Commission proposes slashed subsidies for farmers who neglect safety regulations

Date: 11/09/03

Transgressors risk forfeiting all their payments, writes David Cronin

FARMERS who flout EU food safety laws could incur swingeing cuts in the amount of subsidies they receive, under a new European Commission proposal.

The blueprint is designed to put into practice a key element of the deal on reforming the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), approved by the Union's farm ministers after protracted negotiations in June. That accord introduced the principle of 'cross-compliance' on a compulsory basis; this states that payment of farm subsidies will be made conditional on meeting EU food safety, environment and animal welfare standards.

The new blueprint, which was sent to the Council of Ministers shortly before EU institutions closed for their summer break, recommends that farmers who fall short of those standards would be penalized by cuts in their subsidies ranging from 2% to 100%, depending on the gravity of the offence involved.

EU governments do not have a formal deadline to decide on this proposal. "Politically it is important that it is decided as soon as possible," says Gregor Kreuzhuber, the Commission's agriculture spokesman. "The principle has already been agreed. Of course, we now need to thrash out the legal fine print."

The cross-compliance scheme is due to come into effect with a new regime for subsidies beginning in January 2005 - although member states have been given the option of stalling on its implementation until 2007. Enforcing the rules will be the responsibility of national authorities in EU countries, with the Commission playing a supervisory and monitoring role.

Some analysts have hailed the cross-compliance agreement as a major breakthrough, stressing it is due to reward farmers for good behaviour. "For the first time farmers will be encouraged and supported if they comply with food safety and quality and animal welfare standards, as often demanded by consumer groups," comments Andreas Schneider from the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS). "This cross-compliance will ensure better food quality and helps farmers to actually meet the standards required."

But many critics of the CAP are dubious about the significance of the reforms. Jim Murray, director of the consumer organization Bureau Européen des Unions de Consommateurs (BEUC), feels it is unclear how much scrutiny there will be of whether farmers who receive the entire subsidies they claim are actually honouring food safety commitments. "If an individual farmer says I have now improved quality - do you send out an inspector to the farm or what?" he asks. "There are a lot of questions up in the air."

In any event, Murray says that he views food safety as a "red herring" in the context of the CAP debate. He argues that high food safety standards can be achieved irrespective of whether the CAP remains or European agriculture shifts to a more market-oriented system. Policymakers, he adds, decided to link food safety to the CAP reform dossier due to public concern over the surrounding issues: "The feeling was there was a need to reassure people.

"Making rules on safety doesn't depend on existing rules for the organization of the market," he explains. "We must promote responsibility for food safety and rules promoting agriculture separately." Murray says the fact that Britain's Ministry for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food had responsibility for both agriculture and food safety in the 1990s hampered it from tackling the BSE crisis effectively as it had to juggle the interests of both farmers and consumers. He acknowledges that the European Commission has taken a step in the right direction with distinct directorates-general for food safety and agriculture.

Meanwhile, Tim Lang, professor of food policy at London's City University, says he is "deeply depressed" by the failure of June's CAP reform package to seriously examine nutritional issues. Such issues, he adds, are also absent from the agenda of the World Trade Organization ministerial currently taking place in Cancún, Mexico (10-14 September).

"The CAP reform deal and Cancún are not taking public health seriously," Lang remarks. "They do not at all address inappropriate diets or how trade is being used as a battering ram to open up markets to sell heart disease and diabetes-inducing diets. I'm deeply depressed by the failure of the Commission to take solid evidence about diet and public health seriously. It doesn't give a cat's whisker about nutrition."

Farmers who flout EU food safety laws could incur swingeing cuts in the amount of subsidies they receive, under a new European Commission proposal.