Kaugel pudrumägedest ja piimajõgedest
Istume Riccardo Casottiga Põhja-Itaalia, Ferraras Coldiretti kontoris. Coldiretti on talupidajate ühistu, mis tegeleb sõltumatute müügikanalite loomisega, viies otse kokku tootja ja tarbija ja härra Casotti on nende eestkõneleja. Nende kaupu ei müüda supermarketites, vaid otse farmides ja turul. Samal ajal kui suuremas jaos siseruumides on konditsioneeride mõjul õhk värskendava soojakraadi juures lõõskab ja laastab Põhja-Itaalia põldudel ligi 40-kraadine kuumus. Eestis tuleb põllumehel ette, et vihm rikub saagi, aga Itaalias ollakse leppinud sellega, et teatud osa saagist läheb põua nahka. Sel korral algas põud juba sügisel 2011 ja suve alguses elati üle maavärinad. Probleemide ampluaa on lai igas maailma nurgas, kuid härra Casottiga kohtusime, et uurida, mida Lõuna-Euroopas kohalikust põllumajandusest ja ÜPP-st arvatakse.
Hiljuti said inimesed allkirja anda petitsioonile, kus rõhutatakse, et Eesti põllumees saab otsetoetusena kätte ligi neli korda väiksema summa kui Itaalia põllumees. Sellest johtuvalt võib arvata, et Itaalia põllumehel on loodus ja majandusstiihiatega lihtsam toime tulla ning elatustase on ka üldiselt parem. Vestluse käigus ei mainita paraku kordagi sõna „kasum“, vaid jutt käib sellest, kuidas Itaalias talu pidades ära elada, seda hoolimata faktist, et Ferrara asub Itaalias, kus põllumaa keskmine saagikus on 2 korda suurem kui Prantsusmaal, 3 kolm korda suurem kui Hispaanias ja 4 korda suurem kui Ameerika Ühendriikides. See aga ei tähenda pudrumägesid ja piimajõgesid.
Itaalia farmerile teeb olukorra keeruliseks fakt, et suurt osa põllumajandusüksustest harivad üksikud perekonnad. Statistiliselt „tavaline“ Eesti ja Itaalia põllumajandusmajapidamine erinevad teineteisest üpris suurel määral. Itaalias kuulub, ligi kolmveerand püsikultuuride alusest maast kuulub üksustele, mis on väiksemad kui 20 hektarit [1]. Eestis näitab statistika vastupidist olukorda: 9% majapidamistest on suuremad kui 100 hektarit ja neile kuulub 73% põllumajandusmaast [2]. Suurem osa Itaalia farmi tööjõust on pärit oma perekonnast (neile palka ei maksta) ning kaupa üritatakse turustada oma regioonis vahelülisid kasutamata. Sissetulekud on täpselt sellised, et saab arved tasuda.
Pärides, et mis on tema arvates EL-i põllumajanduspoliitika juures valesti, on härra Casottil üks kindel vastus. Toetused tuleks viia efektiivsuspõhiseks. Näitena toob ta Ühendkuningriigid, kus miljoneid eurosid ÜPP rahadest sai Kuninganna ja tema perekond [3] ning ka oma provintsi, kus suuremaid maaomanikke on kindlustusselts, kes ei tooda midagi, kuid võtab toetuse hea meelega vastu. Toetusi peaksid saama need farmid, kes tõeliselt põllumajandusega tegelevad ning mitte ühtsetel alustel, vaid põhinedes sellel mida, kui palju ja kui efektiivselt nad toodavad. Samuti paistab, et nii Eesti kui Itaalia põllumehed on toetuste suurusele lae kehtestamise poolt, et lõpetada ülisuurte farmide üleliigne toetamine.
