The solution to food inflation is “not on such a small and ill-defined basket”, in particular scolded AFP on Wednesday UFC-Que Choisir.
The anti-inflation basket on which the government is working with large retailers is « a gadget » and the solution to food inflation is not “not on such a small and ill-defined basket”scolded Wednesday with AFP the UFC-Que Choisir.
“How could 50 products meet the diversity of needs according to the types of consumers? »noted Wednesday with AFP Olivier Andrault, in charge of agriculture / food for the consumer association.
A large area can count “several hundred thousand references”he pointed out.
In addition, explained Mr. Andrault, this basket is made up on the voluntary basis of the brands and the commitments are weak as to the price of the products making up the basket.
“In the absence of regulatory definition of these prices, an allegedly ‘broken’ price could only be the usual price. There is no commitment on the absence of price changes, nor on the level of comparability between products, the only way to ensure competition between brands and moderation of margins.tance M. Andrault.
“If such a distributor puts a commitment on 1 kg of spaghetti and the other on 250 g of pasta shells, how to compare them? »he regrets.
The office of the Minister Delegate in particular for Trade Olivia Grégoire defended on Wednesday an anti-inflation basket comprising products from around fifty categories “best value for money”.
To AFP in early February, the same source said “imagine a category of fresh seasonal fruits and vegetables, in which one brand can offer mandarins and another, another food”.
The vagueness also persists on the categories of products contained in the basket. It should include food and non-food products, fresh, frozen products, groceries, cleanliness or hygiene products, but the exact list of categories concerned is still in the arbitration phase, said the firm. of Ms. Grégoire on Wednesday, hoping to achieve this at the end of the week.
M. Andrault deems qu’a contrario, “a measure that could be put in place” to alleviate the burden of current food inflation “is the immediate removal of the increase in the resale at a loss threshold”.
This provision, adopted as part of the Egalim 1 law intended to protect farmers’ income, obliges supermarkets to sell food products at least 10% more expensive than the price at which they bought it.
The stated objective was to fight against the loss of income for agricultural producers. But, according to parliamentary evaluation work, the planned measure “on an experimental basis”
“seems to have only very partially achieved its objective”.
