Extinction

By Karl Schembri

Less than two months since Malta’s EU accession, farmers are saying that cheap imported produce is flooding the market and threatening their livelihood, while the government says it is still too early to panic. The Secretary General of the Association of Farmers, Peter Axisa, sees farmers extinct in five years’ time

Peter Axisa is not the typical Maltese farmer. Born in Sliema, his first contact with nature was when he was eight years old, in a tiny garden in his family’s house where he started planting asparagus and cacti, until his family migrated to the UK.
“When I was 13 I applied to the town council for an allotment (a piece of agricultural public land),” he says. “They gave me a plot of land for 13 shillings a year. My father thought I was crazy. That’s how it all started. I used to go in the fields among several old men and pensioners, with everyone giving me advice, and I got interested.”
Much to his father’s incredulity, the young Peter insisted on taking up farming professionally, studying it and working full-time in the fields, even when he returned to his roots back in Malta to settle for good with his wife.
“You build something which you can’t let go, somehow,” the erudite farmer says. “I tried, believe me … I opened up a garage … I tried everything, but I always fall back there.”
He speaks passionately about his work, even though with all the commitment to represent his colleagues in negotiations with the government, he had to abandon full-time farming.
“There’s no way I’m going to leave agriculture,” he says.
That is why his frank, pragmatic answer to the question ‘why should we safeguard Maltese agriculture?’ sounds so shocking.
“No, we don’t have to,” he says. “We shouldn’t. But don’t say you’re going to and you don’t. That’s what I’m saying.”
It’s a sore point for Axisa and for the farming community. He says he feels betrayed by a government, that is breaking an important promise it had made prior to the EU referendum. It’s about the safety clause on agriculture, the very condition on which Axisa based his association’s support for EU membership last year.
It is undisputable that the removal of levies on imported agricultural produce will spell extinction for Maltese farming, if left to unfettered free market forces. Farmers were promised in writing by then Agriculture Minister Ninu Zammit that imports would be stopped or farmers produce subsidised if cheap imported produce had to flood the market. Now, barely a month and a half since Malta’s accession, with foreign produce entering at the cheapest prices ever, farmers are claiming that their livelihood is threatened. The government’s response has been: “don’t panic.”
It transpires to Axisa that while Ninu Zammit’s declaration explicitly promised farmers that they would “have the local market guaranteed by a safeguard measure which pre-empts importation by stopping it or by imposing a tariff,” the accession treaty states that new member states may only apply for the European Commission’s authorisation to take protective measures when faced with serious and persistent economic difficulties.
“It’s not automatic; the government has to make a case with the European Commission, which will only be accepted when we face disaster. It’s definitely not what we were promised,” he says. “We were promised that should imports flood the market we would be compensated one way or the other, and that was the point when we said ‘fine, then we agree with membership.’ I distinctly remember, during a MEUSAC meeting, there were four ministers and Richard Cachia Caruana. I said let’s take a simple example – I take cabbages to Ta’ Qali and get 10c a cabbage. Cabbages start being imported and my price suddenly goes down to 5c. Are you going to give me 5c? They said ‘yes.’ I said ‘that’s fine.’
“Consumers will be happy because they can buy whatever they like and I’m going to be happy because I’ll have five years to see how I’m affected and restructure accordingly.
“We couldn’t restructure before. We needed all figures in our hand, and besides, we can’t increase production. How can you restructure when you’ve reached full production? Farmers are performing miracles considering the conditions we face. They are really hard workers.”
Axisa says he staked his credibility on the government’s promise, with some arguing back then that he was bought by the Nationalists after years of opposition to EU membership.
“That’s why some people said I was bought by the government. Because I started off against EU membership, but when I was given that promise I was so confident that we had solved it. But I’ve been deceived. That’s why I took it so badly. There’s my credibility at stake, and I fight for my credibility.”
Also, Axisa says that the 50 per cent contribution that used to be forked out by the government for farmer’s national insurance has been stopped.
“They told us they had to remove that contribution because of the EU, but they would replace it with a premium on crop insurance. This never came. They say they’re still studying it, but in the meantime we’re worse off. Study as much as you need, but in the meantime leave us that subsidy. The farmers are in a mess at the moment.”
But the government says there is no need to panic.
“That’s what the prime minister told us last Monday. What gets me is that they’re playing on the idea that we’re not unified, which is absolute nonsense. We are unified. There are two cooperatives and two associations – what’s the problem with that?”
But are they making different demands?
