 |
Party squabbles and social reform
Politics & Public Policy
Latest Post in 'Politics & Public Policy'
euagriculturebudget | 9:46, 15 March 2010
When member states (finally) released detailed data on the individual recipients of its € 55 billion annual farm subsidies, they unleashed a flurry of media reporting. Public anger on big business and rich (possibly aristocratic) landowners swallowing big chunks of the subsidy pie was rampant. By contrast, knowledge of the distribution of public subsidies across member states has always been in the public domain. Regrettably, the inequities manifest in this distribution appear to interest only the farmers in the disadvantaged member states. But citizens should be concerned.
How to explain that farmers in Greece receive three times more income and production support per hectare than their colleagues in Portugal? And why does a hectare of agricultural land in Malta get five times more support than in Latvia? Even more troubling is the question of why other EU member states obtain five or ten times more subsidies per hectare to promote rural development and environmental protection than the UK. Are their birds more beautiful?
The reality is that the distribution of subsidies can only be explained by EU power politics – and rigidity. Nowadays, the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) supports farmers’ income independent of their current production. But how much CAP money a member state gets for its farmers depends on how much it has got in the past when payments were coupled with production. Countries that produced a lot of highly-subsidized crops or meat therefore reaped – and still reap – the lion’s share of the CAP budget. Countries with an agricultural sector that is less productive or specializes in products that were less subsidized, such as fruits and vegetables, are the losers of this system.
A look at the CAP payments for rural development and environmental protection reveals the same picture. Member states’ subsidy levels are again strongly determined by how much they received in the past. Entitlements up to 2013 are based on payments dating back as far as 1994. It is embarrassing that the EU’s distribution of more than 40% of its budget to the member states has nothing to do with policy objectives.
In the future, member states should be rewarded for sustainable farming practices. How much money each member state receives should depend on its Natura 2000 areas (in which stricter environmental standards apply), its organic farming areas (which have positive effects on biodiversity, water quality, flood prevention …) and its forest areas (to support biodiversity-and-climate-friendly forest management). Further criteria for distributing payments could be devised, such as high-nature-value or extensive grazing areas. Whatever the best distribution key, it should not be past agricultural production or past payment levels.
This article is based on the ECIPE working paper ‘Public Money for Public Goods: Winners and Losers from CAP Reform’
Further information can be found at www.reformthecap.eu.
Recent Posts in 'Politics & Public Policy'
European Geostrategy | 21:37, 14 March 2010
What is geostrategy? Does it lead to conquest, imperialism and empire? Is it about power and control? It can be those things and it can lead to ruinous behaviour. But does it have to be? Think again…
European Geostrategy | 16:36, 10 March 2010
With the Treaty of Lisbon implemented, the new High Representative in power, and movement over the establishment of the European External Action Service, has the time come for a European Union Strategic Defence Review?
Jaanika Erne | 1:08, 6 March 2010
To create some more order, here are some links to parliaments and their relations in Europe:
Interparliamentary websites:
COSAC
ECPRD - The European Centre for Parliamentary Research and Documentation
Council of Europe
IPU: Inter-Parliamentary Union
ASGP: Association of Secretaries General of Parliaments
EP Relations with National Parliaments
Exchanging information among parliaments:
IPEX – Interparliamentary EU Information Exchange http://www.ipex.eu/ipex/cms/home;jsessionid=86722EDF4D8F90ED0FF1CB8769797C0D
Database http://www.ipex.eu/ipex/cms/home/Documents;jsessionid=8E75374CDA35008C8558202032D0FCC3
Comments of the European Commission on opinions from national parliaments http://www.ipex.eu/ipex/cms/home/pid/4;jsessionid=86722EDF4D8F90ED0FF1CB8769797C0D
abouteurope | 14:30, 27 February 2010
Now that the sense of anti-climax surrounding the appointment of Herman van Rompuy as the new President of the European Council has subsided, it is worthwhile casting a critical eye over the likely role and powers of the new permanent president. Putting contingent factors (such as personality and leadership style) to one side, the new [...]
European Geostrategy | 13:44, 26 February 2010
President Herman Van Rompuy is often poked as a figure of fun. But does his first speech on foreign and security policy reflect a closet Machiavellian, plotting and strategising to flesh out the European interest?
European Geostrategy | 22:42, 24 February 2010
Much has recently been said about the creation of a permanent military headquarters for the European Union. In this article, we explore the reasons as to why such an institution is desirable, for the sake of the improvement of European military command and control.
European Geostrategy | 0:51, 18 February 2010
With the rise of an increasingly multipolar world, the time has come for Europeans to invoke their maritime geography once again and look beyond their borders to concentrate on the wider world. The European Union needs to form an immensely powerful navy, which can be used to circulate maritime power around the world and undergird the success of the European economy.
Pietro De Matteis | 14:47, 3 February 2010
By Pietro De Matteis
Such a strong decision was in the air especially in Washington. The US was expecting a new EU after the Lisbon treaty: more coherent, stronger and more comprehensible. An Europe that after about 8 years since the Laeken Convention, that started the path towards EU’s institutional reform, could finally become an effective [...]
Jaanika Erne | 23:18, 28 January 2010
Russia has (and also formally on 4th February 2010, see ITAR-TASS, and EU Declaration on the Ratification of Protocol 14) ratified Protocol No.14 to the European Convention on Human Rights. On 15th January 2010, the State Duma of the Russian Federation voted in favour of the ratification of Protocol No.14. On 27th January 2010, the upper [...]
European Geostrategy | 18:26, 28 December 2009
Russia is keen to buy a powerful amphibious warship from France to assert its geostrategic interests around its borders. If France accepts the offer, how will this impact on Russian-European relations, especially in light of Russia’s intentions in the Baltic and Black Sea regions?
