Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Agriculture

Farmers’ protests reach the heart of the EU as chaos unfolds outside European Parliament

Published

10 months ago

7 minute read

European farmers in Brussels

From LifeSiteNews

By Andreas Wailzer

Protesting farmers blocked many roads with tractors, started bonfires, set off fireworks, and toppled a statue in front of the European Parliament.

Protestors have now blocked streets in Brussels with tractors and started bonfires in front of the European Parliament. 

On February 1, the Europe-wide farmers’ protest against policies threatening their existence reached Brussels, where protestors blocked many roads with tractors, started bonfires, set off fireworks, and toppled a statue in front of the European Parliament.  

“We want to stop these crazy laws that come every single day from the European Commission,” a Spanish farmer representing his country’s farmer’s union told Reuters. 

According to Reuters, the police used tear gas and water cannons against some protestors who tried to tear down barriers that were erected to protect the parliament. 

The protest in Brussels happened in the context of a continent-wide uprising, including in France,  where 10,000 farmers erected more than 100 blockades on important roads across the country. Farmer protests also took place in Spain,  Portugal,  Italy,  Greece, Germany,  Scotland  and Ireland. 

READ: How Dutch protests ignited a global backlash to the ‘green’ war on farmers 

“As far as the EU is concerned, the outside world and the inside world are clearly no longer in any meaningful relationship with each other: while more than 1,300 tractors are blocking the European Parliament and its burning forecourt outside, the 27 heads of state inside have not even put the farmers’ anger on their agenda,” he wrote. 

“The so-called common people, the farmers & workers, have often been the main driving force in European history. While those in office are, well, rather described as somewhat ‘retarding’.” 

“Vive la farmers’ revolution!” Sonneborn concluded. 

Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, the former papal nuncio to the U.S., expressed his support for the farmer’s protests in a recent post on X. 

“The globalist criminal plan wants to destroy traditional agriculture, animal husbandry, and fishing in order to force people to eat artificial food produced by multinational corporations,” he wrote. “And it is the big investment funds and the Word Economic Forum that are lobbying parliaments to impose a devastating and inhuman ‘transition’.” 

“I express my complete solidarity with and encouragement to the farmers, ranchers, fishermen, truck drivers, and all those who support them.” 

“Let us accompany with prayer those who are fighting against the New World Order. May the Rosary be the spiritual chain that unites us. May the Lord accompany, protect, and bless those who are waking up before it is too late,” Viganò concluded. 

Foreign imports and ‘climate change’ policies threaten existence of farmers 

At the time of the protests, an extraordinary summit of the heads of state of the EU members took place in Brussels. During the meeting, the politicians approved a 50 billion euro aid package for Ukraine. 

One of the farmers’ concerns is the flooding of the European market with cheap Ukrainian imports that are meant to help the country with its war efforts. Since Ukraine and other non-EU countries do not have to adhere to the high environmental standards of the EU, the farmers view it as unfair competition that threatens their existence.  

For the same reason, the farmers also oppose a planned trade deal between the EU and the Mercosur bloc, a federation of countries in South America. 

One of the major issues for farmers is the so-called “green” measures imposed by EU bureaucrats that include higher taxes or cuts to tax subsidies as well as bans on necessary tools such as nitrogen fertilizer.  

The farmers have also been blamed for their greenhouse emissions and their alleged contribution to “climate change”. They are heavily affected by the EU’s plan to achieve “net-zero” emissions and make the bloc “climate-neutral” by 2050. 

The plan includes cutting fertilizer use by 20%, limiting the amount of land dedicated to agricultural use, halving pesticides by 2030, and doubling organic food production. 

While some of these measures may have a positive impact on food quality, they put immense pressure on farmers, especially smaller farms, whose numbers have been on the decline for decades. The EU’s plan to combat so-called “climate change” could lead to the majority of farmland being controlled by a relatively small elite. 

READ: No farmers, no freedom: Why globalists want to control the world’s food supply 

Part of the problem for smaller farms is the EU’s common agricultural policy (CAP), a € 55 billion per year subsidy system that has been in place for over 60 years. The system “has historically been based on economy of scale: bigger farms, bigger holdings, common standards,” Jon Henley from The Guardian writes. 

This policy has led to a continuous decrease in small farms in Europe as they have become increasingly uncompetitive. 

Before Post

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Alberta / 10 mins ago

Alberta’s fiscal update projects budget surplus, but fiscal fortunes could quickly turn

Business / 3 hours ago

Trump’s government efficiency department plans to cut $500 Billion in unauthorized expenditures, including funding for Planned Parenthood

Alberta / 6 hours ago

Alberta government announces review of Trudeau’s euthanasia regime

Agriculture

Ottawa may soon pass ‘supply management’ law to effectively maintain inflated dairy prices

Published on November 12, 2024

By

From the Fraser Institute

By Jerome Gessaroli

Many Canadians today face an unsettling reality. While Canada has long been known as a land of plenty, rising living costs and food insecurity are becoming increasingly common concerns. And a piece of federal legislation—which may soon become law—threatens to make the situation even worse.

