This is a subscriber-only article
The first of the consultation's three months is over and replies are rolling in, though they have slowed up from the 10,000 responses received in the first two weeks. Some trends are now starting to emerge.
Firstly, there is a consensus from all interested parties that the current version of CAP is not working as it should. It is neither pleasing environmentalists nor farmers. It was telling that Northern Ireland farmers were at best ambivalent towards the benefits of EU membership (via CAP) during the Brexit referendum.
In fairness, Agriculture Commissioner Phil Hogan and his officials acknowledge the complexities of the current CAP, and the word “simplification” is now so much part of the Brussels jargon that it usually appears in the same sentence every time CAP is mentioned. Achieving simplification has been ongoing and the yellow card system in Ireland is a useful and imaginative start.
Priorities
The post-2020 CAP will be on the agenda of Monday's Farm Council in Brussels under the Maltese presidency, who has circulated a discussion paper with simplification at its heart. Establishing priorities is starting to emerge as a second theme, and it coincides with just about every speech made by Commissioner Hogan in the past six months. The current thinking in Brussels is that the cornerstones of the next CAP, as well as being simpler, will be dealing with price volatility, environmental protection, research and innovation, rural sustainability, attracting young farmers, improving transparency and farmers position in the supply chain, all while keeping the market focus.
Few people in Irish farming will disagree with these objectives, but the difficulty begins as the EU looks at how to implement them. Some, such as maximum environmental protection, seems incompatible with achieving a market focus, assuming this is at world price level. If the environment is prioritised, the EU needs to be careful that this is not achieved at the expense of outsourcing agricultural production to areas of the world with a more relaxed approach to environment and welfare controls that add so much cost but no real market value to Irish and EU farmers.
An interesting example of this could be the UK post-Brexit. At an event in Belfast this week, Owen Paterson, former Secretary of State at DEFRA, the UK’s agriculture ministry, outlined a vision for the future of British farming and rural policy.
GM and hormones
He foresees a situation where farmers are freed to farm, accessing GM, probably growth-promoting hormones and any other innovations available, but having to compete at world market prices as the UK would be an open and free-trade market. For marginal land and upland areas, he visualised Government support to maintain the countryside in a way that made it attractive for tourism. He may be a former minister, but many in the current Government share this thinking, and the UK farm and industry lobbies have work to do to secure a farmer-friendly future agriculture policy.
A further challenge for the next CAP is the funds to be allocated without the UK's net contribution to the EU's budget. There is also the issue of finding the method that rewards active farmers who get up to calve the cow, lamb the ewe, or plant the grain, while at the same time supports sensitive and less productive rural areas. The old payment structure that had a ceiling of 90 male cattle plus a cow payment had much to recommend it, yet it wouldn’t be in favour with the World Trade Organisation at present.
No CAP reform is easy and this one will be no different.
Editorial: Brussels cannot ignore the level of farmer frustration with CAP
SHARING OPTIONS: