THE EU NEEDS TO RAISE TO THE CHALLENGE OF THE COVID-19 CRISIS IN AGRICULTURE MARKETS

The Covid-19 crisis is already impacting agriculture in a number of ways: cross-border flows of agriculture goods face delays, and in some areas there are not enough workers.

These are serious problems. We understand that measures are being taken to speed up cross-border trade, and particular work shortages can only be addressed at regional and local level.

However, there is an area where the EU, and in particular the European Commission, needs to be extremely vigilant and proactive, as it falls squarely under her responsibility.

We refer to the agriculture markets, which are poised to suffer dearly as a result of the Covid-19 crisis.

There is already a dramatic impact on the flower and ornamental plants sector, which directly and swiftly feels the blow of shop closures. Other sectors, more dependent upon restauration, will also be impacted. Consumption of fresh products may suffer as a result of confinement, as families shop less frequently and daily routines are upset.

However, the worst is unfortunately still to come. The Covid-19 crisis will evolve into a full blown economic crisis, as a result of the closure of so many economic sectors. Some countries will be more impacted than others, but all will suffer and the EU will face a steep recession.

A recession will cause a reduction of demand for agriculture products and a shift of demand to cheaper products. To make things worse, there is no escape valve through exports, as the crisis strikes worldwide. On the contrary, exports will also suffer.

It is thus predictable that agriculture markets will to some extent, some more than others, fall into crisis in a depressed economic environment.

What should the European Commission do? Should it adopt a wait-and-see policy? Should it rely solely on the current CAP crisis management tools? Should it just raise the level of state aids, instead of pursuing a common approach?

The US have followed another route, they prepared for the consequences by raising the agriculture budget by $ 48 billion, including $14 billion to replenish the Commodity Credit Corp., a Depression-era program designed to stabilize farm incomes, and $9.5 billion to support producers of specialty crops, livestock and dairy, as well as those who supply farmers markets, restaurants and schools.

This relief package comes on top of two previous aid packages to compensate for the losses of US farmers in the US-China trade wars.

In the EU, the producers affected by the US retaliations on the Airbus dispute, in particular wine producers, haven’t received any specific support. As Farm Europe already pointed out the divergence of support to farmers across the Atlantic is widening.

So far the European Commission has only relaxed state aid rules to cope with the Covid-19 crisis. Whilst it is understandable to relax state aid rules in times of crisis, on its own it will create distortions between farmers in countries which have the economic might and the political will to help the sector, and those who haven’t.

And even a host of state aids is not the response to EU-wide market crisis. Those can only be tackled by common measures.

Farm Europe strongly believes that we need to learn from past experience. In the latest market crisis, be in the two dairy crisis, or the fruit and vegetables, it was clear that intervening when the crisis had fully developed cost more and caused more economic and social pain.

In addition, the current CAP is ill-equipped to address severe market crisis in many sectors, as for instance the intervention triggers are way too low and the tool box isn’t bold enough. Risk management tools defined in 2013 and refined thanks to the Financial Omnibus are not equipped to face such a crisis. They provide answers to market volatility not to deep crisis.

Therefore a wait-and-see approach is clearly a mistake. The EU needs to anticipate the pain to come and equip herself to deal with it.

It is crucial that the EU moves swiftly to create a real crisis reserve, with the appropriate rules of engagement. COMAGRI has proposed it, the European Commission should take the initiative as a matter of urgency.

We need more than 400 million euros, we need to have rules of engagement that allow the Commission to intervene quickly to redress the markets, by the best means available – e.g. reducing supply and compensating farmers for the output loss, intervening more decisively. And the last thing farmers need is to see their direct payments cut by the amounts used to fight the crisis.

This crisis risks to be bolder and more profound than before. The European Commission should not rely on CAP crisis management tools that have not worked properly in the recent past, and instead build new ones. The transition Regulation could be a legislative vehicle to quickly implement them. Let’s not miss the opportunity.

