October 23, 2007
Shedding light on the common agricultural policy
Can the common agricultural policy survive a dose of sunshine? Farm ministers on Monday agreed to publish for the first time details of the recipients of the 54 billion euro common agricultural policy. From 2008 anybody should be able to find out how much the farmer next door is getting from the taxpayer, which could undermine support for the 50-year-old policy.
The problem is that much of the cash goes not to John Barleycorn scraping a living from a few fields in Scotland, but to AN Agribusiness, hovering up subsidies as quickly and efficiently as a combine harvester. Names such as Nestle and Tate and Lyle are prominent.
This has been shown by a determined campaign from journalists across Europe who have used freedom of information acts to force governments to disclose subsidies. The European Commission, which hands them out, has long pleaded that data protection. However, farming commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel, who herself owns a farm, was forced to publish them when in government in her native Denmark. She has now become a convert.
Some 20 countries have given out information requested, but according to farmsubsidy.org, which has done an admirable job collating them, most are partial. Two countries, Austria and Greece, have refused point blank. The reader can decide the reason in the case of Greece, which is the only EU member except for new entrants Bulgaria and Romania not to have implemented a new system of tracking that is less vulnerable to fraud.
The question now is how much information will they have to give. Guidelines will be drawn up by the Commission and member states behind closed doors. France at the moment just lists “a grain farmer in Picardy”. In the UK, you can see what rich landowners such as the Vestey family get (1.7m pounds in 2003-4).
Jack Thurston, who runs farmsubsidy.org, fears that there will not be an accurate description of the payments. He told Ms Fischer-Boel on her blog: “Simply publishing names and amounts is not real transparency. If anything, it is a diversion.
He says the Commission’s draft proposal “would not require EU member states to disclose any useful information that explains why the subsidies were paid. It will simply break down the payments into three broad and fairly uninformative categories,.
These are direct payments (basic subsidy for growing) market payments (for unsold produce sold to the EU) and rural development, for new business ventures and environmental measures.
These categories do not explain the varied objectives of the dozens of schemes that make up the CAP, for instance the diversity of objectives of the second pillar, and will leave European citizens guessing as to why all this money is spent.”
However, the Commission says it is hard to break down those sums. “What is important is that you will see names, addresses and amounts on the internet,” says a spokesman.
It could boost its plans to reduce payments to the biggest beneficiaries.
Wonderful if it happens ,a) the more transparency, the better solutions,b) small and medium farming is extremely important, but giving subsidies to huge corporations that also want to grow GM seeds to save money and in the dark is not important at all, every few months we hear another accident (at least here in the USA) were Genetically Modified seeds and crops are found to be growing among natural crops, ooooops ! the seed company apologizes for the mistake until a few months later when another GM crop shows up, again by mistake, shame !
c) Europe and the Americas should promote small-medium farming of organic/natural crops, free-range animals and dairy products,it’s good for the health of the consumers as well as the health of the society,how ignorant the “bourrrocrats” in Washington DC and Brussels EU that can’t even offer plans to excite the youth to work on farms, to plant, to care for farm animals,to fish at sea,our society is only able to direct kids to buy stuff, drink alcohol(mostly from GM crops to addict more), smoke extremely manipulated tobacco products ( the tobacco seeds today are masterpieces of lab design to push nitrosamines,nicotine,perfumes,sugars,colorants,
etc.)and indirectly turn to drugs by default, and then SOCIETY comes down on them with jail,convictions,punishments, shame and more pharmaceuticals to get them off the “illegal” ones, what an ignorant formula! every kid must know how to plant a tree,grow vegetables and fruits,pick crops, swim and start/put-off a cooking fire in the wild,with a laptop and mobile, but able to choose good mushrooms and avoid poisonous ones, every kid needs a “natural” training,Europe and the Americas are growing kids that only know how the buy processed foods, shop and shop and become unhappy while getting very fat and stupid,it’s time for evolution,it’s time to get new “bourrrocrats”.
d) in the warm areas,water dasalination and ethanol-biofuels from sugarcane/jatropha/rapeseeds/corn/etc. needs a massive push, combined with solar homes/turbines/hydrogen fuelcells, check http://www.solardecathlon.org/ where the german solar home design won this year, Europe and the Americas must maximize its farms towards Energy Independence,every home and farm must have solar/turbine/hydrogen power, the training of all the carpenters,plumbers,electricians,system designers and programmers is key to the Economy,we need millions of these solar homes and farms as well as the workers that can build them and live in them,cheaper and happier ,what are they waiting for in Washington DC and Brussels? to not train workers and build these new solar homes and farms is to go against our own future!
Posted by: blogger | October 24th, 2007 at 7:54 pm | Report this commentA farmer that can’t survive without subsidies is not a farmer at all. He is a welfare recipient and should get another job.
The CAP is the most bloated and grotesque of all subsidy regimes. At best it results in a serious misallocation of resources. In truth it forces all European to pay far more than they should for food, while at the same time forcing developing nations to remain in poverty far longer than they should.
And for what?
So farmers that shouldn’t be farmers can continue farming.
Scrap the CAP.
Posted by: Stu99 | October 30th, 2007 at 1:36 am | Report this commentFarmsubsidy.org does more than just compile data released by member state governments, our network of investigative journalists, researchers and activists are the ones who are making the Freedom of Information requests and in many cases taking them through lengthy court processes (including against the Commission itself).
The Gold Standard of transparency is currently practiced by Sweden, which has recently disclosed to us the raw data files that the Commission collects from all member states for audit purposes (these are known as ‘crossed files’). The files are highly detailed and give all the information needed for proper scrutiny of the CAP, including key information like why the money was paid and where the recipient is located. These files already exist, so the Commission spokesperson’s claim that it is not possible to compile detailed data for disclosure is a barefaced lie.
As a result of the pressure applied by farmsubsidy.org and the commitment of Commissioner Siim Kallas to transparency, the new EU financial regulation contains important new provisions on the disclosure of end recipients of EU funds. The new provisions come into effect now for all non-CAP expenditure. But there is a one-year delay for CAP expenditure, introduced at the request of the French government. France is the biggest beneficiary of the CAP and its government prefers that the beneficiaries remain top secret for as long as possible.
The upshot is that despite all the fanfare last month about transparency in the CAP, there will be no disclosure under the provisions of these new laws until 2009 at the earliest (conveniently bypassing the mid-term CAP ‘health check’ or policy review). In the meantime, the farmsubsidy.org network will continue what we have been doing for almost three years now: using existing FOI laws to force governments to release data now, and then compile it and make it available in a way that is useful for European citizens.
Politically, the CAP is maintained by the myth that it exists to give a helping hand to Europe’s small family farmers. The reality is that the policy enriches Europe’s wealthiest landowners, boosts profits to large agricultural supply companies, and makes it much harder for young and enterprising farmers to build successful businesses.
Posted by: Jack Thurston | November 2nd, 2007 at 1:52 pm | Report this commentJack, thanks for your thoughts on this. I did say that you and your ilk used the FOI requests but let’s not split hairs. Worryingly, the Commission is now challenging Sweden’s openness by arguing in court that it should not have released material about a GMO approved by Brussels. Let’s hope this move does not have implications for farm subsidies.
Posted by: Andrew Bounds | November 5th, 2007 at 9:27 pm | Report this commentThe Common Agricultural Policy needs to be dismantled, it is an “injustice” to non farming taxpayers.
There has to be full disclosure.
Posted by: Richard | November 20th, 2007 at 12:54 am | Report this comment