Farmers and growers across Europe have made their feelings very clear over the last few months. From the surprise success of the Dutch Farmers’ Party (BBB), to German, French, Spanish and Italian farmers taking to the streets and blockading Brussels, the range of issues and challenges facing the industry have been well and truly highlighted to politicians, the media and the wider public. Many of the issues are due to the fact that farmers feel that food production policy is coming second to environmental concerns at a time that global food production is becoming less reliable due to climate and political factors.
The points of contention include the importation of cheaper food produced to lower standards and using pesticides that are prohibited in the EU, targets to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the sector, rising costs, the return of set-aside and others. In response to the protests, at a national level, governments have rowed back on plans to cap livestock numbers and reversed previous decisions to end tax relief on agricultural fuel. At a European level, the Commission has cancelled proposals to significantly reduce the use of plant protection products by the end of the decade, reduced GHG reduction targets for farming and introduced short-term measures to prevent cheap grain from Ukraine undercutting European production.
However, while such political backtracking may be seen as a win by some, there are others in our industry who worry that it sends the wrong signals. Like most of life, the devil is in the detail. For example, many growers want plant protection authorisations to be governed by consistent science (rather than political ideals) and backed by similar controls on imports. By simply cancelling the plans without consultation, as European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen appeared to do, difficult decisions have simply been kicked further down the road.
The same is true for the introduction of other environmental factors. It’s not the introduction of ‘greening’ per se which upset farmers, but the lack of financial support and the failure to recognise that it needs to sit alongside traditional farming systems. There needs to be a balance which preserves food production and European food security, while reducing its environmental impact and helping to reverse biodiversity loss. However, by failing to engage with this detail, politicians have failed everyone. Hopefully, governments across the UK (of all political hues) will learn from Europe’s experience and provide the necessary balance in UK policy.
The protests in Europe have prompted some British farmers and growers to call for similar action here, and we have seen protests at Dover, and in Wales (where the government’s current support proposals do little or nothing to recognise the need for food production). However, not only are most UK farmers more conservative, but many large specialist growers are also operating in Europe, either directly or in partnership. They already face enough problems importing their produce without blockading the country’s biggest port.
As this opinion was written, the Prime Minister was getting ready to address the NFU Conference. All the indications are that, despite the positive noises, politicians still lack an understanding of the detail which policies to support farmers and food production actually require if they are to succeed.
The March issue also includes articles on:
- Jack Buck Farms
- Biostimulants
- REAP Conference
- Sakata Dutch Trials
- Takii Seed Demonstration
To read these and more from “The Vegetable Farmer” subscribe today – find out more here