A classic Brussels fudge

What many people do not like about the Commission is the control and influence faceless bureaucrats have over member states.

A recent announcement from the Commission over unfair trading practices (UTPs) in the food chain will almost certainly stiffen the resolve of wavering farmers to vote no, since this decision seems to be deliberately designed to stifle debate in favour of a 'Brussels know best' approach.

At issue is whether there is a need for legislation to tackle these practices. This could lead to the creation of a Europe-wide ombudsman to safeguard the interests of farmers and small suppliers dealing with the major retailers.

The need for this was hinted at by the farm commissioner, Phil Hogan, who accepts that farmers are the weakest players along the food supply chain.

However, the top official in the area of the commission responsible for the internal EU market has said there is no need for legislation. Instead, the commission wants to wait to see how various initiatives in member states work.

This is a big blow to farmers who thought that the proverbial playing field might be about to be made more level - but instead the commission is backing the status quo with all its faults.

It is ironic that this announcement came days after the high profile criticism of Tesco by the UK Grocery Code Adjudicator. That proved that the GCA could have teeth, but had it been a European supermarket chain doing the same it would have been outside the scope of her powers.

The commission view is influenced by the fact that it already has in place a voluntary initiative on the supply chain. However to date this has attracted fewer than 400 organisations to sign up, and most of those are trade bodies representing retailers and processors.

This voluntary initiative is not working, but the commission seems to be in denial about that. It seems to have been influenced by a powerful lobby against legislation by retailers and some national governments, happy with a system that delivers cheap food to consumers, regardless of the consequences for farmers.

This is the same lobby that blocked calls for country of origin labelling to be extended to processed food products. They do not like any legislation that limits their scope to source from the cheapest suppliers - and they do not like the idea of rules that would outlaw unfair trading practices.

The commission argument is that it wants to see member state solutions working before making a decision - a stance that is about kicking the ball as far into touch as it can go.

This has to raise questions about the recently established agricultural markets task force. This was created by Phil Hogan, specifically to address the weakness of farmers as a group, compared to the power of retailers.

It has just begun its deliberations, but the Commission has now effectively vetoed what might have been one of its key suggestions - the idea of legislation to give the Commission teeth to tackle UTPs.

Instead, it will now be left to come up with some fairly meaningless ideas about more cooperatives and collective bargaining. These are good ideas in their own right, but they will only be effective if sanctions are possible across the EU against major retailers that abuse their power.

This has to be a blow for Phil Hogan. He has already seen calls he made for an investigation into fertiliser prices effectively disappearing when he raised them with the commissioner responsible for breaches of competition rules.

Now his idea to drive fairness into the supply chain has been undermined by an official in the internal markets section. As a result Hogan may as well disband his agricultural markets task force, rather than waste their time to come up with suggestions when minds have already been made up in the corridors of power in Brussels.

It is ironic that a bureaucracy so committed to EU-wide solutions to all problems, believe this is an issue best solved at member state level.

That's all the more ironic when agriculture is controlled from Brussels by the CAP and a single market is in place. That makes the commission statement look a classic Brussels fudge - and fudges are one of the reasons many people will vote 'no' in the referendum.