Froggy December 2009

Out with Marie-Ann

 Marie-Ann Fischer Boel, the Danish European Agriculture Commissioner who set up the ending of milk quotas, has retired, leaving the post to the Rumanian Dacian Ciolos.  Ciolos has qualifications in agriculture from French institutions (Rennes and Montpellier) and he has worked for a number of years in several regions of France in agriculture, even setting up a joint project in rural development between Savoy and a Rumanian region.  

He belongs to an independent think tank on European agriculture and rural development called “le Groupe de Bruges” (not the same thing as the Bruges Group).

Their programme deals with the small farms of Eastern Europe and what will happen to them; their text as you will see is full of question marks (underlining not in the original):

“With the accession of 12 new members and with new members at the horizon, the topic of subsistence and semi-subsistence farms has gained a new interest and importance. In most Member States, both old and new, these farms are widely present and still fulfil an important role in the economy and social fabric of rural areas. What exactly is the situation concerning these farms in the various MS [Member States]? What is Europe”s vision on their future and their contribution to a sustainable and multifunctional agriculture and to the viability of rural areas? How does the CAP affect them and in what ways should the CAP be changed in the light of these questions? What are the effects of the current and expected exodus of these farmers to the cities or other parts of the Union? How can alternative employment be developed to keep more people in rural areas?

At the GdB meeting in Bucarest in 2008 the Groupe has supported the Romanian Ministry of Agriculture to organise an international conference on the theme of small farms, specifically in relationship to food safety and food safety policies. The idea is to get this topic higher on the European agenda. The Groupe de Bruges will utilize its network to contribute to the debate.”

The angle they seem to have chosen is “food safety”; what do they mean?  Do they mean the effect of industrial food on the health of the less well off in the US and part of Western Europe?  Probably not.

Rural migration

Their next item on rural migration again contains many question marks:

“The accession of 12 new Member States to the EU has evoked a new debate on developments and consequences of labour migration both within the EU and from outside the EU to the EU. In general this debate is being held in negative terms: migrant workers are considered a threat to local employment and undercutting of wage levels, there is fear of an increase in crime rates, poor working conditions of migrant workers are criticised and frictions arise as a result of cultural and religious differences.

Empirical research, however, also shows the other side of this development: the positive contribution that labour migrants can have on both their country of origin as well as on the hosting country. Migrant workers in agriculture in some cases contribute to the revitalisation of rural areas of the hosting countries, they learn trades that can be used back home and their remittances are invested in improving agriculture or the rural economy.

Which examples already exist of this positive contribution of rural labour migration? How can this added value be put to better use in both the country of origin and the host country? What policies are needed to achieve this? How can the public be informed on this added value so as the give them a better and more balanced picture on the matter of rural migration?” 

This makes clear the consequences of ending small scale farming: farmers leaving their country and moving somewhere else, ie depopulation and immigration.  These farmers emigrate to countries that farm with machines not people, except seasonally for fruit picking.  They most probably won’t find work in agriculture.

The end of cheap food

The next item on the Groupe de Bruges programme deals with the relationship between agricultural producers and food processors and distributors.  There is here perhaps an indication that the Groupe de Bruges may want to support regulation; they complain that supermarkets fix prices and pay producers less than the cost of production.  This implies, although they do not say so, that, if you want to improve the situation for farmers, you should set up national price fixing, pay farmers more and end the ideal of “cheap food”.