Professor Alan Matthews highlights ‘An impressive piece of investigative journalism. It not only adds support for the Commission's proposal for degressivity and capping of income support payments, but it also undermines the argument that these payments are necessary to ensure food security in Europe.’
According to a report in The Guardian, ‘The United
Arab Emirates’ ruling royal family is benefiting from tens of millions in EU
subsidies to grow crops destined for the Gulf, it can be revealed.
A cross-border investigation by DeSmog and shared with the
Guardian found subsidiaries controlled by the Al Nahyans collected more than
€71m (£61m) in six years for farmland it controls in Romania, Italy and Spain.’
Read more here: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/may/07/uae-ruling-royal-family-eu-farming-subsidies
However, some have that this has argued that this is populist journalism the latest version of a tired 'scandal' trope: "The “scandal” that larger farms receive more than smaller ones under area-based payments distracts from the real problem, which is that EU agricultural policy as a whole is catastrophically inconsistent from a governance ("ordnungspolitische") perspective. Industrial and structural policy cannot be justified on the basis of income arguments. This creates a class ("Stand") of privileged recipients of state funds and causes massive problems through misallocations in structural change. This fundamental problem needs to be addressed."
Another comment was: 'We already had the same story X times: the Queen of England, Rheinbraun, BASF etc. As a result more or less bureaucratic active farmer clauses were introduced which did not change a lot while creating difficult and burdensome administrative problems. Capping would be a solution which however was rejected each time it was proposed by the Commission. These stories distract from the real question: Should the CAP carry on with direct payments and, if yes, should they be merely paid for keeping areas in good agricultural and ecological condition or rather for achieving public goods?'
The CAP always leads to controversy about both policy objectives and instruments.
No comments:
Post a Comment