Unclear messages on Irish CAP vision
The most troubling was a phone conversation I had with an MEP who didn’t want to be quoted. I did, however, get a lecture on “the need for Ireland to operate within the system as devised by Europe”.
When I said Ireland didn’t appear to have a clear position on what we should be looking for, I was told that both the minister and his officials were “working to get the best deal possible”.
If every country had its own plan, which basically said give us the money and we’ll use it to our best advantage, no one in Brussels would know what was going on, I have been told.
I was also told the taxpayers of Europe want a clear indication of what farmers were being paid for, and what the justifications for the payments were.
The message I get is stop asking questions, it’s very complicated, and we in Europe know best!
With MEPs having tabled more than 7,000 amendments to the EU Commission CAP reform proposals, complicated doesn’t come close to describing the current situation, I’d say. And that’s where Martin Coughlan begins to get annoyed.
I return to the simple premise that the CAP was originally designed, among other things, to secure food production in the EU, or the Common Market as it was once known.
I think what we are seeing now is the evolution of the CAP into a type of rural social welfare scheme.
I can’t for the life of me figure out how you can marry the original ideas of the CAP with a system that now has thousands of civil servants and politicians crawling all over it, whose sole aim in these negotiations appears to be to hide the fact that farmers need direct aid from the taxpayers, in order to continue food production in Europe.
I say this because, among other things, Mr Coveney has said any new deal must be seen as “doing something substantial to protect the environment and maintain biodiversity”.
Is that not an admission that the CAP is no longer viewed by the minister as a food production model, but more a social welfare payment system for the farming community, dressed up with environmental aspirations?
Is it possible that the huge EU bureaucratic system is attempting to take away the clarity of purpose of the CAP and replace it with ideas that will make the system appear more relevant to European tax payers (while continuing to protect those who negotiate and administer)? Why is it necessary to pretend the money isn’t for the maintenance of farming families and some realistic level of production?
Like any system, what is achievable is governed by the availability of money, the main issue that is taxing the minds of European leaders as they go about the reform.
With all the talk about greening the CAP (a phrase coined solely for its saleability to the taxpayers), you have to wonder if the farm portion of the EU budget is cut, will the greening measures disguise a reduction in production by farmers who can no longer afford to meet environmental standards.
Europe needs to be honest with its taxpayers, and tell them that environmentally sound food production methods aren’t cheap.
