We are now seeing European farmers being systematically denied access to modern technology that is freely available to our competitors. For those in beef production, even feed additives such as Rumensin, and natural hormones such as synovex are banned, let alone Ralgro and clenbuterol that are all pervasive in US and third-country farming.

In cereals, GM technology is almost totally banned for internal EU production – there is only one maize variety cleared for use in Spain.

Even the GM blight-free potatoes, which the Teagasc trial in Oakpark demonstrated were so environmentally superior to the conventional cultivators because of the greatly reduced incidence of pesticide spraying are not allowed.

This year, in cereals we saw the effect of the ban on Redigo Deter seed dressing for winter barley; while the steady withdrawal of active ingredients continues in the EU but are permitted to be used in the growing of feedstuffs imported into the EU.

Over the last few months, I have heard Commissioner Hogan and Michel Barnier (the former French minister for agriculture, now in charge of Brexit negotiations) acknowledge that EU arable farmers were either operating with one hand tied behind their back, or were at a serious competitive disadvantage.

With a Mercosur deal now awaiting ratification and with European governments prioritising their consumers’ prejudices, European farmers should stand back and assess future policy

The readiness to accept this legislatively imposed disadvantage hit me as I listened to the European Commission speaker (Andrew Owen-Griffiths of the plant health unit) at the Forum for the Future of Agriculture in Dublin last week.

He acknowledged that except in exceptional cases we cannot impose EU rules on the rest of the world. With a Mercosur deal now awaiting ratification and with European governments prioritising their consumers’ prejudices, European farmers should stand back and assess future policy.

It seems to me that there is a real opportunity to ask for compensation for European farmers proportionate to the amount of income foregone by the unique imposition of these technical restraints.

It would not be that difficult to work out the extra cost and loss of income from being denied access to the modern technology.

I cannot see why farmers wouldn’t analyse the cash consequences of being denied modern technology

These considerations would not matter if EU support prices were set to reflect European cost of production, but this is no longer the case and, with direct payments increasingly going to a flat fully converged payment, the absolute penalties facing commercial food production in Europe are continuing to increase.

We are not going to see imports meet EU production standards and there is still a drive towards ever-cheaper food.

I cannot see why farmers wouldn’t analyse the cash consequences of being denied modern technology and seek appropriate compensation. There is a growing technology deprivation phenomenon happening in EU agriculture. It should be recognised if farming in the EU is to have a sensible future.

Read more

Forum for the Future of Agriculture meets in Dublin

Department rolls out €20m in Knowledge Transfer payments