Farming industry leaders have stressed that increased flexibility, rather than overarching, prescriptive measures, should form the core of the post-2013 Common Agricultural Policy, the delivery of which is currently subject to debate in Europe. Giving evidence to the Efra Select Committee yesterday, NFU President Peter Kendall expressed concerns that the European Commission’s proposals, released last month, may undermine and hinder British farmers, rather than help them to meet the food production and environmental challenges ahead.

The proposals caused much controversy in the run up to their official release, as a number of leaked documents showed the Commission wanted to see a significant proportion of farmers’ support payments made dependant on complying with certain environmental measures.

image expired

Kendall, George Dunn, chief executive of the Tenant Farmers’ Association and Harry Cotterell of the Country Land and Business Association answered questions posed by the Efra committee over the Commission’s proposals and how their delivery would affect the UK industry. All three agreed that, as they currently stand, the proposals would be detrimental to farmers. 

Mr Kendall suggested that, instead of inflexible greening measures forming part of pillar one, farmers who are already engaged in agri-environment schemes could be made automatically eligible for the greening aid, which at present would cover organic farmers. Kendall claimed uncertainty over the future and current volatility is preventing farmers from renewing their agri-environment scheme agreements and slowing uptake. He called for reforms to focus on ‘positive management’, creating incentives for farmers to provide benefits rather than leave set aside.

Harry Cotterell, of the CLA, supported Kendall’s claims and questioned the affects new greening measures would have on pillar 2 payments. He said, "We’ve got agri environment right as well as anyone has in Europe." The CLA president suggested the proposed greening measures, source of much of the controversy surrounding the CAP reforms, were "not focused on outcomes", and were simply being made to justify large expenditure on the CAP.

He stood with Kendall in claiming current agri-environment and farm assurance schemes, such as LEAF, are already delivering a large number of benefits to the environment and the proposed measures may affect this.

Greening measures: Huge public spending must be justified

Regarding the specific proposals for changes to pillar one payments, the delegates from TFA, CLA and NFU all agreed that certain caveats must be attached to public money being paid to farmers – the CAP accounts for around 40 per cent of the EU’s budget – but said they needed assurances that pillar one greening rules would be applied equally across all member states, to avoid distorting effects on trade.

All delegates said they felt the seven per cent set aside outlined in the EC proposals was too high. The three quibbled the final definition of the seven per cent and sated that long term lays could have detrimental impacts in some cases. They also said new rules requiring three crops be grown on arable land could adversely affect medium sized family farms; the three claimed farmers with a smaller arable area would suffer much worse than large scale arable farms under the new rules. Kendall referred to the proposal as "micromanaging."

Mr Dunn commented, "Would you expect the NHS to take seven per cent of its productive capacity and use it for something which wasn’t within the core remit of the NHS? Would you expect a dairy farmer who has ten hectares of maize to be growing three crops?"

Led by George Dunn of the TFA, the delegates also called for more engagement with farmers on the ground in devising policy, as, even within Britain, different farm sizes and geographical conditions mean rigid frameworks would be hard to implement. Dunn advocated more sensitive distribution of environmental measures, as opposed to the "process driven solutions" suggested by the Commission.

Also questioning the ‘one size fits all’ approach, Mr Kendall pointed out that, as they stand, greening measures would have a devastating impact on pig and poultry farmers; the Commission’s own impact assessment identifies that, faced with increased fodder costs as a result of greening, pig and poultry farmers would see income per worker fall by 25 per cent.

Cotterell agreed that the attempt to apply universal measures would be a mistake; "Trying to take a reform and applying it from Estonia to Portugal would be virtually impossible if rules were to be taken and applied equally across the 27 states." The three cautiously advocated allowing member states more flexibility to decide how money allocated to greening is dealt with.

Dun and Cotterell disagreed, however, on whether more emphasis should be placed on paying ‘active’ farmers; Agriculture Commissioner Dacian Ciolos wants to see farmers meet a number of conditions in order to qualify for pillar one support. He said, "Direct payments should go hand in hand with a better definition and targeting of support to active farmers only." This has caused a stir amongst wildlife and countryside NGOs, who claim their funding would be seriously affected by such a move.  

Germany and France have come out in favour of the greening measures, although Italy recently announced its opposition. A coalition of some of the bloc’s most productive regions, from France, Spain and Portugal yesterday announced they felt the proposals “overall [represent] positive work”, but said more needed to be done.

Kendall reiterates calls for productivity

Speaking after the committee meeting, Kendall renewed his calls for CAP payments to focus on increasing productivity rather than delivering environmental returns. He said, "The next few decades will be a crucial period. There is a growing population to feed, both at home and abroad, and we are seeing increased volatility in our agricultural markets. And we’re contending with globalisation and concerns over our energy security and the need to protect our finite natural resources.

"The EU Commission says it wants smart, sustainable and inclusive growth for European agriculture, but the proposals currently on the table actually move farming in England and Wales in the opposite direction."

Kendall also took aim at the government for its stance on the reforms saying, "I have heard Defra ministers repeatedly say they do not want to see English farmers disadvantaged and that they want the greening measures to be meaningful. I am yet to be convinced that this is not code for gold plating or an attempt by Treasury to reduce its spend on agriculture in the UK."