The new reality. Has one given the recent changes in agriculture, in Europe and in the world, the importance they deserve? We are witnessing a radical change in the way that experts and decision-makers look at the situation. We are no longer concerned about theoretical over-production but by real risks and shortages that entail excessive rises in rates, which is to the benefit of the retail trade and certain producers, but disastrous for consumers. It is practically acknowledged that the first EU response will be to suspend the first set-aside campaign of its agricultural land, which had been introduced in 1992 to avoid certain production surpluses. About 10% of agricultural land is currently lying fallow and subsidised under the CAP (Common Agricultural Policy), corresponding to about 3.5 million hectares. Over-production has disappeared. On the other hand, the world lacks cereals (wheat and corn in particular), and the EU no longer assures sufficient production in milk, butter and meat. And yet the authorities continue to seek to reduce production of products like sugar (where Europe already has shortfalls). CAP intervention prices had already been abolished for most commodities. It is envisaged that dairy quotas should be abandoned. And as for the subsidised set-aside, it is not just a one year suspension that is envisaged but its definitive suppression in the context of the CAP “health check” foreseen for next year.
Successive revisions of CAP have contributed to these developments as it was essential to rid European agriculture of its surpluses: - a handful of “position advantages” artificially guaranteed to some producers, over-high prices enjoyed by some products, etc. This was done. And now, in some cases, one is wondering whether reforms were not taken too far, excessively reducing the relationship between effective production and remuneration, thus transforming farmers into “guardians of the landscape”. The EU has not given sufficient value to what is the essential aim of farming: - to feed the population. Top priority must be given back to this objective, without, however, questioning the principle of agriculture's “multi-functionality”, now acquired not only in Europe.
Safeguarding Community preference. Regulatory adjustments are not the main thing, but rather the general attitude, the overall assessment of what farming means. There is one danger: - those who have never wanted to understand the role of agriculture in Europe must not now say that the current rise in world prices provides an opportunity to eliminate all protection at borders, beginning with the additional Doha Round concessions. This would be an aberration. The surge in prices depends partially on specific situations: - the drought in Australia, the sudden craze for biofuels, and speculation. Droughts end, second generation biofuels will be less cereal-consuming, and speculation exhausts itself. But some realities persist: - the need for agriculture in Europe (as well as the need in the United States) in order to avoid shortages and famine. Europe must safeguard and in some cases re-launch its farming activity for environmental reasons (biodiversity!), as well as social reasons and territorial balance. The EU must ensure it is autonomous from the food supply point of view in order to be able to face up to any circumstances. There are already shortfalls in its supplies of basic products (milk, for example).
It is not a matter of closing borders or for the EU to give up its role as leading world importer of agricultural products from the poor countries, but of ensuring that farmers have a quality of life that is equivalent to other categories, that they deserve it because of the work they put in, the quality of their products, and for their concern to safeguard nature and to respect animal welfare, in response to consumer demand without asking to be paid for products that cannot be sold. The CAP will therefore not be governed by the logic of managing over-production but by that of meeting demand and needs.
This will be to the advantage of third countries also, mainly the most disadvantaged. Changes have appeared in Africa, in India and elsewhere. The ACP countries are beginning to understand where their true priorities lie. Tomorrow, I shall set out a few of these positive developments. (F.R.)