Response to CAP 2028-34: A guide for reflection and debate 73 Do youthinkthereis a balancebetweenthe objectivesof the CAP and the EU's trade policy? All of us involved in agriculture know that this balance does not exist. For example, how can we be so demanding internally in the use of such factors and intermediate goods or in certain agricultural practices and then allow the import of final products from countries that do not apply these restrictions? I think European policymakers should reflect deeply on the degree of dependence we have in the EU on the United States for a wide range of technological goods for agriculture, or on other third countries for fertilisers or raw materials for incorporation into our production chains. Towhat extent doyou considerthe CAP to be a pillarofthe Europeansinglemarket? Precisely to the extent necessary to guarantee food security within the Union. It was no coincidence that European integration began with the creation of the CAP and that for 30 years, from its inception in 1963 until the Maastricht Treaty of 1992, the single market was limited to products covered by the CAP and their derivatives. Is the concept of multifunctionalitystill useful? What areas and objectives should be pursued in this context? Experience shows us that when a farmer produces a tradable good, he is at the same time producing nontradable goods, i.e. public goods such as ensuring food security, land use and planning, water cycle management, preservation of heritage, gastronomy, etc. What is your assessment of the CAP in terms of land use, the environment, climate and social issues? It is thanks to the CAP that we have an agricultural sector with some resilience, most rural areas inhabited and a relatively comfortable situation in terms of food security, not to mention the strategic contribution of the agri-food and forestry sector to the European economy. We know, however, that the CAP still does not provide a minimally satisfactory response in terms of territorial equity, or that in the last five years we have bitten off more than we can chew in terms of environmental and climate restrictions. In its Communication ‘Vision for Agriculture and Food’, presented earlier this year, the Commission acknowledges this, stating that the environmental, climate, economic and social agendas must move forward in sync. I hope that the final regulations to be approved for implementation from 2028 onwards will correct these errors and malfunctions. 1.2 To what extent do you think it is possible to create synergies with cohesion policy? What is your viewonthe operationalisation of a Single Fund? At CONFAGRI, we are against the Single Fund. Even with ring-fencing, there is a great temptation for governments to divert resources sooner or later to other uses that give them more political or electoral gain. In a country as centralised as ours, where the vast interior has no more than 23 MPs out of 230, this fear is real. Just remember how arguments have been made on several occasions to divert Regional Policy funds intended for less developed regions to major infrastructure projects in the Lisbon metropolitan area. We need synergies between rural development and regional development policies in order to improve territorial cohesion, especially in the most disadvantaged areas. But this can be done without a single fund: all that is needed is for the regulations to allow it. Are the European Commission's recommendations for the specific objectives of the CAP relevant to the current challenges? Yes, they seem very pertinent to me and appear to convey a balance of concerns that has been lacking in recent years, where common EU policies, particularly
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTgxOTE4Nw==