CAP critical in securing future food supply

5.18.00pm GMT Thu 25th Feb 2010

Jim Hume, Liberal Democrat MSP for the South of Scotland and Liberal Democrat Rural Affairs spokesperson, today took part in a Scottish Parliamentary debate on the future of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) during which he underlined the critical need for retention of CAP in securing our future food supply.

The MSP also recognised the need to ensure active farming is encouraged through a balanced and proportionate payments system, which does not disadvantage any part of the sector in favour of another.Jim Hume MSP: South of Scotland

Jim Hume MSP said:

“The CAP budget has decreased recently, but there have been questions from some as to whether we should or shouldn’t have CAP support, which is some 40% of the EU budget. We have often heard of the New Zealand example of no support, but we must remember that there is already support there for developing markets and New Zealand did write off all its farming debt. That is often not heard.

“So whilst it’s true that our existing CAP support system must change, due to its historical nature, its continuation is critical for agriculture.

“I do have a few concerns - I feel it questionable that a farmer on good quality land could get paid more per hectare than one on a high hill, where both have the same amount of stock or activity on them. And also how we may police what a minimum cultivation is and how that might be balanced against someone who has put an expensive crop in the ground, such as potatoes. So I do have some concerns about unintended consequences of encouraging less activity.

“We do not want to fix the problem of a very few landlords doing next to no activity for their single farm payment by positively encouraging all land users to do minimal work for theirs. So as I said we welcome the starter for discussion, but hope it does not materialise into a starter for implementation. I have already had a learned farmer in Dumfries and Galloway estimating that £30m would be lost to that area, if the report in its current form was implemented.

“There is an argument that re-basing the payments, by taking into account current or recent activity could be a good way forward to encourage active farming, and take away the problems with the current historic model. Perhaps a base area plus top up for livestock would be workable and be good use of public money. And arable units could be freer to plant what suits the market and consumer, but there must be a certainty that actual work occurs on the arable units, otherwise we may see landlords take back their land in hand to do minimal cultivation with contractors – not good for the communities and unhelpful in encouraging new entrants.”