Otherwise “catastrophe” – Fischler: No accession of Ukraine without EU reforms

“The existing system, where every hectare receives the same amount of support, is not sustainable in the future – with or without Ukraine,” Fischler emphasizes. “Some market distortions in today’s EU are due to the fact that there is completely asymmetrical support for companies,” he said, referring to the high amounts of financing for large companies.

For the complete abolition of area payments
“In my opinion, area bonuses in their current form should be abolished and a new concept developed,” said Fischler, calling for far-reaching agricultural reform in the EU. As part of his reform, which was introduced before the major EU enlargement in 2004, he proposed a staggering cap on area-related agricultural payments, but at that time Germany (due to large agricultural holdings in the former communist East Germany) and Greater Britain was against it (because of the aristocratic landowners).

Now the European Commission must address this issue again, completing the principle of “decoupling” financing from the production aspect introduced by the 2003 reform. “It is precisely the parts of the reform that I was unable to pass then that are now the problem.” Fischler also referred to the aspects of land management and livestock farming, which are currently not part of the conditions for EU agricultural financing.

Austria after a possible EU agricultural reform
Fischler pointed out that the reform he outlined would have relatively less impact on Austrian farmers. Austria is already one of the few countries where the amounts for area-related direct payments (“first pillar”) are lower than environmental or mountain farming subsidies (“second pillar”).

However, across the EU, direct payments cover two-thirds of the EU agricultural budget. This item should not be deleted without replacement, but should be used to offset higher environmental services or for small business social programs. “Since we have predominantly small farms in Austria, the bottom line is that this would not be a big problem in Austria,” said the former Agriculture Minister, who also expressed the idea of ​​Europe-wide nature damage insurance for farmers in this context.

Agricultural price differences between Ukraine and EU countries “resolvable”
Fischler described the problem of agricultural price differences between Ukraine and EU countries as “fundamentally solvable” only if there are long transition periods. The “first harbingers” of the problem appeared in Poland. Ukrainian grain was stored there because it could not reach traditional markets in the Middle East by sea. As a result, the traders offered Polish farmers significantly lower prices, which almost led to an uprising.

Such situations have already been encountered and resolved in the EU, Fischler recalled when Spain and Portugal joined the EU in 1986. “Very long transition periods were agreed so that there were no major market disruptions,” said the former EU commissioner. Because Spanish citrus fruits only gradually entered the European market, Spain also retained its sales markets outside the EU.

Fischler does not believe in Ukraine’s rapid accession to the EU
Fischler, who after his time as EU Commissioner worked as an advisor to the then candidate country Croatia, does not believe in Ukraine’s rapid EU membership. “Realistically, one must take into account a dimension of 20 years before full integration of Ukraine is possible,” he said. “But it will take 20 years to rebuild them anyway.” This is a much bigger priority than the issue of EU agricultural payments. However, in rural areas there is still a lack of basic infrastructure such as internet lines, roads or waste and sewage disposal systems. The country is already very far into the urban centers. “I go there again and again and am amazed at how good the development is,” says Fischler.