book and would be enough to discourage a lot of people reading it, although the book in its entirety is in fact remarkably accessible.
The first part focuses exclusively on Common Agricultural Policy. Its historic development, its institutional law - “a kind of subsystem within the legal order of the Union” - and its links with the internal market and competition are examined in great detail. Other subjects scrutinised include the fundamental principles of “green Europe” and its financial implications, which make it so important in European construction and which have, nonetheless, received a certain amount of flak by some quarters. This policy is also presented on the basis of the logic underpinning the different pillars of the policy, which enable the authors to very usefully clarify the different domains of the “green Europe”. The first of these pillars responds to the traditional heart of the CAP, namely the common market organisations and the un-coupled single payment system. The second pillar focuses on rural development and action taken by agricultural organisations or their links with economic and social cohesion. So many of these themes are very much part of the debates on the future of the Common Agricultural Policy and the future Financial Perspectives. The third pillar covers questions linked to food safety and agricultural product quality, in addition to animal welfare or controversial themes such as genetically modified organisms and it is no less interesting or important than the other pillars. External relations have taken an increasingly important place in the agricultural field as part of the overall nature of Union policies and actions. It also covers important and continually evolving developments and implications of the most recent enlargements on the agricultural question.
Fisheries policy is analysed in the second part of the book. This begins with a chapter on the current fishing situation, which is often a subject that causes a certain amount of anxiety. This economic sector and the challenges facing it could certainly not be described as negligible. Some of the contributions look at marine resource management within the perspective of sustainable development. All these contributions contain clarification about the challenges affecting the external dimension of this common policy.
Obviously, the wealth of such a book cannot be translated in just a few paragraphs. The scientific nature of this book is also accompanied by an independent insight characterising it. There are a number of paragraphs written about the United Kingdom, “the ceaseless and dogged adversary of CAP”. This contribution provides a number of explorations of the British government position and how it has consistently demonstrated since it joined the European Community that it would not hesitate to express its opposition and distance from the usual Commission positions and advocate total liberalism on the basis of the US ideals. It remains to be seen whether this stubborn country will in the next few months join the same coalition as other countries that demonstrate certain coolness about integration and which traditionally follow in its wake and whether they would be prepared to sacrifice everything in the name of austerity … Michel Theys
*** SIR MICHAEL FRANKLIN (editor): Joining the CAP. The Agricultural Negotiations for British Accession to the European Economic Community, 1961-1973. Peter Lang (1 Moosstrasse, Postfach 350, CH-2542 Pieterlen. Tel: (41-32) 3761717 - fax: 3761727 - Email: info@peterlang.com - Internet: http://www.peterlang.com ). 2010, 409 pp, €52.20. ISBN 978-3-0343-0164-0.
Three senior British figures who were very much involved in negotiations on agriculture and fisheries during the United Kingdom's request to join the European Economic Community in the 1960s and 1970s, deliver their absolutely precious contribution to this excellent book. Edmund Neville-Rolfe is an eminent agriculture specialist and adviser. In the past he was an adviser to several British governments and international institutions. In this contribution he plunges into the archives of the British Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food to explain how the so-called London negotiations between Prime Minister Harold Macmillan took place and which were, ultimately scuppered by the veto exercised by General de Gaulle. The history of the fruitful negotiations at the beginning of the 1970s is recounted by the late J. H. V. Davies, a senior official in this department. The book is introduced and explained in different parts by Sir Michael Franklin. Before beginning work a the Permanent Secretary of state for this department, this senior official participated directly in the two negotiations: first as the Private Secretary of Christopher Soames, the Minister of agriculture at the time of the unsuccessful attempt to join the community and then as a deputy of Freddy Kearns, who was responsible for agriculture and fisheries in the British team that concluded accession on 1 January 1973. Obviously, some of these contributions are completely unilateral but this does not mean that they do not provide a detailed account of the context and the challenges contained in these two negotiations. Edmund Neville-Rolfe therefore demonstrates that during the first negotiations, it was politically impossible for the British to speed up negotiations on agriculture due to European and particularly French complexities in this field. He also illustrates how DG VI at the Commission did not make things any easier and how the officials working for this department, “were understandably paranoid about agreeing to anything with us that would call into question agreements so painfully won among the Six”. He also adds that if they had kept a low profile on agriculture, it would not have prevented the veto by General de Gaule. He explained that, “from the humiliations he (de Gaule) felt he had received during the war years, he had led France to a dominant position in Europe and the European Economic Community. Dressed up in Gallic rhetoric about Britain's unreadiness, what de Gaulle must surely have feared was that, with Britain a member, France would cease to be top dog”. Why therefore were the following negotiations successful? Because de Gaulle was no longer president and because the Commonwealth had lost a lot of its support in the United Kingdom, except for for New Zealand butter producers and sugar producers in some countries. It was, above all, the subject of the common fisheries policies that the negotiators would tear each other apart on this occasion but contrary to their predecessors, the outcome to the negotiations would inevitably be a positive one. Suddenly, the British are successfully fighting on the New Zealand question but let go of questions linked to the budget. All the refrains of, “I want my money back” were now in place and we still haven't stopped talking about it! (MT)
*** ROBERT LECOU: Les perspectives d'une pêche durable en Méditerranée. Commission des Affaires européennes de l'Assemblée nationale (Boutique de l'Assemblée nationale, 7 rue Aristide Briand, F-75007 Paris. Tel: (33-1) 40630033 - Internet: http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr ). "Rapport d'information" series, No. 2618. 2010, 88 pp, €3.50. ISBN 978-2-11-125977-5.
In this newsletter, Robert Lecou MP (France) is quite right to examine the question of what will become of fishing in the Mediterranean. This work was begun by his colleague Arlette Franco, who passed away far too young. After having presented specificities regarding the environmental threats to the Mediterranean and those posed by the fishing lobbies that prevail in this context, the author quite naturally focuses on bluefin tuna fishing and regulation on the subject. He points out that with restrictions on fishing periods and quota reductions, this fish will become less and less profitable for fishermen. (MT)