Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Wheat or tweet?

• Mark Mardell
• 26 Sep 07, 12:02 AM

The European Union is going to get rid of one of its oddest rules, whereby farmers are ordered not to grow anything on part of their land and then paid for not doing their job.

Instead of scrapping it, perhaps the European Union should be thinking of expanding the idea?

Journalists could be paid by the "not word" for not turning in tedious articles, and whole pages could be left blank. In an effort to tackle climate change, car manufacturers could be paid for letting assembly lines run idle as workers watch not cars trundle off them. Politicians, perhaps, could reward their loyal foot soldiers with pints and pub lunches for not canvassing in not-to-be-held general elections.

Be that as it may, is to be set aside. It's a penny to a euro that it will never come back. It was an answer to over-production. Since the foundation of the EU, farmers were paid to produce, even if nobody bought their goods. Hence those butter and grain mountains and wine lakes.

So, about 15 years ago someone had the bright idea of paying them not to produce on 10% of their land. But there are no grain mountains now. A bad harvest in Australia and southern Europe, and an export ban in Ukraine have meant less grain on the market and so higher prices.

So today will be asked The whole idea will be reviewed in November and the is keen to get rid of set-aside altogether.

Not everyone is happy. One side-effect of set-aside is that it can safeguard wildlife, particularly if it's land that is never cultivated, rather than rotated year by year. The says it could be a disaster. The French has particularly benefited from the policy.

And you thought that was the in general.

• Permalink
• Comments