Benefits of CAP reform
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.From Ms Helen Browning
Sir: As one of the "panel of experts" brought in by William Waldegrave to consider the future of the Common Agricultural Policy, I am concerned that the panel's report should not be interpreted as an attempt by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Treasury to slash funding to agriculture ("EU urged to drop farming subsidies", 27 July).
The report instead should be the first step to re-targeting expenditure to ensure that the public receives the benefits it needs and requires from farming today - healthy food from an attractive, vibrant countryside. An improvement in animal welfare standards should also be supported financially under a reformed CAP. Unfortunately, the group has been disbanded before it was able to begin the real work of designing the CAP of the future. The report gives indications of the objectives for future agricultural support, but "the devil is in the detail".
In particular, we must recognise that "free trade" per se is not the panacea it is so often held up to be. Without mechanisms to allow nation states the ability to protect themselves against competition from countries with lower regulatory bases (for instance, on environmental, social and animal welfare issues), we will be constrained from upgrading our standards due to the threat of becoming "uncompetitive". The lowest common denominator will inevitably prevail. The veal issue is a good example, as will be the pig industry when sow stalls and tethers are, quite rightly, banned in 1999.
This report must not be bandied about the EU as a UK-centric view of the solution. Indeed, I do not believe that it should go to Brussels until we can demonstrate our commitment to taking on board the valid concerns of our Continental neighbours, so that the reformed CAP will provide real benefits to both today's European citizens and tomorrow's.
Yours faithfully,
Helen Browning
Eastbrook Farm
Swindon
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments