We should remember that although one speaks of the EU of being 25 countries, not all of the countries are very big, and France is by far the largest agricultural producer and exporter, and has about a quarter of all of the farms in the EU. If there is an agricultural policy at all, then, France will inevitably get the biggest chunk of the benefits, because France is by orders of magnitude the biggest agricultural producer.
Turn the tables a little bit, and make there be a "common chocolate producer policy", and all of a sudden the Belgians would have the largest proportion of the benefits, since they produce huge amounts of chocolate.
It is a bit disingenuous, therefore, for critics of the PAC to point to the fact that France gets thrice what Britain does, and therefore that things are monstrously unfair. France has thrice the farmland of Britain, so of course France will get more in absolute amounts paid.
All of that said, the PAC is inefficient, and it does not help France (or any other country) innovate. France is the world's best garden, having the best agricultural land in Europe, also the most varied, but also in the world. There is vast experience in practically every form of crop, and French farmers know what they are doing. The incentive payments are strange and they badly skew the market. What is needed is protection against lower quality non-EU goods, or frankenstein foods from the US that European people do not want. The market can settle out WHAT gets grown better than planning targets, missing what is grown, and ending up paying for waste.
Agricultural reform in France would be the entrepreneurial base from which things could move out into the rest of the society. The French know agriculture. They are masters of it. Pull away the artificial props, and some farms will fail. But the larger and more agile producers will not, and they will do quite well. More importantly, because this is not a unionized sector, and is quite individualistic in control, you have the prospect of economic dynamism coming from the COUNTRYSIDE, which has long been dormant. And, given the over-representation of the provinces in the political structure, what works well for the farmers, in terms of private enterprise and entrepreneurial choice, will end up being imposed by the agricultural sector, of all places, on the rest of France.
Another French paradox, that farming, the most ancient, old and conservative industry could very well provide the impetus that reforms the rest of the business culture!
Therefore, we must hope that M. Blair holds the line here.
Chi-chi is hopeless. He should retire but he simply cannot. And that is probably good to, because it will cork the bottle and allow pressure and frustration to build and explode. France is a nation of rigidities. All is rigid and set, and things change only by violently rewriting everything.
Peasants with pitchforks may well prod France into the modern world. How wonderful! And how appropriate for France too, because this is the sector that has no pretensions, that everyone appreciates but nobody looks up to. Bove has such credibility as he does precisely because he is a nobody, and not a person of status. Were he a simple urbain, nobody would pay any attention to him.
"What is needed is protection against lower quality non-EU goods..."
As a member of the WTO, it is going to become a challenge for France to keep out "lower quality non-EU goods" as more governments sue on behalf of their farmers. Despite the bluster, many farmers outside of France also "know what they are doing" in regards to growing things. This pressure from outside is going to increase over time and it may be that France ends up on the wrong end of these rulings. It will be interesting to see.
This is in addition to cheaper, higher-quality EU goods being grown elsewhere in the trading block. Correct me if I am wrong, but by treaty, France cannot keep these goods out. As members of the EU, any one of the 25 have the right to sell anywhere in the block, correct?