Norwegian farmers and EU

Transcription

1 Norwegian farmers and EU Christian Anton Smedshaug Norwegian farmers union Vi får Norge til å gro! 1

2 Why No in Norway in 1972 and 1994? Democratic deficit within EU Loss of international voice and position Loss of people s control of natural resocurces Fisheries Waterfalls Oil Gas Agriculture National sovereignty 2

3 What is not the EEA agreement? The common foreign and security policy The common agricultural policy The common fishery policy The common trade policy The tariff union Justice and internal matters we participate in the Schengen area, though The economic and monetary union Common agricultural policy Based on a common market which means: Common tariffs around the union no tariffs within All CAP support/financing from Brüssel. No exportsupport on national level Common market for all agricultural products. That means a common support system. Possibility transition arrangments, and limited permanent national support eg North of 62º. Difficult to invoke food safety and animal health restrictions. 3

4 Swedish meat import - % of national consumption Chicken Hog Beef Reformed agricultural policy Support decoupled from production Based on area - Great Britain, Germany Based on former support - Be-Ne-Lux, France Goals Reduce the agricultural budget More focus on the market Increase international competitive ability Move more funding to rural development Make CAP easier(?) Increase the environmental profile 4

5 What are the measures? No limit on the size of the farms No structural element in the support Hog, chicken, egg, no limit in size or limits on starting up Milk production national quotas quotas to be abolished by Market regulation through butter and skim milk powder. Beef, some support linked to the production Fruit, vegetables more or less without support 5

6 Development in the budget of the EU Inntektsstøtte 9,3% Bygdeutvikling 4,1% Markedsordninger 36,9% Markedsordninger 90,7% Markedsordninger 21,3% Bygdeutvikling 10,5% (1992 reform) Inntektsstøtte 59,0% Inntektsstøtte 68,2% 2008 (etter reform) Price difference Norway Sweden NOK Product Norge Sverige Difference % Milk Beef Tomato Hog Lamb

7 Comparison of costs in milk production 2007 (IFCN, 2008) 12,00 kr per kg milk (EKM) 10,00 8,00 6,00 4,00 2,00 0,00 ICE 40 SUI 20 AUT 12 NOR 21 FIN 26 DEN 100 SWE 50 USA 80 IRE 45 NZL 307 Country and size of herd (kyr) Consequences for Norway Less support and lower prices will cause a loss of turnover of % ie 7-14 bn NOK. All profit could be ereased Loss of volumes of production milk, hogs, chicken, beef, grains Loss of production vegetables, fruits? Loss of production areas mountain, fjords and northern agriculture The cost of EU membership for Norwegian farming will be larger than the gains. And Norway will be a net contributor to the financing of EU. Our natural conditions facing our agriculture do not make an competitive environment for our agriculture, together with the areas further south in Europe 7

8 A memory from the campaign of 1994 Goal of the EU work of Norwegian Farmers union Main goal: Norway shall not become a member of the European union Part 1: Work in such a way that the opinion polls show a high turnout for keeping Norway as soverign nation Work to increase the number of parlamentarians against EUmembership Part 2: Work for a NO vote in case of a national election 8

9 Attitude towards Norwegian EU-membership (MMI) Green No, Blue Yes, red - undecided Høst -98 Vår -99 Høst -99 Vår 00 Høst 00 Vår 01 Høst 01 Vår 02 Høst 02 Vår 03 Høst 03 Vår 04 Høst 04 Vår 05 Høst 05 Vår 06 Høst 06 Vår 07 Høst 07 Høst 08 Bør bli medlem Bør ikke bli medlem Ikke tatt standpunkt Norwegian Farmers unions strategy Building of knowledge and organisational skill Regional EU-gatherings Study groups Based on selfmade agricultural material Information distribution through and internet Use the farmers gatherings both the cooperatives and the unions to discuss EU Increase connection with Nordic partners Work on CAP, Fisheries, EU-budget, EU and tariffs, through the organisation and through The Sentral research office for agricultural associations 9

10 Networking No to EU Close contact on national and regional level Cooperation on establishing local groups Getting members Mobilising for arrangments for No to EU Environmental organisations Labour unions International solidarity organisations Fishers organisations Agriculture in general 10

11 The individual Get information networking, internet adresses, newspapers, Membership in No to EU Participate in newspaper debates Make allianses Participate in meetings and demonstrations Spread material Get new members Discuss with persons undecided Important issues in addition to agriculture Foregin policy Fishery Security policy / peace Enlargement of EU Democracy Economy monetary policy - euro EEA, consequences and alternatives Regulation of the labour market Environmental policy (habitat directive) 11

12 Norwegian procedure Decission on applying for membership by the Storting Government negotiate with the EU-commission A consultative national vote - yes or no to the agreement reached between the commision and the government The parlamentarians kan choose what advice they will follow or say something regarding the outcome of the vote and the geographical distribution of the votes. Decision on membership demands 3/4 majority without an election in between and 2/3 majority with election in between. Fight for democracy 1814 Constitution 1837 Local self governence rules 1884 Parlamentarism 1905 Independence (from Sweden) 1917 Laws of ownership to waterfalls 1935 Crisis arrangment between farmers and workers 1972 EU membership rejected 1982 UN Ocean law commission 1994 EU membership rejected 12

13 Conclusion on the work We need to have contineously prepared for debate Focus on: Networking common people vs elite Farmers and the food industry Fishermen Unions (LO) Environmental and international solidarity groups Knowledge of EU and og membership consequences Teaching of the No-front Strong networking through Nei til EU or another alliance The European house - Lykke Friis at Danish Industy 13

14 Joining EU to gain influence? In 1994 Norway would have had 3 % of the votes in the European council In 2004 Norway would have had 2 % I 2009 Norway would have had 1 % It is the number of inhabitants not the cod quota which will decide the influence in EU A country without agriculture is not country, it is an area 14