Govt guarantees Farm Sub's...

[Danllan]

Mr Hammond has stated, unambiguously, that the ag' sub levels will remain as they are and continue. Oddly enough, I believe him.

 

[Billhook]

Mr Hammond has stated, unambiguously, that the ag' sub levels will remain as they are and continue. Oddly enough, I believe him.

4 billion as well when I thought that the EU only gave us 3 billion.
Let us hope that it is targeted in a sensible manner

 

[jendan]

4 billion as well when I thought that the EU only gave us 3 billion.
Let us hope that it is targeted in a sensible manner

..........Talk about some farmers being naive and gullible! We wont be out till 2020. This isnt going to cost the government anything. Its the trade deals after that will matter.

 

[GTB]

..........Talk about some farmers being naive and gullible! We wont be out till 2020. This isnt going to cost the government anything. Its the trade deals after that will matter.

+1

 

[Henarar]

..........Talk about some farmers being naive and gullible! We wont be out till 2020. This isnt going to cost the government anything. Its the trade deals after that will matter.

why are you talking about that ?

 

[czechmate]

Good news indeed.
I hope it gives my buyer (sale agreed in January) the confidence to actually urm, buy

 

[Old McDonald]

why are you talking about that ?

Because he is a remainder still and hopes the truth will all go away. Any excuse to knock those of us who believe that the new govt will do the right thing.

I like the way he has extended us leaving to 2020. That means Art 50 will not be triggered until 2018. Wonder how he knows that?

 

[caveman]

Because he is a remainder still and hopes the truth will all go away. Any excuse to knock those of us who believe that the new govt will do the right thing.

I like the way he has extended us leaving to 2020. That means Art 50 will not be triggered until 2018. Wonder how he knows that?

Probably more to do with the fact that all are farming to the system that is set up untill 2020.
More a guarantee that the scheme will be seen through, no matter what date we actually leave.
Of far more concern should be........ What happens after the current scheme ends.

 

[gone up the hill]

..........Talk about some farmers being naive and gullible! We wont be out till 2020. This isnt going to cost the government anything. Its the trade deals after that will matter.

We will be out at the start of 2019, I think May will trigger article 50 on the 1st Jan 2017, if she leaves it much longer than that there will be riots on the streets for sure.

And once its triggered the UK has to leave at the end of two years regardless of any trade talks etc.

Subs in their current form will therefore continue upto and including 2018, for 2019 ( assuming the above ) the likelihood imo is that the Gov will pay the BPS as per the next two years and then a new scheme will start in 2020 which will be a token area payment of £30/40 acre and the rest in stewardship type payments taking it upto £70/80 acre if you take up all the options.

 

[Henarar]

..........Talk about some farmers being naive and gullible

Because he is a remainder still and hopes the truth will all go away. Any excuse to knock those of us who believe that the new govt will do the right thing.

I like the way he has extended us leaving to 2020. That means Art 50 will not be triggered until 2018. Wonder how he knows that?

I thought that the current system would run to 2020 anyway, as I said it has to stay till we actually leave and that seems like its going to be two years from when we get round to telling the EU lot officially of our intention and I would think as there would only be one year at most left of till 2020 we just as well see the current system out

I was more wondering why he thought that farmers were naïve and gullible ? of why he was talking about it anyway

perhaps you are right and it is just a chance to knock those that are not so naïve and gullible as to want to end up where the EU wants to take us

 

[Billhook]

..........Talk about some farmers being naive and gullible! We wont be out till 2020. This isnt going to cost the government anything. Its the trade deals after that will matter.

The important thing at the moment is that it sends the right signals for inspiring a bit of confidence when the last thing I read you doomers saying was that no way would a Conservative government continue a subsidy system.

Just remind yourselves once more of the potential dangers of voting to remain in the EU. If the vote had been to remain the EU would have seen it as an opportunity to ramp up the ever closer agenda. We would have been forced to join the Euro which we were only allowed to opt out of as a temporary measure until "financial conditions were right" which they apparently are now,. Joining the Euro would have far more damaging consequences to our economy than any trade hurdles. We would be forced to pay to bail out the countries with massive debts most of which have been hidden.
They would ramp up the legislation overruling our own and we would be well on the way to being a small part of a totalitarian state.

Now at least we can vote in and out the politicians whose policies we like or not and they cannot hide behind the EU any more, same goes for the civil service.

Way above all the financial arguments which are not clear at all, and the immigration /free movement issues, is the right to self determination which at least is clear, and what I voted for.

Some people are prepared to be shafted for financial gain. Most other people would rather take a financial hit or even die before they would prostitute themselves

 

[jendan]

Probably more to do with the fact that all are farming to the system that is set up untill 2020.
More a guarantee that the scheme will be seen through, no matter what date we actually leave.
Of far more concern should be........ What happens after the current scheme ends.

Thats exactly what i said! Its the trade deals after that will matter.

 

[caveman]

Thats exactly what i said! Its the trade deals after that will matter.

