Sell at 12 months or earlier run more cows or rent less land or use more fert grow more grass get economies of scale alternatively or as well feed grain@£ 90 cheapest dm going pile more weight on max income off younger cattle what the market wants less fixed costs less capital tied up and guess what you dont need to buy or rent your neighbours farm to do it !
Keep Farm Subsidies....REMOVE MINETTE BATTERS
- Thread starter Bossfarmer
- Start date
No but have come from absolutely nothing think if england had done historic system i'd be sittng quite comfortly now ! have you ? I wouldn't need nor want 2000acres any way.Think I be looking to spread my risk long way before I got to that scale and perhaps have a day off
Goweresque
Member
- Location
- North Wilts
Hence the point I've made repeatedly - a large number of farmers would be better off stopping all farming activities beyond GAEC and any agri-enviroment scheme requirements, renting their land out for whatever rent they could get, and maybe getting a minimum wage job with holiday pay, sick pay and overtime. Far less work, far less financial risk, far less stress, far more money and leisure time. As the minimum wage approaches £9/hr by 2020 that equation is only going to look worse and worse for staying actively farming.
- Location
- Moreton-in-Marsh, Glos
Last night, I was lucky enough to go to a conference, then with 15 others, go on to have dinner with Meurig Raymond, the NFU leader.
IMO that meeting made the tittle of this thread look daft and stupid!
Several points came to light that are extremely relevant to the future of Govt support for farming:
As we know, once Article 50 is triggered in March 2017, we have 2 years to come up with a deal, which is going to be almost impossible to achieve.
This is coupled with the fact that there will also be the next EU Parliament elections in 2019, in which the UK isn't likely to field any candidates. Then followed by the next CAP reforms due in 2020, we would need to perform a miracle to have sorted everything out before either of these two events take place.
Without our EU financial contribution, it will be extremely difficult for the EU to continue its own levels of farm support. But also leaving the EU will cost the UK substantially and our levels of farm support as a proportion of the UK Govt budget must decline.
However, Chancellor Philip Hammond has guaranteed continued farm support up to 2020 and is known to realise how important UK agriculture is in the Country.
Nissan's Chief Executive, Carlos Ghosn has already been pledged by Theresa May that the UK Govt will pay any tariffs brought about by the EU, post a 2019 Brexit. She was in effect forced to do so because had Nissan pulled out of the UK, the pound would have slid even further than it has now. No doubt all the other UK car manufacturers will seek similar support.
This is very relevant to UK farming because there are more people involved with farming and agriculture than there are in both the entire UK motor and aircraft industries combined!
The UK is only 61% self sufficient in food production and before the referendum, this had been predicted to fall even further.
In the 70's and 80's, no direct support to farmers was paid, but grants were paid to farmers (for drainage, buildings etc) as an incentive to increase production. This was very successful.
Since the introduction of IACS, SFP and BPS with direct payments, production has fallen. So it is likely that a grant support system may well be reintroduced to replace or partially replace direct production support and still create profitable farming. Philip Hammond favours this idea.
Environmental payments (pillar 2) have been extremely successful and will probably continue. However, in her opening speech on becoming Prime Minister, TM pledged that she will provide support for those who a just about managing, the so called JAMs. These people want cheap food and will not be very concerned about Environmental standards of where their food comes from
The NFU are extremely pleased that many of our Supermarket chains including Aldi and Lidl have been strongly promoting British food. Further encouragement of the Red Tractor label and logo must be promoted. The NFU is further seeking that post Brexit, our Supermarket chains pledge only to sell foreign food that conforms to UK standards. Waitrose has already agreed to this.
The UK Govt will be adopting into UK, all the EU laws. Then at sometime later, the laws and rules will be examined and repealed or adjusted to the UK situation. However this is not likely to take place until well into the 2020's
Unfortunately, this will mean no bonfire of regulations that effect us as farmers for some considerable time.
The Govt has pledged that their decisions will be based on Science rather than Emotion. The Glyphosate usage EU re-licensing was for only 18 months and will expire even before Brexit. So it will be of great concern to UK farmers how this pans out!
The NFU is of the opinion that Brexit voting amongst UK farmers was about 60/40 in favour of Remaining. It is thought that the Glyphosate debate encouraged more farmers to vote Leave than would have been the case had it been re-licensed for 10 years as normal.
Interesting to note that TFF's own pole showed 70/30 in favour of Leave!
The situation beyond a 2019 Brexit with regard Tariffs is complicated. Philip Hammond has said that if any trade tariffs were placed by the EU upon the UK, that they would be reciprocated. However, if the £ exchange rate falls, which will create even higher inflation, the Govt may well be reluctant to create tariffs that would in effect increase inflation further.
IMO this is a bit defeatist and shows weakness on the UK's part! If tariffs were put on German cars, wouldn't that encourage drivers to purchase British built cars instead? The trouble might be that Govt is very determined to protect the City (of London) as one of it's chief priorities and won't want to upset them!
The 2017 French Elections will have a huge effect on the EU if Marie Le Pen's FN (right wing) party wins. This could cause the end the EU and might in fact be a huge benefit to the UK position.
The fact that the UK is only 61% self sufficient in food production is a huge advantage to us. Meurig sees merit in the fact that if tariffs were introduce on the 2m tonnes of surplus wheat as well as the 40% of UK Lamb production we Export, together with Import tariffs on EU pork/bacon, milk and (Irish) beef, plus the massive increase in Import/Export paperwork that will be required for dealing with a non EU country, this will undoubtedly encourage a massive increase in home production of these at present Imports using our surplus wheat. This would be very encouraging to entrepreneur and young farmers
But there is no doubt that at present, the rest of the EU are circling their wagons against us! The very fact that the sterling drops in value are helping our exporters and farmers, but slowing down EU imports is annoying them.
It is well known that a major vote for Leave was on the back of Immigration control. Not only would this effect vegetable and fruit growers, but our abattoirs and meat packers also employ 60% foreign workers. The UK Govt are keen to protect them, but also keen to protect UK workers within the EU. It is a case of who blinks first as to how this will be sorted.
One of our biggest problems is the very different stances that UK Conservative Politicians are taking with regard Brexit. Some MPs are very keen to crack on and support a hard Brexit, while others are keener to take a softer approach and make sure the UK gets the best deal and continues to trade with the EU. There is for instance a huge difference between Liam Fox's and Philip Hammond's views. Leadsom is seen to be learning fast! We won't mention Boris!
It is believed by the NFU that farming support will continue beyond 2020 and that Philip Hammond has sent a coded message that the levels will be in the region of 2/3rds the level that they are now. It is also realised that hill farms and LFA's will need fuller support to be able to continue farming.