“Not at all. At the end of the day we all make the same demands, so we are unified. But if you heard the way Net TV reported our meeting with Gonzi – which was disgusting, they’ve become as disgusting as Super 1 – they made it sound as if the problems we’re facing are because we’re not unified, which is absolute nonsense.
“I’m saying that the statement the prime minister made and that even the ministers are making all the time, that the sector is not unified, is absolute nonsense. The demands that we made were made in complete agreement between all of the representatives of the sector. They’re simply not interested in the safeguard clause, they don’t want to listen.”
Axisa emphatically stresses that the farmers’ demands are not about getting consumers to pay high prices for their fruit and veg while subsidising agriculture through their taxes at the same time. “Anything but that,” he says.
His association, together with the others, is proposing to set up a consortium involving producers’ organisations, traders (pitkala) and the government, in a bid to have a say in the setting of prices and to secure their market share.
“What we’re saying is that there should be a system…because it all started off by the government saying that the farmer should not be worse off by joining the EU than he was prior to joining. That was accepted by the government.
“We don’t care how; whether it is through direct or indirect subsidies, through this scheme or that one, what’s important is that when the farmer balances out he’s going to have the same income as he had in the last three years. They agreed to this, but they’re not keeping their word. “Our message is this: We want the government to monitor the income of farmers individually – not as a pool – and compensate him accordingly for five years. In the meantime we’re going to see what is viable and what isn’t and we can go to our members and tell them ‘listen, 95 per cent of your produce should be carrots and grow five per cent cabbages, because the market is acting in this way.’ Then you can control it like that. You can never get it 100 per cent right because nature is against you, but you can direct farmers to fill the niches.”
Would farmers be willing to follow such directions?
“It’s in their interest.”
Because it seems that farmers are quite uncoordinated and unregulated.
“No, farmers plan individually but if we plan it all together, then it’s going to benefit everyone. You can tell a farmer grow more of this and less of that. It is doable. It can be easily done and monitored.”
Why do they need five years to do this?
“We need five years because we agreed with the government that we need five years to restructure. The government promised us this. Not only that, but I remember asking Simon Busuttil what would happen if five years were not enough. He told me ‘we’ll ask for an extension. Other countries did it so we can do it too.’ That might not be the only solution at the end of the day. Five years can pass and I’ll be telling you, ‘I’m sorry but there’s no future for farmers’.”
He reiterates that consumers shouldn’t be paying for farmers’ subsidies.
“They should come from EU funds,” he says.
But if it is difficult to make a case for a safeguard clause with the European Commission, it must be even harder to get EU funding to subsidise losses.
“Well in that case I’m afraid we’ll just have to dismantle and stop farming once and for all. There’s no other way. ‘Mr Farmer, it’s not true that I want you to keep agriculture going,’ that’s what they should tell us. They’ve been telling us for ages that we’re the guardians of the environment, of the countryside, that farming is not just about production and all that. They should be honest and say that’s not true.”
So is all this talk by the government about the need of farming to preserve our landscapes, our traditional rubble walls, to prevent soil erosion … is this just empty talk?
“No, no I’m quite sure they mean it, but on the other hand are you willing to pay for it?”
Is it a question of putting their money where their mouth is?
“I think they’ve tried, but I have my doubts whether they’ll succeed. It was too premature to come up and say ‘I’ve solved your problem.’ That safeguard clause would have solved our problem, but if they’re not going to apply it and they’re going to make a bloody issue out of it every time we’ll have to use, forget it.
“In fact we told the Prime Minister that we want something that comes into action automatically. With computers today you adjust your thresholds and get real time information about imports. Then as soon as so much tons of potato come into the market at such a price, you stop imports, and adjust accordingly.”
The EU wouldn’t allow that.
“The EU approved it… or so they told us.”
Who are ‘they’?
“The agriculture ministry.”
Were there any communication problems with the ministry? Were they on different wavelengths?
“Not at all”.
Were they lying?
Were they simplifying everything?
“I think they were simplifying everything. I don’t think there were communication problems at all, in fact I felt very good dealing with the government. That’s why I’m so disappointed.”
Does he see the Maltese lacking national pride when it comes to buying Maltese products?
“Definitely.”
Why should they be proud?
“The most basic answer to that is taste. You can’t compare the Maltese orange to the imported orange, the Maltese peach to the imported peach, a carrot … my daughter bought imported carrots last time, beautiful carrots, they were nothing compared to the Maltese ones. She bought some plums from Marsaxlokk, beautiful imported plums. She bit one and told me ‘stuff these.’ Taste is what gives me a lot of confidence. I mean look at our potatoes…people go crazy for our potatoes, wherever you go.”