According to Statistics Canada, rising prices are now “greatly affecting” nearly half of Canadians who are subsequently struggling to cover basic living costs. Even more alarming, 53 per cent are worried about feeding their families. For policymakers, few national priorities are more pressing than the ability of Canadians to feed themselves.

Between 2020 and 2023, food prices surged by 24 per cent, outpacing the overall inflation rate of 15 per cent. Over the past year, more than one million people visited Ontario food banks—a 25 per cent increase from the previous year.

Amid this crisis, a recent academic report highlighted an unforgivable waste. Since 2012, Canada’s dairy system has discarded 6.8 billion litres of milk—worth about $15 billion. This is not just mismanagement, it’s a policy failure. And inexcusably, the federal government knows how to address rising prices on key food staples but instead turns a blind eye.

Canada’s dairy sector operates under a “supply management” system that controls production through quotas and restricts imports via tariffs. Marketing boards work within this system to manage distribution and set the prices farmers receive. Together, these mechanisms effectively limit competition from both domestic and foreign producers.

This rigid regulated system suppresses competition and efficiency—both are essential for lower prices. Hardest hit are low-income Canadians as they spend a greater share of their income on essentials such as groceries. One estimate ranks Canada as having the sixth-highest milk prices worldwide.

The price gap between the United States and Canada for one litre of milk is around C$1.57. A simple calculation shows that if we could reduce the price gap by half, to $0.79, Canadians would save nearly $1.9 billion annually. And eliminating the price gap would save a family of four $360 a year. There would be further savings if the government also liberalized markets for other dairy products such as cheese, butter and yogurt. These lower costs would make a real difference for millions of Canadians.

Which brings us back to the legislation pending on Parliament Hill. Instead of addressing the high food costs, Ottawa is moving in the opposite direction. Bill C-282, sponsored by the Bloc Quebecois, has passed the House of Commons and is now before the Senate. If enacted, it would stop Canadian trade negotiators from letting other countries sell more supply-managed products in Canada as part of any future trade deal, effectively increasing protection for Canadian industries and creating another legal barrier to reform. While the governing Liberals hold ultimate responsibility for this bill, all parties to some degree support it.

Supply management is already causing trade friction. The U.S. and New Zealand have filed disputes (under the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership) accusing Canada of failing to meet its commitments on dairy products. If Canada is found in violation, it could face tariffs or other trade restrictions in unrelated sectors. Dairy was also a sticking point in negotiations with the United Kingdom, leading the British to suspend talks on a free trade deal. The costs of defending supply management could ripple farther than agriculture, hurting other Canadian businesses and driving up consumer costs.

Dairy farmers, of course, have invested heavily in the system, and change could be financially painful. Industry groups including the Dairy Farmers of Canada carry significant political influence, especially in Ontario and Quebec, making it politically costly for any party to propose reforms. The concerns of farmers are valid and must be addressed—but they should not stand in the way of opening up these heavily regulated agricultural sectors. With reasonable financial assistance, a gradual transition could ease the burden. After all, New Zealand, with just 5 million people, managed to deregulate its dairy sector and now exports 95 per cent of its milk to 130 countries. There’s no reason Canada could not do something similar.

Bill C-282 is a flawed piece of legislation. Supply management already hurts the most vulnerable Canadians and is the root cause of two trade disputes that threaten harm to other Canadian industries. If passed, this law will further tie the government’s hands in negotiating future free trade agreements. So, who benefits from it? Certainly not Canadians struggling with food insecurity. The government’s refusal to modernize an outdated inefficient system forces Canadians to pay more for basic food staples. If we continue down this path, the economic damage could spread to other sectors, leaving Canadians to bear an ever-increasing financial burden.

Author:

Jerome Gessaroli
Continue Reading

Agriculture

2024 harvest wrap-up: Minister Sigurdson

Published on November 6, 2024

By

As the 2024 growing season comes to a close, Minister of Agriculture and Irrigation RJ Sigurdson issued the following statement:

“While many Albertans were enjoying beautiful fall days with above-average temperatures, farmers were working around the clock to get crops off their fields before the weather turned. I commend their continued dedication to growing quality crops, putting food on tables across the province and around the world.

“Favourable weather conditions in August and early September allowed for a rapid start to harvest, leading to quick and efficient completion.

“The final yield estimates show that while the South, North West and Peace regions were slightly above average, the yields in the Central and North East regions were below average.

“Crop quality for oats and dry peas is currently exceeding the five-year average, with a higher rate of these crops grading in the top two grade categories. In contrast, spring wheat, durum, barley and canola are all grading in the top two grades at rates lower than the five-year average.

“Crop grading is a process that determines the quality of a grain crop based on visual inspection and instrument analysis. Factors like frost damage, colour, moisture content and sprouting all impact grade and affect how the grain will perform during processing or how the end product will turn out. Alberta generally produces high-quality crops.

“Farmers faced many challenges over the last few years and, for some areas of the province, 2024 was a difficult growing season. But Alberta producers are innovative and resilient. They work constantly to meet challenges head-on and drive sustainable growth in our agricultural sector.

“Alberta farmers help feed the world, and I’m proud of the reputation for safe, high-quality agricultural products that this industry has built for itself. Thank you to our producers, and congratulations on another successful harvest!”

Continue Reading

Trending

X