It is expected that rents will fall as direct support declines and that there will be special support for younger farmers.
IMO it could be argued that Brexit was won as a backlash to Project Fear. There is a lot to decide and a lot of uncertainty. But there is cause for optimism too and we must allow this to flourish rather than become too depressed about our farming futures. I certainly felt much happier after last night's meeting!
IMO that meeting made the tittle of this thread look daft and stupid!
Several points came to light that are extremely relevant to the future of Govt support for farming:
As we know, once Article 50 is triggered in March 2017, we have 2 years to come up with a deal, which is going to be almost impossible to achieve.
This is coupled with the fact that there will also be the next EU Parliament elections in 2019, in which the UK isn't likely to field any candidates. Then followed by the next CAP reforms due in 2020, we would need to perform a miracle to have sorted everything out before either of these two events take place.
Without our EU financial contribution, it will be extremely difficult for the EU to continue its own levels of farm support. But also leaving the EU will cost the UK substantially and our levels of farm support as a proportion of the UK Govt budget must decline.
However, Chancellor Philip Hammond has guaranteed continued farm support up to 2020 and is known to realise how important UK agriculture is in the Country.
Nissan's Chief Executive, Carlos Ghosn has already been pledged by Theresa May that the UK Govt will pay any tariffs brought about by the EU, post a 2019 Brexit. She was in effect forced to do so because had Nissan pulled out of the UK, the pound would have slid even further than it has now. No doubt all the other UK car manufacturers will seek similar support.
This is very relevant to UK farming because there are more people involved with farming and agriculture than there are in both the entire UK motor and aircraft industries combined!
The UK is only 61% self sufficient in food production and before the referendum, this had been predicted to fall even further.
In the 70's and 80's, no direct support to farmers was paid, but grants were paid to farmers (for drainage, buildings etc) as an incentive to increase production. This was very successful.
Since the introduction of IACS, SFP and BPS with direct payments, production has fallen. So it is likely that a grant support system may well be reintroduced to replace or partially replace direct production support and still create profitable farming. Philip Hammond favours this idea.
Environmental payments (pillar 2) have been extremely successful and will probably continue. However, in her opening speech on becoming Prime Minister, TM pledged that she will provide support for those who a just about managing, the so called JAMs. These people want cheap food and will not be very concerned about Environmental standards of where their food comes from
The NFU are extremely pleased that many of our Supermarket chains including Aldi and Lidl have been strongly promoting British food. Further encouragement of the Red Tractor label and logo must be promoted. The NFU is further seeking that post Brexit, our Supermarket chains pledge only to sell foreign food that conforms to UK standards. Waitrose has already agreed to this.
The UK Govt will be adopting into UK, all the EU laws. Then at sometime later, the laws and rules will be examined and repealed or adjusted to the UK situation. However this is not likely to take place until well into the 2020's
Unfortunately, this will mean no bonfire of regulations that effect us as farmers for some considerable time.
The Govt has pledged that their decisions will be based on Science rather than Emotion. The Glyphosate usage EU re-licensing was for only 18 months and will expire even before Brexit. So it will be of great concern to UK farmers how this pans out!
The NFU is of the opinion that Brexit voting amongst UK farmers was about 60/40 in favour of Remaining. It is thought that the Glyphosate debate encouraged more farmers to vote Leave than would have been the case had it been re-licensed for 10 years as normal.
Interesting to note that TFF's own pole showed 70/30 in favour of Leave!
The situation beyond a 2019 Brexit with regard Tariffs is complicated. Philip Hammond has said that if any trade tariffs were placed by the EU upon the UK, that they would be reciprocated. However, if the £ exchange rate falls, which will create even higher inflation, the Govt may well be reluctant to create tariffs that would in effect increase inflation further.
IMO this is a bit defeatist and shows weakness on the UK's part! If tariffs were put on German cars, wouldn't that encourage drivers to purchase British built cars instead? The trouble might be that Govt is very determined to protect the City (of London) as one of it's chief priorities and won't want to upset them!
The 2017 French Elections will have a huge effect on the EU if Marie Le Pen's FN (right wing) party wins. This could cause the end the EU and might in fact be a huge benefit to the UK position.
The fact that the UK is only 61% self sufficient in food production is a huge advantage to us. Meurig sees merit in the fact that if tariffs were introduce on the 2m tonnes of surplus wheat as well as the 40% of UK Lamb production we Export, together with Import tariffs on EU pork/bacon, milk and (Irish) beef, plus the massive increase in Import/Export paperwork that will be required for dealing with a non EU country, this will undoubtedly encourage a massive increase in home production of these at present Imports using our surplus wheat. This would be very encouraging to entrepreneur and young farmers
But there is no doubt that at present, the rest of the EU are circling their wagons against us! The very fact that the sterling drops in value are helping our exporters and farmers, but slowing down EU imports is annoying them.
It is well known that a major vote for Leave was on the back of Immigration control. Not only would this effect vegetable and fruit growers, but our abattoirs and meat packers also employ 60% foreign workers. The UK Govt are keen to protect them, but also keen to protect UK workers within the EU. It is a case of who blinks first as to how this will be sorted.
One of our biggest problems is the very different stances that UK Conservative Politicians are taking with regard Brexit. Some MPs are very keen to crack on and support a hard Brexit, while others are keener to take a softer approach and make sure the UK gets the best deal and continues to trade with the EU. There is for instance a huge difference between Liam Fox's and Philip Hammond's views. Leadsom is seen to be learning fast! We won't mention Boris!
It is believed by the NFU that farming support will continue beyond 2020 and that Philip Hammond has sent a coded message that the levels will be in the region of 2/3rds the level that they are now. It is also realised that hill farms and LFA's will need fuller support to be able to continue farming.
It is expected that rents will fall as direct support declines and that there will be special support for younger farmers.
IMO it could be argued that Brexit was won as a backlash to Project Fear. There is a lot to decide and a lot of uncertainty. But there is cause for optimism too and we must allow this to flourish rather than become too depressed about our farming futures. I certainly felt much happier after last night's meeting!
Last edited:
gone up the hill
Member
- Location
- Devon
The rubbish the NFU top team are sprouting about Brexit gets worse by the day!
The debate about sprays had no bearing on which way farmers voted and no way in hell did 60% of farmers vote to remain in the EU.
Ref Pillar 2 payments being very succesfull, yes they have been but the new schemes are totally unworkable and uptake has been very low, if the NFU think that these type of complicated and unworkable schemes are the way to go then it will be a disaster for UK AG.
Ref the tariffs, the UK Gov will put them on things like grain/beef etc if it means the service/ banking sectors can then export their goods to other country's.
