/ 19 April 2004

Africans warn European Union on cotton reform

Agriculture ministers meeting in Brussels this week are facing charges of hypocrisy over their attempts to reform Europe’s highly subsidised cotton sector, after four of the world’s poorest countries warned that the current blueprint will fail to end dumping of EU exports in world markets.

With cheap cotton from the west blamed for pushing world prices to their lowest levels since the depression, bankrupting more cost-effective farmers in west Africa, cotton has emerged as a central issue in the new round of global trade talks. The main culprit is American cotton, allowing Brussels to claim the moral high ground at the World Trade Organisation meeting in Cancún last September when it backed demands by Burkina Faso, Mali, Benin and Chad for reform.

But the four African governments say Europe has failed to clean up its own house.

Although Europe’s subsidised exports are tiny in comparison to US exports, a British government study found they had a disproportionate impact on former colonies in west Africa.

Reduced EU production would also open up opportunities for west African farmers to sell their produce in the European market.

The African countries are worried by the European commission’s own admission that the current reform package will cut cotton production by less than 4%. ”We fear that reform will not produce the desired effect, namely a reduction in uncompetitive cotton production in Europe,” the four governments say in a leaked copy of a letter, seen by The Guardian.

Cotton is mostly grown in Spain and Greece where farmers collect â,¬800-million each year in subsidies. Both countries strongly oppose any change to the current system where payments are linked to the amount of cotton produced.

Despite the efforts of Britain and a coalition of northern European countries which support reform of Europe’s lavish system of farm subsidies, the commission has come up with a compromise deal which would leave the current system largely untouched.

Payments would be linked to production for up to 40% of output, leaving little incentive for farmers to switch to other, less lucrative products. – Guardian Unlimited Â