The figures published by the European Commission on aid applications for volume reduction clearly represent the large-scale interest in the compensation for production cuts offered by the EU. In the first application period, over 52,000 farmers have participated and almost 99% of the available EU allocation of 150 million euros has already been claimed.

European milk producers have thus clearly spoken in favour of volume reduction. The excessive milk volume supplied in recent months has supressed milk prices across Europe and has put numerous milk producers out of business. "The high participation in the EU volume reduction programme shows that Europe's milk producers want to address the production-related issues," says Romuald Schaber, President of the European Milk Board. This is in clear contradiction to statements from agricultural experts, sections of the European Commission, farmer's associations and the processing industry, who claim that milk producers want to keep on increasing production and that a targeted reduction in supply is not possible.

Even in major milk-producing countries like Ireland, the Netherlands, Germany, France and Belgium, participation in the volume reduction programme has been substantial. "There can be no clearer sign that we need to step on the brakes", continues Schaber. "Volume reduction is a first step in the right direction. It is unfortunate that this measure was introduced so late and that production volumes across Europe will not be capped in parallel. Funding must also be made available for the second reduction period, in order to ensure further volume reduction."

To avoid such hard-hitting dairy crises in the future, a Market Responsibility Programme, like the one proposed by the EMB, must be put in place. This would allow milk producers to take early preventive action against market fluctuations in the future.

EMB press release (28 September 2016)

When you read and listen to some of the statements released in the last few days, you get the impression that the dairy crisis is over. Markets are more stable, demand for butter is rising and it is becoming more expensive behind the scenes on retail markets.

Milk has high value on spot markets at 42 cents in the Netherlands, the Kieler Milk Index is back to 30.7 cents, and yes - even some dairies have moderately increased their farm-gate prices. Thus the slight upward trend has also reached dairy farmers - the weakest members of the value chain, unless they are unlucky enough to be supplying to leading dairy DMK. In this case, they will have to wait a bit longer. Representatives from farmer's associations are rejoicing and believe it or not, already have a price of 30 cents in sight for the end of the year. Their declaration: Many farmers will survive the crisis. How great!

So is the market back in shape? Can we go back to our plans, produce more, store, conquer markets - as though nothing happened? No way! Just a reminder: Prices are still 15 cents below production costs across the board, farms are desperately fighting to survive, many farms and families are overtaken by resignation, doubt or even a feeling that the end is nigh. Many more will shut down their farms, that too when things are getting slightly better because cattle, equipment and even land is easier to sell at that point. Most farmers are this frustrated because they have come to a bitter realisation: This crisis is not an industrial accident within a functioning system; it is the direct effect of this system that only serves the interests of dairies and trade. These parties as well as the farmer's association and Federal policymakers, who followed the former's whispered instructions, are still not willing to admit their culpability and assume their responsibility. Nonetheless, European and Federal policymakers are taking baby-steps in the right direction by offering a volume reduction programme to the tune of 150 million euros, together with possible further funding for volume control - something that was unthinkable just a few months ago!

These small victories are thanks to the persistent offensive put up by numerous farmers, many from the ranks of the AbL. Minister Schmidt and his department had to reluctantly accept our ideas because they were perplexed and helpless themselves. However, implementation is slow, bureaucratic and too limited, all in the hope that the crisis will come to pass before the crisis instruments actually come into force. The French Agriculture Minister has responded differently and is providing an additional 10 cents over and above the 14 cents offered by the EU for every litre of reduced milk, but only for farms continuing milk production, in order to ensure that the initial recovery serves precisely these farms and is quicker. And what about our dairies? For months, they adamantly refused to implement the reduction within the sector stipulated by policymakers and are now advising some of their suppliers to not participate in the programme! This makes it very clear that all they are interested in is very cheap milk.

To the contrary, Dutch dairy Friesland/Campina is expressly supporting the national 10-cent reduction bonus with their own funds, in order to increase the value of milk. Things in Germany are completely different, where the unholy trinity of farmer's association, dairies and policymakers leads to farmers' interests being completely side-lined.

One of the important duties of the AbL is to highlight these connections and to present alternatives. We therefore always stand with farmers, wherever they decide to resist this system and stage public demonstrations to create awareness about their situation. AbL is also at the forefront in highlighting alternatives to the expand or disappear philosophy, constant intensification and an offensive export strategy. A different model of milk production that is sustainable, animal friendly and in harmony with society is possible. Therefore, we are promoting initiatives like suitable feeding of ruminants using less concentrated feed, meadow-grazed milk production, GMO-free milk and organic milk, together with other colleagues from the sector. One is not possible without the other - resistance and self-help are two sides of the same coin!

Ottmar Ilchmann, vice-president of AbL Germany

On Monday, September 19, President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Junker is expected to be at Zurich University to celebrate the anniversary of Churchill's 1946 speech.  No other person represents the EU like Juncker.

He is a vehement advocate of free markets, even though the consequence of this liberalisation is that citizens are left at the mercy of ruthless competition. The motto is simply everyone against everyone else. The French against the Germans, the Dutch against the Irish, the Danes against the Poles, and so on. Who will survive - you or me? But the winners in this contest - contrary to the repeated claims of the European Commission - are not the citizens, they are the large multinational corporations and no one else.