No point the UK producing more produce unless the supermarkets are made to pay higher prices for them, producing more cheaper ( as the NFU seem to support ) isn't the answer and make no bones about it the UK Gov will not allow food prices to rise..
Ref the thread title, its 100% correct regardless of which side of the fence you sit on ref subs as MB totally undermined future talks with the comments she made in the interview with the times.
Seems to be the case that the NFU top team are not on the same page ref support going forward post Brexit and with MR unlikely to be in the top post after Feb 18 this cannot be a good thing for NFU members.
Hindsight
Member
- Location
- Lincolnshire
In the 70's and 80's, no direct support to farmers was paid, but grants were paid to farmers (for drainage, buildings etc) as an incentive to increase production. This was very successful
Interesting post and thank you for an informative review of the NFU meeting. But can I just disagree in respect of the statement about Ag support post 1973 and accession to EEC and through the 80's upto 1992 with the Macsharry reforms. I suggest there was indeed direct support in conjunction with farm improvement grants but it was not as visible It was a period of guaranteed prices and intervention buying in conjunction with external import tariffs. The cost of CAP was considerable and the cash total was simply rolled into Area and headage payments post 1992 under the Macsharry reforms to make the cost of CAP visible to both farmers and the public and to allow the dismantling of interventing in the market resulting in grain mountains and winde and ,milk lakes - to coin those phrases.
Best wishes,
Interesting post and thank you for an informative review of the NFU meeting. But can I just disagree in respect of the statement about Ag support post 1973 and accession to EEC and through the 80's upto 1992 with the Macsharry reforms. I suggest there was indeed direct support in conjunction with farm improvement grants but it was not as visible It was a period of guaranteed prices and intervention buying in conjunction with external import tariffs. The cost of CAP was considerable and the cash total was simply rolled into Area and headage payments post 1992 under the Macsharry reforms to make the cost of CAP visible to both farmers and the public and to allow the dismantling of interventing in the market resulting in grain mountains and winde and ,milk lakes - to coin those phrases.
Best wishes,
Last edited:
Are you suggesting that Meurig should stand for, and be elected to serve, a 3rd term in Feb 2018?
caveman
Member
- Location
- East Sussex.
Establishment pigs trying to convince the plebs to support them at the trough.
Last edited:
What have you actually done since the vote in June,have you spoken to anyone in a position of power and more importantly do you know what you want?.Not all farmers were swayed by the chemical argument but a good few were
How do you know that. People often agree with someone ranting on at a livestock market, just to avoid getting into an argument, then do the opposite.
So where's all promise of getting rid of the regulations you promised us
He can stand if he wants, but lets all have a vote instead of just the cronies
gone up the hill
Member
- Location
- Devon
If ( and that's a big If imo given the way the PM is now talking and the court action etc ) that Article 50 is triggered in March 17 then the NFU has two years to hold talks/ agree a new sub regime before we leave the EU, I cannot see how it is in the members intrests for the top team to get derailed for several months by a leadership election half way thru these talks as there is only a very limited time that the talks can take place in and these months when hustings etc take place will be very crucial months.
Also if you have an election and say MB gets elected what happens if she has disagreed with everything that has been said in talks/ proposed new sub regime/ trade agreements etc and decides to rip the previous 11 months of talks up and start again??
Someone reminded me yesterday about a interview MB gave 18 or so months ago where she was supporting increased TB cattle movement control measures as the way forward, a few weeks/ months later her herd got some IR's and she couldn't sell her store cattle and she was then giving interviews saying that the current TB cattle movement controls were too harsh/ unworkable ( that was the same controls that she claimed were not good enough ) and it was wrong that she couldn't sell her store cattle on the open market...
gone up the hill
Member
- Location
- Devon
Is it a secret or are you going to share what you want then we will see if it's what every one else wantsYep I have spoken to people in power and also I know what I want
- Location
- Moreton-in-Marsh, Glos
Here is the NFU Policy Statement, dated 12th Oct. Things move very fast and my previous post re Meurig Raymond is more up to date. IMO, worth a read though.
Policy Statement
The voice of British farming
Although every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, neither the NFU
nor the author can accept liability for errors and or omissions. © NFU
Department Name/NFU Policy Statement/Sept ’11/draft.
Brexit Policy Framework
NFU Policy Directorate
12 October 2016
Brexit Policy Framework
Building the case for Post-Brexit Agriculture
Leaving the European Union presents an historic opportunity to create a new, bold and ambitious future for UK farming, a future that working with our partners in the industry and Government the NFU must realise: that is the clear message we received from NFU members during our Brexit consultation across England and Wales.
For decades UK farming has been subject to policies set at a pan-European scale, implementing successive CAP reforms driven by political and economic pressures on the European stage - the most recent being the ill-suited Ciolos reform. The creation of a new policy framework designed in the UK should aim to establish a new deal with society - a stable consensus on what farming can deliver for the economy, for consumers and the environment. A deal that must also deliver for farmers - a fair deal on trade, a secure business environment, reasonable returns from the market, access to modern technology needed to compete on the global stage. These objectives held true before the Brexit vote, but will be ever more relevant and necessary in the decades ahead.
Our vision is simple: that competitive, profitable and progressive farm business is central to a dynamic UK food chain. That UK food chain should deliver an increasing proportion of the nation’s needs for high quality, safe, affordable food to British, as well as to new export markets. Alongside this we see more farms delivering increasing levels of non-food products, better environmental care of the 75% of the UK land area agriculture manages and with growing emphasis placed on our high standards of animal health and welfare.
Our membership is proud of what they contribute to the nation. British farmers and growers produce high quality food to world leading standards while also caring for a thriving environment. Our sector is the bedrock for a vibrant supply chain and essential for our food and drink industry, worth £108bn to the economy. The British public have made it clear in survey after survey that they are hugely supportive of British farmers and growers, fully aware of the contribution we make to the economy and the environment and that they would like to see more British food produced at home. The integrity of British produce has never been greater and we have seen our major retailers’ sourcing shift towards 100% commitment to selling British produce when in season.
The last decade has also demonstrated that the nation’s food security should not be taken for granted as world markets, driven by unpredictable weather and unstable trading block decisions have produced increasingly volatile returns for producers. While farmers produced 61% of the UK food needs in 2015, this has dropped over the last 30years and is projected to decline below 50% by 2040, making the nation more dependent on food imports, unless UK farm businesses become more competitive.
The NFU consultation running up to and following the Brexit vote has been the biggest of its kind in the NFU’s history. All 55,000 of our members have had an opportunity to have a say and share their views on what a future agricultural policy should look like for their businesses and their families’ future. We’ve also reached out to the next generation of farmers; decisions made now will shape their working lives.
