Press release by French NGOs: Agir pour l’Environnement, Friends of the Earth, EFNCP, FNAB, FNCIVAM, FNH, LPO, MRJC, 4D, RAC, Solidarité, WWF.

Paris, January 23rd 2012

On January 17, in the Ariege Pyrenean department, President Sarkozy expressed good wishes to the “rural world stakeholders”. The signatories of this communication believe that his vision of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is outdated. Mr Sarkozy’s call to change the agricultural model does not make sense if France has not yet decided to support a real reform of the CAP, which could back more sustainable farming and food systems that are less reliant on aid. [more]

Press Release – Paris, 12th October 2011

A group of French environmental organisations, sustainable farming groups, intenational solidarity and rural protection groups have reacted to the proposed changes to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) unveiled today by the European Commission. If funding for farmers is to go in a positive direction, the rest of the reform proposals leave a lot to be desired.

The proposals made by the European Commission do not constitute far-reaching reform of the CAP. They are distinctly out of phase with the recent Eurobarometer survey1, which found that a clear majority of Europeans who responded want to see a CAP that is more environmentally-friendly; which recognises the value of small farmers and supports local food supply circuits. It is long overdue, in fact, to propose structures which actively promote more sustainable forms of agriculture. [more]

An open letter to the European Agriculture Commissioner Dacian Cioloş published by the financial daily La Tribune, highlights the concerns of a score of French and European organisations over the proposed changes to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), which have been in circulation.

As announced in the outline financial plans for the years 2014-2020, which were released at the end of June, the European Commission intends to link the payment of 30% of the direct subsidy to environmental measures. According to a first leaked draft which is to be finalised and will be presented on October 12, this “greening” of direct payments would be based on farmers meeting three requirements:

•    Crops diversification: to have three different crops growing on arable land, of which the main one should not exceed 70% and the two others should cover a minimum of 5%; apart from these maximum and minimum percentages, this is already a requirement of the Good Agricultural and Environmental Conditions (GAEC in English, BCAE in French) and is also part of France’s Agro-Environnmental Measures;

•    Preservation of permanent grasslands, while allowing up to 5% to be ploughed up in case of force majeure; this provision already exists in the French BCAE regulations, without any percentage being stipulated for turning land over to arable use;

•    Ecological Focus Areas: at least 7% of total useable land should be covered, either lying fallow, or terraced, according to the characteristics of the land concerned, or kept as grass field borders or wooded areas. This measure to promote biodiversity has existed in French BCAE requirements, at a rate of 3% in 2011, with the government’s intention at the outset of this scheme to raise the rate to 5% in 2013.

Reckoning that these measures might be a bit ambitious in the light of the European Commission’s communication on the reform of the CAP between now and 2020, a score of NGOs have thus alerted Commissioner Cioloş.

“To the Agriculture Commissioner:
Sir,
The CAP reform of 1992 made the subsidies paid to different holdings visible. This transparency has fed a debate on the purposes of the CAP in the context where the wider social dimensions of agriculture have been increasingly brought to the fore, clarifying the choices that need to be made. Keep things simple. On one side there is the option to continue with an industrial agriculture that is continuing full steam ahead and which adapts by correcting only its most obvious defects and crises. On the other side there is ecological agriculture, which values natural environments, local genetic resources and employment. Four facts arise from this:

1: These two models are in direct competition and their co-existence leads the former to marginalise the latter, as well as assuming its appearance of ecological agriculture while altering the underlying structure.

2: The supposed economic superiority of the industrial agriculture model is only possible with heavy public funding, emergency intervention packages in the event of a crisis and the disowning of costs that are sustained by the environment and public health. Without this strong public funding, industrial agriculture would lose money and it this is also the case for holdings where the owners give up because the running costs are too high.

3: A growing number of case studies now reckon that industrial agriculture no longer has the capability of feeding the world, contradicting what its advocates would like to believe: what is more, it does rather more than just disorganise localised food production systems.

4: Production while managing the environment properly is not an economic aberration – on the contrary, it is the best insurance policy for the future of farmers themselves, European citizens and peasants all over the world. For 20 years now, subjected to the pressure of specific interest groups, successive CAP reforms have remained unachieved, notably on the environmental level. Your arrival in the post of Agriculture Commissioner gave hope to the defenders of a diverse and ecologically vision for European agriculture. The broad consultation launched in spring 2010 on the future of the CAP allowed us to hope for a renewal of the targets and tools. The place given to the environment, rural innovation, as well as small farms, gave us hope to believe that at last the measure and gravity of the problems had been understood. The Communication of the European Commission in November 2010 was ambivalent, but it announced some aspects of greening for direct subsidies, which make up 80% of the CAP budget.

