Less money for farmers meets with cross-party resentment
Published: Thursday, Jan 25th 2024, 04:51
Volver a Live Feed
Due to the tight financial situation, the Federal Council wants to spend a total of 2.5% - or CHF 347 million - less on agriculture between 2026 and 2029. The planned cuts have been met with cross-party opposition.
The federal decree on financial resources for agriculture for the years 2026 to 2029 provides a payment framework of CHF 13.67 billion for discussion.
The Federal Council wants to increase support for adapting agricultural production to climate change. It also wants to use more money for structural improvements in agriculture and for the breeding of disease-resistant varieties and sustainable plant protection.
The Federal Council intends to make the necessary funds available through cuts and reallocations from the direct payments and production and sales payment frameworks.
Farmers' association and the bourgeoisie stand up
The Swiss Farmers' Union (SBV) rejects both the reduction of the agricultural budget and the reallocation of funds from the budget for direct payments. Structural improvements in agriculture should be achieved by increasing funds, not by reallocating them.
The implementation of stricter requirements in the areas of nutrients, biodiversity promotion and plant protection leads to lower yields, additional costs and higher risks in production. Added to this is the general rise in prices. Even a stable framework credit for agriculture - compared to the 2022 to 2025 payment framework - would therefore be equivalent to a reduction, the SBC stated in its response.
Federal expenditure on agriculture has remained constant at CHF 3.6 billion for around 20 years. The total of 2.8 billion direct payments are linked to clear benefits. Farmers' incomes are also still far below the level of comparable incomes.
The SVP also takes up this point: In its response, the party calls for remuneration that ensures the long-term survival of farms. In the context of complex crises, agriculture should be strengthened as a whole. The SVP therefore rejects the proposal and calls for the 2022 to 2025 payment framework to be retained.
The FDP also calls for this in its consultation response. It is a matter of common sense that the requirements cannot be increased and the funds reduced. However, the FDP also calls for the planned increase in structural improvement measures, as envisaged in the proposal, to be compensated for within the existing agricultural budget in the interests of cost neutrality.
For the Green Liberals, the draft does not deal enough with subsidies that damage biodiversity. It is incomprehensible that sales promotion for meat is not being reduced. The structural measures should under no circumstances lead to more intensive production and should benefit plant production more. No comments were available from the Center Party at the end of the consultation period.
Structural improvements to be examined
Meanwhile, the SP and the Greens also reject austerity measures for direct payments to farmers. According to the SP, farmers' efforts to achieve the most sustainable production possible must be fairly compensated and planning security is needed. The SP also sees an equally great need to adjust or avoid individual payments, in particular for subsidies that it believes are harmful to biodiversity. These include, in particular, payments to promote the sale of animal products.
The Environmental Alliance, an association of Greenpeace, Pro Natura, VCS and WWF, supports the principle that agriculture should contribute to the federal government's efforts to save money. The Environmental Alliance rejects the increase in funding for structural improvements. This would contradict policy coherence and prevent a shift towards resource-efficient agriculture.
The SP and the Greens also stated the same. The increase in funding for agricultural structural improvements would cement outdated structures. Moreover, this subsidy has yet to be tested for its harmfulness to biodiversity.
If the funds are increased, more farms should also be able to benefit - and the requirements must be adapted to ensure they are consistent with the objectives of agricultural and food policy, the SP demands.
The Greens are also calling for sales promotion to be restructured and geared towards site-adapted production and healthy nutrition. Contributions to crop insurance should be linked to adaptation to climate change.
The umbrella organization of the Swiss economy, Economiesuisse, supports the Federal Council's proposal: in view of the financial policy situation, it is pragmatic. It is positive that with this payment framework, the sectoral net corporate income could be kept constant despite moderate cuts in the federal budget - and that the productivity of the sector would be maintained according to the federal government's calculations.
©Keystone/SDA
Spanish 
English 
German 
French 
Arabic