Under the guise of "food security": The multi-billion shekel grab by Dichter and the agricultural lobby

At the government meeting on Sunday, ministers will be asked to vote on several critical matters: extending the declaration of a special situation in the home front, the annual declaration of a state of emergency, and they will also receive a review on the opening of the school year and the challenges of the education system. In between, they will also raise their hands for a seemingly innocent, seemingly urgent clause that Minister of Agriculture Avi Dichter is bringing to a vote: "Anchoring food security as a national goal, and approving the food security plan for the years 2026 to 2050."

It sounds patriotic, highlights the captivating words "food security," and offers a long-term strategic plan, except that it is a grab by the agricultural lobby and the minister, who has become its puppet. Just before the elections, and in the hope that no one will notice, they are seeking to pass a decision that could hurt the pockets of all of us and, above all, finally bury, by government decision, the reform in agriculture that was supposed to benefit farmers and the public.

Minister of Finance Bezalel Smotrich strongly opposes the move and is working to remove the clause from the government meeting's agenda. The Treasury opposes setting agricultural policy for many years before the structural changes that are supposed to introduce more competition into the industry and lower prices have been made.

A source familiar with the details tells Walla that Dichter decided to carry out a "targeted assassination" of the agricultural reform. "At first I thought he did it for electoral reasons, so that they would choose him in the primaries, but in light of his position on the Likud list, that is probably not the reason, but just him being operated by the agricultural lobby. Food security sounds great, but where is the removal of the barriers of plant protection? The quotas? The various councils? If this decision passes, it is an immediate increase in the price of the basic food basket of the Israeli citizen and fueling the cost of living."

His predecessor in the position, Oded Forer, and the then Minister of Finance Avigdor Lieberman, tried to change the system. Instead of protecting agriculture mainly through tariffs, quotas, and planning, they sought to gradually open the market to imports and competition, transfer direct support to farmers, and invest in technology, innovation, and mechanization. In the egg industry, a plan was also set for the gradual end of planning and quotas, alongside compensation for growers and investment in upgrading chicken coops.

The idea was to give farmers a safety net from the state, and at the same time expose them to competition that would force the industry to become more efficient. With the change of ministers, the direction changed: the continued reduction of tariffs was frozen, the opening of the market was stopped, and the transition to direct support was not completed. Dichter also did not hide his opinion on the move and called it "crazy."

During his term, Dichter increasingly became the minister of the farmers instead of the minister of agriculture. Time after time, he preferred to protect the growers instead of opening the industries to competition and demanding that they become more efficient. The result is well felt in the pocket: prices of fruits and vegetables that continue to climb, recurring shortages of dairy products, and agricultural industries that continue to enjoy protections, while the public pays the bill.

The food security plan includes quite a few necessary clauses: increasing local agricultural production, preserving land, ensuring water and workers, investing in research, innovation, and mechanization, strengthening the food industry, reducing food waste, and diversifying import sources. After a prolonged war, a climate crisis, and threats to trade routes, there is importance in Israel's ability to produce for itself a significant part of the food it consumes.

The plan seeks to inject billions into agriculture, ensure it has water, workers, and investments, and strengthen local production, but it almost does not touch the system itself. The quotas, planning mechanisms, production councils, and barriers in the field of plant protection remain in place, and the transition to direct support is pushed aside. Thus, the industry receives more money and more protections, without being required in return to have real efficiency, an increase in productivity, and more competition.

If the government determines that increasing local production is a national goal until 2050, it will be much harder in the future to reduce tariffs, open the market to imports, or change the planning mechanisms. Any such attempt could immediately be presented as a blow to food security.

Imports, the source says, although they create dependence on foreign countries, are an important tool for creating competition. When the option to buy produce from outside exists, the local producer is required to compete on both price and efficiency. Without this pressure, it is easier to continue protecting the industry and harder to make it become more efficient.

"No one is suggesting giving up on Israeli agriculture. Israel needs strong agriculture and local production capacity, certainly after October 7. But if the state is going to invest billions in the industry, it must demand in return more yield, more productivity, more competition, and lower prices."

Dichter: "We turned the equation around"

Response of the Minister of Agriculture and Food Security, MK Avi Dichter: "The inter-ministerial staff work to formulate the National Food Security Plan 2050 was spread over more than two years, and it was formulated by professional staff from six government ministries, the IDF, and other bodies, in order to ensure real food security in the face of the challenges of the climate crisis. The first swallow of the plan was fixed in a government decision more than two years ago, and its essence is the growth of agricultural produce by a third in the coming decade. This decision is being implemented in vegetables and is starting to give significant results in curbing price increases, mainly in tomatoes and later also in fruits.

"In the last decade, imports have grown fivefold and prices have continued to rise. We turned the equation around: local production is the central one and imports are a supporting pillar. We lowered water prices for farmers, contrary to the Treasury's position, and we are increasing water quantities to grow produce. We dramatically increased the number of foreign workers from 30,000 to 70,000, contrary to the Treasury's position. We are dealing with adding land for agriculture in peripheral areas and investing in R&D. This will lead to a decrease in prices. We are already seeing it in vegetables and over time we will see it in fruits as well. The plan also deals with food loss, which reaches a rate of more than 30% in certain vegetables and fruits, and with encouraging the consumption of healthy food. The Treasury's opposition to the Ministry of Agriculture's plans has been baseless in recent years and is without professional basis even today."