Liam Dann: French farming shameful rort

How is it that that the European Union - a bunch of countries that built their enormous wealth by plundering Africa and Asia well into the 20th century - has the gall to stand in the way of trade reforms that might give the world's poorest countries a half- chance of creating economies where children don't starve to death.

Did I say gall? I probably should have said Gaul.

It is becoming increasingly clear that without the French resistance the UK, Germany and other less agriculturally dependent nations would be prepared to offer more to help the World Trade Organisation reach an agreement.

The French are lovely people but their of approach to agriculture is just appalling. What is really infuriating is that the system they are so determined to preserve is collapsing from within.

Perpetuating that system is putting their farmers at greater risk than reforming it. It is tragic and pathetic that they are too stubborn to recognise a win-win situation.

Free trade would not destroy European agriculture. European food is still recognised as the best in the world. The farmers who produce that aren't all going to suddenly go out of business. Some will.

But frankly the EU system is so bloated and inefficient that some just don't deserve to be in business.

An editorial this month in British magazine the Spectator highlights examples of why the EU's common agricultural policy is so wrong.

In 2003 the European Court of Auditors found that 50 per cent of the suckling cows claimed to be grazing in Portugal did not exist. Eighty-nine per cent of farms had claimed subsidies based on acreage numbers so inaccurate that they added up to more than the total area of the country.

Subsidising agriculture is consuming more than half of the EU's $180 billion budget every year.

Throw in the arrival of new EU members with huge farming populations (such as Poland, whose eligibility for full subsidy rights is being introduced gradually) and it becomes obvious that already over-burdened European governments can't afford to subsidise into perpetuity.

A cynic might conclude that this is the reason (rather than any genuine altruism) for EU offers to give ground on the subsidy debate - offers still being opposed by the French.

But the chance of the EU giving up protectionist tariffs look slim. It is the tariff issue that is killing the Doha Round of trade talks.

What are the French afraid of?

The image of the proud French farmer is a thin veneer. There is simply no way for a fully developed nation to be proud when it is hiding behind tariffs. Could French rugby fans be proud of EU regulations which guaranteed their teams a 30-point head-start before the whistle blew? Of course not. It would be an embarrassment.

And in reality, the tariffs on many agricultural products are more like a 100-point advantage in rugby terms. They rule out any possibility of competition.

The shameful exhibition we see from the French every time trade talks begin is at least a good reminder of how far New Zealand farming has come in 20 years.

New Zealand dropped its protectionist policies so fast that it really wasn't fair on a lot of farmers. But the benefits of the move are now beyond dispute.

Our farmers are clever, resourceful people. They are pragmatists but beneath their common sense outlook lurks an intense passion and love for what they do. They are justly proud guardians of our economy.

These things are not widely understood by this country's young urban population. I didn't really understand them when I took on the job of Primary Industries Editor three years ago. I have had a wonderful (and eye-opening time) learning about the sector and its people.

This is my last column as Primary Industries Editor. I am moving on but will be writing for the Business Herald and am pleased to be carrying that passion for agriculture that is, frankly, the only thing that keeps this South Pacific paradise in the First World.