Towards a Common Agricultural Policy in the European Economic Community: a Study in Decision-Making
| Author | Carol A. Cosgrove |
| DOI | 10.1177/004711786700300103 |
| Published date | 01 April 1967 |
| Date | 01 April 1967 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
40
TOWARDS
A
COMMON
AGRICULTURAL
POLICY
IN
THE
EUROPEAN
ECONOMIC
COMMUNITY:
A
STUDY
IN
DECISION-MAKING
CAROL
A.
COSGROVE
Disputes
concerning
agriculture
have
been
the
occasion
for
all
the
major
crises
in
the
European
Economic
Community.
The
attempts
to
reach
agreement
on
the
details
of
a
common
agricultural
policy
have
strained
the
Community
almost
to
breaking
point.
Consequently,
it
is
in
the
sphere
of
agricultural
decision-making
that
the
Community
package
deal
technique
has
evolved
to
its
most
sophisticated
form.
Nevertheless,
although
package
deal
diplomacy
provided
a
mutually
acceptable
solution
to
the
grain
price
issue
of
December
1964,
six
months
later
such
a
solution
apparently
could
not
be
found
for
the
crisis
arising
from
the
financing
of
a
common
agricultural
policy.
Deadlock
ensued.
Jean
Monnet
has described
Community
decision-making
as
&dquo;a
permanent
dialogue
between
the
Commission,
responsible
for
proposing
solutions
in
the
Community
interest,
and
the
national
governments,
who
express
national
points
of
view
and
take
the
final
decisions&dquo;.’
Thus
to
be
acceptable
the
Commission’s
proposal
must
be
based
on
an
acute
awareness
of
national
problems
involved,
together
with
an
independent
conception
of the
Com-
munity
interest.
Moreover,
the
Council
of
Ministers
has
often
been
the
scene
of
basic
conflicts,
and
sometimes
embittered
relations
between
states,~
2
the
latter
having
been
under
severe
pressure
from
interest
groups.
The
package
deal
is
an
extension
of
the
quid
pro
quo
typical
of
all
bargaining
procedures.
It
is
a
phenomenon
of
international
and
national
politics,
the
idea
being
that
&dquo;a
spoonful
of
sugar
makes
the
medicine
go
down&dquo;.
In
the
Community
this
technique
has
expanded
the
area
open
to
negotiation
and
eventual
agreement,
and
is
an
integral
part
of
the
Community
method.
Irrespective
of the
amount
of
sugar,
however,
the
medicine
will
not
be
taken
if
the
results
are
expected
to
be
damaging.
For
example,
in
the
case
of
the
grain
price
issue,
recalcitrant
states
were
persuaded
that
unpleasant
political
decisions
had
to
be
taken
to
safeguard
expected
advantages
in
the
industrial
sector;
in
June
1965,
how-
ever,
no
amount
of
&dquo;sugar&dquo;
could
induce
France
to
accept
the
prescription
offered
for
financing
the
common
agricultural
policy.
This
article
attempts
to
trace
and
analyse
the
evolution
of
the
common
grain
price
decision
of
15
December
1964
and
the
origins
of
the
crisis
of
1
July
1965,
which
arose
ostensibly
from
the
question
of
financing
the
common
argricultural
policy.
In
order
to
place
these
events
in
their
proper
perspective,
mention
must
be
made
of
the
importance
of
agriculture
in
the
Six,
the
1
"European
Community",
Number
7,
1964.
2
German-Dutch
relations
after
the
decision
to
include
agriculture
in
the
movement
to
the
second
stage
of
the
transition
period.
41
aims
of
Community
farm
policy,
the
import
of
common
price
levels
for
farm
products,
and
the
significance
of
the
decisions
taken
in
January
1962
and
December
1963,
inaugurating
the
common
agricultural
policy.
Agriculture
occupies
a
key
position
in
the
Community’s
economy.
The
necessity
to
include
this
sector
was
stressed
in
the
Spaak
Report
of
1956,1
but
the
latter
gave
no
indication
of
the
detailed
form
a
common
agricultural
policy
should
take.
The
French,
Dutch,
and
the
Italians
made
the
commitment
to
develop
such
a
policy
a
basic
condition
for
their
participation
in
the
Common
Market
project,
these
states
being
significant
net
exporters
of
agricultural
produce.
The
Rome
Treaty
followed
the
Spaak
Report
in
outlining
a
framework
for
a
common
agricultural
policy,
leaving
the
content
to
be
negotiated
between
the
institutions
of
the
Community,
thus
recognising
the
potential
conflicts
of
interest
in
the
agricultural
sphere.
These
in
turn
were
exacerbated
by
the
fact
that
agriculture
in
the
Community
was
declining
in
relation
to
industry;
in
1956
farm
products
had
contributed
12
per
cent
to
the
gross
domestic
product
of
the
Community,
dropping
to
9.2
per
cent
in
1962.
The
President
of the
Commission,
Professor
Hallstein,
explained
the
four
objectives
of
Community
farm
policy
in
1962 :
i
First,
to
ensure
an
adequate
income
to
the
farming
population
(which
constitutes
nearly
20
per
cent
of the
total
working
population
in
the
Community);
second,
the
increase
of
agricultural
productivity
by
encouraging
technological
progress
and
a
rational-
isation
of
production;
third,
the
establishment
of
an
equilibrium
between
production
and
consumption
- thus
recognising
that
a
balance
must
be
achieved
between
production
and
demand,
the
latter
being
generally
inelastic
for
agricultural
goods;
and
fourth,
the
need
to
maintain
reasonable
consumer
price
levels
since
food
prices
influence the
cost
of
living,
and
so
have
a
decisive
effect
on
wage
structures
and
therefore
on
the
economy
of
the
Com-
munity
as
a
whole.
The
level
of
farm
prices
would
be
the
key
to
attaining
these
objectives.
’rhe
extensive
state
intervention
in
the
agricultural
markets
of
the
Six
was
to
be
replaced
by
Community-wide
regulations.
There
would
be
no
free
circulation
of
agricultural
goods
in
the
Community,
however,
without
a
common
price
level.
The
cereals
price
is
the
most
important
of
all
farm
prices
as
it
influences
price
levels
for
all
other
farm
products
and
is
an
important
determinant
of
farm
incomes.
Any
agreement
on
a
common
price
level
would
be
a
major
political
decision
as
in
3
Rapport
des
chefs
des
délégation
aux
Ministres
des
Affaires
Etrangères.
(Comité
intergouvernemental
créé
par
la
conférence
de
Messine).
Brussels
1956.
4
"Industry
and
Agriculture
in
the
E.E.C."
an
address
in
Lincoln,
Nebraska,
U.S.A.,
6th
December,
1962.
To continue reading
Request your trial