According to news reports from news agencies, Italian farmers would intend to continue their protests for another week against the constraints imposed by the Common Agricultural Policy which, upon closer inspection, at the time, to the European Parliament, would seem having been voted favorably by the exponents of those parties, the League and the Brothers of Italy, who today contest its assumptions and objectives.

Let's be clear in concrete terms, and beyond any ideological inspiration: the elections for the conquest of seats in Europe are upon us, we can say, and we perceive the need on the part of the Majority party compositions to maximize the non-partisan approval rating only towards their respective opposition opponents, but also towards their government allies in order, probably, to re-establish the necessary counterweight in their internal relations.

Yet, with the latest Budget Law, that same Government seems to have reintroduced the so-called Irpef taxation on agricultural income, thus somehow increasing the tax burden relating to the sector. But, then, does it make sense to place, so to speak, all responsibility for the current difficulties of the Italian agricultural sector on European policies aimed at achieving the ecological transition and implementing the so-called Green Deal? There is probably no univocal answer that can be said to be satisfactory, and with good likelihood, and, conversely, useful solutions could be found to regulate, rebalancing it, the contingent situation that has arisen also with the causal contribution of other factors, such as probably armed conflicts existing, which appear to have contributed to the rise in prices and the shortage of raw materials.

Undoubtedly, the farmers must be supported and helped, and the reasons for the ongoing protest seem to be shared since, even if everything is considered and conceded, it would be appropriate to restore necessary counterbalances between the reasons of large-scale industrial distribution and the reasons of small producers, favoring a subsidy plan in their favor. A discussion table would perhaps be the solution to establish common fixed points to be subjected to the evaluation of the European Parliament for the revision of the recently voted and approved Common Agricultural Policy, since the implementation of the basic rules of democratic discussion has always placed dialogue at the basis of any agreed changes.

Meanwhile, because on an exquisitely teleological level, the reformed Common Agricultural Policy should have, in its intent, not only provided ad hoc support to small-scale agricultural businesses by implementing agriculture's contribution to the environmental and climate objectives of the European Union, but even allow Member States, in their composite variety, greater flexibility in adapting measures to local conditions, given and considering the diversity that exists between them. Even more so when environmental sustainability cannot in any way conflict with social sustainability, which, indeed, should have a top position in the order of priorities. And even more so when it is desired to create, as it would appear to be achieved, an unprecedented "green" architrave aimed at promoting environmental conditions such that local farmers, in their small way, would be called upon to immediately respect also through measures prepared on a both voluntary and supplementary to rural development, with the burden on Member States to report annually on the progress made, if made. Each country would then be free to choose the specific interventions it deems most effective to achieve its specific objectives, based on a clear assessment of its needs.

Well: if the premises appear to be such, and of such consistency, it probably seems legitimate to ask which internal assessments have been carried out, from 2021 to today, to identify the aforementioned needs on which to calibrate the interventions useful for achieving the objectives of the Common Agricultural Policy, given and considered that the same has found its application starting from January 2023 since, to be honest, the three regulations of the reform package were agreed precisely in the month of July of year 2021 by the Council and the European Parliament with related publication in the Official Journal of 6 December 2021. In fact, a fundamental circumstance cannot be overlooked which is capable of justifying, at least on an instrumental level, the profound changes taking place. That for which, historically, the then European Economic Community, established in 1957 with the Treaties of Rome, had deemed it necessary to assign a leading role to the common agricultural policy and its programmatic objectives, to encourage the achievement of some important objectives indicated, ab origine in article 39 which later became article 33 identified from time to time, and overall, both in increasing productivity and in ensuring a sustainable and egalitarian standard of living for the agricultural population as well as in stabilizing the markets, guaranteeing the security of supplies even through sustainable costs for consumers.

In essence, Europe at the time believed, and rightly so, that the common glue should be found precisely in the context of the agricultural sector as it was suitable, due to its characteristics, to act as a glue of the various souls existing on the Continent. And certainly such an evaluation could only present itself in all its far-sightedness. Therefore, if the Common Agricultural Policy appears to be such and of such consistency, then the protests that are being carried forward with determination throughout Europe to reform both European and national policies cannot in any way remain unheard, re-establishing optimal conditions of sustainability for the best common interest, both of local producers and of final consumers.

Politics as a whole is called upon to resolve the contingent difficulties, and should intervene with the utmost speed, beyond any propaganda. Useful and readily perceptible solutions: this seems to be what the agricultural sector needs, to be protected and preserved at all costs given its indisputable relevance in terms of the general economy and the needs of the population.

Giuseppina Di Salvatore

(Lawyer – Nuoro)

© Riproduzione riservata