‘No sustainability without profitability'
Speaking at the commission's conference on the Vision for Agriculture and Food in Brussels this morning (May 8), the Spaniard explained, to heavy applause, how important profitability is for farmers.
He said: 'I think that the vision has two basic meanings. The first is the fact that it provides a holistic view, on the challenges for the next future.
'The second one is that it has a dynamic view, looking to the future and looking at the challenges.
'I want just to add something, my first comment is very simple: We need profitability.'
The minister praised the EU Commissioner for Agriculture, Christophe Hansen, on the vision, and said that it is 'easier' and more business-orientated.
'I have to say too, that we have to keep our ambition from the overall point of view, that one or the other are not in contradiction,' Planas said.
'We can have a profitable farms, and we have to have sustainable farms for the future,' he added.
Profitability
According to Minister Planas, farming has 'no future' without generational renewal in the sector.
Prior to the Spanish agriculture minister's address, Commissioner Hansen had told the conference that the EU has lost more than 3 million farms, and that there are 9 million farms remaining.
Minister Planas told the conference that the challenge of generational renewal is directly linked to the challenge of innovation.
The minister said: 'We need to review, that the future is linked with innovation. New things, for example artificial intelligence, it's here in the farming sector and we are one of the pioneers in artificial intelligence, perhaps even sometimes we don't know it.
'I think that it is good that this link between conservation, and generational renewal, and innovation is there.
'The vision is not perfect, but the vision has also some good points,' the Spanish agriculture minister added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
Why the EU's plan to access our phones and data is daft
Precognition, an idea examined by Philip K Dick all the way back in 1956, is the latest misguided plan to make us all feel safer. In Dick's The Minority Report, better known for its Tom Cruise big-screen adaptation in 2002, crimes could be stopped before they happened. Dick's method was precogs, a psychic trio of people that could recognise when a crime was going to happen. The European Commission has a different approach, decryption through its Protect EU plan, which has noble motives. It aims to combat child sexual abuse material by giving law enforcement authorities access to encrypted data . The method would involve scanning private communications, including on platforms well-known for end-to-end encryption like WhatsApp or Signal. READ MORE [ Have EU laws to protect our privacy online worked? Opens in new window ] The way of doing this would be to scan messages on the client-side before they are encrypted, essentially checking what the user plans to send before it gets to the encryption stage that happens during the process of sending. For context, these are infinitesimally small amounts of time in which the actions would occur. This would make it easier for law enforcement authorities to access the communications of those that distribute illegal content. It rather feels like the European Commission missed the point of Dick's work. Well, maybe not everyone involved. The proposal was announced on April 1st after all. The methods outlined in ProtectEU undermine the strong cybersecurity stance the EU itself wishes to push There are layers of terrible to this awful idea, which is basically shielding itself in the argument that it's for the greater good. Before the matter of user privacy rights, there are obvious cybersecurity challenges. The backers of ProtectEU are missing the most obvious issue with their plan: any attempt to weaken encryption weakens everyone's security. While criminal actors benefit from it, it also impacts pretty much everyone else from journalists through doctors, law enforcement itself, businesses, whistleblowers and, rather importantly in this context, the victims of crime. [ How businesses can help protect themselves from cyber attack Opens in new window ] Any tool that would create a means to weaken encryption, even if the tool was created for the purposes of doing good, can be exploited by criminals and other bad actors. Even Lindsey Graham, the US senator and a noted hawk when it comes to anti-terror measures, agrees on this. Graham was one of the loudest calling for Apple to find a way to access the iPhones of the culprits in the San Bernardino terrorist attack in 2015. He changed his tune to the opposite when the risk this would create was made clear to him. As it happened, the phones in question were later accessed by targeting a zero-day vulnerability, or security flaw. The methods outlined in ProtectEU undermine the strong cybersecurity stance the EU itself wishes to push. Governments across the bloc, along with agencies within it, constantly push for greater digital resilience yet this measure would erode the strongest protection it has at the front line of security. Then there's the matter of the would-be good actors that would have access to such a system. Between the tech companies that would need to comply and the law enforcement agencies involved, the amount of people with potential legitimate access to such a backdoor would easily number in the tens of thousands. Simply assuming these would all be good actors, even with the most rigorous of vetting processes is laughable. That puts to bed the classic argument of 'if you have nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear.' ProtectEU would essentially be prosecuting the intent not the attempt We