The EU shall not let a helping hand to be bitten

Europe is calling for measures to mitigate the disastrous impact of the COVID-19 and the European biofuels industry is answering that call of social responsibility without hesitation today.

Many of the European biofuel companies have successfully changed their complex manufacturing and production processes to be able to offer a much-needed contribution towards curbing the spread of the COVID-19 virus. Just as we speak, they have become a vital place, which can produce disinfectants such as hand sanitizers from bio-fuel ethanol or use glycerin co-produced from biodiesel, which is an essential component of the process of production of hydro-alcoholic to help meet the needs of hospitals, pharmacies and other institutions during the corona pandemic. These anti-COVID-19 activities have translated into at least dozens of plant sites and factories across Europe, from France to Germany and the CEE region, constantly producing -often donating- and delivering now million liters of alcohol ready to be used. Thanks to these comprehensive measures there is now another local European alternative capable to provide offerings to save lives.

And while biofuels producers are busy helping others and are trying to make a difference out there, there are also voices, who have openly called on the governments of some Member States to suspend or consider implementing derogations to their blending biofuels obligations. Such a backstab to the biofuel sector in the challenging times that are to come would only lead to a halted procedure on transport decarbonization, to a loss of jobs and competitiveness and a detrimental effect not only for European farmers and agriculture but for the EU and its much-awaited climate ambitions as a whole.

Therefore, while the EU is facing the imminent it mustn’t give up on making sure to secure its future. European biofuels do make an essential contribution not only to protein co-production or by diversifying the transport fuel pool and thus making such a strategic infrastructure less vulnerable but also to the Green Deal and the overall climate actions of the EU. Turning a blind eye and walking past without a word from the side of the EU on such initiatives would be a mistake and a step in the wrong direction.

Accepting such propositions would furthermore be in stark contrast on what is currently happening both in the US – where the Environmental Protection Agency has decided not to appeal court ruling challenging the Trump administration’s widespread use of the waivers – and the UK – where the government is in an open consultation to introduce higher blending mandates.

We call on the Commission to send a clear message that decarbonization backtracking won’t be accepted and that it is still committed to phase out subsidies for fossil fuels while ensuring that currently working options will not be hindered.

During the sanitary crisis, the EU needs to not let go of its other priorities. Once the impending threat is over, the “means and how’s” can be further discussed on the way to move forward. Until then, in return, the biofuels sector continues to keep doing what it has been doing: giving working solutions to acute problems that need immediate answers today.

 

Stefan Schreiber,

President of the Green Energy Platform

Informal Agri-Fisheries Council: MAINTAIN THE FOOD SUPPLY & LABOUR FORCE

Although the Council of March 23 was cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the agriculture ministers of the 27 nevertheless met for a video conference on March 25, 2020. In the presence of the President of the Council Marija Vučković as well as the Commissioners for Agriculture Janusz Wojciechowski and the Commissioner for Environment Virginijus Sinkevičius, the ministers discussed existing and planned measures in the Member States and at Community level to find solutions to the impacts caused by the pandemic on the agriculture and fisheries sectors.

During the “informal” debate, delegations reiterated that the supply of high-quality food will continue uninterrupted during the crisis. Guided by Croatia’s Agriculture Minister Marija Vučković, delegations held an exchange of views on the measures already taken, as well as those planned at national & European level to counteract the impact of the virus on their respective sectors. 

Many delegations (IE, FR, PT, CY, LT, RO, PL, IT, NL, CZ, AT, SE) called for European action to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on the agri-food & fisheries sectors. For the time being, the Commission has confined itself to passing the responsibility for responses to the MS in the form of state aid, and to ensuring the movement of food products within the Union. It has also hid behind the monitoring of future market developments so as not to take a position in the sitting on the request for exceptional measures.

Following the debate, underpinned by a Presidency overview of the situation, the Council chairwoman said “in order to ensure normal functioning of the food supply chain, it is crucial to identify critical obstacles caused by COVID-19,” citing some of the points raised from the floor such as restrictions in the movement of goods, changes in consumption patterns & in the operation of agri-food production systems. She also highlighted the lack of labour “due to border closures, social distance requirements, mandatory isolation or quarantine.”

