DEFRA liaising with TFF.

Jackov Altraids

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Devon
Nope, we don't want lots of little groups pushing their own agendas.
One large group pushing the main issues facing the majority...
We want a level playing field. No RT assurance schemes.
A campaign fighting the vegan/ anti livestock climate change nonsense.

One issue, one step at a time.

That would be good too.

What % of agreement from TFF would be required to make something TFF policy?
I doubt you would get 100% for anything.
 
This I why ultimately I don’t like State intervention in business. It never ends well. Paying the BPS was one thing, and if we had to have aid it was about as light a touch as possible. Paying us do stuff that certain pressure groups want us to do is a bad idea. I honestly think that encouraging “no till” on some farms will be the next British Leyland.
Trouble is the state has to intervene when we are using finite resources at an alarming rate.
 

Daniel

Member
You have highlighted exactly the point of consulting with DEFRA, they need contacts they can turn to for information because of their lack of real life experience.
You must have noticed on TV news that they have the same guest speaker on every time a certain subject is discussed, they know very little themselves so get the guest speaker along as they have used them in the past and know how to get hold of them. A good example of this is @Daniel off here at times seeming to be the UK's chicken expert, another would be Greta every time climate change is mentioned.
This is how it works so to have a bunch of switched on farmers being the ones that get contacted rather than Monbiot can only be a good thing. If you don't agree with their viewpoint go and get yourself noticed and see if you can be the go to guy.

The difference there is that I have at least worked in poultry farming for 17 years.

Whereas Greta plays truant and reads other people's scripts!
 

Jackov Altraids

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Devon
No you wouldn't. A surprising number like filling in RT templates. But surely the " Ecological damage done to farmland in the last 60 years " isn't the majority ?

As has been comprehensively discussed, the " Ecological damage done to farmland in the last 60 years " was not said to be representing the whole of TFF so whether there is a majority isn't hugely relevant.
"One large group pushing the main issues facing the majority" would need consensus.

I support both principles.

A large group should carry considerable clout whereas smaller groups can pursue any theme that is important to them while maybe not of concern to the majority.
 

Chris F

Staff Member
Media
Location
Hammerwich
I speak to Defra about every other day. But not really about policy, more about how they are communicating with Farmers. Not farming groups, farmers. They are trying to listen to every one of you who makes an opinion and then from that form some consensus of policy.

That can only be good. As each and every farmer gets a say. What they chose to say is up to them.

Yes groups have formed on TFF to give evidence at a parliamentary level. But even that evidence was largely about how communcation happens.

I can assure you the land agent who also gave evidence that day, only had one agenda, to make land agents more money. And that who is currently swaying policy at a government level.

More farming groups need to be set up, not less. Be it 50 or 100 of them. Farmers need to be in whitehall talking to civil servants, not pseudo farmers or land agents. If you follow the money in farming, it's not to farmers, its to the people who give evidence at these sorts of things. So the more farmers we have there, the better.

In my opinion.
 

delilah

Member
Specific to ELMS, Defra have their 'engagement group'.

https://defrafarming.blog.gov.uk/2021/07/27/the-environmental-land-management-engagement-group/

I guess any group formed out of TFF members could ask Defra if they could join that engagement group ?

My view is that education of the existing members of that group is more important. Anyone who wants to contact them to say what they think ELMS should look like, email addresses attached.

edit: To expand on why I believe you need to educate those groups, rather than set up any more groups:
Those groups have a mandate. Their membership.
You can't compete with a membership of 850,000 (Wildlife Trust), you need them on board.
 

Attachments

  • EEG Environmental land management engagement group.docx
    18.3 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:

Jimdog1

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Devon
I certainly wouldn't describe the current posse as "diverse"!
Can you not see that we already have a union that has a broad and diverse membership that seems incapable of getting any meaningful message across and currently appears to have rolled over to have its belly tickled? The tff logo is meaningless. Those farmers don't represent me but some of what they say I agree with and more importantly they have put their time to DO something.
 
The members on here who are singing the praises of the comedy act that have been "talking" to DEFRA are living in cloud cuckoo land if they think that the government are going to suddenly sit up and implement their ideas before those of quangos like RSPB, NE etc.

I certainly wouldn't describe the current posse as "diverse"!

Very much a group of like minded individuals.
Do you think there's a group of Scottish members headed up by Bossfarmer talking to the Scottish Government or are we leaving the 'comedy ' to NFUS?
 

goodevans

Member
I think it's a good idea. But my problem is the group that's doing it. They basically just populate one thread on the forum where they like to scoff at conventional farmers methods. I'm not saying what they practice is wrong. There are a lot of merits to there ideas in my opinion.

