If the principles are clear the reality is perhaps lessBeijing could consider worst case scenarioThe time is the controlled sophisticationThe global gas market became a buyer marketThe concept of deferred salary must be assessed in this light I will table an amendment to this effectRuined by his manager and companion read the view at pThe recession has put an end to this state of affairsChoirs on the other hand is directly movingThis is done and Thomson can now move forwardEarly 2008, when the price of milk reached records after several years of stagnation, the farmers earned 8 cents per litre. Today, they lose 5 cents per litre, 30,000 euros per cow over one year. The situation is untenable. How has it happened That's several years that the EU increases adverse French farmers signals. Since the reform of the common agricultural policy (Cap) in 2003, prices are more secured but are set by the market. The income of farmers is complemented by direct support, paid by the Community budget. Reform today shows its limits.
In agriculture, the market regulator is a myth. What market is it There are two markets, a market for fresh products (milk, butter, cheese) and an international market for other products (milk powder). There are also two applications, very concentrated, an application for a handful of industrialists on processed products and an application for distributors on liquid milk product benchmark sold virtually without value added (excluding packaging) and margin. However, the offer consists of 100,000 farmers in hundreds of cooperatives.
The market may be exploitative or devastating, but it regulates very evil. Because the professional application reacts to the price, while producers is always offset. When prices rise, production fits with delay, because farmers tend always to delay, to ensure that the increase of prices is perennial. The risk is the production increases when the market turns, as in 2008. Producers are still poor when prices fall. It does not cows technical unemployment when demand decreases! In times of low prices, farmers can no longer live on their production and European aid becomes crucial. Their dependence on the EU is total. Farmers, assisted, have no choice but to hope for the maintenance of a system that they abhor. Thus, in the eyes of farmers, the reform of the CAP did not stop the overproduction, but added a dose of humiliation.
The abandonment of milk quotas in 2013 was confirmed by the end of 2008 CAP health check. This deletion requested by several Member States which have large dairy potentials, removes a management tool that allows to preserve the small farms. Surrender of quotas, surrender of breeders... pas is quickly crossed. While it has continued to consider the CAP appropriations as a reserve available to fund new spending, the Commission is forced to accept the return of refunds, export aid to evacuate new surplus on a part of the productions. It might even soon announce, penaude, that the agricultural budget is too low to cope with the crisis...
The State is also very confused. Yesterday, the time of the administered CAP, while they had all the tools of control, States have been unable to impose the necessary adjustments. Today, they are also paralyzed. He would have much European money (EUR 10 billion per year in France) If a reporter party aid of arable crops on farmers. This is the meaning of the appeal of the Minister of Agriculture to "a fairer CAP", implied with better distributed aid. This development is envisaged for the future but the crisis is today. Another possibility would be to support the incomes of farmers through the national budget, which amounts to the generalized CAP, community and national cofinancing that the France is to avoid as long as possible.
The crisis impact much the price of milk. It is tempting to blame the large distribution, with impudence to counteract virtues of fair trade in the distance and humiliating local producers by imposing price of asphyxia. But the crisis results in changes of consumption with a fall in exports and purchases of expensive products (cheese, yogurt) and arbitration to the first price of commodity, milk, that distributors sell more and more under their own brand and virtually no margin. The only way to lower the selling price is lower the purchasing price to the producer. Producers are therefore the costs of the competition between distributors.
Finally, the Organization of the market has some weaknesses. The revolt of the producers is understandable. They have the feeling of being abandoned, deceived and sentenced. But have they chosen the right way, the good fighting Return to the administered CAP and quotas is illusory. Indeed, it is less the CAP issue the structure costs and price negotiation. The France has chosen a model of small farms, distributed on the territory. This model is to his credit but has a cost which must be compensated. Equipment operating costs are nearly the same as elsewhere in Europe so that the production is lower. The operation is done mainly by grouping of small farmers and not by employees in many Member States.
We must also recognize that some States are doing better than others. In Germany for example, the reactivity of farmers is better because the price immediately adjust to the market. To simplify, the domestic milk price is linked to that of milk powder, international, price changes are immediate, without offset as in France.
We also invent new ways of marketing and negotiation. Direct sales by distributors, still anecdotal trucks, can deal with tense local situations. If the bold producer is not put on the black list of the stations to purchase! Regarding prices, contractualization can take over from quotas. A condition that farmers weigh more because the current bargaining is too unbalanced.
