I refer to the (very well-written) editorial of July 14, A Supplement To Agriculture, and would like to make the following comments:
Thanks to The Times for hammering the point we very often try to drive home, i.e. that of the farmer not being rightly compensated for his efforts while the consumer pays higher prices than necessary for the same produce.
As I previously stated in a letter to The Times, the problem in Malta (although bad enough as pointed out in the same article) is nothing in comparison to many member states of the European Union and this is where the worrying part lies. If the EU has not managed to curb such a situation, is it not a bit presumptuous for us to assume that we in Malta are going to solve it?
Having said that, we as farmers' representatives are promoting the setting up of a producers' group with the aim of offering a well-presented, fine-tasting product to the consumer with the least possible mark-up. I am glad to say that it is a matter of days before recognition for such an entity is given and hopefully it should not be long before it commences operations. So we are conscious of the problem and it is our intention to try and address it.
I can assure readers that we, as representatives of the farmers, made sure that the Commissioner for Agriculture, Mariann Fischer Boel, was made aware of the problems Maltese and Gozitan farmers are facing. So much so, that at one time when it was so obvious that the non-implementation of the safeguard clause was causing so much hardship to our farmers, the commissioner herself suggested that we apply for the implementation of the clause since provision for this was made during the negotiations between our government and the EU. But Minister George Pullicino assured her that this was not necessary. That's all we needed!
Despite the minister's opinion, we insisted and are still insisting with Commissioner Boel that the Minister is wrong in his conclusion on this matter and that there are clear cases where the safeguard clause should be implemented. In fact we presented the commissioner with examples of where we know such cases can apply and I think it is only fair to let the Commissioner discuss the matter with whoever she has to before we come to any conclusions on the outcome of our claim to her. There is no doubt that Commissioner Boel saw and heard enough for her to conclude that agriculture in the Maltese islands really and truly deserves that extra special treatment. In fact she put a lot of accent onto this point. Let's hope that her impressions translate into positive action.
I again assure readers that we, as representatives of farmers, are in continuous contact with the authorities and to be fair, many cases are given instant attention and our voice heard. Unfortunately though, there are cases where the decisions taken are the completely opposite to what we propose, such as in the case of the non-implementation of the safeguard clause. The implementation of the safeguard clause is imperative if the "restructuring", is to take place. We knew what was coming, we put out preoccupying thoughts to the authorities and they are the ones that came up with the solution of the safeguard clause.
The idea of the clause was to give five years for the Maltese farmer to "restructure". Two years have already gone by and not much "restructuring" has been done. How can farmers invest money they are not making? The safeguard clause would have given that extra bit of income encouraging the farmers to invest. The way things are going, the authorities are going to have to come up with a very effective salvage programme when the subsidies, which are presently giving the farmers an artificial income, suddenly come to an abrupt end. That is, if one actually believes that the retention of agriculture really is on the government's agenda.
During the time I spent writing these few words, my writing was interrupted twice by farmers phoning to tell me that tomatoes are being dumped at the Ta' Qali market and imported watermelons have slashed prices of this product to ridiculous levels. Since it is pointless trying to "put our case to the Minister" or Prime Minister for that matter, perhaps the commissioner or someone in the EU commission can pull a few strings?
I've seen the Maltese newspapers on their desks in Brussels so I know that they are aware of what is being written!