“The Ministers today called upon the Commission to closely monitor and defend the integrity of the single market and to propose appropriate action where problems in the supply chain are identified. We need a few days to summarise the outcome of this meeting, and together with the European Commission, we will evaluate and decide on further steps to be taken” added Marija Vučković. 

 

full note available on FE Members area 

BREXIT: WITH COVID-19 A PROLONGATION OF THE TRANSITION PERIOD IS A MUST

Before the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic we were working on the hypothesis that the transition period, mostly for UK political reasons, would only last till the end of the current year.

Covid-19 dramatically changes the landscape. Negotiations between the EU and the UK, already under a tight time schedule, were interrupted. Their resumption date is a question mark, as we haven’t as yet reached the peak of the pandemic.

Taking the European Parliament new meeting schedule as an example, face to face meetings are not expected to resume before September. It would therefore be impossible to conclude the negotiations on the future relationship, and in particular on the modalities of the Free Trade Agreement, in time.

In addition to that, the pandemic gives the UK Government a strong political argument to justify accepting a prolongation of the transition period, say of one more year till the end of 2021.

Those would be logical, rationale, decisions, and on top of that good news. And we all need good news in these times of distress.

That would mean “business as usual” for the EU/UK agri-food relationship for an extra year. The UK would stay in the single market till the end of 2021, which would give more time to negotiate the best possible future relationship.

I am also moderately optimistic that after the pandemic is over, the focus on the economic pain suffered and how to turn the economy around will make both sides concentrate on their core interests, and on the least possible disruptive arrangements.

NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE EU BUDGET: NO AGREEMENT ON THE MFF

The month of February was marked by the failure of EU leaders to reach an agreement on the EU’s 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). Charles Michel’s proposal of an overall level of the MFF 2021-2027 at 1.074% was not unanimously supported at the Summit on the 19-20th February and no compromise emerged. As far as the CAP is concerned, the severe cuts (-10% 1st pillar, -25% 2nd rural development) have been prohibitive for some Member States.

 

full note available on FE Members area

Negotiations on CAP reform: Need for longer CAP transition

February was marked as follows:

  • Following the work of rapporteur Elsi Katainen, the majority of ComAgri MEPs confirmed the need to extend the one-year transition period proposed by the European Commission by at least one year.
  • They also expressed their support for producer organisations as a means of strengthening the position of producers in an exchange of views with the European Commission.

 

full note available on FE Members area 

Wine sector: Coming into force of the promotion regulations

The European Union Regulation for the promotion of EU wine entered into force on 3 February, ratified by a positive vote by COMAGRI on 18 February. Rising prices continued to drive down wine sales in the USA.

In France, winegrowers are asking for a compensation fund from the French President.

On a world level, the price of American wine is falling, mainly due to a surplus of Californian wine. In addition, coronavirus is affecting the international wine trade, with falls in world wine exports to China.

 

full note available on FE members area 

NEEW BREEDING TECHNIQUES: European Commission launches a consultation

In February, the European Commission launched a consultation on NBTs as part of a study it wants to finalise by April 2021. In France, the State Council through a decision, considers that NBTs should be subject to the same clauses as GMOs with regard to the application of the European directive regulating genetically modified organisms.

After Germany, via its Minister of Agriculture calling for greater openness towards NBTs, it is Italy’s turn, via Teresa Bellanova, Minister of Agriculture, who is asking “Europe to distinguish them from GMOs, because the end result is completely different”.
Finally, DG AGRI, via the words director, sees new selection techniques as a means of managing pests in agriculture, as an alternative to pesticides.

In the framework of the Farm to Fork strategy which should be presented at the end of March (and which will be put out for inter-service consultation by the European Commission from Monday 9 March), the Commission indicates that it wants to take legislative initiatives relating to NBTs under its mandate, without mentioning a date at this stage of the internal discussions which are taking place between its services.

full note available on FE members area