NFU England and Wales president Peter Kendall was in sizzling form when he addressed the Oxford Farming Conference.
Just back from Australia and entering the last two months of his eight-year presidency he admitted he would let rip and that not everything he said was NFU policy.
He was nonetheless fiercely critical of the direction in which the CAP was moving and criticised the ongoing reforms as accelerating the betrayal of the original CAP.
He even suggested Rural Development Policy, the much cherished Pillar 2, should be taken right out of the CAP and formulated instead by individual states to meet their needs.
“The agreement reached last June represents a huge missed opportunity,” he said.
“Food security is now back on the political agenda but does the CAP as agreed in Europe and implemented in the UK really reflect this new reality?”
These were strong words, especially as two of the architects of the new CAP were sharing the platform with him.
EU Farm Commissioner Dacian Ciolos has nurtured the policy for four years and Ireland’s Farm Commissioner Simon Coveney led the negotiations in the final six months.
Mr Kendall’s point was that the objectives of the original CAP of 55 years ago were clearly stated.
“It was exactly right then and remains exactly right now,” he said.
“The objective then was, and I quote, to increase agricultural productivity by promoting technical progress and by ensuring the rational development of agricultural production and the optimum utilisation of the factors of production, in particular labour, thus to ensure a fair standard of living for the agricultural community. What is not there is any hint of a social policy.”
He blamed EU Farm Commissioner Franz Fischler for the change.
He had introduced the two Pillar concept back in 2003 with the second Pillar concentrating on rural development.
This had been a mistake and the CAP as agreed in June 2013 offered an opportunity to rectify the error.
Instead of a strategic vision there had been a tactical defence of budgets and in Mr Kendall’s view a “failed reform”.
It had too many “populist elements” including greening, capping, small farmer schemes and new entrant aid.
Not surprisingly his fellow panel members were not of the same view.
Mr Ciolos said: “We cannot separate agriculture from the environment.
“Land is not only for the public good but an essential element of production. Greening is about sustainability of the soil.”
He also pointed to the diversity not only within the EU but within member states.
“For example the UK had small farms as well as large ones,” he said
“Payments decoupled from production would give minimum levels of income.
“Some environmental factors were supported by the market but others were not and needed support from Pillar 2.
“Biodiversity, soil fertility and water are all public goods.
“The maintenance of natural resources is of global interest, not just for farmers.”
Simon Coveney argued similarly that the CAP had moved in the right direction and would help the EU’s farmers provide food for its 500 million inhabitants.
The new CAP had flexibility but he had striven to keep simplicity to the fore.
He did, however, stress that although the policy moved away from “everyday market intervention” and coupled support there would be an ever increasing need for crisis management tools.
He expected price volatility to rise in the future and the EU had to recognise that and be able and willing to step in as required.
Mr Coveney was nonetheless bullish about the future.
“We are at the start of a golden era in food and farming in Ireland,” he said.
“Food and drink exports from Ireland now totalled 7bn euros annually with 4bn euros worth of produce coming to the UK.
“We can now give the individual carbon footprint for each of 36,000 beef farms and soon we will be able to do the same with 18,000 dairy farms.”
All of this backed up Irish claims of sustainable farming.