FT get leaked speech...
- Thread starter B'o'B
- Start date
SilliamWhale
Member
That is not true Clive! The polluter doesn't pay for loads of industrys
- Location
- South Molton
Road salt, tyre dust, oil,...... all big pollutants
Lazy Sod
Member
- Location
- Warminster Wiltshire
How do they test the water? Are you talking about ditches and streams? They would have been lucky on my former farm. There are no ditches or streams, absolutely no water leaves the farm except for that which soaks downwards in the soil. Not in the Severn Trent area by the way and I've never heard of the scheme either.
- Location
- Shropshire
Rivers and large brooks that join it
- Location
- Lincolnshire
Will be interesting to see how they get on spreading sewage sludge in the brave new world.
- Location
- Lincolnshire
Just one more reason why I am glad I haven't got a big farm.
£10K off the bottom line would be within the realms of variation due to bad weather/sh!t prices/a big breakdown anyway.
We are already changing anyway. I don't see subs going as too big a deal.
I see weather, loss of actives and volatile prices as being more of a challenge to be honest.
£10K off the bottom line would be within the realms of variation due to bad weather/sh!t prices/a big breakdown anyway.
We are already changing anyway. I don't see subs going as too big a deal.
I see weather, loss of actives and volatile prices as being more of a challenge to be honest.
- Location
- Shropshire
The water plant next door to me has been applying the silt that they get from the water cleaning to the same block of land they own (circa 120 acres) for the last 30 years. They are applying around 15000 tonnes per year to fields that drain into their own clean water reservoir.
The EA keep reducing their application rate licence, but they keep on managing to spread it all on there.
Apparently It is very high in aluminium sulphate and zinc
Last edited:
Hindsight
Member
- Location
- Lincolnshire
Anglian Water run similar scheme in Lincolnshire drinking water catchments - aimed at reducing metaldehyde usage to protect the two resevoirs in NE Lincs. I have not been involved as area I cover is south of the catchment. Something similar operating around Rutland Water I believe. Of course the government solved the issues now by banning metaldehyde. So the payment to use Ferric not needed. And thus no payment required to farmers to prevent usage. It is much easier, and more effective to simply ban agchems that leach into water. And thus we see leaching data becoming increasingly important consideration in registration of new and reregistration of pesticides.
- Location
- Shropshire
It’s much easier to ban the release of raw sewage into the rivers, but the water companies are still given licences to do it.
We often talk about public money for public goods. What more important public good is there than clean water?
Like I said, the earlier suggestion is just my thoughts, but they asked my opinion and why the farming membership into their farm to tap scheme was dropping. I gave them my answer. If someone asks me what incentives they can give me to join a farming scheme, my answer 99% of the time is “pay me more money”
If they took the scheme away, I wouldn’t cry about it, I would just carry on with my current practices (ie not using metaldehyde), but that wasn’t what they asked me.
Hindsight
Member
- Location
- Lincolnshire
All 65 million UK residents will be required to take it back. After suitable treatment of course. Those living in flats will be paid to construct a window box. And the nation will begin to produce more home grown food. I just love it when a plan comes together. As Hannibal would say.
Agricultural Transition Plan 2021 to 2024
Our plans for agriculture in England from 1 January 2021, with an update for January 2024.www.gov.uk
The 60 pages
Thanks Sid,
They published during the speech, plenty of words, more detail on timings of the different aspects but still very little detail other than 50% reduction of BPS by 2024 for the up to £30,000 claimants and more for larger claims. Coming down quicker than anticipated and with no definite commitment beyond 2024.
Hindsight
Member
- Location
- Lincolnshire
Yes I concurr with your sentiment.
The Water Companies will argue that there are at times events which occur that am afraid will lead to unexpected discharges of raw sewage. To criminalise these events is not productive - cost is passed to customers, for what purpose. We can debate that approach. Over time government will expect technical solutions - and may legislate accordingly. Or ignore? WHo know. Same with you comparison with agriculture. We would argue there are circumstances which lead to unexpected and unpreventable discharges. And there are technical solutions, maybe. To take an example - Propyzamide application to rape. I walked a 40 hectare block of rape Friday and it will receive a routine application of propyzamide in next couple of weeks. In reality about 10 hectares needs routine treatment and 30 hectares requires none or just a patch or two. An outsider would correctly challenge me - why. Well lack of a reliable technical application solution really. But that will come - propelled by ongoing legislative constraints in use of propyzamide I expect. So carrot and stick. Just I am more cynical and suspect a tad more stick than carrot!
Best wishes,
- Location
- South Molton
I went for 15% YOY with a tender, but even that was optimistic!
- Location
- Essex
- Location
- Essex
When they levy such fines, it's usually stipulated that it doesn't feed through into household bills, which are regulated anyway to reduce profiteering.
It's government policy I believe? maybe not informed or in-law yet ?
muleman
Member
2025....there will be an increase in sub again when people are going hungry.
WRXppp
Member
- Location
- North Yorks
Bigger heap normaly means lower prices so how does that work?
that is not what prouctivity means