EU agriculture chief slams the idea of reform-linked funds for farmers

The idea of having an EU budget, including for agriculture, based on political conditions and milestones, as is the case with the bloc’s post-pandemic recovery fund, is “unacceptable,” the outgoing Commissioner for Agriculture Janusz Wojciechowski told Euractiv.

Wojciechowski is working on the end-of-mandate activity report. In a draft seen by Euractiv, he vindicates the EU and his personal contribution to the resilience of the agrifood sector in the face of the “tremendous challenges” posed by the pandemic, extreme weather events, and the economic aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Although he is stepping down, the 69-year-old Polish politician is not shying away from having his say on the future of EU agricultural policy.

Wojciechowski rejected the idea of an EU budget that disburses funds based on the fulfilment of certain political reforms or conditions, such as the “milestones” that currently mark the delivery of funds for the national recovery plans.

It is an idea echoed by many in the EU, including the incumbent EU Budget Commissioner Johannes Hahn.

Wojciechowski said he could not imagine a Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) with conditions like respect for the rule of law or economic benchmarks.

“Farmers in Poland [would] not receive money because [of] the problem with the (…) judiciary? Absolutely not,” he said, adding that the same could happen to their Italian counterparts due to concerns over the country’s public debt.

Against cuts on promotion policy

Wojciechowski regretted the Commission’s recent proposal to cut EU funding for the promotion of agricultural products, saying it was “very important” to maintain a trade surplus for the sector.

In the revision of the bloc’s multiannual financial framework (MFF), the EU executive proposed cutting €440 million from the CAP budget for 2025-2027, mainly affecting the support for the promotion of EU agrifood products and missions and events in markets abroad.

“I’m worried about that,” the commissioner said, adding that the “secret” of the EU’s success in agrifood trade was the quality of its products, which need to be promoted.

Europe needs food diplomacy, Wojciechowski said, recalling the six missions to Vietnam, Singapore, India, China, Kazakhstan, and Japan, and “the very positive opinion” of these trips by representatives of the EU agrifood business.

Wojciechowski pitched himself as the defender of promotion policy also when it comes to the proposal for new legislation that was part of the Farm to Fork action plan but was never tabled.

This was due to “the controversy over support for the promotion of red meat and wine” in the Commission, said Wojciechowski, who cited the pesticide regulation and the industrial emissions directive as other EU initiatives where his position differed from that of the College of Commissioners.

“I presented my separate vote,” Wojciechowski recalled “and finally (…) my objections were taken into account” in the legislative process, which ended with the withdrawal of the pesticide regulation and the exclusion of cattle farming from the scope of the directive.

Mirror clauses, with caution  

Asked about calls to ensure a level playing field between EU producers and their international competitors through the same production standards – the so-called “mirror clauses” –, Wojciechowski was cautious.

“We should be careful about this because open trade is, first of all, good for us,” he said, adding that the EU has “more offensive than defensive” interests in the agrifood trade.

He said that EU negotiators should try to align production standards between the bloc and trading partners “as much as possible” when negotiating free trade agreements.

“But we should remember that the European Union is a World Trade Organisation member (…) We cannot create requirements that can be [perceived] as trade barriers” by partners, he added.

[Edited by Angelo Di Mambro and Zoran Radosavljevic]

Read more with Euractiv