James Dyson’s message to the Govt

[kiwi pom]

It isn't an 'anti-freezer fact'. It is a 'there's nothing wrong our side of the farm gate' fact. It is to highlight where the environmental damage is caused in the food chain.



Every McDonalds burger served in the UK is produced in Scunthorpe. Go work out the food miles on that one.

It is the same for every basic foodstuff. Year on year, fewer producers supplying fewer processors supplying fewer retailers, with the only thing increasing being the food miles.

And that is the Dyson model. To be one of that handful of producers. I am not blaming him as a businessman, he is responding to the marketplace. What I am saying is that there is nothing environmental about it and he shouldn't claim that there is. If he wanted to be eco he would be disrupting the marketplace. He would be opening food stores in the poorest boroughs in England and stocking them from local farms. But that would be too much like hard work, with less tax benefits than buying up farmland.

Pretty arrogant to think you're not doing anything wrong.
To use your McDonalds example all the chips are probably made in only a couple of places too. It's efficient and allows them to keep the prices they charge their customers low.
I'm sure they'd love to hear from you about how to do it cheaper, but I suspect you're saying they shouldn't exist in the first place.
If Dyson opened loads of local shops in the UK towns and cities today, where would he get the produce from?
What do you produce?

 

[kiwi pom]

Grumpy take on the situation.

I agree with some of what Dyson said, although I'm not sure the technology grants will be money well spent. That seems to be a pile it high and sell it cheap answer.

Labelling and levelling up of standards Vs imports I agree with. (Levelling up, or down, to be discussed)

The general principle of food security and displacing imports seems a good goal. Why import bacon when we could produce it ourselves? Red Tractor probably has something to answer for with that example.

But...

If he was the highest bidder to secure 33,000 acres, to shelter cash from inheritance tax, that's pushed the price of land beyond what commercial farmers can pay. So those neighbours are stuck on their same acreage and can't afford to expand. So they can't easily get more efficient by scale. Suppose that's life. Those with more cash can buy things.

From a farmers point of view, cheaper land makes expansion easier. £10k+ per acre makes expansion difficult when your net margin is £150/acre.

Dyson had a pile of cash to buy things with. Good on him. That's fine. He's made the money elsewhere. No problem.

I don't see anything wrong with importing or exporting food. Land should be used for what it is most suited for. In Ag terms produce what you are best at and sell it to the highest bidder, home or abroad and import whatever is harder to grow domestically.
At least Dyson shows an interest in his farms. More than some folk who sink money into land.

 

[Exfarmer]

I don't see anything wrong with importing or exporting food. Land should be used for what it is most suited for. In Ag terms produce what you are best at and sell it to the highest bidder, home or abroad and import whatever is harder to grow domestically.
At least Dyson shows an interest in his farms. More than some folk who sink money into land.

Totally agree, there are large estates round here where the owners have zero interest in the land, it is just seen as a tax free vehicle to keep the value over for the next generation. It does have the advantage for the local contractors who make there living farming it, but sadly they rarely have the interest or the spare cash to farm it as an owner occupier such as Dyson does. This is not to criticise those guys who are normally working to very tight margins since the Land agent will soon find another if the returns are not there

 

[Grass And Grain]

I don't see anything wrong with importing or exporting food. Land should be used for what it is most suited for. In Ag terms produce what you are best at and sell it to the highest bidder, home or abroad and import whatever is harder to grow domestically.
At least Dyson shows an interest in his farms. More than some folk who sink money into land.

If it's cheaper to grow strawberries in Spain during October, then it makes sense to import.

However, for things you can grow in the UK, it's annoying if you farm in a country which piles expensive regulation on you, then imports from lower regulation competitor countries. It's even more annoying if your own farming union voluntarily pile even more costs on their own farmers.

Balance of payments isn't something to ignore.

 

[JP1]

Most farms are "cottage industries", though?

We're a resourceful and fantastic skill set who not only know how to grow food but many other skills that are required to maintain the infrastructure be that our buildings, machines or landscape environment

 

[digger64]

George Eustace was all for farmers getting paid by the market and not the taxpayer.

