Conclusions and recommendations
Impact of accession on agriculture in the new
Member states
1. While
the New Member States struggle with their current weaknesses,
including structural fragmentation and a lack of capital investment,
we consider that they are unlikely to be in a position to undermine
agricultural markets in the EU. (Paragraph 19)
2. The ability of
the NMS to implement the transitional agri-food measures is of
critical importance, as the discovery of sub-standard food in
circulation on the single market would bring the whole system
into disrepute. Lax safety standards in the New Member States
could undermine consumer confidence in all food products across
the whole of the EU. We recommend that the UK Government use all
its influence to ensure food safety standards continue to be upheld.
(Paragraph 24)
3. We believe that
the UK Government should press the Commission to address the
adequacy of the accession countries' internal scrutiny systems.
It is essential that the GM status of exports from the NMS can
be assured. (Paragraph 25)
4. Further targeted
rural development programmes are important in helping the NMS
to overcome their weaknesses, particularly with regard to the
modernisation and restructuring of their agriculture sectors.
Rural development policies also offer the best opportunity to
diversify and generate non-farm income. (Paragraph 28)
5. The evidence we
received on the agricultural implications for the NMS was of course
received prior to enlargement. A few months on, it is still too
early to determine what the full impact of accession will be.
It does seem, however, that fears of markets being immediately
flooded by products from the NMS were not grounded in fact. We
consider that the agricultural potential of the NMS will not be
realised until its farming sector is restructured; such restructuring
will take some years to complete. The environmental concerns,
which came from official as well as other sources, deserve serious
attention. We also believe the UK Government should explore ways
in which it can use its existing knowledge and experience to assist
the NMS in achieving their environmental targets. (Paragraph 33)
Impact of enlargement on agriculture in the UK
6. The
Government should do more to identify investment opportunities
and encourage exports of UK farm produce to the NMS. Specific
funds should be allocated to target these new market opportunities,
with improved trading relationships facilitated by UK embassies.
(Paragraph 39)
7. Overall, we consider
that enlargement represents more of a challenge than a threat
to the UK farmer. (Paragraph 47)
Other issues
8. We
regard it as important that the European Parliament's increased
responsibility in agricultural policy-making should not be dominated
by what the Minister so strikingly described to us as one of the
least progressive elements of the EU, the Agriculture Committee.
We share his concerns and urge the UK Government to continue to
push for further agricultural reform. (Paragraph 50)
9. Consequently, it
is inevitable that finite budgetary resources will be spread increasingly
thinly across an enlarged Europe. As EU membership grows to 25
and beyond, the need for structural and cohesive funds will compete
more fiercely against demands for agricultural support. The longer-term
effect can be only in the direction of reduced agricultural support
for farmers in longer-standing EU Member States such as the
UK. (Paragraph 55)
| 
