Mixing politics and butter

Press, 27 November 1980, Page 20

Mixing politics and butter

New Zealand dairy products to the European Economic Community have become the victim of Presidential elections ■in France. At both the meeting of the Agriculture Ministers of the E.E.C. earlier this month, and at the meeting of the Foreign Ministers which has just . ended, France has blocked agreement on an E.E.C. Commission plan to accept diminishing quantities of New Zealand butter over the next three years. Almost certainly the instruction to block the agreement has come from a very high level in the French Government, probably the President himself. This suggests that France may still be immovable on the subject at the beginning of next month when the E.E.C. summit is held and at the meeting of Agriculture Ministers which will be held on December 8 and 9. Because the Presidential elections will not be held until April and May of next year, and New Zealand’s present agreement to export butter to Britain expires at the end of this year, the position has become very serious.

Officially France is not citing the election as the reason for any agreement being delayed. Yet it is undoubtedly a relevant element. France is arguing that the Community has to sort out its problems over the Budget before it can enter into any arrangement for longer than one year. That probably gives a clue to the outcome. New Zealand may need to accept such a transition arrangement. That would be both unfair and unsatisfactory. Any farming needs an assured market over a reasonable period. The case is all the worse because the other members of the Community, with the exception of Ireland which may be expected to give its agreement if France does, have accepted the proposal from the Commission. From New Zealand’s point of view it may be argued that the E.E.C. is having an internal difference of opinion with eight on one side and one on the other,

and it is really all an E.E.C. problem. But nothing to do with butter in the E.E.C. is simple. ?.

Considering the time that the Community has taken in the past to solve other Budget problems, any link between solving the present crisis and New Zealand’s access to Britain to sell butter would make New Zealand’s position intolerable. The present crisis is over basic'financial support for the Community. At the moment each country in the Community imposes a value added tax of 1 per cent. By next year the Community may have hit the ceiling in its spending. The most expensive programme by far is the Common Agricultural Policy, which absorbs 75 per cent of the E.E.C. Budget. The C.A.P. has proved notoriously hard to reform. Various countries are strongly opposed to increasing the E.E.C. Budget. The crisis may be with the Community for a long time to come. Britain, as usual, is putting New Zealand’s case in the Community discussions. It is continuing to do this firmly in spite of the subtle changes going on in Britain’s attitude towards the Community. Britain’s farmers, for example, are beginning to gain some marked benefits from the C.A.P., just as their counterparts in other parts of the Community did before them. This explains the switch from the more usual British scepticism about the C.A.P. to recent praise by the British Minister of Agriculture, Mr Peter Walker. The British Government is also feeling the need to demonstrate its allegiance to the Community and various statements doing this have recently been made. Yet for all that Britain’s support for New Zealand has been unswerving. It should not be Britain alone that points out that New Zealand’s reliance on a traditional market should not be interfered with by the French election.