But Maltese consumers don’t seem to appreciate that.
“No, they don’t. I know people who just go to the shelves and buy stuff because it’s imported, most of which is just rubbish.”
It does look nicer.
“Yes, I admit it does, and that’s where we’ve lagged behind. But here we have another problem. Now we’re going to be tied down with specifications from the EU, with certain standards, certain presentation, etc.
“Fine, we’re in favour of upgrading and presenting better, but my income is going to come down, my production costs are going to go up, and what will I be left with? So that’s another problem we’re going to have. You see, you get stuck everywhere.
“This consortium we’re proposing will solve a lot of our problems, but I don’t think it will be the answer in the long run. Because when we’re on our own, in five years’ time, we’re going to have huge problems.”
It seems like a lost battle, isn’t it? The Maltese farmer is on his way to extinction.
“I see it that way, yes. I hate to say it, because I represent them, but I have to say it.”
He says it’s not agriculture that will come to an end. “Agriculture will still remain, but not in the way we know it. Definitely not as an industry. I can’t see people planting tomatoes in the sun, breaking their backs in that heat, to get 3c4 or less.
“But then, the land has something… you wouldn’t appreciate this but if you have a bit of land and you see what nature gives you out of that bit of land, there’s a bond between you and the land.”
But it’s one thing to love your land and have this bond and another to be a professional, full-time farmer, producing for the Maltese market and, ideally, exporting.
“Exactly. Ideally that’s what we should have.”
That’s what agriculture is about, isn’t it?
“That’s why I’m worried, because in my opinion it will come to an end, it will fizzle out into nothing. I’m sure, because it’s happening in the EU itself. And this is nothing. You wait till the World Trade Organisation gets its own way…all these problems are nothing compared to what we’re going to face, because as soon as the barriers are removed when they come to an agreement with the WTO, European farmers will be completely finished. “Completely. How can you compete with third countries? These are the people that produce our stuff anyway, because their conditions are good; in Europe most vegetables are produced under glass, these simply grow outside in the wild. Once you remove the barriers and there are no tariffs, nothing, they will simply flood the whole market and that’s it.”
The European Farmers’ Committee based in Brussels claims that every three minutes, a farmer disappears from the European Union. Globalisation gone wrong? Not for multinationals though, as Axisa eloquently explains the third world country farmers’ plight to retain trade barriers.
“I couldn’t understand how farmers in third countries did not want barriers to be lifted,” he says, until he asked his colleagues in Brussels how could it be that farmers from Latin America and North Africa were against WTO removing trade barriers and flooding the European market. “No, they said, because the farmers themselves are not the exporters. The exporters will make all the money and the farmers will continue getting peanuts, as is happening right now in Kenya. The farmers kept getting peanuts while multinationals that have nothing to do with Kenya became filthy rich. The country remained poor – they didn’t even invest in the processing plants there because the multinationals have them elsewhere. That’s why now I understand, now it makes sense.”
And it is also thanks to powerful multinationals that true Maltese fruit and vegetable varieties are almost all extinct, such as Maltese qarghabaghli and tomato. Plum tomato is on the verge of extinction.
“Small seed companies are being bought by multinationals, who in turn introduce new varieties on the market that are Genetically Modified, which makes you rely on them.”
In what way?
“Every year you have to go back for their seeds, you can’t save your own seeds, and you have to use their chemicals to control the weeds and pesticides.
“The problem I see now about GMs is not just whether they’re harmful for man or not, it’s also about the threat of cross pollination for endemic varieties. As long as it’s normal cross-breeding you have no problem, because you will always have the endemic variety, but if the original variety is genetically modified and is stronger than the natural one, it will take over the entire island, and everyone in turn will end up depending on the multinationals’ seeds.
“And in Malta it’s inevitable that non-GM crops are going to be contaminated by GM crops. The position of high officials who influence the minister is that we should open up to GMOs, and that scares me, because it’s not worth the risk. Let others open up if they want to but we should remain GM-free.”
To illustrate the price discrepancies brought about by multinationals, Axisa refers to the Tesco scandal in the UK.
“A British farmer was getting Stg44 for a ton of potatoes, and the same ton of potatoes was being sold at Tesco’s at Stg724. It’s the biggest scandal in my opinion. “Blair knows about it, he tried to do something about it, but the multinationals overpowered him. These multinationals are strong, powerful giants. So we have to be careful because if we’re going to leave these things happen here, we’re going to be much worse off and you’re going to be much worse off.
“That is why I’ve sacrificed all my life for the farmers, because I’ve seen both sides of the coin. Farmers haven’t.”