Response is mix of good, bland and worrying

Apr 9 2008 The Journal

THE Government’s response to the CAP Health Check proposals is a mixture of the good, the bland and the worrying, the NFU said yesterday.

Its policy director Martin Haworth said: “There is much the NFU can agree to, including full decoupling, simplification, avoiding payment limits, raising the minimum claim size and the abolition of set aside.

“However, the UK position on Article 69 – a cut in the Single Farm Payment to fund specific programmes – is more concerning. Some of the conditions the UK wants are welcome; for example, that measures should not be trade-distorting, should not lead to an uneven playing field across the EU and should be time- limited.

“But it is hard to see how these conditions are compatible with the Government’s declared interest in examining ways in which the article could be used, and their wish that this should be on a regional basis.”

Equally worrying, said Mr Haworth, was the position on modulation. He added: “The NFU supports the commission position that there should be an increase in European modulation, but this should be offset by an equivalent cut in national modulation, where this exists.

“The Government, on the other hand, wants to see an increase in the funds available for the UK and wants the ability to use all of any increase on environ- mental issues.

“The NFU could only support the first proposition if it resulted in no increase in modulation to individual farmers, in other words that the increased money comes from EU funds, and would only support the second proposition if the environment was interpreted more widely than countryside stewardship, on climate change measures for example.

“Regarding set-aside, the NFU supports its abolition but does not support the implication in the paper that there is clear evidence that there are environmental benefits that are at risk.”