Should a person who benefits from public subsidies also be allowed to negotiate and vote on the amount of those subsidies? While such a situation clearly raises questions of a conflict of interest, it does not appear to be an issue that troubles the European Parliament.
There are ten Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) who, as farmers or with agricultural businesses, receive aid from the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) while also shaping its terms and who come under no particular scrutiny over their double roles. There are six others who, at the date of this month, have close family members who also receive CAP subsidies.
While the negotiated reforms of the CAP, which will be in place for the next seven years, are to be put to a vote in the Parliament this week, this investigation by Mediapart focuses on the negotiators who sit on the Parliament’s Agriculture and Rural Development committee (AGRI) and that of Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (ENVI) while also receiving public funds from the CAP, which is the European Union’s biggest single budgetary item.
The CAP represents more than 30% of the EU budget, and during the 2021-2027 term is expected to total almost 387 billion euros.
France receives around 9 billion euros per year from the CAP, and there are three French MEPs with agricultural interests who benefit from part of that, plus another with indirect links to beneficiaries of the subsidies. Of all the European Parliament groups, it is the conservative European People’s Party (EPP) alliance which has the most MEPs with potentially conflicting interests in the matter. Four of them receive aid from the CAP, while four others have family members who do. The liberal Renew Europe group are in second place, with three MEPs who benefit from the CAP, followed by the Greens-EFA alliance, with two. Finally, one MEP from France’s far-right Rassemblement National party (the former Front National), also receives funds from the CAP.
While some MEPs admit to concern over the issue, and yet others chose to take leave of their agricultural businesses at the beginning of their mandate, most of those concerned by the potential of conflicts of interest appear to see no problem.
“Farms receive direct payments in accordance with the provisions of the Common Agricultural Policy,” was the reply of the secretariat of German conservative MEP Peter Jahr in response to Mediapart’s questions. As rapporteur on the reform of the CAP, he has a key role in the negotiations over its future terms. His two companies, Agrar GbR Taura and Agrar GmbH Taura, last year received a total of 111,265 euros in subsidies.
Danish MEP and member of the Renew group, Asger Christensen, who last year received 118,075 euros in aid from the CAP and who NGO Transparency International ranks as the fifth-richest MEP, argues that “total” transparency on the issue avoids a conflict of interest. But the CAP funds received by MEPs do not appear on their declarations of financial interests and assets which are posted online by the European Parliament. Mediapart was able to find the information from the CAP funding details that are made available online by the 27 member states.
“There is no conflict of interests in this case. If there was, a farmer could not be an MEP and a doctor could not be a member of the ENVI or newly created BECA committee,” declared the secretariat of Polish conservative MEP Jarosław Kalinowski, referring to the recently formed Special Committee on Beating Cancer. Doctors, however, do not directly receive EU subsidies. Kalinowski, a member of the EPP group, last year benefitted from 5,547 euros in aid from the CAP.
German MEP Martin Häusling, a veteran participant in agricultural issues within the Parliament, to which he was first elected in 2009, also dismissed any suggestion of a conflict of interest. In 2018, a farm belonging to Häusling, shadow rapporteur on the CAP reforms for the Greens, received 56,501 euros from the CAP. Since then, he has passed ownership on to his two sons. “I always negotiate on behalf and [in consideration of] the aims and visions of my political group,” he told Mediapart. “As the designated shadow-rapporteur on the CAP of the Greens/EFA, I act as the messenger to what has been decided in accordance with all group members.”
Enlargement : Illustration 2
French MEP and farmer Benoît Biteau, also with the Greens-EFA group, similarly insisted that he does not profit from his political position. He and his group have argued for a 60,000-euro ceiling to be placed on individual aid from the CAP, which is currently unlimited except in only a few EU member states (and not in France), and those limits are far higher than what he proposes. If the 60,000-euro ceiling was adopted, he would lose out; last year his own farm received 107,696 euros in CAP funds. He said that one cannot talk of a conflict of interest “when the given orientations are not made with a logic that could favour the [agricultural] structure of the member”.
Slovenian MEP and farmer Franc Bogovič, a member of the conservative EPP group, told Mediapart that, “There is a clear division of responsibilities between an EU legislator and an executive arm”, adding that he and his parliamentary colleagues had “absolutely no influence” on the allocation of agricultural subsidies which are decided by the European Commission.
“When my farm was subsidised with 7,700 euros [in 2019], I was one of 7 million farms in Europe who received a subsidy, and one of 57,000 in Slovenia [sic].”