Now, the form of the reform is starting to be defined. And what starts to come out of the Commission offices is worse than disturbing. What has happened to the so-called “greening” of the first pillar? It has been downgraded to a reworking of unambitious measures that have been drafted so that no-one will be upset and the ultimate purpose of [the greening measures] is give the CAP a degree of environmental legitimacy. What happened to targeted subsidies for holdings that were proactively environmentally friendly? Stillborn. It is not even the status quo ante, there is potentially a real risk of turning back the clock: existing ambitious initiatives are at risk of being choked off and certain measures are potentially dangerous. The same applies for rural development policy: we observe a heavy dilution of any environmental priorities and any notion of a minimum budgetary percentage for environmental work has been abandoned. Far from being a goad to change the ways of most member states, the European Union has become an advocate of the lowest common denominator.

We wish to alert European citizens as to what the European Commission is preparing for the coming years. This superficial “greening”, or rather “greenwashing” has largely been supported by France, which is “…prudent when it comes to greening…” in the words of French prime minister François Fillon. In its present form, the  reform would succeed in legitimising subsidies for agricultural holdings which contribute to the further degradation of the environment . Its structures would also marginalise those who work in sensitive ways to supply sustainable food, maintaining the quality of both the landscape and the environment  as well as maintaining employment. Such a waste of public money is as irresponsible as it is unacceptable. We are alarmed by the proposed CAP reforms from the Commission in which the ecological foundations of agriculture are denied and sacrificed to an industrial approach to agriculture. It is our duty to remind of the ambitions that you had at the outset of the CAP reform process: it is time to submit credible and ambitious options to Europe’s leaders, ones that meet the expectations of European citizens and would also save the future of agriculture and farmers. In all its previous forms until now, the CAP has not been capable of preserving jobs nor the environment: this is starting to get on our nerves.”

Signatories:

Agir pour l’Environnement, Dominique Bernard, Président

BirdLife Europe, Angelo Caserta, Directeur régional

Bureau Européen de l’Environnement, Jeremy Wates, Secrétaire général

Chrétiens dans le Monde Rural, Xavier Bonvoisin, Président

Dossiers et Débats pour le Développement Durable (4D), Joseph Racapé, Administrateur

Fédération Nationale d’Agriculture Biologique, Dominique Marion, Président

Fondation pour la Nature et l’Homme, Cécile Ostria, Directrice générale

Forum Européen pour la Conservation de la Nature et le Pastoralisme, Xavier Poux, Directeur

FNCIVAM, Didier Lorioux, Président

France Nature Environnement, Bruno Genty, Président

Générations Futures, François Veillerette, Porte-parole

Greenpeace France, Sylvain Tardy, Directeur de campagnes

IFOAM EU Group, Marco Schlüter, Directeur

Les Amis de la Terre France, Martine Laplante, Présidente

Ligue pour la Protection des Oiseaux, Allain Bougrain Dubourg, Président

Mouvement Rural de Jeunesse Chrétienne, Jérémie Godet, Président

Pesticide Action Network, Simon Gergely, Directeur

Réseau Action Climat-France, Sandrine Mathy, Présidente

Réseau Cohérence, Armina Knibbe, Présidente

Union Nationale de l’Apiculture Française, Olivier Belval, Président

WWF France, Serge Orru, Directeur général

Public statement published March 30 on leMonde.fr

The environmental problems linked to certain agricultural practices have been made public by scientists and farmers since the 1970s. And in 1983, the environment ministry even decreed “urgent action for water in Brittany.” [The current farm minister] Bruno Le Maire would like to convince us that his ministry has turned the corner for the environment…

Lack of coherence and political will

Even if the Grenelle [environmental package] marked a step in the right direction, the president of the Republic’s words [March 2010 in a round table at the Paris farm show] set off a rebuttal of the environmental agenda when Nicolas Sarkozy said: “I would like to say a word on all these environmental questions. Because that, too, is starting to be too much. (…ça commence à bien faire…)” [These words are normally used to rebuke misbehaving children.] The French state relinquished its headline commitment to environmental measures in agriculture with an announcement in August of a “…moratorium on environmental obligations.” The head of state should not therefore have subsequently obfuscated over his use of that telling phrase and the increasingly animated reactions to it that are making themselves heard. [more]

Press release: Paris, November 26th

A group of French organisations with shared interests in defending the environment, sustainable agriculture and development, international solidarity and rural movements, have reacted to a communication issued by the European Commission about the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) after 2013, published on November 18.

Our organisations have welcomed with interest the European Commission’s Communication entitled: The CAP towards 2020: Meeting the food, natural resources and territorial challenges of the future.