The process of leaving the EU, establishing new trade deals and creating a domestic agricultural policy will take time, possibly several years. Our analysis and our member consultation shows that there are strong links between different parts of the policy settlement the UK Government must agree with the EU – trade will be a key part of these negotiations, possibly defining the regulatory system in which businesses must function. That is why it is vital that the NFU is offering in this policy framework early advice to the Government on the critical elements for farming in any future relationship. As the negotiation over leaving progresses the NFU will be offering further advice on the basis of our consultation to Government regarding the detail needed to reflect what farming needs from a post Brexit policy.
Contrary to popular commentary our members have been clear, Brexit is not about burning bridges, but building them; making clear the industry’s importance to UK politicians and consumers, but also maintaining links with the Europe, our largest and closest export market and a critical source of labour. An important theme running through member meetings has been that the NFU must work with new as well as current partners to make farming’s case to Government. Competition for the Government’s attention and resources will only increase in the month and years ahead - we must fight to have farming’s voice clearly heard.
We have also drawn a strong signal that obsessing over Brexit must be avoided. As Commissioner Hogan has already assured us, the UK has not left the EU until it does, so the UK Government must continue to seek the best deal for UK food and farming in Brussels, as it must at home. The UK Farming Unions, through our well-respected Brussels office, will need to play a more influential role as the negotiations proceed. Our influence is especially important as the legacy of over 40years of EU legislation is highly unlikely to be reformed on the UK’s exit and may well form the basis of future trading relations with the EU. Throughout the NFU’s task is to achieve long term confidence and, crucially, short term certainty.
Charting our ambition
Although as a food producer farming’s role is vital and will remain so, society expects far more from our industry, delivering non-food products, environmental care and high standards of animal health and welfare to name but a few. To guide a new deal post-Brexit the NFU will develop a set of measures of farming’s performance across the outcomes society values and needs. These measures should reflect the NFU’s vision that farming becomes more competitive, profitable and progressive. In turn these measures will provide a basis for our setting out farming ambitions in the decades ahead – not simply a continuation of current trends but seeking improvement wherever practical.
In concept we propose that a ‘balanced scorecard’ is developed, an initial proposal is set out below. At present this has too many measures, in its final iteration we envisage no more than three or four measures under each heading.
Realising Farming’s Future
We have stated our ambition that competitive, profitable and progressive farm business is central to a dynamic UK food chain. This vision centres on delivering the nation’s food security in a sustainable manner using a policy framework that:
• Establishes a stable policy suitable for a long-term industry;
• Gives British farmers the best possible access to markets inside and outside the EU;
• Protects farmers and consumers from agri-food imports that do not meet the same high standards adhered to by British farmers;
• Ensures farmers and growers have sufficient supplies of labour;
• Builds on farming’s environmental role, allowing all farmers to care for the countryside and wildlife and mitigate climate change;
• Improves farming’s competitiveness including policies that are science and evidence-based to create a better regulatory environment for British farmers;
• Avoids unnecessary complexity.
In this initial contribution to shape farming’s future we focus on three urgent aspects of the policy needed; trade, labour flows and domestic agricultural policy. Given the early stage of development, we have not mapped out each area in detail but instead have established farming’s key requirements, the evidence for these requirements and immediate actions that are needed to take forward policy development in each area. In the months ahead, as the impact of the Referendum vote becomes clearer, the NFU will produce more detailed policy proposals working with a growing partnership of farming advocates.
Framework position on trade
Introduction
The consultation confirmed that trade is an important issue for NFU members. The EU single market is by far our biggest export destination and crucial for some sectors. A prime example is lamb where 38% of our production ends up on the European market.
The European market is relatively mature and growing more slowly that some emerging and developing economies. For that reason, access to these markets is seen as becoming increasingly important in future.
NFU members are equally concerned about the future terms of import access to the UK market. The risks are seen as a potential unilateral lowering of British tariffs, as some proponents of Brexit advocate, or bilateral free trade arrangements with countries like New Zealand or Brazil where agricultural interests risk being traded off in return for access to services markets.
The established NFU principles on these issues is that we want the best possible access to the EU single market and we want to limit our exposure to competing imports produced to lower standards.
Key policy positions:
Access to the EU Single Market
Of the existing models, the Norwegian European Economic Area arrangement was the most favoured in the consultation but a larger number are looking for some bespoke UK arrangements. The NFU appreciates the political sensitivity over issues such as labour movements, regulation and budget contributions. These are matters that will need to be settled by negotiation. The NFU’s primary concern is that our continued access to the EU single market should not be fettered by tariffs or non-tariff barriers.
Access to markets in the rest of the world
The EU has negotiated more than 50 preferential access agreements with countries around the world. In the worst case all these would need to be renegotiated by the EU, in addition to any further deals which the British government might like to conclude. Our determination is that any future trading arrangements with any country, in or out of the EU, must be balanced, with the same conditions applying to imports as to exports. If this is the case then the best outcome here would be that the UK remains part of the European customs union.
Exposure to imports produced to lower standards
The consultation demonstrated overwhelming support for arrangements which limit our exposure to imports produced to lower standards (for example, lower animal welfare standards, goods produced with chemicals prohibited domestically etc). This is not a straightforward matter as WTO rules prohibit discriminating against imports on the basis of their production methods.
We can help ourselves by promoting the qualities and values of British production through assurance schemes, and the NFU believes more needs to be done both publically and privately in this area. But there are limits to what can be done and this can only be a partial solution.
In addition we will need to see an adequate level of tariffs maintained and for “sensitive” sectors to be treated differently in trade negotiations.
As we have noted already, if trade relationships are balanced, with the same conditions applying to imports as to exports, then the best outcome will be that the UK remains part of the EU customs union.
Immediate Actions
It is important to recall that the timescale for trade negotiations with EU and non-EU is likely to be protracted. The triggering of Article 50 may allow talks with regard to the EU Single Market to commence, but a series of important EU member state elections in 2017 suggests that substantive talks may be delayed until late in 2017 at the earliest. This being the case the NFU’s key tasks is to establish our priorities for the trade talks (above) and build our contacts and competence to engage effectively and timely way as opportunity arises. With this in mind the NFU is already engaging closely with Defra, Department of EU Exit and Department of International Trade and will build on our existing Ministerial level contact to ensure the opportunities and concerns of farming regarding trade is well understood by these key departments.
Specific actions include:
Appointment of a Director of EU Exit and International Trade and establishment a team to lead our trade policy work.
