The National Farmers' Union has spoken up about the myths and misconceptions of the CAP and its effect on world poverty. Its President, Tim Bennett, said at a conference last week:

"The European Commission came under intense bombardment from many sides before Hong Kong: from European farmers, and some governments, who thought it had gone much too far, and from most British commentators and some governments who thought it had not gone far enough. I think the Commission did a very good job. There is no doubt that the 2003 CAP Reform puts us in a much better negotiating position. And the recent sugar reform contrasted starkly with American intransigence on their cotton subsidies.…

"I do understand and accept the principles behind trade liberalisation, but I am exasperated by the way some of the facts and arguments are often presented. Top of my list are those who present the CAP as an immoral attack on poor countries and Africa in particular. Opening our markets, the argument runs, would be the single greatest contribution to making poverty history.

There are several conspicuous flaws in this argument. First, it is normally put forward in ignorance of the fact that Europe already has, since 2001, opened up all its markets by allowing, through the Everything But Arms initiative, duty-free and quota-free market access to the poorest countries, including most of Africa. This is an initiative that other industrialised countries have only just promised -in Hong Kong- to match but have not yet achieved. In terms of the actual trade flows, the EU imports more farm products from developing countries than the US, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and Canada put together and absorbs 70% of the imports from Least Developed Countries while the US only takes 17%."