all have lots to hide, every one of us. Sadly, most of it isn't even that interesting. Personal information regarding our finances and the likes would be the most obvious example. That's why the privacy issue is so entangled with the cybersecurity one here. Even if encryption isn't removed, scanning before it acts nullifies its very purpose. This in turn would enable less democratic regimes to point to the EU – meant to be a bastion of democracy – as justification for their own efforts to outlaw or inhibit encryption. A successful implementation of ProtectEU would effectively have the Commission doing the hard work for totalitarian states in designing a mass surveillance system. Europe wouldn't use it, I think, but plenty of others would. Yes, it really is that bad an idea but it somehow gets worse. Let's assume the method for scanning pre-encryption, as ProtectEU plans, occurs and, implausibly, no cybercriminals or anyone else ever misuse the new means of attack. In that instance, when should law enforcement authorities act on the information? If they act the moment they know the person has illegal digital material in their possession then that actor has clearly got possession of illegal material and could probably be proven to have intent to distribute. Likewise the intended recipient could potentially be charged with intent to receive, where such laws exist. Yet they couldn't be charged with actually distributing it, while the would-be recipient would not yet have committed the crimes related to receipt and possession. If authorities act immediately, then they are limiting what they can charge and likely who they can charge as well. If they wait, then they get to add on more charges but have knowingly failed at preventing a criminal act. It's quite a dizzying moral puzzle. ProtectEU would essentially be prosecuting the intent not the attempt. The Minority Report was meant to be a warning not an instruction manual.
Irish Independent
an hour ago
- Irish Independent
Baseline 10pc US tariffs will do damage to Irish businesses, experts warn
A regime of 10pc tariffs – the expected outcome of trade talks between America and the EU next week – will have a negative impact on Irish business, experts have warned.
Irish Independent
an hour ago
- Irish Independent
Irish adults rank among richest in Europe – but cost of living and inflation means many do not feel benefits
Surging property prices have ensured that the average Irish adult is now 30pc richer than British people, according to a report from wealth managers Unio Wealth Management. This is despite the fact that middle-income people feel financially stressed, the report states. Average net wealth per adult has been calculated at €323,000. This is a jump of €140,000 from 2013, when the country was emerging from the financial collapse. Despite the fact that many will argue that they are barely managing financially, Ireland now ranks second among the European Union's wealthiest nations, after Luxembourg. Unio, which has offices in Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Galway, used data from the European Central Bank, Eurostat and other organisations to arrive at its conclusions. We just don't feel it on account of difficulties with housing, childcare and infrastructure Director and chief investment officer of Unio, Mike O Sullivan said Irish people do not feel wealthy. 'To many people, Ireland is a rich country, but we just don't feel it on account of difficulties with housing, childcare and infrastructure rollouts in comparison with our European counterparts.' He added that much of Ireland's wealth is 'new wealth' and there are fewer multi-generational businesses compared to other EU countries, which suggests Irish people are still coming to terms with the notion of wealth. The report found that net wealth per adult in Ireland is now higher than the height of the Celtic Tiger, up by €140,000 in the last 12 years. According to a Red C sentiment survey commissioned by Unio, only 10pc of Irish people consider themselves 'quite wealthy'. And only 40pc of Irish people feel wealthier than they were 10 years ago, with younger people and those in higher income brackets most likely to express this sentiment. Irish people are divided on the concept of wealth, with an equal number of respondents feeling comfortable with the term as those who feel uncomfortable. Unio found that Irish people are not highly indebted, on average. Property accounts for two-thirds of the wealth of Irish people. This has been put at €250,000 per adult. Financial assets, such as investments and pensions, around for a third of wealth, or around €114,000 on average. Household debt averages €40,080 per adult, or 11pc of gross assets. Compared to its EU neighbours, Ireland is a wealthy country, Unio said. Average household wealth in Ireland has grown more rapidly than other EU countries, apart from countries which began from a much lower base. Ireland was a middle-ranked EU country back in 2013, but faster growth has enabled Ireland to rise through the ranks, and now stands in second place, only lagging Luxembourg. Irish households are statistically much wealthier Mr O Sullivan said Ireland does not have a lot of 'old money'. 'Although Irish adults are 30pc richer than their UK counterparts, the UK has a far greater level of multi-generational wealth than Ireland, although that is now changing.' But he said the report paints a picture of a stressed middle class. 'Irish households are statistically much wealthier compared to other European nations but there isn't a broad sense of wealth among the population, which can likely be attributed to inflation and a high cost of living along with people associating their incomes as a sole measure of wealth.'