Tundub, et ÜPP rahajagamispoliitika taandamine vaid erinevatele numbrite võrdlemisele ja riikide vastandamisele pole päris adekvaatne. Oleme siiski ühtses Euroopa Liidus ning ka härra Casotti nõustub, et uusi liikmesriike peab toetama ning toetused võrdsustama, kuigi selle mõjul jätkub raha „vanadele olijatele“ vähem. Ehk olekski õigem otsida hoopis mõttekaaslasi, mitte konkurente teiste Euroopa Liidu riikide hulgast. Kultuurilistest ja majanduslikest erisustest hoolimata võib Eestlane leida Lõuna-Euroopa põllumehes ootamatu liitlase ÜPP reaalsusele vastavaks ja farmerisõbralikumaks muutmisel.
[3] The royalty of CAP madness http://www.voxeu.org/article/royalty-cap-madness
(Avaldatud Maalehe paberversiooni lisas Maamajandus)
English version:
Far from hills of porridge and rivers of
milk
(An Estonian metaphor for an easy and
wealthy life)
We are sitting with Riccardo Casotti in the
office of Coldiretti in Northern Italy, Ferrara. Coldiretti is a union of
farmers that is engaged in creating independent sale channels connecting directly
the producer and consumer and Mr. Casotti is the vice president of the regional
unit. Their goods are not sold in supermarkets but rather from the farms where
they are produced or on the farmer’s markets. At the time when there is fresh
air indoors thanks to air conditioning, the Northern Italian fields are ravaged
by a heat wave of nearly 40 degrees. It happens in Estonia that the rain ruins
the crops, but Italy the farmers have come to terms with the fact that a part
of the crops is destroyed by the heat. This time the draught started already in
autumn 2011 and the beginning of the summer brought a series of earthquakes.
The range of problems is wide in every corner of the world, but we met with Mr.
Casotti to discuss specifically how agriculture is perceived in Southern Europe
and what do they think of the local agriculture and the CAP (Common
Agricultural Policy).
Recently people had a chance to sign a
petition in support of Estonian farmers that emphasises the fact that an
Estonian farmer receives as direct financial support an amount four times
smaller than the farmer in Italy. Based on that one could assume that it is
easier for an Italian farmer to cope with the forces of nature and economy and
that they are generally better off. In the course of our conversation the word ‘profit’
is never mentioned though, instead, we talk about surviving while being a
farmer in Italy. This is despite the fact that Ferrara is situated in Italy
where the average crop yield is twice as big as in France, thrice the one of
Spain and four times the size in the United States. This however does not mean
hills of porridge and rivers of milk.
The situation for an Italian farmer is
complicated by the fact that a big part of the agricultural units are being
cultivated by single families. Statistically “average” Estonian and Italian
agricultural unit differ from each other quite substantially. In Italy on third
of the land is owned by units smaller than 20 ha [1]. In Estonia the statistics
show the opposite: 9% of the units are bigger than 100 ha and they own 73% of
the cultivated land [2]. The bigger part of the workforce in Italy comes from
within the family (they are not being paid) and they try to market their goods
in their own region without all the middlemen. The incomes are sufficient to
pay the bills.
When asked what the EU is doing wrong with
the agricultural politics Mr. Casotti has definitely one answer: the subsidy
system should be reformed to reflect the efficiency of agriculture. He gives as
an example the United Kingdom where millions of Euros of CAP funds were
received by the royal family [3] and also his own province: one of the biggest
landowners is an insurance company that does not produce anything but is happy
to receive the money. Subsidies should be given to those farms that actually
cultivate the land, and not based on common grounds, but depending on what, how
much and how efficiently they are producing. It also seems that both Estonian
and Italian farmers are in favour of setting a cap for the size of the
subsidies for a single entity to restrict excess support of giant corporations.
It seems that narrowing down the discussion
over the subsidy system of CAP to just comparing numbers and confronting
countries is not adequate. We are still in the common European Union and as
also Mr. Casotti agrees – the subsidies should be more equal also to the newer
member states, even though it reduces the funds available for the “old” member
states. Maybe it would make more sense to find allies not enemies within the
other European Union member states. Independent of cultural and economical
differences an Estonian might find an unexpected ally in the Southern European
farmer to modify CAP more corresponding to the reality and farmer-friendlier.
(Published in the paper version of Maaleht in the supplement Maamajandus)
[3] The royalty of CAP madness
http://www.voxeu.org/article/royalty-cap-madness