The MEPs are due to vote in the coming days on whether to approve the different programmes contained in the proposed new CAP, and the criteria for their attribution. During the process, they could for example decide to reduce or put an end to aid according to surface size, to harden or soften environmental protection terms conditional to aid, or to increase aid which is coupled with positive measures for countering climate change.
But one indication that the issue is of little concern to some was the fact that several MEPs did not take the time to answer Mediapart’s questions. That was the case of Maxette Pirbakas, member of the French far-right Rassemblement National party and a former president of the local farmers’ union federation (FDSEA) in the French Caribbean island of Guadeloupe, and who received 105,849 euros from CAP funds in 2019. Austrian conservative MEP Simone Schmiedtbauer (EPP), a farmer and farming union official, also did not respond, and neither did her compatriot and MEP Alexander Bernhüber, who also sits with the EPP, and who last year received CAP funds of 21,509 euros.
Keeping it off the record...
While some MEPs admit to concern over the issue, and yet others chose to take leave of their agricultural businesses at the beginning of their mandate, most of those concerned by the potential of conflicts of interest appear to see no problem.
Neither are MEPs required to provide the financial results of a company they may own. In terms of income, they must tick one of the boxes against monthly earnings; from 1 euro to 499 euros, 500-1,000 euros, 1,001-5,000 euros, 5,001-10 000 euros or another for more than 10,000 euros.
For the EU’s executive body, greater details are required. In the case of Irish MEP Mairead McGuiness (EPP), who early this month was appointed as European Commissioner for Financial Stability and Financial Services, her declaration of interests published when she took up the post included the fact that her husband is a farmer, but that fact never appeared – because not required – in her declaration as a parliamentarian. Her latest declaration of interests also notes that she is co-owner, with her husband, of 40 hectares of agricultural land (which is eligible for CAP funding), a fact also missing not included in her parliamentary declaration. McGuiness’s husband, Thomas Duff, last year received CAP funding of 25,512 euros.
Moreover, the definition of what might constitute a conflict of interest is also different between the two bodies. “A conflict of interest arises where a personal interest may influence the independent performance of their duties,” reads the code of conduct for members of the European Commission. “Personal interests include, but are not limited to, any potential benefit or advantage to Members themselves, their spouses, partners or direct family members.”
Several MEPs have among their close entourage people who receive CAP funding, although most of these cases involve separate households in tax terms. That is the case of French conservative MEP Anne Sander (EPP), whose brother Franck heads an organisation representing beet producers (the CGB, which lobbied for the recent exemption accorded to beet growers in France from a ban on using the class of pesticides known as neonicotinoids), and who last year received 35,936 euros of CAP funds. There is also the example of German MEP Marlene Mortler (EPP), whose son Jörg received 76,505 euros in 2019 in CAP benefits.
The code of conduct of the European Parliament simply states that, “A conflict of interest exists where a Member of the European Parliament has a personal interest that could improperly influence the performance of his or her duties as a Member”. However, a conflict of interest does not exist, it adds, “where a Member benefits only as a member of the general public or of a broad class of persons”.
Which raises the question as to whether farmers who receive aid from the European public purse are “a broad class of persons”. In response, the spokesperson for the president of the European Parliament – the president has the responsibility of overseeing MEPs’ declarations of financial interest – referred Mediapart back to the code of conduct, adding that, “For an agricultural holding, an MEP would need to declare the level of total income derived from the business as a whole, but not the breakdown of the sources of revenue for the business”.Despite a 2018 report by Greenpeace in which the NGO denounced the CAP funds received by MEPs and the links of some with the agribusiness, but the regulations have not changed since.
None of the MEPs questioned here by Mediapart intend to add the sums received from the CAP, nor their family links with others who receive such funds, on their declarations. MEP Jarosław Kalinowski, however, said he believes those who receive CAP benefits should include them in their declarations. Most of the MEPs who have agricultural interests said they supported the transparency of publicly available data on where CAP subsidies go. But only Martin Häusling and Jarosław Kalinowski said they favoured harmonising and simplifying access to the data, which is published by national governments in various formats, and not always in English, while some do not reveal the names of farmers who receive funding. Meanwhile, Ulrike Müller has proposed an amendment for changes in the presentation of the data to make it easier to identify the holding companies of beneficiaries of aid.