Agree with UK Farming Unions trade policy principles and strategy
Exploring potential alliances with food industry and NGOs to establish common ground and joint lobbying opportunities
Framework for Access to Labour
Introduction
The consultation reaffirms the importance of access to a flexible, skilled workforce to farming’s competitiveness. Brexit has highlighted access to non-UK EU born labour, but members also raised concerns over labour costs, access to skilled workers and opportunity offered by mechanisation/robotics to replace labour. In the context of Brexit especially for horticulture, poultry and pig sectors, continued access to non-UK born seasonal and non-seasonal workers is a number one priority.
The number of these workers needed across the UK food chain for it to remain competitive is significant yet official figures under estimate total non-UK born labour employed on farm, as elsewhere in the economy. Data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) does not include seasonal workers or those workers in communal accommodation, both of which are characteristic of seasonal labour on farms. This is why Government is working with sectors, including farming, to understand labour access use and needs.
There are a number of issues that make it difficult to recruit sufficient domestic labour; flexibility of location, hours and tolerance of harsher working environments are prominent reasons. But even amongst the EU labour force there is evidence of a growing difficulty in sourcing the labour force farm business requires - this means the prospect of sourcing labour from beyond the EU also has to be considered.
Farm businesses we contacted during the consultation indicate there is a very urgent need to focus on the short term labour supply and the seasonal labour required for 2017 – sterling’s devaluation has made the UK labour market less competitive within the Single Market. There is a real danger that production will shift abroad unless the industry can access the supply of labour it needs and with investment plans also on hold, continued growth in the sector is under threat. This is contrary to the ambition of the sector to grow GDP contribution and to put significantly more British food on British plates.
NFU’s research shows that a home grown food system is highly valued. Retailers are seeking higher volumes of British food due to the uncertainty over the exchange rate; consumers express a wish to purchase UK produce. Growing our domestic food production provides jobs, adds further value to UK GDP and will continue to provide us all with safe, quality and affordable food. There will ultimately be significant implications on the balance between UK production and imports if required labour is hard to recruit, and existing skills cannot be accessed.
Evidence of need
Horticulture: working with NFU’s partners in horticulture we estimate that the sector employed 80,000 seasonal workers in 2016 and this will increase to 95,000 by 2021. In 2012 37,000 people worked permanently in Horticulture and Potatoes (source: NFU Catalyst for change). We estimate that this will be similar today with approximately 10,000 of these workers from the EU (source: British Growers Association).
Poultry: British Poultry Council has identified that the poultry meat sector employs 34,800 workers (directly); of these 10,800 work on farms and the remaining 24,000 work in poultry meat processing. ONS figures for the poultry meat processing sector are: Total labour 47,455 of which 33% is UK, 57% is EU and 9% is non-EU. The British Egg Industry Council has identified that EU migrants working in the egg sector account for approximately 40% of total farm labour and 60% of total labour in packing centres. Further clarification on these figures is being obtained.
Key Policy priorities
Trial a ‘substantial’ fixed-term work permit scheme for agriculture and horticulture targeted at non-EU workers during 2017 – (suggest title: Seasonal Agricultural Permit Scheme – ‘SAPS’). (Long term goal to bring 90,000 global workers to pick and pack fruit & veg, plants & flowers; and send them home again).
Assurance that EU workers that are already in positions have right of residency in the UK and that they will have right to leave and return to their home member state
Government to commit to holding further discussions on permanent labour and seasonal labour for the medium to long term
AHDB and Government to provide significant investment in innovation, productive technology, robotics, automation and mechanisation, and to support science funding for research and development.
In the longer term – working with schools, the National Land Based College and universities to promote and provide the relevant technical skills needed for the industry
Immediate Actions
1. Improve the evidence base on the number of EU workers and non-EU within the UK agri-food chain. NFU staff team will lead investigation via Commodity Boards and food chain network and Government.
2. Engage with Migration Advisory Committee, Defra, Home Office and EU Exit Ministers and officials to promote a SAPS trial, and inform and test proposals and maintain momentum
3. Build coalition with other sector organisations within and beyond agriculture where there is common interest (e.g. CBI, Hospitality trade)
4. Establish a small working group of MPs to act as a sounding board for discussion on seasonal and permanent labour requirements.
NFU Policy Statement
Page 9
A Framework for a Domestic Agricultural Policy
Introduction
All countries in the world have agricultural policy measures that intervene is some way in agricultural markets and many have comprehensive measures to address various issues, including price and market volatility, environmental protection and enhancement and improvements in sectoral economic performance.
The nature of the trading relationship the UK Government negotiates with the EU and non-EU countries will dictate the competitive environment in which farm businesses will operate. During the member consultation is was clear that agricultural policy measures must be modulated to match and prepare farm businesses for the business/trading environment in which they will operate.
It is a valid criticism of the Common Agricultural Policy that there has been a lack of clarity over what the purpose of direct payments is, and particularly since the introduction of “greening” that the same policy instrument was expected to deliver different policy goals.
The design of a bespoke domestic agricultural policy offers the opportunity not only to design a policy to fit our needs and conditions but also to construct a multi-faceted policy with different instruments targeted at different specific issues.
The government has committed to financing the current CAP budget until 2020. Thereafter the agricultural sector will have to present a compelling case for an appropriate budget allocation. British politicians will in future be directly accountable for the policy and its budget, which was not the case while we were inside the EU and subject to its CAP. The introductory chapter to this report sets out our case for a new policy and its financing.
Form and Scope of Agricultural policy
The consultation demonstrated support for a policy comprising different instruments and elements. In an industry as diverse as ours there was, unsurprisingly, a wide variety of views, but a flexible delivery framework on the following lines appears to command broad approval.
Farmed Envt Scheme for Designated Areas
Agricultural Productivity Enhancement
Insurance & Risk Management
Animal & Plant Health measures
Promotion of British Produce
Broad Farmed Environment Scheme
Volatility Mitigation
Key Policy elements:
1. Volatility mitigation
This is in the form of a direct payment, open to all (a payment either decoupled or coupled was supported by over 60% of respondents to the consultation). The advantage of this measure is that it is compatible with WTO rules (provided it is decoupled) and the infrastructure to deliver it already exists.
2. Broad ‘Farmed Environment’ scheme
A voluntary measure, accessible to all farmers: a points-based system aimed at protection of landscape features, biodiversity, climate mitigation, soil and water care. The ambition here is to attract as many farmers and as big a land area as possible, not to constantly ratchet up standards. The scheme replaces “greening” in the CAP Basic Payment Scheme.
