A long misunderstood and misreported policy of the EU, the Common Agricultural Policy needs to be better explained, claims MEP Paolo De Castro. As new chair of the Agricultural Committee he is setting the record straight.

The Interview: CAP is easy as ABC for Agriculture Committee Chair (Extended version)

https://api.multimedia.europarl.europa.eu/documents/20125/14793455/P005-00084-L-EN.srt

Paolo De Castro,   welcome to EuroparlTV.

You have just been elected Chairman   of the Agriculture Committee.

An important Committee,   for if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified,

it will have codecision   in agricultural matters.

It's an important and demanding role.   How are you going to handle it?

First of all, let's clarify   that agriculture and rural development

still represent more than 40%   of the EU economic resources.

Therefore this is indeed   a huge responsibility.

Codecision, if the Irish referendum   of the 2nd October goes well,

gives this Committee   an extraordinary responsibility.

It's the first thing I said to my colleagues   in the Committee,

because probably we still don't realise   the full significance of this.

Not many people realise   what codecision means.

The Council will not be able   to make a decision

without the support of the EP's   Agriculture Committee.

It's a demanding role, and you find   yourself, at the beginning of term,

faced with this big hurdle,   the revision of the financial perspective.

As you said, agriculture absorbs   40% of EU budget,

the Northern, non-agricultural countries,   would like to penalise agriculture,

how do you intend to operate,   within the agricultural reform,

in order to keep   a large enough agricultural budget?

It's a difficult challenge. When Franz   Fischler did the reform in 2002,

the mid-term review,   he managed to make an important reform

with the budget guarantees coming   from the Franco-German agreement.

This time, the difficulty consists in dealing   first with the financial perspective,

and then with the reform   on the CAP content.

So you defend agriculture and talk of   other things.

Indeed. We must be able to explain   straight away,

why Europe needs a CAP.   - Why does Europe need a CAP?

A CAP is not only necessary   to the 10 million European farmers.

It is necessary to the 500 million   EU citizens. And this is the point.

Because if we want agriculture to be   good to the environment,

respectful of the wellbeing of animals,   mindful of food safety,

our consumers want safe, healthy   foods, they want a sustainable agriculture

with gentle farming   that defend the natural resources,

they want respect for the environment...

All this can only be achieved   through a Common Agricultural Policy.

And it was the 2002 reform that   connected funding coming through CAP

not to production,   but to farmers' behaviour.

This is central. Funds are allocated if   the behaviour complies with EU requests.

The CAP system, however,   receives a lot of criticism.

Some say that since it's not the   aftermath of war,

In order to guarantee quality,   we need modern agriculture.

But there's another argument:   the producers say, we get very little

but the final product is very expensive.

As an example, very relevant for you   as an Italian citizen - milk.

Milk costs 20-24 cents/litre, but a   European citizen pays up to €1-1.50/litre.

The Agricultural Policy   hasn't dealt with prices since 1992.

The difference between   production price and consumption price

does not depend   on the CAP interventions.

This needs clarifying, otherwise we keep   on, as some British newspapers do,

attributing an intervention on prices   to the CAP .

It's some US newspaper, perhaps.   - Some US newspapers, yes, indeed.

And then the Americans spend $77 billion   in their Farm bill...

With reforms we compete with the US.   - Yes. We might go back to this later.

But a price policy doesn't exist anymore.

The policy of direct funding addresses   incomes, but not, as in the past -

as you mentioned -   because there was a need to produce,

there was supply that   needed to meet a certain demand.

Decoupling was introduced   in order to satisfy the citizens' needs.

So agricultural policy does not just benefit   farmers, but all EU citizens.

But is there a more intelligent way   of investing in agriculture

in order to prevent a litre of milk   from costing €1-1.50

while it costs the producer   20-24 cents per litre.

We must explain that the CAP has   nothing to do with prices anymore,

or we keep being subjected to the type of   criticism coming from Anglo-Saxon press,

which says the CAP contributes   to keeping the prices high.

Prices stay high - or very low, as they are   now, below 20 cents for milk,

but they have no relation   to our intervention.

If anything, now farmers would like us   to intervene because they are too low.

Agricultural policy intervenes with funding   that's connected to farmers' patterns.

The funding is connected to what the   farmers do, not to what they produce.

whether they are respectful   of environment, animals...

If we want products that satisfy   the EC consumers' requirements,

Is shortening the chain between producer   and consumer a solution to price rises?

It's an interesting subject,   I'll answer as an economist.

But the CAP is not interested   in lowering the prices.

Of course we want a balance between   consumption and production price.

But the present CAP, with its funds linked   to patterns, has no influence on prices.

Prices are influenced by the crisis.   Last year we had very high prices,

consumers were worried about   the price of milk, cereals, pasta,

now everyone is worried about   the opposite: milk prices being too low.

Yet our policy hasn't changed   since last year.

So let's not give the CAP responsibilities   that it has no control over.

Indeed, is there the possibility   to intervene with new solutions,

Let's see if there are instruments   that can be used in European agriculture.

But let's not blame the CAP   as it has nothing to do with it.

Going back to this big,   well, maybe not reform of CAP,

but let's say revision of the EU budget.