Until this happens farming or farming's views will not be valued - BPS has effectively paid to rent nearly the whole of UK farmland .
You cant have it both ways

 

[digger64]

That's what @farmerclare says when she is driving our 1958 MF35 and fergi spud planter [height of technology] with me on the back madly throwing spuds down the spouts.
I wonder if old greedy Dyson uses such new fangled methods

I bet your return on capital invested is vastely better % than his !

 

[honeyend]

Its back to the idea, that big companies can control UK resources. Large farms with large inputs will end up by being owned by overseas companies for have whole point to to squeeze as much juice out of the orange as possible.
We have lost control of our water and power supply, because overseas companies control it, the UK cannot even tax their profits.

Interest rates are now going up, the pound has fallen against the dollar, so anything we import and have to borrow money for is going to be expensive. This will gradely effect everyone who has borrowing. So eventually if may mean that we will be unable to afford to import food, which is cheap enough for people to buy.
So we increase production, but if fuel costs, fertilizer and sprays are expensive, it's still going to be more expensive food.

No one has been bothered about where we get our food or power from, because we earned the money as a country to buy from somewhere else, that seems to be coming to an end. Any good manager plans for the future, and the what ifs, but at least for twelve years possibly longer, long term planning has just been ignored. When you think about it its a nonsense that we are constantly planning for a nuclear war, but could not even plan to get enough chemicals for water treatment, or store enough gas, or be buying gas we own at world prices.

 

[kiwi pom]

If it's cheaper to grow strawberries in Spain during October, then it makes sense to import.

However, for things you can grow in the UK, it's annoying if you farm in a country which piles expensive regulation on you, then imports from lower regulation competitor countries. It's even more annoying if your own farming union voluntarily pile even more costs on their own farmers.

Balance of payments isn't something to ignore.

I think just about all farmers regardless of country have problems and many claim they have more issues than other countries, don't they?

 

[sjt01]

I think just about all farmers regardless of country have problems and many claim they have more issues than other countries, don't they?

Cheap food keeps politicians in power. Especially in Africa.
A friend of mine worked in tobacco. When Idi Amin was ousted, he was flown in as well as brewery experts, as without booze and fags there would soon have been another coup.

 

[Ceri]

Its back to the idea, that big companies can control UK resources. Large farms with large inputs will end up by being owned by overseas companies for have whole point to to squeeze as much juice out of the orange as possible.
We have lost control of our water and power supply, because overseas companies control it, the UK cannot even tax their profits.

Interest rates are now going up, the pound has fallen against the dollar, so anything we import and have to borrow money for is going to be expensive. This will gradely effect everyone who has borrowing. So eventually if may mean that we will be unable to afford to import food, which is cheap enough for people to buy.
So we increase production, but if fuel costs, fertilizer and sprays are expensive, it's still going to be more expensive food.

No one has been bothered about where we get our food or power from, because we earned the money as a country to buy from somewhere else, that seems to be coming to an end. Any good manager plans for the future, and the what ifs, but at least for twelve years possibly longer, long term planning has just been ignored. When you think about it its a nonsense that we are constantly planning for a nuclear war, but could not even plan to get enough chemicals for water treatment, or store enough gas, or be buying gas we own at world prices.

Well said…….

 

[Grass And Grain]

I think just about all farmers regardless of country have problems and many claim they have more issues than other countries, don't they?

Yea, probably right.

I'd guess Denmark and Netherlands have tighter nitrogen and phosphorus controls than UK. Maybe we've got more protection of hedgerows which constrains field size.

NZ has a good climate, so can probably produce beef and lamb competitively.

Food security does come onto it though, as does employment, environment and landscape use.

We could say, for example, no sub for UK farmers and no quotas or tariffs for South American beef or lamb from NZ (don't know if there are quotas or tariffs for NZ lamb?). Then our grasslands are not economic so they go to scrub or trees.

The above is fine until some nutter of a world leader starts torpedoing our supply boats. No-one can ever discount that risk.

If I was Prime Minister of this country, it would be very irresponsible to rely totally on food imports. There's near on 70 million people reliant on our government's food policy.

Makes £3 billion of agricultural subsidy look cost effective imho.

 

[Ffermer Bach]

It isn't an 'anti-freezer fact'. It is a 'there's nothing wrong our side of the farm gate' fact. It is to highlight where the environmental damage is caused in the food chain.



