A-Infos (en) France, UCL: Interview - Thomas Gibert: "This isn't just a health crisis, it's also a political crisis!" (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

Thomas Gibert, a farmer on a mixed crop and livestock farm (cows and 
goats) in southern Haute-Vienne and national spokesperson for the 
Confédération Paysanne (Farmers' Confederation), is mobilized, like many 
people in the agricultural sector, to denounce the total slaughter of 
herds. Caught between neoliberal policies and political interests, it is 
the working conditions of farm workers that are under attack. ---- The 
topic of lumpy skin disease (LSD) has been widely discussed in the news 
for the past few weeks. Can you explain what LSD is and its implications 
for animals and humans?

LSD is a viral disease that infects cattle and is transmitted by biting 
and sucking insects, such as flies or horseflies. It's quite contagious, 
with a morbidity rate (that is, infection rate) of around 40% and a 
mortality rate between 1 and 5%.

The first cases in France appeared this summer in the Savoie region, and 
the immediate public health response to contain the disease was the 
implementation of a health protocol involving total culling as soon as 
the first case was declared, as well as vaccination coverage in a 
limited area around the case. This is a public health policy that you 
are contesting...

At the conference, we opposed this public health policy because we 
believe that total culling does nothing to slow the spread of this 
disease. According to scientific studies conducted by the EFSA and other 
examples of this protocol, when vaccination coverage is effective in a 
given area, there is no difference between total culling and targeted 
culling, that is, euthanizing only the sick animals. The suffering for 
farmers is far too great.

In reality, the authorities refused to extend vaccination to the entire 
country, which was our primary demand and the scientifically accepted 
measure that effectively controls the disease.

Why is the government refusing widespread vaccination?

It was refused because the chosen approach was to protect France's 
"disease-free" status to safeguard beef exports. To be able to export, 
there must be fewer than a certain number of disease outbreaks. The 
areas surrounding the outbreaks of non-disease-free cattle are not 
disease-free and therefore cannot export; only the rest of France is. If 
vaccination is implemented, France loses its disease-free status until 
immunity develops, which can take several months. The policy of 
preserving France's "disease-free" status at all costs was championed 
solely by the leaders of the FNSEA (National Federation of Farmers' 
Unions) within the pseudo-health parliament, the CNOPSAV[2], where the 
FNSEA is actually overrepresented.

This is not just a health crisis, but also a political and governance 
crisis, since the minister only listens to the FNSEA leaders, whose sole 
guiding principle is the free market economy. There is a push to 
deregulate trade and increase competition, and as a result, French 
livestock farming is geared towards exports. Health policies are imposed 
by Europe, and we no longer have any control over them. Therefore, we 
found ourselves in a situation where we could not expand vaccination 
because we no longer have control over health policies.

What we are demanding is food sovereignty, which, according to the 
definition of La Via Campesina[3], is the right of peoples to decide 
their agricultural and food policies without dumping on third countries, 
which is the opposite of the current situation.

We find ourselves in a very complex situation where the responsibility 
falls on farmers linked to exports, who are told, "You are irresponsible 
if you refuse total slaughter." And farmers who operate in short supply 
chains, who don't care about disease-free status, are treated with 
contempt, told that their herds can be destroyed and that their 
marketing methods don't matter.

What would be the consequences if France loses its disease-free status?

We are told that if France loses its disease-free status, it will cost 
the cattle industry 2 billion euros. This is actually the figure for 
exports over a year. However, in the Savoie region, the crisis has been 
contained, and these areas are already resuming exports. Exports were 
only halted for a few months. The economic impact could be lessened by 
carrying out this vaccination campaign as quickly as possible, 
allocating the necessary resources, and negotiating with our neighbors, 
particularly Italy and Spain, to facilitate the rapid export of 
vaccinated animals. With this protocol, the economic impact is reduced, 
and the health policy becomes more acceptable.

You are accused of being anti-science, sometimes with parallels drawn 
with anti-vaxxers...

What we are advocating is an alternative health protocol that has 
already been implemented in mainland France. In 1992, there was an 
outbreak of lumpy skin disease on Réunion Island, and the protocol that 
was put in place involved vaccination coverage across the entire 
territory, the culling of sick animals, the quarantine of outbreaks, and 
the suspension of transport in the affected area. Within a few months, 
the crisis was eradicated. And when we talk to our fellow farmers in 
Réunion, this crisis was not at all traumatic for them.

There are other ways to do things, and at the time, the army and local 
councils were mobilized to ensure that vaccinations were carried out as 
quickly as possible. We at the Confédération Paysanne (Farmers' 
Confederation) say that this protocol must be implemented at the 
metropolitan level. We are sometimes told that it was an island, and 
that fewer animals were affected, but there is no scientific proof that 
this isn't applicable. What we are proposing is something concrete and 
that works.

The problem is that current policy is being implemented against farmers, 
without consultation. There are veterinarians who are being threatened 
by farmers, but the responsibility lies with the politicians, who have 
forced this through. A health policy must be developed in consultation 
between veterinarians and farmers; otherwise, it doesn't work.

And in addition to the suffering of farmers, the State adds police 
violence, using flash-ball launchers and tear gas grenades, as soon as 
farmers rise up against this inhumane and ineffective policy.

