There is increasing recognition of the links between methods of farming production, food quality and health, and growing criticism that aspects of the current system of providing public finance to support the agricultural sector in the EU hinders rather than promotes health and does not respond to consumer demands.

European citizens have already paid a very high price for CAP - not only in terms of public expenditure, but also in environmental degradation, ill health, rural exodus and loss of social cohesion, and most recently, loss of consumer confidence.

The purpose of this statement is to outline our main demands for policy change, and to provide a focus for joint action by non-governmental organisations and other public interest groups in promotion of healthier food production, social justice and environmental sustainability in relation to future CAP reform and the enlargement process.

How should the CAP be changed?

To fulfil the new Amsterdam Treaty requirements

Article 152 requires the EU to ensure a high level of human health in the definition and implementation of Community policies and activities, and that Community action should be directed towards improving public health, preventing human illness and diseases, and obviating sources of danger to human health. Article 153 calls on the EU to take into account consumer protection requirements in the definition and implementation of other Community policies and activities. Article 6 requires the EU to integrate environmental protection measures in the definition and implementation of Community policies and activities, in particular with regards to promoting sustainable development. Articles 13,136 and 137 call on the EU to combat poverty and discrimination and promote social inclusion. The Protocol on Protection and Welfare of Animals calls on the Community to pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals when formulating and implementing agricultural policy.

To improve farming policies and food practices to support health

Food inequity, the lack of a safe healthy diet for all, may be responsible for over 1 million deaths yearly (14% of all deaths) in the World Health Organization's (WHO) European Region. Access to safe healthy food is a human right emphasised in the WHO's policy framework Health21, and the CAP should be reformed to reflect this.

The CAP should increase financial support to healthy consumption and production, including an increased availability of fruits and vegetables. This must be accompanied by health promotion efforts to raise awareness of the risks associated with an unhealthy diet. Animal husbandry practices affect not only the health of the animal, but ultimately human health as well. Routine use of antibiotics in animal feed as growth promoters not only compromises animal welfare but also contributes to the growing public health threat of antibiotic resistance in both humans and animals. The EU should follow advice from the WHO and the EU Scientific Committees to implement a ban on such antibiotics. The EU should also uphold its ban on hormone treated beef and dairy products. The public health implications of GM crops and foods, particularly the use of antibiotic resistant markers, are causing concern among a growing number of public health experts and scientists. The EU should invoke the precautionary principle and ban genetically modified foods until more evidence is available about potential health consequences. The use of pesticides should be significantly reduced to protect the health of agricultural workers, consumers (who are exposed to pesticide residues in drinking water and food products) and farm animals.

To respond to consumer demands

In its opinion on the reform of the CAP, the Consumer Committee called for a farming policy that delivers "safe and nutritious food, produced as naturally as possible, at reasonable prices, respects the environment and animal welfare, and makes an effective contribution to rural development". Consumers are also increasingly concerned about production methods including those relating to genetic engineering, animal welfare and sustainability and are demanding better information about the production and quality of food products.

Consumers are also calling for the consistent and transparent application of the precautionary principle, in particular in relation to GMOs.

To improve the environmental sustainability of agriculture and the quality of agricultural products

Intensive/industrialised production is ecologically inefficient, consuming far more energy than it produces and polluting soil, air and water. CAP support has to be shifted away from intensive/industrialised farming towards environmentally sustainable farming practices that serve at the same time to enhance biodiversity and food security by increasing the range and variety of plants and animals.

Agri-environmental measures and low input systems such as organic farming offer additional environmental benefits in terms of reduced pollution, enriched soil fertility and protection of wildlife habitats, and such efforts should increasingly receive a greater portion of the CAP budget. As suggested in the WHO urban food and nutrition plan, the EU should support local/regional marketing of agricultural and food products instead of favouring long transport and concentration of processing and retailing sector.

To reduce food poverty and increase rural employment, both within and outside the EU

Health and wellbeing in rural areas depend on the economic viability of agriculture and future CAP reform should reflect this. Within Europe, the EU should promote forms of agriculture that are more labour intensive, such as extensive or organic production systems, which use more skilled labour, and horticulture.

