BBC NEWS | The Reporters

Wheat or tweet?

Mark Mardell
26 Sep 07, 12:02 AM

The European Union is going to get rid of one of its oddest rules, whereby farmers are ordered not to grow anything on part of their land and then paid for not doing their job.

Near Sault, southern France Instead of scrapping it, perhaps the European Union should be thinking of expanding the idea?

Journalists could be paid by the "not word" for not turning in tedious articles, and whole pages could be left blank. In an effort to tackle climate change, car manufacturers could be paid for letting assembly lines run idle as workers watch not cars trundle off them. Politicians, perhaps, could reward their loyal foot soldiers with pints and pub lunches for not canvassing in not-to-be-held general elections.

Be that as it may, set-aside is to be set aside. It's a penny to a euro that it will never come back. It was an answer to over-production. Since the foundation of the EU, farmers were paid to produce, even if nobody bought their goods. Hence those butter and grain mountains and wine lakes.

So, about 15 years ago someone had the bright idea of paying them not to produce on 10% of their land. But there are no grain mountains now. A bad harvest in Australia and southern Europe, and an export ban in Ukraine have meant less grain on the market and so higher prices.

So today agriculture ministers will be asked to reduce the amount of land farmers are required to set aside to zero. The whole idea will be reviewed in November and the European Commission is keen to get rid of set-aside altogether.

Not everyone is happy. One side-effect of set-aside is that it can safeguard wildlife, particularly if it's land that is never cultivated, rather than rotated year by year. The RSPB says it could be a disaster. The French Little Bustard has particularly benefited from the policy.