The bare minimum. The balance of power within the EU these days is such that there is no chance that the draft reform of the CAP which I summed up in this column of bulletin 9039 can be accepted. All that we can hope for in the meantime is that the Community institutions have the wisdom to: a) refuse to accept, within the framework of the WTO, any excessive opening up to the agricultural products of the entire world, which would have the effect of stamping the European preferences into the ground in favour of the poorest countries and of destroying entire swathes of European agricultural activity; b) safeguard the budgetary support to the CAP as decided upon by the heads of government for the next few years.
These minimum requirements do not mean abandoning other aspects of the overall plan, which include: a) renegotiating the Union's commitment not to develop its production of soya and other oil seeds and pulses, which is absurd both economically and ecologically (the EU can only cover 25% of its needs); b) better distribution of the added value of agricultural production: the share of the farmers represents one third, very often less, whereas mass distribution and the agro-food industry continued to swell their profits; c) better international balance; currently, European farmers are obliged to respect increasingly stringent social and environmental norms, which their main competitors on the world market are not. Furthermore, the opening up of the European market to products from the poorest countries is, beyond all comparison, higher than that of any other country, under agreements with the ACP States and the "Everything but Arms" initiative. No European trade concession is possible unless these different elements are addressed
A skilful negotiator, but... A policy going in the direction indicated cannot be implemented by the current EU. It is true that the European negotiator, Peter Mandelson, took reasonably firm stances, but I get the impression that he did it more as a skilful negotiator than as a person who is convinced of the need to safeguard European agriculture; if he obtains sizeable quid pro quos (in services and industry in particular), he would be prepared to give a lot of ground on agriculture. And different positions should not be expected from the current Presidency of the Council …
Understanding the British position. I come on to the attitude of the United Kingdom. I believe that this attitude, which is difficult to understand in most of the continental countries and Ireland (see the statements by Prime Minister Bertie Ahern), is deeply rooted. The system of "imperial preferences" was simple and clear: the United Kingdom exported its industrial production and in exchange, the countries of the Commonwealth provided it with agricultural products. The dairy products arrived from New Zealand, cereals from Canada and Australia, cane sugar from the Caribbean, and so on. On that side of the channel, the mindset is still marked by this, and the notion of self-sufficiency in food is incomprehensible for the British. Their commitment to nature and their respect for the animal and vegetable worlds are beyond discussion, and certainly better than those in many countries of the continent, but historically, they express themselves differently. In most of the continental countries, it is agricultural activity which fashioned the natural environment, the countryside and conditions. In the United Kingdom, it is parks, gardens, and even symbolic traditions such as foxhunting. On the continent, however, self-sufficiency in food is a requirement logically, socially and strategically. Added to this is Europe's duty to help to relieve the world food shortage, a duty which requires us to conserve agricultural production, which will soon be indispensable (within a timescale put by the experts at around 20 years), when the world's food requirements will have exceeded its production capacities. According to various studies, in order to contribute to world food security, Europe should not only maintain, but actually increase its agricultural production. The way Tony Blair sees things, which has recently been confirmed yet again, takes no account of this point. This is irresponsible.
Two solutions. Given the situation I describe, I can see only two solutions. Either the British farmers need to get sufficient support behind them in order to obtain a national consensus leading their country to take part in the rescue of agricultural activity in Europe and its own food autonomy, or the United Kingdom should leave the common agricultural policy. It won't have too pay towards its costs anymore (which would automatically resolve the problem of the "British rebate"), but at the same time, it would be giving up any right to the funding and market mechanisms under the CAP, but its politicians and other wealthy citizens would be able to continue to holiday in Tuscany, where they can buy plenty of land and ex-farms.
(F.R.)