The EU should recognise the vital role of agriculture in poverty alleviation and the health and welfare of the majority of the population in developing countries. It should seek to formulate agricultural and associated trade policies which do not distort fair trade or undermine national and regional agricultural development or food security. Trade and financial assistance arrangements should be established which support the development of environmentally friendly production methods in developing countries.

Early elimination of export subsidies and all forms of dumping practices would also benefit agriculture in many developing countries where dumping of EU and USA produce destroy local food production.

To enrich the diversity of food culture and wildlife

Current production patterns are based on a narrow and shrinking variety of agricultural products -- processed, packaged and promoted to appear different from each other. Sustainable production and processing of more fruit, vegetables, legumes, starchy staples, a diverse variety of cereals and fish would increase choice and help to halt the erosion of food cultures throughout the EU.

To respond to international trade issues

WTO should be reformed to allow broader interpretation of members' demands for measures to promote sustainable development and agriculture, and protect health, the environment and animal welfare. These reforms should also include a more consistent definition and application of the precautionary principle.

The role of Codex Alimentarius and its decision-making process should urgently be reformed to prioritise health and consumer interests over those of trade and industry, and provide more transparency. The EU should facilitate increased NGO and other public interest groups participation in these international fora to strengthen the representation of civil society and provide a more democratic decision-making process.

 Signatories as of 6 SEPTEMBER 1999

1. European Public Health Alliance (EPHA)
2. European Farmers Co-ordination (CPE)
3. Eurogroup for Animal Welfare
4. European Consumers Association (BEUC)
5. European Environmental Bureau (EEB)
6. European Network of Experiences in Sustainable Development (ENESD)
7. European Heart Network (EHN)
8. Friends of the Earth Europe, Biotechnology Programme
9. Greenpeace, European Unit
10. Euro-coop
11. European Council for Classical Homeopathy (ECCH)
12. European Institue of Women's Health
13. International Union for Health Promotion and Education (IUHPE)
14. Northern Alliance for Sustainability (ANPED)
15. Pesticide Trust, UK
16. Pesticde Action Network (PAN), Europe
17. Pesticide Action Network (PAN), Belgium
18. Pesticide Action Network (PAN), Germany
19. Demeter International, EU Group, Germany
20. Compassion in World Farming (CIWF), UK
21. Prof. Anna Ferro-Luzzi, National Institute of Nutrition, Italy
22. Carlos Alvarez-Dardet, Journal of Epidemiology and Community
Health, Universidad de Alicante, Spain
23. Dr Mike Joffe, Imperial College, UK
24. GATT WTO Campaign, Norway
25. The Swedish Society against Painful Experiments on Animals
26. Food Basket Foundation International
27. Foundation Bellerive
28. CWM Harry Land Trust, Wales
29. Fonds voor Ontwikkelings Samenwerking (FOS), Belgium
30. Avalon, The Netherlands
31. Bundesberbond de Lebensmittel kontrolleure, Germany
32. World Animal Net (WAN)
33. ArbeitsGemeinschaft Okologischer Landbau (AGOL) e. V., Germany
34. Genetixsnowball, UK
35. Public Interest Consultants, UK
36. Pia Lindeskog, Dr Med Sci, Applied Nutrition, Stockholm County
Council, Sweden
37. Ingela Dahlin, Applied Nutrition, Stockholm County Council, Sweden
38. Swindon Friends of the Earth, UK
39. Aktionsgruppe Babynahrung, Germany
40. Initiativ Liewensufank, Luxembourg
41. European Federation of Childbirth Associations (ENCA)
42. Baby Food Action Network-Europe
43. Persephoneia Institut fur Agrarkultur und Heilkunst GmbH, Germany
44. Ruth Jarman, UK
45. Sandwell Health Authority, UK
46. Arbeitagemeinschaft Freier Stillgruppen, Germany
47. Lithuanian Institute of Agrarian Economics, Lithuania 48.
Food Commission, UK
49. Food Information Trust, UK
50. European Office of the International Association of Consumer Food Organizations

 PLEASE SEND YOUR SUPPORT TO: Genon Jensen European Public Health Alliance (EPHA) -- A network of over 70 NGOs protecting and promoting the health of Europe's people 33 rue De Pascale 1040 Brussels Tel: +32 2 233 3886 (direct) Fax: +32 2 233 3880 E-mail: genon@epha.org

Supporters of the statement will receive regular updates on the number of signatures and news on further progress of the campaign.