Can you tell us about the current mindset of farmers in the struggle and 
how the mobilization is progressing on the ground?

The level of distress, and therefore the determination of farmers on the 
ground, is very high. There are blockades in the cold that last day and 
night on countless roads. What we are seeing now is that the blockades 
are multiplying by the hour. There is a desire to fight back, to hold 
out, and to win. This mobilization is taking place right now, against 
the backdrop of the 2024 mobilizations, where we have not received a 
response to our key demand, which is income.

And what's more, France is going to be a signatory to the EU-Mercosur 
agreement[3], the victims of which will once again be cattle farmers, 
since we will be trading German cars for beef that will flood the 
European market at a lower cost. We're being led to believe there will 
be safeguard clauses, but in fact, these are temporary emergency 
measures that won't protect French livestock farming. And these measures 
don't prevent the competitiveness of South American products, which come 
from immense farms spanning tens of thousands of hectares, run by 
agribusiness managers who exploit labor for less than one euro an hour. 
We'll never be competitive.

There's no better context to add fuel to the fire. So clearly, they're 
giving themselves every opportunity to block everything!

When Rousseau from the FNSEA says that you, a "minority," must show 
solidarity with the entire "sector" and stop your selfishness, what do 
you say?

What contempt! There's already a disregard for its own base, which 
doesn't feel the same way at all, and what contempt for all the farmers 
it represents... The Confédération Paysanne and the Coordination Rurale, 
the unions that have mobilized, together garnered 60% of the votes in 
the professional elections. The FNSEA's hegemony is over. We won't get 
out of this crisis with this same governance. The minister herself 
admits it: she inherited this co-management system from which she can't 
extricate herself. There's a major structural problem with governance, 
and we fully intend to change that.

On the other hand, large retailers are making grand announcements of 
"support" for "our farmers." Price negotiations are underway for 2026. 
What is the reality behind these announcements?

Negotiations are always very unbalanced as long as there are no concrete 
measures to regulate prices. As long as there isn't a guaranteed minimum 
price, they'll always be the ones twisting our arm in the end. We need 
to impose a guaranteed minimum price, and also regulate the 
international market to prevent competition with other countries, 
because that's what's preventing fair prices. We're constantly driving 
down prices and environmental and social standards.

Regarding the blockades, you're dealing with the Rural Coordination, a 
far-right group that's pushing to dismantle all standards protecting 
health, living beings, and the environment. What strategy is the 
Confédération Paysanne adopting in this context?

This alliance of convenience may seem strange. We have very strong 
ideological divisions, and there's no question of sweeping them under 
the rug. However, we do share the same commitment to defending livestock 
farmers, which is why we find ourselves at the blockades. There are also 
more and more farmers who are members of the FNSEA (National Federation 
of Farmers' Unions) present at the blockades, including entire 
departmental federations, and that's to be expected because the FNSEA 
leadership doesn't care about livestock farmers. Regarding the 
Coordination Rurale (Rural Coordination), our watchword is to not go 
beyond the demand for the DNC (National Cattle Breeding Scheme). The 
EU-Mercosur agreement could also be a point of expansion because the 
stakes are enormous, but we won't go any further and we refuse to allow 
any other demands to be put forward.

The development of CND is linked to climate change, so there is a risk 
of other health crises of this type occurring in the coming years. How 
can we address this in the long term?

Climate change is indeed very conducive to the development of zoonoses. 
The same is true of the industrialization of livestock farming. The 
concentration of animals, the segmentation-that is, the fact that one 
farm, for example, raises chicks, another fattens them, and yet another 
raises laying hens-all of this leads to the concentration of animals on 
huge farms and the transport of livestock, which promotes the spread of 
disease. In contrast, small-scale farming involves self-sufficient farms 
that manage the entire production chain. We have our own chicks and we 
raise them until they start laying. This means far less movement, far 
less concentration, and if a virus arrives, it doesn't necessarily 
infect the entire herd. There's also much more interaction to develop 
herd immunity. Genetic diversity within the livestock is also important 
because the industrialization of livestock farming favors a single 
breed, which is then multiplied tens of thousands of times. And if 
there's a vulnerability, the entire herd can be affected. The greater 
the genetic diversity, the greater the chance of having a resilient 
livestock population. Therefore, small-scale farming is the best 
response to the arrival of these zoonoses.

Interview by Agrippine (UCL Nantes, UCL Ecology Commission)

[1]European Food Safety Authority

[2]National Council for Guidance on Animal and Plant Health Policy

[3]La Via Campesina is an international movement founded in 1993 that 
brings together millions of people working in agriculture, livestock 
farming, and other agricultural sectors. For more information, see 
https://viacampesina.org.

[3]The EU-Mercosur agreement is a free trade agreement between Europe 
and South America that will pit French and Brazilian livestock farmers 
against each other. Brazilian agribusiness is more competitive, 
particularly due to its weak environmental standards and the 
exploitation of its workers.

https://www.unioncommunistelibertaire.org/?Thomas-Gibert-Il-ne-s-agit-pas-seulement-d-une-crise-sanitaire-mais-aussi-d-une
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S  N E W S  S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en