We welcome the Commission’s willingness to encourage sustainable practices and production systems to ensure the supply of environmental services, as well as the integration of the environment and the fight against climate change as guiding principles in the future development of rural development policy. However, it is still too early to ascertain whether this “greening” is real or fake. [more]

Press Release - 20 January 2009. Today, organizations of the CAP 2013 group submit their priorities for the implementation of the health check of the Common Agricultural Policy to the Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries Michel Barnier.

The rationale for aid payments and their targeting will be central to discussions on the future of the CAP. It is therefore essential and a matter of some urgency to anticipate the nature of future changes to the CAP without waiting until 2013. The implementation of the changes brought about by the Health Check should help the CAP prepare for the future. This should involve placing as much emphasis as possible on making French agriculture more sustainable.

With this is mind, the organisations of the CAP 2013 group set out the following principles for the CAP to follow:

[more]

Briefing paper - Nov 21th 2008

The CAP health check agreement reached by the Council of European Ministers of Agriculture on November 20th 2008 shows the face of a Europe without a real project for agriculture and rural areas. If this minimalist compromise solves intergovernmental impasses formerly considered insoluble, such as milk quotas or shifting money, it shows major sectoral rigidities that prevent Europe from building a vision for its common agricultural policy in the future.

This briefing paper describe the three major issues that have regularly shaken the debate on the CAP health check among member states : market regulation, direct payments and modulation. Beyond these thematical issues, it explain the future challenges :

- Beyond the health check : reshaping the CAP on renewed objectives

- Markets are not efficient against price volatility. Their organization are!

- Dairy sector: the improvement of a more flexible quota system is an alternative to their
abolition by 2015

- What the CAP could do to reorient farm systems towards sustainability

- Reshaping the CAP pillars architecture

Position paper - February 2008

The French organisations signing this document wish to examine and comment on the Commission’s “health check” in greater depth, and to put forward approaches for improvements that would anticipate on foreseeable trends. The challenges that a European policy will be facing reach far beyond consultations with agricultural and food industry interests alone, for they encompass the whole gamut of social demands and issues concerning food, the environment, climate change and rural development.

Dowload the document

Communiqué - 21 Nov. 2008 - Le compromis des 27 ministres Européens de l’agriculture sur le bilan de santé de la Politique agricole commune du 20 novembre est décevant, car il ne propose pas de direction claire à ce que sera la PAC après 2013. D’un côté il désorganise les marchés agricoles qui ont besoin de régulation, et de l’autre il reste timoré sur le transfert des aides pour faire face aux défis environnementaux et ruraux de l’Europe. Ces ajustements de la PAC manquent de cohérence pour bénéficier d’un soutien de l’opinion publique, soutien qui sera nécessaire à l’heure de la révision du budget européen.

Si des aménagements restent possibles dans les Etats membres, notamment pour redistribuer des aides vers les secteurs en difficulté ou vers l’environnement, ou encore pour réduire les écarts dans l’attribution des aides reçus par les agriculteurs, les organisations signataires demandent la mise en place d’une nouvelle gouvernance pour décider de la mise en œuvre du bilan de santé en France.

Les choix qui seront faits induiront de nombreux impacts sur l’environnement, les territoires et la santé. Les questions agricoles touchant l’ensemble de la société, il est grand temps que les collectivités territoriales et les organisations de la société civile soient considérées comme des parties prenantes à part entière dans la définition de la politique agricole.

Au delà du bilan de santé et sans attendre 2013, la refondation de la politique agricole européenne est urgente. En tant qu’organisations représentatives de la société civile française, nous restons mobilisés sur l’avenir de la Politique Agricole Commune, afin qu’elle recouvre sa légitimité et s’engage sur la voie d’une politique européenne alimentaire, environnementale et rurale durable, plus juste entre les producteurs et plus solidaire des pays en développement.

Organisations signataires : Les Amis de la Terre, Comité catholique contre la faim et pour le développement (CCFD), Comité français pour la solidarité internationale (CFSI), Confédération paysanne, Fédération nationale de l’agriculture biologique des régions de France (FNAB), Fédération nationale des centres d’initiatives pour valoriser l’agriculture et le milieu rural (FNCIVAM), Fondation Nicolas Hulot pour la Nature et l’Homme, association 4D (Dossiers et débats pour le développement durable), Réseau action climat, WWF France.

Contacts

Samuel Féret : +33 6.08.83.12.35 – samuel.feret@gmail.com

Ambroise Mazal, CCFD : +33 6.79.44.33.81 – a.mazal@ccfd.asso.fr

Bernard Cressens, WWF : +33 6.12.06.16.55 – B.Cressens@wwf.fr

A lire aussi notre note de synthèse : « Bilan de santé de la Politique agricole commune : un compromis de transition avant la nécessaire refondation ».