3. Farmed Environment Scheme for designated areas
By application: this is a selective scheme for environmental enhancement, restricted to farmers in designated areas (e.g. SSSI, National Parks, AONB)
4. Agricultural productivity measures
By application: measures to improve the productivity and competitiveness of individual businesses. This could encompass instruments like capital grants, knowledge transfer, benchmarking etc.
5. Animal and Plant Health measures
By application: continuation of public involvement in animal and plant health issues, especially in areas of human and public health.
6. Promotion of British produce
By application: includes measures such as facilitation and promotion of exports, and promotion of the values and qualities of British production, home and abroad, through assurance schemes.
What budget is required and how should it be shared?
It is not possible to quantify the budget requirements of a new policy until there is considerably more clarity over our future trade arrangements. There are two elements to this. First, if our access to the single market is restricted there could be serious consequences for some sectors: lamb being an obvious example. Second, if our markets become more open to imports from the rest of the world (either by a general lowering of tariffs or through bilateral free trade agreements with countries like New Zealand or Brazil) there will be an impact on domestic farm-gate prices.
If either or both of these things happen there will be relatively more need for volatility measures. If they are avoided there will be less need for those measures, which will allow more resource on other measures.
Immediate Action
For the reasons we explain above it is too early to define the detail of policy instruments needed or the relative weighting that they should be given. However there is need to develop thinking beyond the framework we set out above, so the principle focus in coming months will be a systematic exploration of each theme with view to defining possible outcomes, potential measures, instruments that could be deployed, key actors and deliverability
I think this does give a good insight as to what NFU are doing and shows that Meurig has got his head screwed on.
How many of you NFU sceptics might think again after reading it, I wonder?
Policy Statement
The voice of British farming
Although every effort has been made to ensure accuracy, neither the NFU
nor the author can accept liability for errors and or omissions. © NFU
Department Name/NFU Policy Statement/Sept ’11/draft.
Brexit Policy Framework
NFU Policy Directorate
12 October 2016
Brexit Policy Framework
Building the case for Post-Brexit Agriculture
Leaving the European Union presents an historic opportunity to create a new, bold and ambitious future for UK farming, a future that working with our partners in the industry and Government the NFU must realise: that is the clear message we received from NFU members during our Brexit consultation across England and Wales.
For decades UK farming has been subject to policies set at a pan-European scale, implementing successive CAP reforms driven by political and economic pressures on the European stage - the most recent being the ill-suited Ciolos reform. The creation of a new policy framework designed in the UK should aim to establish a new deal with society - a stable consensus on what farming can deliver for the economy, for consumers and the environment. A deal that must also deliver for farmers - a fair deal on trade, a secure business environment, reasonable returns from the market, access to modern technology needed to compete on the global stage. These objectives held true before the Brexit vote, but will be ever more relevant and necessary in the decades ahead.
Our vision is simple: that competitive, profitable and progressive farm business is central to a dynamic UK food chain. That UK food chain should deliver an increasing proportion of the nation’s needs for high quality, safe, affordable food to British, as well as to new export markets. Alongside this we see more farms delivering increasing levels of non-food products, better environmental care of the 75% of the UK land area agriculture manages and with growing emphasis placed on our high standards of animal health and welfare.
Our membership is proud of what they contribute to the nation. British farmers and growers produce high quality food to world leading standards while also caring for a thriving environment. Our sector is the bedrock for a vibrant supply chain and essential for our food and drink industry, worth £108bn to the economy. The British public have made it clear in survey after survey that they are hugely supportive of British farmers and growers, fully aware of the contribution we make to the economy and the environment and that they would like to see more British food produced at home. The integrity of British produce has never been greater and we have seen our major retailers’ sourcing shift towards 100% commitment to selling British produce when in season.
The last decade has also demonstrated that the nation’s food security should not be taken for granted as world markets, driven by unpredictable weather and unstable trading block decisions have produced increasingly volatile returns for producers. While farmers produced 61% of the UK food needs in 2015, this has dropped over the last 30years and is projected to decline below 50% by 2040, making the nation more dependent on food imports, unless UK farm businesses become more competitive.
The NFU consultation running up to and following the Brexit vote has been the biggest of its kind in the NFU’s history. All 55,000 of our members have had an opportunity to have a say and share their views on what a future agricultural policy should look like for their businesses and their families’ future. We’ve also reached out to the next generation of farmers; decisions made now will shape their working lives.
The process of leaving the EU, establishing new trade deals and creating a domestic agricultural policy will take time, possibly several years. Our analysis and our member consultation shows that there are strong links between different parts of the policy settlement the UK Government must agree with the EU – trade will be a key part of these negotiations, possibly defining the regulatory system in which businesses must function. That is why it is vital that the NFU is offering in this policy framework early advice to the Government on the critical elements for farming in any future relationship. As the negotiation over leaving progresses the NFU will be offering further advice on the basis of our consultation to Government regarding the detail needed to reflect what farming needs from a post Brexit policy.
Contrary to popular commentary our members have been clear, Brexit is not about burning bridges, but building them; making clear the industry’s importance to UK politicians and consumers, but also maintaining links with the Europe, our largest and closest export market and a critical source of labour. An important theme running through member meetings has been that the NFU must work with new as well as current partners to make farming’s case to Government. Competition for the Government’s attention and resources will only increase in the month and years ahead - we must fight to have farming’s voice clearly heard.
We have also drawn a strong signal that obsessing over Brexit must be avoided. As Commissioner Hogan has already assured us, the UK has not left the EU until it does, so the UK Government must continue to seek the best deal for UK food and farming in Brussels, as it must at home. The UK Farming Unions, through our well-respected Brussels office, will need to play a more influential role as the negotiations proceed. Our influence is especially important as the legacy of over 40years of EU legislation is highly unlikely to be reformed on the UK’s exit and may well form the basis of future trading relations with the EU. Throughout the NFU’s task is to achieve long term confidence and, crucially, short term certainty.
Charting our ambition
Although as a food producer farming’s role is vital and will remain so, society expects far more from our industry, delivering non-food products, environmental care and high standards of animal health and welfare to name but a few. To guide a new deal post-Brexit the NFU will develop a set of measures of farming’s performance across the outcomes society values and needs. These measures should reflect the NFU’s vision that farming becomes more competitive, profitable and progressive. In turn these measures will provide a basis for our setting out farming ambitions in the decades ahead – not simply a continuation of current trends but seeking improvement wherever practical.
In concept we propose that a ‘balanced scorecard’ is developed, an initial proposal is set out below. At present this has too many measures, in its final iteration we envisage no more than three or four measures under each heading.
