From Best to Worst

The Malta Independent



The reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) so much necessary to conclude the budgetary arrangements for EU enlargement seems to be sailing into troubled waters.

Seven EU farm ministers, led by France, launched a frontal attack on the reform proposed by the Commission to permit new candidate members, especially those with large agricultural sector, to participate, albeit limitedly from the benefits of CAP.

CAP subsidies still absorb half the EU budget.` More than that it inflates the consumer`s cost of living and makes mockery of the WTO objectives to open up markets for free trade, permitting poorer countries to eradicate poverty by providing them with open markets for their agricultural produce. ` The Financial Times this week editorially labelled GAP as an extravagant folly that neither Europe nor the world can afford`

Not only this does not happen, but also the EU still produces structural surpluses of dairy produce and sugar, which are then placed on the international markets at heavily subsidised prices.` This depresses markets elsewhere and offers unfair competition to poorer agricultural based economies.

The Financial Times this week editorially labelled GAP as an extravagant folly that neither Europe nor the world can afford.` It pays big farmers subsidies for not producing, enriching them at the expense of the small producers it is supposed to help.

But as an outside country with a small agriculture base we have the best arrangement through the facility of buying surplus EU commodities at subsidized prices.` We benefit and take advantage of the EU CAP folly.` The moment we join EU as members we would not only give up this facility but will be forced to join the CAP folly having to buy such basic commodities at high internal prices so that the rich farmers of northern Europe could be subsidised at the expense of the Maltese consumer.

`We will be moving from the best position to the worst possible position saving only in the small subsidies hitherto allowed to local farmers for their cash crops but paying much higher protection levies to European farmers.` We will be moving from the best position to the worst possible position saving only in the small subsidies hitherto allowed to local farmers for their cash crops but paying much higher protection levies to European farmers.

The benefit of staying out is clear and immediate.` It is continuing to take advantage of the EU farm folly rather than become part of it. But our Minister for Foreign Affairs is not sufficiently realist to quantify the cost of giving up the existent benefit.` He does not even concede that inflation induced by the application of CAP could weaken our international competitiveness.

Incredibly he accuses Labour that we are stuck in time basing our economic development on cheap Labour and promising us showers of foreign direct investment for the simple reason that we can present EU membership in our credentials.

May be now that the bubble of the shower of EU funds has been burst those who have only empty platitudes to justify their obsession for EU membership will switch their tack to a shower of foreign direct investment.` Somebody however has to explain to me why foreign investment would come here if we offer the same menu as other member countries plus added shipping costs.

The Financial Times ended the editorial in criticising the French-led position on CAP reform by stating that perhaps it is really true that those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first send mad. It applies here as well

Alfred Mifsud