At the end of April (27/04), farmers' organisation Uniterre organised a symbolic action in front of the headquarters of the Swiss milk producers’ organisation (SMP) with "ghost busters".

The situation on the dairy market is unacceptable! The umbrella organisation for Swiss milk producers (SMP) has turned into a harbinger of death. The sustained low milk prices are driving milk production into the ground. Dairy farmers urgently need a legitimate, democratic representation of their interests. The Swiss milk producers’ organisation must remain in the hands of farmers! We are proud and confident because we produce valuable, quality food on our farms! We must not fall to our knees before buyers who need our milk!

In its current configuration, the SMP is unable to assume its role on the dairy market as a representative of milk producers. Its work considers the demands of milk traders and processors as well. That does not work. We therefore demand that the SMP board members, who are also board members of milk traders' organisations or dairies, step down immediately. It is impossible to defend the interests of both producers and the dairy industry at the same time. That is why both functions must be strictly separated. Two thirds of the SMP board is or was a part of administrative bodies in milk trading or even milk processing.

A producer organisation must advocate for milk contracts that at least fix volume, quality and price, as stipulated by the law.

Milk prices must cover costs (basic input costs of 0.67 francs or 0.62 euros/kg milk) and provide fair remuneration for the work done by farmers. We do not want any politically-driven dumping base price for milk! Who would start with the European minimum wage, add 10% Swissness (Swiss seal of origin) and thus come up with the Swiss base wage?

It is high time for us to have a farmers' organisation that upholds farmer solidarity, that truly represents our interests, and that demands and implements volume management and fair prices (1 franc or 0.92 euros/kg) for dairy farmers!

Rudi Berli, Uniterre Switzerland

From 30 April to 3 May, I had the chance to accompany EU Agriculture Commissioner Hogan on his trade mission to Canada as representative of Faircoop Belgium. The delegation consisted of sixty representatives from European companies and producer organisations covering different sectors  (dairy, meat, wine and spirits, cereals, fruits and vegetables).

With the adoption of the free trade agreement with Canada (CETA), participants hoped that this would be an especially good opportunity to sell their products on the Canadian market. The programme included numerous meetings with Canadian ministers as well as representatives from the trade and agricultural sectors. But it was a huge disappointment when no Canadian buyers attended the scheduled business meetings. The 60 representatives, who each had a table for product presentations, were therefore understandably disillusioned. A second business meeting planned for the following day was cancelled.

For me, information regarding the Canada-EU free trade agreement was of utmost interest. Within the framework of CETA, Canada will now import 18,500t of cheese duty-free. Above the tariff rate quota, Canada will continue to maintain prohibitive duties on most cheese imports at a rate of more than 245%. The Canadians, on the other hand, have unrestricted access to the EU internal market for all milk products. Considering the milk price in Canada is very high at 50 to 60 cents, the EU, however, does not expect milk to be exported from Canada to Europe.

On each day of the trip, I was able to meet Mr. Hogan and was also given the opportunity to explain the EMB position to him in an extensive one-on-one meeting. Commissioner Hogan was highly interested and attentive during our discussion.

A further point to be noted: Canadian milk supply management effectively adjusts the production volume to demand on the Canadian market. In addition to milk and milk products, they have quotas for eggs and poultry as well. Every farmer producing more than 100 eggs per day must be covered by a quota. I have never heard the words quota or regulation so often in just four days!

It was important for me to be there and to gain insight into the Agriculture Commissioner's trade missions. I am convinced that it has brought us a small step closer to our goal of cost-covering prices and fair remuneration.

Erwin Schöpges, president Faircoop Belgium and EMB Executive Committee member

Interview with Hans Geurts, milk producer in the Netherlands and former president of the Dutch dairy farmer's association NMV.

What is the current situation like for dairy farmers in the Netherlands?

The discussions about phosphate surpluses from agriculture are currently overshadowing all other topics. The thresholds that we guaranteed at EU-level have been surpassed. So, we now have to reduce inputs; otherwise the derogations will be removed, i.e. the EU approved possibility to have an annual output of 250kg of nitrogen from farm manure on intensive grassland instead of only 170kg. The number of cows has to now be reduced to limit the amount of phosphate, which has led to major disagreements between dairy farmers. Some say: "We have not increased output at all, why should we then reduce it?", while others have extensive lands and argue that they could easily use the manure on their land and that there is no need to trim the herd. Furthermore, those who expanded their farms, because the signs at the time pointed to growth, must now cut back due to a lack of funds.

How does this affect farms?

In 2017 as well, farms can continue to have the same number of cows and young cattle as on the reference date 2 July 2015 - if they do not have enough land, it must be four percent less. The fact that some limits have been put on us in the Netherlands is actually good for dairy farmers all over Europe. Since March, the number of cows has been gradually reduced by 160,000. In 2018, we will receive a phosphate quota. As soon as it is assigned, it can be traded. All those who have just invested in larger stalls will, of course, want to use their entire allowance. This puts phosphate rights under pressure and they will become expensive. Other farms will discontinue their activity. Building additional stalls for significant increases in growth will become close to impossible. That is absolutely uneconomical because of the additional costs incurred due to the necessary effluent-disposal certification and the phosphate quota. Dutch farmers, who are growth-oriented, are now facing the same issues as with the milk quota, but in addition, they are all dealing with a low milk price as well - because the phosphate amounts are managed nationally while milk volumes are controlled at EU level. It is a disaster.

So, you think control measures are necessary?

The big problem with milk production is that good milk prices and uncontrolled production do not go hand in hand. If you earn money, you have to pay taxes. That is why farmers would rather invest incoming funds straightaway. This leads to ever-increasing capacity and thus overproduction, which then means that many farms have to give up their activity because of the bad milk prices. It is a highly-warped kind of development.

Why should we be in favour of farms being able to continue their activity?

There are many reasons why it is better to have as many family farms with 60 to 120 cows as possible, rather than a few farms with 1,000 cows: Firstly, for farmers and farms themselves. Aiming for constant growth means that you also become a threat to your colleagues. Farms are also an important element in ensuring the vitality of rural areas. Furthermore, family-run dairy farms have a good reputation among citizens. It is still possible to implement desired conditions like access to pastures in these structures. Farms need to earn an appropriate income - from the sale of milk based on market demand.

What would market-aligned volume management look like?

I think the abolishment of milk quotas was a historic mistake. We should have reworked milk volumes and made them more flexible so that they could have been adapted to the market situation. There are still two options: The first would be a new policy framework. However, any sort of replacement for quotas will always lead to major disagreements about how the new volume limits should be distributed among farms because farms have already developed in different ways since the end of the quota system. The EMB's Market Responsibility Programme, which addresses policies at EU level, is a good crisis plan - but it will be very difficult to achieve structural success with it. After all, whenever the milk price is good, it leads to more milk and we thus find ourselves in a constant crisis. The second option is for dairies to regulate their own volumes, at least temporarily.

What is the role of social debates in the Netherlands?

Pasture grazing is very important for our citizens. In fact, the Parliament is discussing whether it should be made compulsory to put cows out to pasture. Dairies are now paying a premium of one to two cents per kg milk if the cows have had at least 120 days pasture access for at least 6 hours a day according to a negotiated standard. We are advertising pasture-grazed milk intensively because there is high demand. Some farmers are reintroducing this practice and are letting their cows out - even with the end of growth opportunities in sight. But for those with very large stalls and limited land of their own, this approach is impossible. This shows how inflexible they are.

Thank you for speaking to us!

Christine Weißenberg, extract of the interview with Hans Geurts published in Unabhängige Bauernstimme 05/2017