Is Defra reckless and short sighted cutting Farm BPS payments and replacing with lower production environmental whilst the third world starve?

[ollie989898]

It's not your job to feed the world. It's your job to make a bit of money and keep your farm in a similar or better to state than when you took it on. End of story. I am sort of glad that world events have now caught up and blown ridiculous UK/EU agricultural policies to smithereens. Governments don't have a clue about business and they don't have a clue about farming. Ignore Deathra's few shillings and get on with life.

I find it ironic that so many people are calling for BPS or the reintroduction of headage or area payments- yeah, because they didn't half fudge the industry down the pan for the last 40 years did they?

Speaking solely as a tax payer: money should not be sent to landowners to plant fudging trees, nor grow wheat, nor keep animals. If these activities are not commercially viable as they stand, they should not be carried out. End of fudging story. I don't know what folk on this forum are finding time to complain about, we all know food has been far too cheap for decades. Now there is a correction happening. And strangely, people are waking the fudge up to the fact that farming and food production is pretty damned important and food should not be treated like an endless fountain of trash that you can flog to people in such amounts they literally die from it.

 

[glasshouse]

It's not your job to feed the world. It's your job to make a bit of money and keep your farm in a similar or better to state than when you took it on. End of story. I am sort of glad that world events have now caught up and blown ridiculous UK/EU agricultural policies to smithereens. Governments don't have a clue about business and they don't have a clue about farming. Ignore Deathra's few shillings and get on with life.

I find it ironic that so many people are calling for BPS or the reintroduction of headage or area payments- yeah, because they didn't half fudge the industry down the pan for the last 40 years did they?

Speaking solely as a tax payer: money should not be sent to landowners to plant fudging trees, nor grow wheat, nor keep animals. If these activities are not commercially viable as they stand, they should not be carried out. End of fudging story. I don't know what folk on this forum are finding time to complain about, we all know food has been far too cheap for decades. Now there is a correction happening. And strangely, people are waking the fudge up to the fact that farming and food production is pretty damned important and food should not be treated like an endless fountain of trash that you can flog to people in such amounts they literally die from it.

Subsidies are paid for owning land
Thats even crazier

 

[ollie989898]

Subsidies are paid for owning land
Thats even crazier

It all needs to stop. And if farm gate prices all rise, then I can't think of a better time to stop it.

 

[glasshouse]

The EU will be re enacting the cereals regime and intervention shortly.

 

[Jackov Altraids]

I have mentioned before that it is worth observing North Devon's UNESCO biosphere reserve Nature Recovery Plan, as it looks to me like the "canary in the mine", having been produced in conjunction with all those preparing the new landscape recovery scheme.

The plan, which interestingly finds that development was not a driver towards the degradation of the landscape, has not been scrutinised in any way and is not supported by any substantial evidence.
They are however, campaigning to get as many councils, businesses and individuals to sign their support for it which gives it a legitimacy it really doesn't deserve.
There has been no consultation and there has been no input from farmers/ landowners.

Two thirds of the BPS budget will go to these organisations which will fund pet projects of the privileged and wealthy, achieve little/no public good and be paid for by those who can least afford it. They will be actually making food production more difficult and more costly.

Nature Recovery Plan

Aligning with the Government’s 25 Year Environment Plan and the Prime Minister’s pledge for 30% of the UK land to be protected by 2030. The plan includes five action plans which details...

www.northdevonbiosphere.org.uk

 

[glasshouse]

I have mentioned before that it is worth observing North Devon's UNESCO biosphere reserve Nature Recovery Plan, as it looks to me like the "canary in the mine", having been produced in conjunction with all those preparing the new landscape recovery scheme.

The plan, which interestingly finds that development was not a driver towards the degradation of the landscape, has not been scrutinised in any way and is not supported by any substantial evidence.
They are however, campaigning to get as many councils, businesses and individuals to sign their support for it which gives it a legitimacy it really doesn't deserve.
There has been no consultation and there has been no input from farmers/ landowners.

Two thirds of the BPS budget will go to these organisations which will fund pet projects of the privileged and wealthy, achieve little/no public good and be paid for by those who can least afford it. They will be actually making food production more difficult and more costly.

Nature Recovery Plan

Aligning with the Government’s 25 Year Environment Plan and the Prime Minister’s pledge for 30% of the UK land to be protected by 2030. The plan includes five action plans which details...

www.northdevonbiosphere.org.uk

Sounds like stalins ruinous five year plans

 

[Jackov Altraids]

Sounds like stalins ruinous five year plans

And remember, it was only this week that a study showed that these protected areas had no overall positive effect on bird populations.
There really needs to be a judicial review of all environmental schemes/ spending.
Good intentions are not good enough.

{I know a judicial review isn't the right term, but it's closest to what I think should happen. Every environmental policy should have the money streams traced and the environmental outcomes evaluated}

 

[Bald Rick]

It all needs to stop. And if farm gate prices all rise, then I can't think of a better time to stop it.

That's fine and dandy but governments live or die by having affordable food on the shelves.

Doesn't take much for the populace to get angry even in supposedly civilised societies such as Italy where there were food riots not so many years ago.

For better or worse, subsidies to farmers allow that policy to be followed to a degree

 

[J 1177]

That's fine and dandy but governments live or die by having affordable food on the shelves.

Doesn't take much for the populace to get angry even in supposedly civilised societies such as Italy where there were food riots not so many years ago.

For better or worse, subsidies to farmers allow that policy to be followed to a degree

Exactly look at the panic when people thought they couldnt get bog roll, wait until they cant get grub. Il admit im upping production, im putting a couple more rows of tatties in the garden.

 

[Henarar]

Subsidies are paid for owning land
Thats even crazier

Wish I knew how to get these subsidies for merely owning land,

 

[Vader]

Well, yes, if farmers can't be arsed to state what an SFI standard needs to look like to work for them, then they obviously don't need it.

Its pointed out by quite a few that all they needed was HLS with a few tweaks.

 

[Hilly]

It's not your job to feed the world. It's your job to make a bit of money and keep your farm in a similar or better to state than when you took it on. End of story. I am sort of glad that world events have now caught up and blown ridiculous UK/EU agricultural policies to smithereens. Governments don't have a clue about business and they don't have a clue about farming. Ignore Deathra's few shillings and get on with life.

I find it ironic that so many people are calling for BPS or the reintroduction of headage or area payments- yeah, because they didn't half fudge the industry down the pan for the last 40 years did they?

Speaking solely as a tax payer: money should not be sent to landowners to plant fudging trees, nor grow wheat, nor keep animals. If these activities are not commercially viable as they stand, they should not be carried out. End of fudging story. I don't know what folk on this forum are finding time to complain about, we all know food has been far too cheap for decades. Now there is a correction happening. And strangely, people are waking the fudge up to the fact that farming and food production is pretty damned important and food should not be treated like an endless fountain of trash that you can flog to people in such amounts they literally die from it.

Well said !

 

[Against_the_grain]

Going into harvest 23 the cost of production is negative. For food. Think about that. Businesses will lose money growing food next year as it stands. That should be very concerning for governments around the world, indeed the French seem to have realised this. We don't want hand outs. As mentioned before a bit of security for the risks involved is all it would take to secure supply. Imo a subsidy for fertiliser purchases would be a decent start instead of this absolute nonsense of rewilding etc...

 

[Vader]

And remember, it was only this week that a study showed that these protected areas had no overall positive effect on bird populations.
There really needs to be a judicial review of all environmental schemes/ spending.
Good intentions are not good enough.

{I know a judicial review isn't the right term, but it's closest to what I think should happen. Every environmental policy should have the money streams traced and the environmental outcomes evaluated}

Trouble is environment stuff is the new can not disagree topic.
No one will say anything against such things as worried they won't look green and concerned about nature.
Same as why all those girls got groomed and abused in Rotherham, no one wanted to speak out...

 

[Vader]

Going into harvest 23 the cost of production is negative. For food. Think about that. Businesses will lose money growing food next year as it stands. That should be very concerning for governments around the world, indeed the French seem to have realised this. We don't want hand outs. As mentioned before a bit of security for the risks involved is all it would take to secure supply. Imo a subsidy for fertiliser purchases would be a decent start instead of this absolute nonsense of rewilding etc...

But to do anything, prime minister Princess nuts nuts would have to admit current plans are wrong.

 

[digger64]

Trouble is environment stuff is the new can not disagree topic.
No one will say anything against such things as worried they won't look green and concerned about nature.
Same as why all those girls got groomed and abused in Rotherham, no one wanted to speak out...

There used to be loads more wildlife etc before all these schemes FACT , in theory we should now be tripping up over birds ,partridges/ etc now , there used to be loads of fish in the local rivers now no fert/sprays, no river maintenance , fenced banks and derelict sodden meadows -no fish .

 

[B'o'B]

Ah, it was Friends of the Earth put it into Defra's head that we need to DD ? And Greenpeace persuaded them that we need to measure SOM ? Bollox. Farmers have brought this on themselves.

Think you will find that soil scientists and academics have been on about SOM and reduced soil disturbance since at least the 1970s to my knowledge and probably far longer. Although I appreciate that fact doesn’t fit with your continuing narrative.

 

[Against_the_grain]

There used to be loads more wildlife etc before all these schemes FACT , in theory we should now be tripping up over birds ,partridges/ etc now , there used to be loads of fish in the local rivers now no fert/sprays, no river maintenance , fenced banks and derelict sodden meadows -no fish .

Yep and during the days of stubble burning no less!

 

[DrWazzock]

Maybe DEFRA is irrelevant to food production. or will be at the end of the BPS taper down?
If the government is essentially non interventionist other than for environmental works then I can’t see DEFRA having much of a role at all in commercial farming.
Really the SFI is a job creation scheme for DEFRA employees as far as I can see. It’s of no importance or relevance to my commercial crop production business, hence my complete lack of interest in it.

 

[DrWazzock]

Think you will find that soil scientists and academics have been on about SOM and reduced soil disturbance since at least the 1970s to my knowledge and probably far longer. Although I appreciate that fact doesn’t fit with your continuing narrative.

Yes. We are gradually moving to much lower soil disturbance anyway. We have been doing so for at least a decade. We are well ahead of the SFI. It’s just a silly distraction.