Realising Farming’s Future
We have stated our ambition that competitive, profitable and progressive farm business is central to a dynamic UK food chain. This vision centres on delivering the nation’s food security in a sustainable manner using a policy framework that:
• Establishes a stable policy suitable for a long-term industry;
• Gives British farmers the best possible access to markets inside and outside the EU;
• Protects farmers and consumers from agri-food imports that do not meet the same high standards adhered to by British farmers;
• Ensures farmers and growers have sufficient supplies of labour;
• Builds on farming’s environmental role, allowing all farmers to care for the countryside and wildlife and mitigate climate change;
• Improves farming’s competitiveness including policies that are science and evidence-based to create a better regulatory environment for British farmers;
• Avoids unnecessary complexity.
In this initial contribution to shape farming’s future we focus on three urgent aspects of the policy needed; trade, labour flows and domestic agricultural policy. Given the early stage of development, we have not mapped out each area in detail but instead have established farming’s key requirements, the evidence for these requirements and immediate actions that are needed to take forward policy development in each area. In the months ahead, as the impact of the Referendum vote becomes clearer, the NFU will produce more detailed policy proposals working with a growing partnership of farming advocates.
Framework position on trade
Introduction
The consultation confirmed that trade is an important issue for NFU members. The EU single market is by far our biggest export destination and crucial for some sectors. A prime example is lamb where 38% of our production ends up on the European market.
The European market is relatively mature and growing more slowly that some emerging and developing economies. For that reason, access to these markets is seen as becoming increasingly important in future.
NFU members are equally concerned about the future terms of import access to the UK market. The risks are seen as a potential unilateral lowering of British tariffs, as some proponents of Brexit advocate, or bilateral free trade arrangements with countries like New Zealand or Brazil where agricultural interests risk being traded off in return for access to services markets.
The established NFU principles on these issues is that we want the best possible access to the EU single market and we want to limit our exposure to competing imports produced to lower standards.
Key policy positions:
Access to the EU Single Market
Of the existing models, the Norwegian European Economic Area arrangement was the most favoured in the consultation but a larger number are looking for some bespoke UK arrangements. The NFU appreciates the political sensitivity over issues such as labour movements, regulation and budget contributions. These are matters that will need to be settled by negotiation. The NFU’s primary concern is that our continued access to the EU single market should not be fettered by tariffs or non-tariff barriers.
Access to markets in the rest of the world
The EU has negotiated more than 50 preferential access agreements with countries around the world. In the worst case all these would need to be renegotiated by the EU, in addition to any further deals which the British government might like to conclude. Our determination is that any future trading arrangements with any country, in or out of the EU, must be balanced, with the same conditions applying to imports as to exports. If this is the case then the best outcome here would be that the UK remains part of the European customs union.
Exposure to imports produced to lower standards
The consultation demonstrated overwhelming support for arrangements which limit our exposure to imports produced to lower standards (for example, lower animal welfare standards, goods produced with chemicals prohibited domestically etc). This is not a straightforward matter as WTO rules prohibit discriminating against imports on the basis of their production methods.
We can help ourselves by promoting the qualities and values of British production through assurance schemes, and the NFU believes more needs to be done both publically and privately in this area. But there are limits to what can be done and this can only be a partial solution.
In addition we will need to see an adequate level of tariffs maintained and for “sensitive” sectors to be treated differently in trade negotiations.
As we have noted already, if trade relationships are balanced, with the same conditions applying to imports as to exports, then the best outcome will be that the UK remains part of the EU customs union.
Immediate Actions
It is important to recall that the timescale for trade negotiations with EU and non-EU is likely to be protracted. The triggering of Article 50 may allow talks with regard to the EU Single Market to commence, but a series of important EU member state elections in 2017 suggests that substantive talks may be delayed until late in 2017 at the earliest. This being the case the NFU’s key tasks is to establish our priorities for the trade talks (above) and build our contacts and competence to engage effectively and timely way as opportunity arises. With this in mind the NFU is already engaging closely with Defra, Department of EU Exit and Department of International Trade and will build on our existing Ministerial level contact to ensure the opportunities and concerns of farming regarding trade is well understood by these key departments.
Specific actions include:
Appointment of a Director of EU Exit and International Trade and establishment a team to lead our trade policy work.
Agree with UK Farming Unions trade policy principles and strategy
Exploring potential alliances with food industry and NGOs to establish common ground and joint lobbying opportunities
Framework for Access to Labour
Introduction
The consultation reaffirms the importance of access to a flexible, skilled workforce to farming’s competitiveness. Brexit has highlighted access to non-UK EU born labour, but members also raised concerns over labour costs, access to skilled workers and opportunity offered by mechanisation/robotics to replace labour. In the context of Brexit especially for horticulture, poultry and pig sectors, continued access to non-UK born seasonal and non-seasonal workers is a number one priority.
The number of these workers needed across the UK food chain for it to remain competitive is significant yet official figures under estimate total non-UK born labour employed on farm, as elsewhere in the economy. Data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) does not include seasonal workers or those workers in communal accommodation, both of which are characteristic of seasonal labour on farms. This is why Government is working with sectors, including farming, to understand labour access use and needs.
There are a number of issues that make it difficult to recruit sufficient domestic labour; flexibility of location, hours and tolerance of harsher working environments are prominent reasons. But even amongst the EU labour force there is evidence of a growing difficulty in sourcing the labour force farm business requires - this means the prospect of sourcing labour from beyond the EU also has to be considered.
Farm businesses we contacted during the consultation indicate there is a very urgent need to focus on the short term labour supply and the seasonal labour required for 2017 – sterling’s devaluation has made the UK labour market less competitive within the Single Market. There is a real danger that production will shift abroad unless the industry can access the supply of labour it needs and with investment plans also on hold, continued growth in the sector is under threat. This is contrary to the ambition of the sector to grow GDP contribution and to put significantly more British food on British plates.
NFU’s research shows that a home grown food system is highly valued. Retailers are seeking higher volumes of British food due to the uncertainty over the exchange rate; consumers express a wish to purchase UK produce. Growing our domestic food production provides jobs, adds further value to UK GDP and will continue to provide us all with safe, quality and affordable food. There will ultimately be significant implications on the balance between UK production and imports if required labour is hard to recruit, and existing skills cannot be accessed.
Evidence of need
Horticulture: working with NFU’s partners in horticulture we estimate that the sector employed 80,000 seasonal workers in 2016 and this will increase to 95,000 by 2021. In 2012 37,000 people worked permanently in Horticulture and Potatoes (source: NFU Catalyst for change). We estimate that this will be similar today with approximately 10,000 of these workers from the EU (source: British Growers Association).
