Madam, - In your edition of September 28th Chris Johns comments on an article by Taoiseach Bertie Ahern in the Financial Times, which set out the arguments in support of the EU's Common Agricultural Policy. Mr Johns's views typify the arrogant and self-righteous "Britain knows best" attitude to most things European.
He questions the justification for the Cap in the first place. The founding fathers of the EEC decided that a common market in industrial goods would not be achievable if there were large differences in food prices and hence labour costs between the six member-states. The Common Agricultural Policy was the necessary first building block in the construction of the EU.
He asks the question: if the Cap did not exist, would it be invented today? He may be surprised to discover that the Cap is not unique: the two other major developed economies of the world - the US and Japan - have their own agricultural policies, which they strongly defend in WTO negotiations.
It is easy for commentators to be casual about food security when the local supermarket shelves are well stocked with food. But if there were to be a major outbreak of avian flu in Asia or foot-and-mouth disease in South America, I could envisage Tony Blair resurrecting the "Food from Britain" campaign of the 1970s.
Mr Johns tries to sidestep two central points made by Bertie Ahern. Firstly, in October 2002 the EU heads of government, including Tony Blair, agreed the budget for the Cap up to 2013; and indeed the level of that budget for an EU of 25 members is no greater than the previous budget for the EU of 15.
Secondly, the Cap has just been reformed, and that reform is being introduced only in 2005, or 2006 in some member-states. Europe has responded to the demands of other WTO countries by "decoupling" agricultural supports from production and prices. This marks a decisive shift by the EU away from subsidised production.
I also wish to point out to Mr Johns that farmers throughout Europe are more than producers of food of the highest standards of quality, safety and traceability. They are also the managers of the major part of the natural environment. Furthermore, a rural economy continues to exist in most countries of Europe and farmers are the mainstay of this rural fabric.
Chris Johns manages to throw in the usual cheapshot criticisms of the Cap. One is the line about its implications for people in the poorest countries of the world. He conveniently ignores the "everything but arms" agreement whereby the EU accepts tariff-free and quota-free access to its market for all exports, industrial and agricultural, from the 49 poorest countries of the world.
The other relates to the impact of the Cap on consumers. I wish to tell him that in Ireland, according to published CSO data, less than 9 per cent of total consumer expenditure goes on food consumed in the home. Of this, the IFA estimates that farmers receive no more than one-third. In other words, the farm gate price of food accounts for less than 3 per cent of total consumer expenditure.
I agree with Chris Johns on just one point: that Mr Ahern is unlikely to have convinced opinion-makers in the UK. However, that is not a reflection on the valid case made by the Taoiseach.
Finally, I note that since Tony Blair's publicity stunt at the EU summit meeting in June, when he delayed agreement on the next EU budget, it is notable that the UK attitude to Cap reform has since become much more realistic. Last week, as reported in your paper, the British Ambassador to Ireland, Mr Eldon, talked about reforms being agreed before 2014, not 2007. - Yours, etc,
JOHN DILLON, President, IFA, Bluebell, Dublin 12.