Agri-Shop Ltd
Farminguk
03 December 2016 | Online since 2003
OvoConcept


FarmingUK
FarmingUK Logo
18 October 2016 11:07:42 |Finance,Government,News,Produce

UK farmers 'can produce cheaper food due to leaving costly regulations of EU'


The paper finds that £7.5 billion of extra regulatory costs would have hit the sector if UK stayed in EU

The paper finds that £7.5 billion of extra regulatory costs would have hit the sector if UK stayed in EU

A new thinktank report has come to the conclusion that Brexit means the UK can avoid 'costly agricultural regulations', which in turn means farmers can produce cheaper food.
The new paper from the pro-free-market Institute of Economic Affairs demonstrates the extent to which pressure groups have been able to lobby the EU to increase regulation in the areas of food standards, animal welfare and the environment which have created deadweight costs and which are misaligned with consumer preferences.
The paper charts the increase in compliance costs within existing Common Agricultural Policy regulations and then demonstrates that, in the worst case scenario, the potential costs of further environmental restrictions would have added costs of up to £7.5 billion had the UK remained within the EU.
The CAP is not only the EU’s most expensive policy, but is also most complex and interventionist, the paper says.
Its remit covers a multitude of areas, from biodiversity to food safety to environmental protection, all of which have led to a 'huge regulatory burden' on the food industry.
Since the 1990s, the growth of regulation and subsidies has gone hand-in-hand as subsidies have been increasingly tied to environmental requirements imposed on farmers, this leads to costs for consumers and taxpayers alike.
One cause of the growth in regulation is the use of the precautionary principle which is 'poorly defined,' the paper says.
However, in general, its applications means that the benefit of the doubt is given to the protection against any possible harm at the expense of consumer, business or economic interests.
The paper says the result has been a 'drift towards overregulation' and a 'jettisoning of rational principles' of managing and taking into account risk.
As relatively few people have direct experience of farming, professional, well-resourced non-farming interest groups have been successful in campaigning against things such as genetically modified crops (GMOs).
The think tank argues pressure groups have been able to lobby for increases in EU regulation - which has proved costly to the sector

The think tank argues pressure groups have been able to lobby for increases in EU regulation - which has proved costly to the sector


The threat from increased regulation
Official figures shows that compliance with existing agricultural regulations is costing nearly £600 million every year in England alone.
These figures fail to take into account the longer-term costs arising from the impact the regulations have on competitiveness and food affordability, meaning the real cost is higher.
"The concern is not only the long-term opportunity costs of regulations, but also the danger that the use of the precautionary principle has unnecessarily widened the burden and long-term deadweight costs of regulation," the report says.
"The current EU review process could result in the removal from sale of many more pesticides commonly used in the UK, leading to significant yield losses and reductions in economic margins.
"Without the use of crop protection products such as pesticides, overall yields would fall by a half.
"If all food were grown organically wheat yields would halve, leading to a price rise of nearly 70%.
"Potato yields would fall by 44% leading to a price increase of nearly 200% and bean yields would fall by a quarter, leading to a price rise of over 50%," the paper explains.
Commenting on the report, Mark Littlewood, Director General at the Institute of Economic Affairs, said: “EU member states face staggering food price rises unless the march of increased regulation is halted.
“The UK is fortunate that it now has the opportunity to repatriate control of its farming regulations.
“It’s crucial that decisions stem from good scientific evidence, and pay attention to consumers’ interests and the potential crippling costs that overregulation can have in pushing up food prices and the cost of living.”

Download

0 Comment

loginuserlogo
Name

Please enter your name


Email

Please enter your email

Please enter valid email


Comment

Please enter your comment


Post Comment

Your comment has been submitted successfully. Please wait for admin approval.


Comments

No comments posted yet. Be the first to post a comment

Trending Now

Viewed
Discussed


Top stories you may have missed
closeicon
Username
Password