The EU decides on its agricultural reform and wants to advance the change to climate neutrality. But: It won't work that way

"The common European agricultural policy has been a source of memorable word creations since its inception. Sea of milk, mountains of butter, mountains of pork stand for the bizarre overproduction that was caused by Brussels price guarantees. Killing of newborn calves was rewarded. A straight line leads from the killing of calves to chick shredding, which is not financed by the EU, but fits the image of an agriculture that treats animals like goods, destroys the environment and heats up the climate - subsidized with about every year 50 billion euros, the largest budget item in the EU.

 

    Many farmers feel that they have been judged unfairly, and with some right. There are very different lifestyles on the seven million farms that are spread across the 27 EU countries. And the system in which these people operate is always the result of political control. 

 

Agriculture is currently in the most difficult transformation of all, towards climate neutrality. Because changes were made too late and time is of the essence, the change is pushing both sides to the limit of excessive demands - agriculture and politics.

 

    The reform is far too undemanding

 

    This Tuesday, the European Parliament will adopt the new funding guidelines until 2027. After an exhausting struggle, two years too late, the federal states, the Commission and the leading parliamentarians agreed in June on a reform that divides even party families. The majority of the Social Democrats will vote in favor, the German Social Democrats against. 

 

What they all have in common is knowledge: the EU is barely making any progress with this reform on the way to the climate targets it has set itself; it is far too undemanding for that.

 

    The vast majority of EU money for agriculture continues to flow in the form of direct payments: the larger the cultivated area, the more money the farms receive. This reinforces the trend towards agricultural industrialization. 

 

At least the direct payments are increasingly linked to ecological requirements. From 2023 onwards, a quarter of this is to be linked to measures for climate, species and soil protection. The national governments, in coordination with the EU Commission, determine which ones exactly before the farmers can decide whether it is worthwhile for them to take part in the program. What does it all bring? Definitely a lot of uncertainty, a lot of bureaucracy - and the knowledge that a new wave of regulation will soon be rolling.

 

    A vision arouses existential fears among the farmers

 

    In a strategy paper, the EU has just drawn up the vision of climate-friendly, sustainable, earth-bound agriculture that is intended to set standards worldwide, but arouses fears of existence among farmers. 

 

A quarter of the usable area is to be cultivated with organic farming, the use of pesticides is to be reduced by 50 percent, the use of chemical fertilizers by 20 percent. All this by 2030, this is the only way for the EU to fulfill its Green Deal. 

 

This vision must now be fed piece by piece into the Brussels legislative machine. Experience has shown that what comes out of this is far from the state of a vision, especially in agricultural policy."

 Lithuanian farmers who cultivate the grain monoculture for export using the industrial methods and destroying Lithuanian soil in the process will not survive such policy changes.