Farmers will have to be even greener to receive subsidies

FARMERS and landowners will need to tick even more boxes for environmental friendliness to get subsidies in future.

A discussion paper on reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, published yesterday, listed issues to be negotiated for a new agreement to take effect in 2013.

The "communication" from rural development commissioner Dacian Ciolos, a Romanian, summed up discussions so far and made clear that the free marketeers' dream of an end to subsidies was a long way off – thanks to new awareness of "food security", rural income difficulties, food miles and the need for more productivity with less pollution.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

It was also clear that the consensus is for a move towards spending less on direct subsidies to farmers (known as Pillar One support) and more on "rural development" (Pillar Two). The idea is for governments to direct the money to where they think it is needed – towards the barely profitable farms of the UK uplands, for example.

There is general support, according to Mr Ciolos, for confining Pillar One payments to "active farmers", as opposed to big landowners, like the Queen, and for capping payments to big operators, unless they are labour-intensive.

A theme of the paper is the need for more compulsory green elements in the qualifications for Pillar One support and more "public goods" in return for Pillar Two – meaning cleaner air and water and more biodiversity.

Another theme is the need to encourage agricultural development in new EU countries – like Romania – rather than to conserve old England.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Mr Ciolos quotes concerns about the social costs of more importation of food. He also mentions talk of a need to protect food producers against exploitation by retailers and commodity speculators driving market fluctuations. These might be seen as arguments for keeping existing intervention tools and possibly adding more. The UK will resist, but Mr Ciolos is saying the concerns are up for discussion although he adds "simplification" of the CAP is a priority.

The president of the National Farmers' Union, Peter Kendall, warned that while the document was right in identifying the challenges for farmers some of its measures could undermine the good intentions.

"I see a recipe for complexity, distortion and a risk of undermining efforts to help farmers become less reliant on support," he said. "I fear the commission has fallen into the trap of trying to please as many people as possible, rather than adopting a clear direction,"

"It is rare that a clear policy pleases all of the people all of the time but I fear that what we have here will end up as a confused proposal that suits no one."

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

William Worsley, president of the country landowners' association, said the paper was "on broadly the right track", while The Campaign to Protect Rural England questioned whether the paper was bold enough on green needs.

Related topics: