ELMS: Parliamentary call for evidence

[BrianV]

It's £3 Billion a year, tops. What is the rural tourism economy worth ? How much does it cost to remove agricultural pollutants from drinking water ? If they get the design of ELMS right, then it will represent outstanding value for money for the public.

edit: Right on cue, just seen this in the sidebar on here:

https://storymaps.arcgis.com/collections/6730f10b64184200b171a57750890643?item=1

If you want to improve river water might not a good start be made by banning all sewage sludge being spread on farmland as the pollutants it contains are 10 times worse than farmyard dung which is basically grass, then of course there is sewage plants overflows, let’s see how they cope with that for a start!

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

If you want to improve river water might not a good start be made by banning all sewage sludge being spread on farmland as the pollutants it contains are 10 times worse than farmyard dung which is basically grass, then of course there is sewage plants overflows, let’s see how they cope with that for a start!

I read yesterday that, in England at least, 60% of rivers are polluted by agriculture and 50% by sewage works discharges (and 40% by urban area discharges despite urban areas only covering >5% of England).

It would be useful to know how the actual volume or concentrations compare, to compare the impacts of each rather than the lengths of river affected.

We farmers do need to clean up our act on water pollution but no more than the rest of society.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Could you ask one of the folks you dealt with to clarify this ? It would seem odd if it is a straight rerun, we should know why this one follows in such quick succession.

edit: If the straight and honest answer is "the first one told us what the problems are with ELMS as it stands, we now want to know what you instead think it should look like" then great. There has been enough energy put into dismantling what it currently looks like, its time for folks to put forward their constructive proposals to Govt.

Here we go. Jonathan has pointed out what we all missed:

This inquiry is being run by the Public Accounts Committee while the previous one was by the EFRA Committee.

 

[delilah]

So this enquiry is following on from the NAO report. I wrote to the NAO and their reply was useful in that they really don't mince their words on where this is all at.
However, they did make it clear that their remit is to look at the delivery process, value for money etc, but not to interfere in the actual structure of the scheme.
On that basis, i'm not sure what the point of this enquiry is, or what the point would be in contributing to it. I don't want to comment on what poor value for money ELMS in its current structure would be, I want to comment on how the structure needs changing.

 

[farmerm]

So this enquiry is following on from the NAO report. I wrote to the NAO and their reply was useful in that they really don't mince their words on where this is all at.
However, they did make it clear that their remit is to look at the delivery process, value for money etc, but not to interfere in the actual structure of the scheme.
On that basis, i'm not sure what the point of this enquiry is, or what the point would be in contributing to it. I don't want to comment on what poor value for money ELMS in its current structure would be, I want to comment on how the structure needs changing.

"value for money" is rather subjective... depending on the criteria used to determine "value" there is arguably a risk that no system of payment for either farm subs or environmental payments would meet a value for money test.

 

[delilah]

"value for money" is rather subjective... depending on the criteria used to determine "value" there is arguably a risk that no system of payment for either farm subs or environmental payments would meet a value for money test.

There's a few that could be used in relation to ELMS:
- % spent on admin.
- Return on investment. £1 spent on water course margins produces £x in reduced water clean up charges.
- Multiplier effect. £1 spent on maintaining farming in LFA's generates £x for tourism.

But, as said, do we want to have that conversation with regards what ELMS currently looks like ? Or do we want to change what it looks like ?

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

There's a few that could be used in relation to ELMS:
- % spent on admin.
- Return on investment. £1 spent on water course margins produces £x in reduced water clean up charges.
- Multiplier effect. £1 spent on maintaining farming in LFA's generates £x for tourism.

But, as said, do we want to have that conversation with regards what ELMS currently looks like ? Or do we want to change what it looks like ?

That's exactly the approach that this inquiry will want to hear.

How much will ELM cost to deliver?
What benefits will it deliver (in £, biodiversity, water quality improvement, flood risk mitigation, public access benefit etc)?
Is there a more efficient and effective option and, if so, what?
Are the timescales and terms of engagement appropriate?
What are the risks and how are they being managed?

 

[delilah]

That's exactly the approach that this inquiry will want to hear.

How much will ELM cost to deliver?
What benefits will it deliver (in £, biodiversity, water quality improvement, flood risk mitigation, public access benefit etc)?
Is there a more efficient and effective option and, if so, what?
Are the timescales and terms of engagement appropriate?
What are the risks and how are they being managed?

But do we even want to engage with regards what it currently looks like ? Is that to legitimize it ?
If folks know where they want their business and the industry to go, and ELMS as it stands works for them, then great, but for me we can't get there from here.

