Commissioner argues for retention of ‘rural’ policy within the CAP

EUROPEAN “rural” development policy absorbed into regional policy would probably no longer be “rural“, according to EU Commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel.

She told a conference in Brussels that the magnetic power of towns in regions defined as “rural” would attract too much of the funding in such a scenario.

“I’m at the firm conviction that rural development should stay in the Common Agricultural Policy and I will fight for this.

“This is not because I want more funding but because rural development policy must stay in the CAP,” she said.

On the other hand, Ms Fischer Boel said it would be possible to work within rural development policy in such a way as to give more coherent support — and more solid support — to mountain areas.

“It would be possible to reserve a special place for mountains in our rural development policy. Call it a ‘box’, call it an ‘axis’, call it what you like.

“It would group together all policy measures relevant to mountain areas — and quite possibly tailor them to the specific needs of these areas.

“We could even agree minimum levels of spending on this area of policy, just as we do at present for the various axes of rural development policy or for the new challenges we have defined in the CAP health check,” she said.

The agriculture and rural development commissioner said these ideas are logical ways of ensuring that the voice of the mountains would not be drowned out by other, louder voices.

“At present, mountain areas are relatively small competitors for funding under a number of rural development measures. We all have to live with the fact that we don’t always get what we want in life.

“But if mountain areas find that one measure after another is not designed in their favour in a given rural development programme, these small individual defeats could add up to a serious problem.

“Separating off measures for mountain areas would eliminate this danger,” she said.

Ms Fischer Boel said mountain-based production has a great deal to offer, and many consumers will pay extra for it — if they’re confident that a given product is “the genuine article”.

“Helping to provide the accurate information necessary for this consumer confidence is an essential goal of our review of quality policy, and I look forward to pushing ahead with this,” she said.