Poultry: British Poultry Council has identified that the poultry meat sector employs 34,800 workers (directly); of these 10,800 work on farms and the remaining 24,000 work in poultry meat processing. ONS figures for the poultry meat processing sector are: Total labour 47,455 of which 33% is UK, 57% is EU and 9% is non-EU. The British Egg Industry Council has identified that EU migrants working in the egg sector account for approximately 40% of total farm labour and 60% of total labour in packing centres. Further clarification on these figures is being obtained.
Key Policy priorities
Trial a ‘substantial’ fixed-term work permit scheme for agriculture and horticulture targeted at non-EU workers during 2017 – (suggest title: Seasonal Agricultural Permit Scheme – ‘SAPS’). (Long term goal to bring 90,000 global workers to pick and pack fruit & veg, plants & flowers; and send them home again).
Assurance that EU workers that are already in positions have right of residency in the UK and that they will have right to leave and return to their home member state
Government to commit to holding further discussions on permanent labour and seasonal labour for the medium to long term
AHDB and Government to provide significant investment in innovation, productive technology, robotics, automation and mechanisation, and to support science funding for research and development.
In the longer term – working with schools, the National Land Based College and universities to promote and provide the relevant technical skills needed for the industry
Immediate Actions
1. Improve the evidence base on the number of EU workers and non-EU within the UK agri-food chain. NFU staff team will lead investigation via Commodity Boards and food chain network and Government.
2. Engage with Migration Advisory Committee, Defra, Home Office and EU Exit Ministers and officials to promote a SAPS trial, and inform and test proposals and maintain momentum
3. Build coalition with other sector organisations within and beyond agriculture where there is common interest (e.g. CBI, Hospitality trade)
4. Establish a small working group of MPs to act as a sounding board for discussion on seasonal and permanent labour requirements.
NFU Policy Statement
Page 9
A Framework for a Domestic Agricultural Policy
Introduction
All countries in the world have agricultural policy measures that intervene is some way in agricultural markets and many have comprehensive measures to address various issues, including price and market volatility, environmental protection and enhancement and improvements in sectoral economic performance.
The nature of the trading relationship the UK Government negotiates with the EU and non-EU countries will dictate the competitive environment in which farm businesses will operate. During the member consultation is was clear that agricultural policy measures must be modulated to match and prepare farm businesses for the business/trading environment in which they will operate.
It is a valid criticism of the Common Agricultural Policy that there has been a lack of clarity over what the purpose of direct payments is, and particularly since the introduction of “greening” that the same policy instrument was expected to deliver different policy goals.
The design of a bespoke domestic agricultural policy offers the opportunity not only to design a policy to fit our needs and conditions but also to construct a multi-faceted policy with different instruments targeted at different specific issues.
The government has committed to financing the current CAP budget until 2020. Thereafter the agricultural sector will have to present a compelling case for an appropriate budget allocation. British politicians will in future be directly accountable for the policy and its budget, which was not the case while we were inside the EU and subject to its CAP. The introductory chapter to this report sets out our case for a new policy and its financing.
Form and Scope of Agricultural policy
The consultation demonstrated support for a policy comprising different instruments and elements. In an industry as diverse as ours there was, unsurprisingly, a wide variety of views, but a flexible delivery framework on the following lines appears to command broad approval.
Farmed Envt Scheme for Designated Areas
Agricultural Productivity Enhancement
Insurance & Risk Management
Animal & Plant Health measures
Promotion of British Produce
Broad Farmed Environment Scheme
Volatility Mitigation
Key Policy elements:
1. Volatility mitigation
This is in the form of a direct payment, open to all (a payment either decoupled or coupled was supported by over 60% of respondents to the consultation). The advantage of this measure is that it is compatible with WTO rules (provided it is decoupled) and the infrastructure to deliver it already exists.
2. Broad ‘Farmed Environment’ scheme
A voluntary measure, accessible to all farmers: a points-based system aimed at protection of landscape features, biodiversity, climate mitigation, soil and water care. The ambition here is to attract as many farmers and as big a land area as possible, not to constantly ratchet up standards. The scheme replaces “greening” in the CAP Basic Payment Scheme.
3. Farmed Environment Scheme for designated areas
By application: this is a selective scheme for environmental enhancement, restricted to farmers in designated areas (e.g. SSSI, National Parks, AONB)
4. Agricultural productivity measures
By application: measures to improve the productivity and competitiveness of individual businesses. This could encompass instruments like capital grants, knowledge transfer, benchmarking etc.
5. Animal and Plant Health measures
By application: continuation of public involvement in animal and plant health issues, especially in areas of human and public health.
6. Promotion of British produce
By application: includes measures such as facilitation and promotion of exports, and promotion of the values and qualities of British production, home and abroad, through assurance schemes.
What budget is required and how should it be shared?
It is not possible to quantify the budget requirements of a new policy until there is considerably more clarity over our future trade arrangements. There are two elements to this. First, if our access to the single market is restricted there could be serious consequences for some sectors: lamb being an obvious example. Second, if our markets become more open to imports from the rest of the world (either by a general lowering of tariffs or through bilateral free trade agreements with countries like New Zealand or Brazil) there will be an impact on domestic farm-gate prices.
If either or both of these things happen there will be relatively more need for volatility measures. If they are avoided there will be less need for those measures, which will allow more resource on other measures.
Immediate Action
For the reasons we explain above it is too early to define the detail of policy instruments needed or the relative weighting that they should be given. However there is need to develop thinking beyond the framework we set out above, so the principle focus in coming months will be a systematic exploration of each theme with view to defining possible outcomes, potential measures, instruments that could be deployed, key actors and deliverability
I think this does give a good insight as to what NFU are doing and shows that Meurig has got his head screwed on.
How many of you NFU sceptics might think again after reading it, I wonder?
gone up the hill
Member
- Location
- Devon
Needs to a simple and workable scheme for both the RPA and farmers.
I would go with a set payment of £70 acre and then add simple bolt on options to top that figure up. Ie: say over wintered stubble/ £20 acre/ every other year hedge cutting /£10 acre/ low input grassland £10 acre etc etc. ( but no more than 10 bolt on options at most and you can only take out 1 of the 10 options a year across all your land )
I would do away with things like three crop rule/ EFA's as well.
Not very imaginative is it
gone up the hill
Member
- Location
- Devon
If you want it imaginative then fine but it will end up so unworkable and costly for both farmers and the RPA to implement with red tape that it will never happen.
It needs to be simple/ fair and value for money.
Bossfarmer
Member
- Location
- between Perth and Inverness
I quite like those ideas theyre simple and straightforward personally id leave my whole arable area in stubble each winter to get £20 an acre sub amd help wildlife
Where's the value for money in giving farmers £70 for doing nothing,it's a nice dream but I am afraid that's all it is