Every McDonalds burger served in the UK is produced in Scunthorpe. Go work out the food miles on that one.

It is the same for every basic foodstuff. Year on year, fewer producers supplying fewer processors supplying fewer retailers, with the only thing increasing being the food miles.

And that is the Dyson model. To be one of that handful of producers. I am not blaming him as a businessman, he is responding to the marketplace. What I am saying is that there is nothing environmental about it and he shouldn't claim that there is. If he wanted to be eco he would be disrupting the marketplace. He would be opening food stores in the poorest boroughs in England and stocking them from local farms. But that would be too much like hard work, with less tax benefits than buying up farmland.

I disagree, I think there are problems both sides of the farm gate. A lot of agricultural practices are not good for the environment or for that matter for the rural communities. Both these problems are caused by government policies. But there are also problems with as you say, food distribution etc, to my mind where the current system is really weak is that it is not robust if there is a problem, if all food comes through a small number of distribution centres, problem in one centre causes a big problem to society.

 

[delilah]

Pretty arrogant to think you're not doing anything wrong.

It is a statement of fact. In terms of GHG emissions - because that is, we are told, the biggie - nothing I or any other primary producer gets up to makes a blind bit of difference. Unless, of course, you have some facts to show otherwise.

To use your McDonalds example all the chips are probably made in only a couple of places too. It's efficient and allows them to keep the prices they charge their customers low.
I'm sure they'd love to hear from you about how to do it cheaper, but I suspect you're saying they shouldn't exist in the first place.

Efficient in terms of what ? Calories of food provided in proportion to calories of oil consumed ? Because by that measure it is grossly inefficient. It all rides on the back of cheap oil.

If Dyson opened loads of local shops in the UK towns and cities today, where would he get the produce from?

The local and regional infrastructure that he would stimulate; bakeries, dairies, abattoirs. We have spent the last 50 years dismantling that infrastructure. We wont put it back in place overnight. But people like Dyson are better placed than most to kick start it. And if he genuinely cared about food, farming and the environment, that is what he would do rather than buying farmland.

What do you produce?

Cereals, osr, beef, pork, lamb.

edit: and you ?

 

[Ffermer Bach]

Efficient in terms of what ? Calories of food provided in proportion to calories of oil consumed ? Because by that measure it is grossly inefficient. It all rides on the back of cheap oil.

I think by that metric (which after all must be the most important), small scale allotment gardening and organic farming are the most efficient methods of producing food, probably upland stock farming would also be one of the most efficient ways of producing food too. Could we produce all our food this way, not sure, but oil is going to run out or become more and more expensive, so I guess we will find out in the end.

 

[Huno]

It is a statement of fact. In terms of GHG emissions - because that is, we are told, the biggie - nothing I or any other primary producer gets up to makes a blind bit of difference. Unless, of course, you have some facts to show otherwise.



Efficient in terms of what ? Calories of food provided in proportion to calories of oil consumed ? Because by that measure it is grossly inefficient. It all rides on the back of cheap oil.



The local and regional infrastructure that he would stimulate; bakeries, dairies, abattoirs. We have spent the last 50 years dismantling that infrastructure. We wont put it back in place overnight. But people like Dyson are better placed than most to kick start it. And if he genuinely cared about food, farming and the environment, that is what he would do rather than buying farmland.



Cereals, osr, beef, pork, lamb.

edit: and you ?

What do you know about the efficiencies of the global sea freight and shipping industry Delilah? The levels of efficiency in that sector put our sector to shame in comparison?

 

[Huno]

What do you know about the efficiencies of the global sea freight and shipping industry Delilah? The levels of efficiency in that sector put our sector to shame in comparison?

Prehaps if we shipped more food and less plastic junk for example that would be a better starting point??

 

[delilah]

What do you know about the efficiencies of the global sea freight and shipping industry Delilah? The levels of efficiency in that sector put our sector to shame in comparison?

I know the cows don't walk onto the ship at one end and walk off at the other. That's enough for me.

 

[Huno]

I know the cows don't walk onto the ship at one end and walk off at the other. That's enough for me.

They do when shipped from Australia to the Middle East, mainly sheep for Hallal

 

[delilah]

They do when shipped from Australia to the Middle East, mainly sheep for Hallal

What, they walk them to the docks ? Do they f@ck.