 

[Henarar]

But do we even want to engage with regards what it currently looks like ? Is that to legitimize it ?
If folks know where they want their business and the industry to go, and ELMS as it stands works for them, then great, but for me we can't get there from here.

tell them that then and why

 

[delilah]

tell them that then and why

Sure, but I told the NAO, and they said it was outside their remit. But, yes, costs nothing to tell them anyway.

 

[Henarar]

Sure, but I told the NAO, and they said it was outside their remit. But, yes, costs nothing to tell them anyway.

well tell them then in no uncertain terms
time some bugger did

 

[delilah]

well tell them then in no uncertain terms
time some bugger did

can I call them muppets ?

 

[Henarar]

can I call them muppets ?

That will sound quite tame in comparison to some insults flying around of late so yeah crack on

 

[Jackov Altraids]

I read yesterday that, in England at least, 60% of rivers are polluted by agriculture and 50% by sewage works discharges (and 40% by urban area discharges despite urban areas only covering >5% of England).

It would be useful to know how the actual volume or concentrations compare, to compare the impacts of each rather than the lengths of river affected.

We farmers do need to clean up our act on water pollution but no more than the rest of society.

I really don't wish to seem facetious, but seeing the colour of the local waterways yesterday after the first considerable amount of rain for a prolonged period, I was wondering if it is actually right or natural that the water running should be 'clean'?

There is a considerable difference in pollutants through natural processes and man created discharges.

I'm sure the water would have failed many tests yesterday but would be entirely 'natural'.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

I really don't wish to seem facetious, but seeing the colour of the local waterways yesterday after the first considerable amount of rain for a prolonged period, I was wondering if it is actually right or natural that the water running should be 'clean'?

There is a considerable difference in pollutants through natural processes and man created discharges.

I'm sure the water would have failed many tests yesterday but would be entirely 'natural'.

Erosion is a natural process. In some catchments the erosion of river banks, leading to deeply discoloured water and to siltation downstream, is entirely normal. Land management over the last half century and longer has made it MUCH worse though, particularly soil loss from the exposed unstable surface of cultivated fields.

None of this is as straightforward as some like to make out.... Nature simply isn't like that.

 

[ollie989898]

There's a few that could be used in relation to ELMS:
- % spent on admin.
- Return on investment. £1 spent on water course margins produces £x in reduced water clean up charges.
- Multiplier effect. £1 spent on maintaining farming in LFA's generates £x for tourism.

But, as said, do we want to have that conversation with regards what ELMS currently looks like ? Or do we want to change what it looks like ?

Tourism my chuff. Tourism will continue whether UK Ag PLC gets given a cent or not.

Any other industry caught polluting the environment would be fined, not paid money to avoid doing it!

 

[delilah]

Tourism my chuff. Tourism will continue whether UK Ag PLC gets given a cent or not.

Could you get that in writing from a tourism officer for an SDA area in which PP is the predominant land use ?

 

[wanton dwarf]

I read yesterday that, in England at least, 60% of rivers are polluted by agriculture and 50% by sewage works discharges (and 40% by urban area discharges despite urban areas only covering >5% of England).

It would be useful to know how the actual volume or concentrations compare, to compare the impacts of each rather than the lengths of river affected.

We farmers do need to clean up our act on water pollution but no more than the rest of society.

I don't get this constant self fllagelation.

We have a 300 acre industrial estate being put up near us. The site was previously an arable farm, clay based soil. So during all the autumn and winter heavy rains that site leaked soils plus god knows what chemicals and oils.

I did speak in passing to an EA officer about it - as they were talking about a neighbours ploughing. The soil supposedly contained particles so small a seperation pond was useless. Now thinking about it now that seems like so much BS. We don't see water failing to drop soluable particles, it's a matter of time and biology to get the seperation.

In my experience the EA are controlled by Central Government, if they say jump the EA says how high ?

So going back to your figures, where is the evidence that 60% of Rivers are polluted by Agriculture. I'd like to check my local river and see if they are lying again.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

I don't get this constant self fllagelation.

We have a 300 acre industrial estate being put up near us. The site was previously an arable farm, clay based soil. So during all the autumn and winter heavy rains that site leaked soils plus god knows what chemicals and oils.

I did speak in passing to an EA officer about it - as they were talking about a neighbours ploughing. The soil supposedly contained particles so small a seperation pond was useless. Now thinking about it now that seems like so much BS. We don't see water failing to drop soluable particles, it's a matter of time and biology to get the seperation.

In my experience the EA are controlled by Central Government, if they say jump the EA says how high ?

So going back to your figures, where is the evidence that 60% of Rivers are polluted by Agriculture. I'd like to check my local river and see if they are lying again.

That was a quote from the EA themselves. I'll look it out....

 

[Courier]

I still fail to see where the money is coming from to pay all of this.the country is near bankrupt after COVID anyway and public don’t want to see what they perceive as rich farmers getting money for doing very little
nick…

Aaah, but it was promised..