Part of the duty of policy makers is to put measures in place to assist those who are adversely affected by policy reform, but it must be done in ways that do not perpetuate the very problems that ought to be solved. Adjustment assistance should allow for a more equitable approach, targeted carefully to families or regions, instead of the old production-based approach that resulted in those who produced the most receiving the largest subsidies. One consequence of the dynamism of the sector has been the emergence of a whole new set of issues with which policy makers must grapple. Provoked by some recent, highly publicised scares, consumers are more and more worried about the safety of the food they consume, and there is a clear need for further research, an improved understanding of current scientific knowledge and better information. The way food is produced raises some concern, in particular as regards the impact of intensive production methods on the environment or on the welfare of animals.
Sustainable development is a big issue.
Farmers are custodians of the soil, water and other resources that go to produce our food and must make sure that those activities do not irrevocably deplete those resources. I know that many of you are also concerned about rural areas and their future. Here the challenge is to try to find integrated approaches to agricultural, environmental and rural policy that will contribute more effectively to the development of thriving rural areas providing an attractive alternative to our congested, polluted cities. And in all these areas we need policy solutions that do not fetter international trade. Finally, I am convinced that a policy stance involving specific targeted measures, against a background of diminishing support and protection overall, is in no way incompatible with the new demands being made on the sector and is, in fact, the best way forward.