Completely in line with this trade philosophy, the EU abolished milk quotas over a year ago and thus kicked off an unbridled increase in milk volumes. This step had already been taken in Switzerland six years ago. The consequences were plan to see: increasing volumes, decreasing prices and major profits for corporations - while famers were operating at a loss. The volume increases in the EU have had a global effect. All over the world, dairy farmers are now on the brink of financial ruin. Anyone who operates at a loss on a daily basis cannot survive for long. It leads to frustration and even rage, not just among farmers, but increasingly among citizens as well.   People fight back against such a destructive system and against those that portray it in a favourable light.

Today, on this historic day, we dairy farmers appeal to Commission President Juncker to stop and think about whether this absolutely cut-throat, "everyone against everyone" kind of competition is really the appropriate basis for a community of states. Our appeal to Mr Juncker: "Mr Juncker, you are the face of the EU. You bear a great responsibility. A change in direction is urgently needed. Events like the current milk crisis affecting dairy farmers could have been avoided if suitable framework conditions had been created for the dairy market. However, the EU and the individual Member States now have to pour in millions in subsidies to prevent the worst from happening. This money could have been saved and used for something more sensible if the correct supporting measures had been put in place. It is never too late for a sensible realisation! Mr Juncker, large corporations are not going to the hold the United States of Europe together. The hope of people in a shared future is the only possible foundation for this vision."

BIG-M, the farmer's interest group for a fair dairy market

Interview with Jan Slomp, dairy farmer and president of the Canadian National Farmers’ Union

Mr Slomp, you recently wrote a letter to the EU’s agriculture Commissioner Mr Hogan saying you have an idea how the milk crisis could be solved. Europe should take inspiration from the Canadian experience with dairy supply management. How could this work?

Back in the 1960s, Canada faced a similar situation to what Europe is experiencing now with an over-supply of milk on the market and farmers going bankrupt due to low milk prices. It took a year of discussions between farmers, but in the end everybody agreed that limiting the milk supply was the only way to solve the crisis in the long term. A system of supply management was installed which is based on three pillars and is still active today: Firstly, supplies are matched with demand on the Canadian market. Secondly, farmers receive a fair price for their milk, based on an index which calculates the production costs in each region. Finally, tariffs and import controls allow Canadians to protect their milk farmers from low-cost world market products to be dumped on their internal market.

The not-so-nice side of supply management is that we hardly export anything - which is unacceptable for free-trade proponents. But this system has allowed farmers to make a good living, it allows citizens to have access to dairy products at a reasonable price, and it requires no subsidies whatsoever. The whole system is paid for by dairy farmers themselves. We should not forget that the millions of Euros which are poured into the European dairy sector at this very moment as an emergency measure are also tax payers’ money. But the problem is that these measures can at best provide short-term relief. If Europe wants to keep its milk farmers and healthy rural areas in the long-term, then supply management is the best option.

Most Europeans would be happy if farmers received a fair share of the price they pay for milk products. Additionally, citizens are becoming more and more concerned by ethical questions related to food production. They want cows to graze on pastures, not to be fed with GM-soy, and not to be pushed to their physical limits by producing a maximum amount of milk. Is the Canadian system fit to help farmers to produce in a way which is sound for the environment and animal welfare?

The Canadian system allows farmers to plan a lot better. Therefor any kind of investment into better stables, pasture systems and so on can be met much easier than within a system where farmers constantly have to worry about their existence. The Canadian supply management system gives farmers stable income, and in return environmental and animal welfare conditions can be applied to production.

It seems that Europe is currently going into the opposite direction, with Commissioner Hogan visiting countries such as Mexico, Colombia, China and Japan in a quest for new markets for European products...

Supply management doesn’t mean you have to stop exports completely, but you cannot pursue an aggressive export strategy and protect your own farms at the same time. Trade should be based on mutual interests, so if after satisfying the European market, there is an interest from other countries to import European products, that’s fine. But often what happens is that producing and exporting more is seen as an end in itself. Like in Europe, we have many fierce proponents of trade liberalisation in Canada. Many politicians heralded the strong increase in exports of food products from Canada as a big success. But what they forget to mention is that at the same time, food imports have been increasing just as heavily. So in the end, we surrender sovereignty over our own affairs because we cannot decide how our food should be produced anymore.

With free trade agreements, the problem is that many of them should better be called “forced trade agreements”, which aim to dump products on other countries’ markets. Take the example of CETA, the Canadian-EU trade deal which is currently the hot potato on everyone’s plate. It foresees to raise import quotas for European cheese into Canada by 17.000 tons. That’s the equivalent of 400 Canadian dairy farms! It wouldn’t be so bad if European farmers would make a living from these exports, but they are not. These 17.000 tons of cheese are a huge strike to the Canadian dairy market regulation. Canada should never have accepted these imports. But dairy farmers did not negotiate strongly enough and settled for compensation. That may help dairy farms now, but it will not help future generations who want to start farming.

Thank you a lot for this interview, Mr Slomp.

Interview by Astrid Österreicher, office of MEP Maria Heubuch

Further info:

• Letter by Jan Slomp to EU-Commissioner Hogan

• On the Canadian system of supply management: Strengthening Supply Management - Defending Canadian control of our market space and advancing food sovereignty

• Press conference with Jan Slomp