We have plenty of trade deals to be going on with..... With other member states and with other countries, as part of the EU.
These will all carry on if the other parties see sense.
But we are now free to start negotiating other deals..... no matter whether or not the control freaks say we can't.

 

[jendan]

Because he is a remainder still and hopes the truth will all go away. Any excuse to knock those of us who believe that the new govt will do the right thing.

I like the way he has extended us leaving to 2020. That means Art 50 will not be triggered until 2018. Wonder how he knows that?

Why would you believe anything a politician tells you? They have already said they wont do article 50 until into 2017. The shortest time they think it will take is 2 years. So we will be well into 2019. Nearly all of these things run over time,a few more months and we are into 2020. At most they will just have to honour 1 years BSP. There is no mention at all of what comes after.

 

[jendan]

We will be out at the start of 2019, I think May will trigger article 50 on the 1st Jan 2017, if she leaves it much longer than that there will be riots on the streets for sure.

And once its triggered the UK has to leave at the end of two years regardless of any trade talks etc.

Subs in their current form will therefore continue upto and including 2018, for 2019 ( assuming the above ) the likelihood imo is that the Gov will pay the BPS as per the next two years and then a new scheme will start in 2020 which will be a token area payment of £30/40 acre and the rest in stewardship type payments taking it upto £70/80 acre if you take up all the options.

There will not be riots on the streets unless far right wing groups get involved with their own agenda. But your summing up of post 2020 is feasible,and possibly what they might go for,although i would be on the lowest side of your figures.

 

[Fenboy3]

We have plenty of trade deals to be going on with..... With other member states and with other countries, as part of the EU.
These will all carry on if the other parties see sense.
But we are now free to start negotiating other deals..... no matter whether or not the control freaks say we can't.

Ah the old trade deal conundrum I don't see how or why these deals will continue under the same terms as they have with the eu. In any negotiation you have to look at the relative strengths of the parties and I would respectfully suggest that the eu deals will in all likelihood be better than ones in which we can negotiate bearing in mind the size of the market that is on offer of 460 million consumers as opposed to 65 million and as a result these 50 other countries the eu has trade deals with would want a better deal with us than currently exists. We can only hope you are right Click

 

[RobFZS]

Ah the old trade deal conundrum I don't see how or why these deals will continue under the same terms as they have with the eu. In any negotiation you have to look at the relative strengths of the parties and I would respectfully suggest that the eu deals will in all likelihood be better than ones in which we can negotiate bearing in mind the size of the market that is on offer of 460 million consumers as opposed to 65 million and as a result these 50 other countries the eu has trade deals with would want a better deal with us than currently exists. We can only hope you are right Click

But the eu has not got any trade deals in place with any massive economies, so what has any of the deals they have in place with anyone else, got to gain? we will always be the biggest economy, trade between Britain and these 50 other countries is happening now, why would UK + these non-EU countries not apply principle of continuity to the trade deal already in place?

how many of the 460 million consumers actually have a job for a start to actually pay for goods coming from other countries? your point would have made genuine sense if the eu had a deal with china, if it had a deal with japan, if it had a deal with the USA, but it does not.

i heard all these arguments before the ref, it's totally pointless going down this path, we are here now, saying we cant helps no one,

inb4 adding balance, adding balance to what? the argument is done, we either make these deals, or we go bust, and you will be coming down with us, so make the most of it.

 

[caveman]

Ah the old trade deal conundrum I don't see how or why these deals will continue under the same terms as they have with the eu. In any negotiation you have to look at the relative strengths of the parties and I would respectfully suggest that the eu deals will in all likelihood be better than ones in which we can negotiate bearing in mind the size of the market that is on offer of 460 million consumers as opposed to 65 million and as a result these 50 other countries the eu has trade deals with would want a better deal with us than currently exists. We can only hope you are right Click

460 million customers and probably only about 50 million of those can afford to buy anything we produce

 

[Fenboy3]

460 million customers and probably only about 50 million of those can afford to buy anything we produce

You mean Germany France Italy Spain Holland Belgium Austria about 300 m there without the Scandinavians etc

 

[Fenboy3]

Yo

But the eu has not got any trade deals in place with any massive economies, so what has any of the deals they have in place with anyone else, got to gain? we will always be the biggest economy, trade between Britain and these 50 other countries is happening now, why would UK + these non-EU countries not apply principle of continuity to the trade deal already in place?

how many of the 460 million consumers actually have a job for a start to actually pay for goods coming from other countries? your point would have made genuine sense if the eu had a deal with china, if it had a deal with japan, if it had a deal with the USA, but it does not.

i heard all these arguments before the ref, it's totally pointless going down this path, we are here now, saying we cant helps no one,

inb4 adding balance, adding balance to what? the argument is done, we either make these deals, or we go bust, and you will be coming down with us, so make the most of it.

Your last para just backs up what I am saying we have to make these trade deals which puts us in poor negotiating position