Neil O'Brien on how Mandelson is betraying the poor

By Alex Singleton | 8 December 2005

The Director of Open Europe, Neil O'Brien, writes in the Spectator:

...Mandelson talks about cutting agriculture tariffs "in half". But what he actually means is cuts in previously agreed tariff ceilings (known as "bound rates"). These ceilings are currently set at roughly double the tax level which is applied in practice. So unless the ceiling is cut by more than half, the actual amount of tax which is charged won't change much. On top of this, the EU is demanding 170 of its most important products be classified as specially "sensitive" - making them exempt from significant cuts at all.

The effect of this, according to a study by the World Bank, is that in real terms the EU's offer would not cut tariffs "in half" - but would actually reduce them by less than 1%.

And when Peter Mandelson says he wants to cut "trade distorting subsidies" by 70%, he doesn't mean that the EU might actually spend any less on the CAP. Heaven forbid. As Mandelson's spokesman told the French press: "Nothing as part of the EU's offer in world trade talks will reduce overall levels of EU farm spending by one cent."

In fact the EU is not offering to change anything at all. The EU is effectively asking for credit for a "reform" of the CAP it carried out in 2003. This reform allows the EU to shuffle funds between the different headings of the negotiations (the 70% refers to the amount being shifted between the bafflingly-named blue, green and amber "boxes").