CAP reforms will aid land owners and not food producers, claims IFA

PROPOSALS to reform the CAP will reward land owners rather than food producers, the IFA has told EU Agriculture Commissioner Dacian Ciolos at a meeting in the European Parliament in Brussels.

While the EU’s current Single Farm Payment (SFP) is paid in relation to farm output, the new CAP proposes moving to a model of paying per hectare owned, even land which is not actively farmed. Farmers in Ireland and several other EU member states are fundamentally opposed to this proposal.

IFA president John Bryan told Mr Ciolos that Irish farmers have serious concerns that the Commission proposals have the capacity to undermine active producers, interfere with the farmer’s normal business decisions and, at a national level, reduce the capacity of Irish agriculture to contribute to our much needed economic recovery.

Mr Bryan said: “The proposal to move to a uniform per-hectare payment by 2019 is of huge concern for Irish farmers. At farm level, the changes in payment levels will cause huge disruption, in a very short time period, undermining viable businesses.

“It is too simplistic a proposal, as it takes no account of the major differences in productive capacity of land across Ireland and is not supportive of the active farmer. Overall, it will reduce the growth potential of Irish agriculture.”

He told Mr Ciolos that member states must be given the flexibility to implement a payment system that supports production, ensures viable farm businesses, and reflects existing production patterns. The IFA delegation also met Irish MEPs to brief them on the views of Irish farmers.

Mr Bryan said: “On a related note, the uncertainty created by the 2019 flat-rate proposal combined with a future reference date of 2014 for the new payment system is causing disruption in the land market and is affecting farmer’s business decisions. This issue must be addressed immediately.”

He added that the Commission’s proposals on greening would impose additional costs on the farmer and interfere with production decisions and it was unclear what environmental benefits they will deliver. Mr Bryan called for the measures to be revised so that they are voluntary and can be incorporated into farmer’s normal practices.