THE FUTURE OF farming hangs in the balance. This week, the government of the Spanish region of Catalunya announced emergency restrictions on water supplies due to a level of drought not seen in recorded history. Water for irrigation of crops will be reduced by 30%, livestock farmers will have their water usage halved. Should the drought continue, the restrictions will get tighter.
Farmers protesting in France this week included the drought-induced lack of water in their laundry list of complaints. Ironically, this list also included what they feel is the ‘burden’ of regulations that are designed to reduce the impacts of climate breakdown and ecosystem collapse.
Farmers are facing greater competition from imports from Ukraine and a looming deal with countries in South America (known as Mercosur in shorthand, after the regional association on that continent) that would see increased volumes of food imports, particularly beef. Disease outbreaks and predation of livestock by wolves are a preoccupation, depending on the region. Precarious incomes and a general sense of insecurity were a common denominator and helped to prompt farmer demonstrations in Ireland in support of their European colleagues.
Many people sympathise with at least some of these concerns, which matter to us all, given the importance of food production. Changing how we produce food is also essential if we are to prevent run-away climate change and species extinction. People want to see farmers supported in that task.
However, the protests in France and Belgium, which saw acts of vandalism and the symbolic immolation of a tree outside the European Parliament headquarters, do not suggest farmers share the public concern that environmental issues urgently need to be addressed. The main farmer representative body in Europe, Copa-Cogeca, lobbied, and was successful, in removing a previous stipulation that some farmers need to have 4% of their land set aside for natural features, such as strips of wild plants. French farmers also won concessions at home on pesticide use. It was enough for the unions to call off their protests and EU leaders must feel relieved that the weakening of already weak regulations was enough to return peace to the streets of Brussels and Paris.
But reducing the acceptable space for nature on farmland to 0% will do little for farmers. In fact, it will only exacerbate environmental extremes which are making crop yields so vulnerable. Continued use of pesticides only entrenches a vicious circle that simply creates more dependence on industrial chemicals while directly damaging the health of farmers who are in contact with them.
On Thursday’s Prime Time on RTÉ, the president of the Irish Farmers’ Association, Francie Gorman, tried to articulate the concerns of Irish farmers. He bemoaned recent restrictions on the spreading of slurry (i.e. the partial loss of the nitrates derogation) during the very week when the farming media was reporting the widespread abuse of rules designed to protect water quality. It turns out that reported shipments of slurry off farms were not actually happening, something which was apparently an open secret within the industry.
Gorman also cited the reduced pot of money available for farmers under the current Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). He said that a new fund just for implementing environmental regulations was needed. But not only will the CAP deliver nearly €10 billion of taxpayer’s money to farmers in its current round up to 2027, the last budget announced a new, €14 billion infrastructure, climate and nature fund that will deliver significant funding to farmers for this very purpose. Alas, instead of celebrating this significant investment in rural Ireland, the IFA said that “farmers will be concerned about what will be required of them to access any of this fund”.
Farmers need help in implementing the slew of new regulations that have come on board in recent years. The MERCOSUR deal must be abandoned, more cheap beef is bad for farmers and bad for the environment. The Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, which places a carbon tax on certain imports to the EU such as steel and fertilisers, should be expanded to include food products like beef.
But farmers themselves are not passive bystanders in this discussion. They need to develop a more sophisticated approach to getting what they want beyond simple tractor protests. Farm organisations have so far been unable to articulate what they want the future of farming to be. They have produced no plans that would provide farmers’ incomes while also meeting environmental objectives. They must also be mindful that public support will not last if they are seen merely as obstacles to necessary change.
Pádraic Fogarty is an environmental campaigner.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say