The majority are being represented by a minority. Its like all arable farmers being represented by a group of organic farmers.

I'm maybe wrong but I believe they will steer government policy to force the rest of us to do what they are doing and believe everyone else should be doing too.

I've several members of the group on ignore. This was before I knew they were in this group.
It's a bit like religion
 

MartinLines

Member
Arable Farmer
Specific to ELMS, Defra have their 'engagement group'.

https://defrafarming.blog.gov.uk/2021/07/27/the-environmental-land-management-engagement-group/

I guess any group formed out of TFF members could ask Defra if they could join that engagement group ?

My view is that education of the existing members of that group is more important. Anyone who wants to contact them to say what they think ELMS should look like, email addresses attached.

edit: To expand on why I believe you need to educate those groups, rather than set up any more groups:
Those groups have a mandate. Their membership.
You can't compete with a membership of 850,000 (Wildlife Trust), you need them on board.
As someone who sits on the ELM engagement group and a number of other government/Derfa groups I represent NFFN farmers. As a farmer and someone who talks to farmers across the country every day I always try and put the practical farming side across in these meetings. It's not about education but informing and working with all organisations. The NFFN already work with the conservation organisations across the UK demonstrating what farmers can do with the right support and encouragement. As a grass root farming network we get the opportunity to communicate to the members of of these organisations through their membership publications. it is only by finding way to work together will we achieve positive outcomes for farmers. Defra with their co-creation of ELM wants to hear from and work with as many farmers, groups/organisations as possible as no one organisations or farmer has all the right ideas.
 

Highland Mule

Member
Livestock Farmer
Do you think there's a group of Scottish members headed up by Bossfarmer talking to the Scottish Government or are we leaving the 'comedy ' to NFUS?

I reply to any consultation that I'm aware of and that I feel has the potential to significantly affect me - last one being the proposals around transport of animals and time constraints etc., as initially highlighted to us by @JP1. We don't need to have a fancy group name or the likes to get our opinion heard, but we do have to make the effort to open our mouth.


As an aside, it might interest some that I'm also actively advising that EFRA trial a five year long ban on all use of glyphosphate in Staffs to test the environmental benefit, although I'm doing that under the banner of The Farming Forum Responsible Farming Group.



(joke)
 

DRC

Member
That is wrong and quite insulting. Organisations like the Tenant Farmers Association, the National Sheep Association, the Countryside Landowners Association, Farmers Wildlife Action Group etc etc have been representing farmers in specific groups for decades at a governmental level...
That’s right. I’ve more faith in George Dunn from TFA representing my views than the NFU or the Holy( istic) 14.
 
As someone who sits on the ELM engagement group and a number of other government/Derfa groups I represent NFFN farmers. As a farmer and someone who talks to farmers across the country every day I always try and put the practical farming side across in these meetings. It's not about education but informing and working with all organisations. The NFFN already work with the conservation organisations across the UK demonstrating what farmers can do with the right support and encouragement. As a grass root farming network we get the opportunity to communicate to the members of of these organisations through their membership publications. it is only by finding way to work together will we achieve positive outcomes for farmers. Defra with their co-creation of ELM wants to hear from and work with as many farmers, groups/organisations as possible as no one organisations or farmer has all the right ideas.

Oh I don’t know……. I think @Kevtherev has all the ideas. Let him loose on defra, see what happens.

Vote for Kev.
 

delilah

Member
That’s right. I’ve more faith in George Dunn from TFA representing my views than the NFU or the Holy( istic) 14.

George Dunn's colleague is on the engagement group, I would send him some encouragement/ pointers as there don't seem to be many on here at the moment who are happy with what the SFI is looking like.

As someone who sits on the ELM engagement group and a number of other government/Derfa groups I represent NFFN farmers. As a farmer and someone who talks to farmers across the country every day I always try and put the practical farming side across in these meetings. It's not about education but informing and working with all organisations. The NFFN already work with the conservation organisations across the UK demonstrating what farmers can do with the right support and encouragement. As a grass root farming network we get the opportunity to communicate to the members of of these organisations through their membership publications. it is only by finding way to work together will we achieve positive outcomes for farmers. Defra with their co-creation of ELM wants to hear from and work with as many farmers, groups/organisations as possible as no one organisations or farmer has all the right ideas.

You have received my email then (y) . I can only repeat what I said in it: If the SFI doesn't work for farmers, then it doesn't work.
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 79 42.5%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 65 34.9%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 30 16.1%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 6 3.2%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,287
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top