CAP Health Check

Thank you Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to be participating in this important debate and once again I declare a farming interest.

The aim of the common agricultural policy was to provide farmers with a reasonable standard of living, consumers with quality food at fair prices and to preserve rural heritage. The policy has since evolved to meet society's changing needs so that food safety, preservation of the environment, value for money and agriculture as a source of fuel crops have become key factors.

Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy under the Lib Dem guidance from Ross Finnie, gave farmers greater freedom to decide what crops and livestock to produce. Under the reformed CAP, instead of having to produce particular products to obtain support, farmers are able to choose what to produce and therefore an obvious ability to match market demands. And at last there was a recognition that farmers in receipt of CAP support have important responsibilities towards the protection of the environment, animal health and welfare, and public health, Things they have a proud track record on in Scotland.

This health check is broadly welcomed and we know that it's intended only to be an adjustment to CAP if needed, rather than a sweeping reform.

There has to be a level playing field for farmers in Scotland, one that will ensure sustainable food production and a successful agricultural industry. That's a given. And of course these two things must run alongside the environmental stewardship of our land so Scotland's renowned biodiversity is retained and nurtured as my amendment reflects. You cannot have environmental benefits without economic activity on the ground to deliver it.

The health check puts forward proposals which aim to simplify the Single Payment Scheme; to phase out milk quotas fully by 2015; and it aims to look at ways of protecting livestock production in disadvantaged areas.

These are all welcome moves.

There are however concerns over proposals for modulation which brings me to the key aspect of the Liberal Democrat amendment today. Any increases in compulsory modulation by the EU must be tempered with reductions in national voluntary modulation rates - many farms will already be disadvantged by voluntary modulation, which is not widely practiced in the rest of the Member States at all.

There is also deep concern within the industry over proposals for progressive modulation and quite frankly if progressive modulation is implemented, it will result in land being split into smaller less efficient units, it will result in job losses, it will discourage expansion within the industry. Remember Scotland has larger farms than anywhere in Europe, and often the European type of farming is lifestyle rather than serious food producing business. Therefore why should we put our country at a disadvantage.

There will be no even handedness in any system that employs the use of progressive modulation or capping. Large farms with higher numbers of staff will find it impossible to absorb the costs to them of progressive modulation and this undoubtedly will cause economic damage. There will be no incentive to expand and develop the business. This will be devastating for our rural economy, but it will also send out the wrong message to future entrants to the industry at a time when we need to encourage as much young blood as possible, making farming and agriculture an exciting and viable prospect for the next generation.

I've said before that we need economic activity on the ground to maintain and secure our biodiversity and other environmental benefits. If progressive modulation and capping is imposed how will that good environmental work be continued if there are no economically viable farms to manage the land.

We will all have read the SRPBA briefing, I'm sure, and a direct quote from one of its members quite categorically states that he would have to either downsize which would mean getting rid of livestock and labour or he would have to split the holding if progressive modulation became a reality. Both options resulting in smaller, inefficient farming. Just think of the Run Rig system of farming back in the 18th C., and how inefficient that was.

We Liberal Democrats also believe that the Scottish Rural Development Programme should be reviewed in the light of concerns over food production and therefore food security. We are living in an era of "just in time delivery", gone are the grain mountains and wine lakes. Here are the times of world shortages of food and we as part of Europe can help that. Food production has to be up there as one of the key priorities.

Presiding Officer,

The Scottish Government in its 2007 manifesto said that it would give Scotland a stronger voice in Europe.

The Scottish Government in its 2007 manifesto said it would proactively act to safeguard agricultural support for Scotland's farmers.

I cannot emphasise enough that the Scottish Government must stand by their manifesto commitments to Scottish agriculture and I look to the Cabinet Secretary for clear assurances that he will fight the cause for Scotland in Europe as strongly as the Lib Dems did for 8 years, and say no to progressive modulation and capping for the benefit of our environment, economy and agriculture. And that voluntary modulation will reduce in line if compulsory modulation increases.

I move my amendment on behalf of the Liberal Democrats.