Agro production

I was intrigued by the article Agro Production Up 11 Per Cent (February 8).

I am not aware of how the 11 per cent has been arrived at but I have followed closely the plight of the farmers since we joined the EU and beg to differ on the interpretation of the statistics given.

In my opinion, a more credible interpretation would be that in spite of producing more to make up for the heavy competition from imported vegetables, the farmer has ended up earning less!

Imagine producing 11 per cent more and earning eight per cent less! What is even worse is that the consumer is no better off than he was in the previous year. He is still paying through his nose for his vegetables, imported or not.

Wholesalers are either ignoring the pitkali market completely or they are pushing imported vegetables instead of the local produce. It is a known fact that once an item of local produce starts to fetch a reasonable price at the pitkali market, the importers will quickly saturate the country with the same imported vegetable. The local produce will then go to waste because it will either not be sold at all at the pitkalija or the farmer will end up receiving a trifle for his labours.

I also believe that the pittance the farmer is receiving in subsidy hardly makes up for the decrease in his earnings. So why are we importing vegetables if this is driving the farmers out of business and forcing them to take up alternative employment?

Isn't it about time that the government started using the so-called safeguard clause to protect the poor farmers' livelihood against the indiscriminate importation of vegetables? Wasn't this what was promised to the farmers when the government had lobbied for their support before the EU referendum?