New deal needed on CAP income
This CAP funding will depend significantly on the future budget for the EU, which EU heads of state meetings are scheduled to discuss and finalise in a series of meetings beginning today.
However, given the critical situation in the Middle East, it is reasonable to assume that discussion time will have to be found also for heads of state to formulate the EU’s position on this matter, as a priority.
This could mean that the specific detail on any agreed changes to the EU’s budget, and how they will impact on the CAP portion of the budget, will get moved out to a later date.
This is all speculation, of course, but speculation is all we’ve really had to go on in relation to discussions about the CAP over the last 12 months.
We are in the dark partly because of the issues surrounding the seven-year EU budget, but also, I believe, because some of our 12 MEPs have put in underwhelming performances, not only in their attempts to get to grips with the importance of EU farming subsidies as the basis for continuing European food production, but also in explaining this reality to EU taxpayers.
The depth of thinking in relation to the realities of where Irish farming should be going seems to be governed by a belief among a majority of politicians that if Ireland secures a decent portion of our existing CAP budget allocation then their job is done.
However, retention of our €1.6bn is only half the battle, in my opinion. The real issue for farmers is how the money — reduced or otherwise — gets divided.
I have over the last 12 months put forward a number of ideas on how any “New Deal” might be structured, so as to focus funds where they might do the most good.
Those farmers currently receiving a “cheque in the post” cannot continue to view it as a type of family heirloom to be handed down from one generation to the next when they retire.
We need to employ a more up-to-date reference period, so as to take account of those who are now working farms, and who have earned the right to draw on the public purse. The new reference period would use information such as that in the Animal Identification and Movement (AIM) System, formerly known as CMMS, plus production data from the Department of Agriculture’s single farm payment records.
Some farm organisations seem to be focusing on a need to arbitrarily cap payments, but would not a more imaginative approach be to cap the amount of land any one individual can draw subsidies on, coupled with a new payment system that would front-load payments on say the first 60 hectares, after which a sliding scale would apply up to a maximum of an additional 100 hectares?
The principal focus of this idea is to protect and encourage the mid-range family farm, which is the backbone of agricultural production in Ireland.
Returning to the importance of retaining as much of our CAP take as possible, a question that has not been asked — to the best of my knowledge — is whether farmers can expect a zeroing of the take from their payments for modulation, in a new CAP.
Doing so would help balance the cumulative effect of inflation (14% from 2004 to 2011) on farm payments.
Not doing so would mean that should the EU reduce the CAP by 5% this week, our loss in real terms is inflation of 14%, plus modulation of 10%, plus the possible CAP cut of 5%, totalling 29%.
While Minister Coveney and farm leaders rightly concentrate on the proposed cut in the overall EU budget, it is inflation and modulation payments that have really hammered us.
