TDs taking interest in CAP reform
The callers were very much in favour of the idea that any new deal would have to be based on those who are currently actively farming.
One man was very critical of the current system — on the basis that a percentage of people receiving payments do not depend on farming for the majority of their income.
He cited a few well-known business people who run multi-million euro enterprises, and who also receive substantial single farm payments. He also mentioned doctors, dentists and stud farms.
While neither you, dear reader, nor I are ever likely to get rich on the back of direct farm aid, there is a valid question as to how much aid any one farm enterprise should legitimately be entitled to.
I don’t go along with the idea that if you own a shop, a garage or run the local post office, for example, and also own a farm of land, you should be barred from receiving assistance on the grounds that your farming enterprise isn’t the biggest contributor to your income.
Within my own area, I know of several people who run very successful town-based businesses, and also manage a farming enterprise equally successfully.
As 2013 approaches, and with it, Ireland’s presidency of the EU, the amount of column inches and air time that the CAP reform will receive is bound to increase, and it’s going to very interesting to see where the media will focus its attention during the debate.
I mention this because of a recent Dáil debate. I found it very reassuring that even TDs with urban constituencies appeared not only interested but very well informed about the importance of the forthcoming reshuffle of the CAP. Deputy Patrick Nulty of the Labour party, whose constituency is Dublin West, expressed concern at the payment of larger sums “to certain individuals and companies who receive massive benefits in other areas are getting these sums from the CAP”. He said this can lead to a negative perception of small farmers. Minister Coveney concurred, and stated that the capping of farm payments was proposed by Brussels, with €300,000 the cut-off figure.
What exactly do the EU authorities intend any future payments to be used for? At this point the SFP is supposed to represent assistance in keeping families on the land by helping out with their bills.
But who needs €300,000 to run their house, save the Queen of England, perhaps?
Is the new plan to maintain a model of farming that can be inherently loss-making, while finding new and novel ways to slip farmers a few quid just to keep them going?
This is the biggest question and it’s the one that is glossed over. The flaw is not that five or six individuals or companies get €300,000; it’s not that others get figures from €100,000 up; it’s that the food production business does not return a consistent wage to those on the bottom rung of the ladder.
Granted, at present, Irish agriculture is in rude good health, but as Deputy Seamus Kirk of Fianna Fáil said in the same Dáil debate, “Price volatility will kick in at some stage in the future”.
He added, “The single farm payment provides support and helps take farmers through the difficult period when repayments and normal family expenses and costs must be met.”
So what will Europe decide? Nothing is yet decided, but should the quality of recent Dáil debate be reproduced in the final thinking of the Irish negotiating team, we will not go to the table empty handed.