... and keeping it in the family
Luxembourger MEP Charles Goerens (Renew) said he set up a limited liability company for his agricultural business when he became a minister out of concern for what he called “political hygiene”, because otherwise the losses incurred by his farm could have been deducted from his tax returns. The company, S-M-H S.à.r.l, was transferred to a manger and his two children, and last year received 62,169 euros in CAP subsidies. Goerens said he receives no remuneration from the business, which he helps out on an unpaid basis during his “little free time”.
Dutch MEP Annie Schreijer-Pierik (EPP) also removed herself from her farming activities before she was first elected to the European Parliament. “With much sadness and emotions in 2014, before the EP elections, in order to avoid any conflict of (personal) interests, I formally seceded from our agricultural partnership (farm) and renounced and transferred all rights and any income associated with it,” she told Mediapart by email. It was her son who succeeded her in managing the farm, which last year received CAP subsidies of 1,252 euros.
It was after his first term as an MEP that Jan Huitema (Renew) separated himself from his family's dairy farm business in the Netherlands in which he had a stake, but more for reasons of his workload. “It was very challenging to combine the work in the European Parliament with the work on the farm,” he told Mediapart. Since last year’s European Parliament elections, the business is back in the hands of his parents, who in 2019 received CAP subsidies of 29,090 euros.
While one MEP, whose name is withheld, said that to combine a full-time political role with that of maintaining a farm was an “illusory” idea, only a small number of MEPs chose to give up their agricultural activities, and which they may return to full-time after their term in the Parliament. It is a problem for many MEPs who had professional activities before their election, unlike those who were in the public sector.
“Being an elected representative is not an occupation but a mandate perfectly limited in time, and that mandate should not justify halting an activity, especially for a company head in general and a farmer in particular, such as it is that creating a farm is complicated and much more than a simple job,” said French MEP and farmer Benoît Biteau. “It is a choice of lifestyle, sometimes tough, initiated by generations of farmers in the family, and to give it up because one becomes an elected representative for five years would be incoherent.” To keep his own farm, Idendi’Terre, going, during his lengthy absences to be in Parliament, Biteau decided to use his remuneration as an MEP to pay those who work on it during his lengthy absence. He, like others, believe also that a person’s expertise in the field is important in political decision-making, and he says in that respect it is a question of “credibility” and legitimacy.
That is also the opinion of French MEP (Renew) and former French farmers’ union official Jeremy Decerle. “I am indeed a farmer, a beneficiary of the CAP, member of the agriculture committee and a negotiator for the future CAP, which is perhaps more pertinent than handing me the dossiers on culture, industry or banking,” he said. “[…] I would personally like those of us who come from the field to be more numerous to judge and decide on questions as specific as those of agriculture.”
German MEP Martin Häusling argued that to exclude those with farming interests from the CAP negotiations would be to hand the reform to “people not being familiar with the subject”, while Danish MEP Asger Christensen said it was important that politicians had “real world” experience. His German colleague Ulrike Müller underlined the importance of her “experience as a farmer over 40 years”.
Some suggest their involvement in the CAP reform is indispensable. “Who else should provide the practical know-how and the experience how to do something better?” asked Austrian Green party and CAP beneficiary MEP Sarah Wiener.
“No-one else has a deeper understanding of what kind of support from the EU is necessary, in order to guarantee a sustainable and successful farming landscape in Europe and in order to guarantee food security for safe and healthy food of high quality, produced carbon-efficiently, for our citizens,” added Slovenian MEP and farmer Franc Bogovič.
Their arguments suggest that MEPs with professional experience in the fields of for example health, or climatology and the environment, have less competence than farmers to shape issues which concern a vast sector in food production.
“The problem is not the participation of farmers in Parliament,” commented Trees Robijns from the German NGO Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Union (NABU). “The problem is that farmers who benefit from the CAP have a direct interest in the status quo, and that Parliament’s AGRI committee has a preponderant role in the orientations of the Common Agricultural Policy. Now, the impact of agriculture is enormous. It involves health, climate and biodiversity.” Volkswagen engineers would not be allowed to negotiate standards on carbon emissions, she added, so why would the situation be different for the agricultural sector?
-------------------------
If you have information of public interest you would like to pass on to Mediapart for investigation you can contact us at this email address: enquete@mediapart.fr. If you wish to send us documents for our scrutiny via our highly secure platform please go to https://www.frenchleaks.fr/ which is presented in both English and French.
-------------------------
- The original French version of this article can be found here.
English version by Graham Tearse