LIVE - DEFRA SFI Janet Hughes “ask me anything” 19:00-20:00 20th September (Today)

[Janet Hughes Defra]

Hello, I’m Janet Hughes. I’m the Programme Director for the Future Farming and Countryside Programme in Defra – the programme that’s phasing out the Common Agricultural Policy and introducing new schemes and services for farmers.



Today (20 September) between 7pm-8pm, I and some of my colleagues will be answering your questions about our work including the Sustainable Farming Incentive, Farming in Protected Landscapes, and our test and trials.



We’ll try to answer at least 15 of your top voted questions, so please vote on the questions you’d most like me to answer.



You can read more about our Future Farming policy on our blog.



I’ve answered some of your questions previously: you can watch the videos on the Farm TV or Defra’s YouTube (part 1 and part 2 of the videos). I’m happy to answer any follow-up questions about that, as well as other questions you might have.



Housekeeping:

• We’ll do our best to answer as many questions as we can, in the order in which you’ve voted on them
• If there are top voted questions we can’t answer immediately for whatever reason, we’ll do our best to come back with answers to them in the next few days
• If this works for you as a format, we’ll do it again, so let us know what you think!

Looking forward to seeing you at 7pm!

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Food production is hugely important for the public. But we don't think subsidies are the right way forward because they stifle productivity growth, are unfair, drive up land and rent prices and don't produce much public benefit.

That's why we are going to spend the money instead on (a) supporting productivity in the sector and (b) investing in environmental, climate and animal health and welfare outcomes. The government has committed to maintain the same level of spending on agriculture but through these schemes instead of subsidies.

Also, we think food production and these outcomes can and should go hand in hand - it's not about choosing one or the other.

The trouble is that on many farms food production is barely, or no longer, profitable without BPS. This is not a productivity issue, it is a structural one. We farmers have been persuaded over many decades by our Ag colleges, our advisers and our primary customers to greatly increase output using ever greater technical inputs. This has allowed the UK food industry beyond the farm gate to commodify food and drive the farmgate price down. SFI, LNR and LR will not address this. Nor will fancy grant schemes for more technology.

 

[steveR]

Food production is hugely important for the public. But we don't think subsidies are the right way forward because they stifle productivity growth, are unfair, drive up land and rent prices and don't produce much public benefit.

That's why we are going to spend the money instead on (a) supporting productivity in the sector and (b) investing in environmental, climate and animal health and welfare outcomes. The government has committed to maintain the same level of spending on agriculture but through these schemes instead of subsidies.

Also, we think food production and these outcomes can and should go hand in hand - it's not about choosing one or the other.

I remain to be convinced that our customers, the big food manufacturers and retailers, will buy into this as wholeheartedy as one would hope....

Most farmers have long understood for many years, that subsidies are not actually to benefit farmers, but rather allow us to produce and sell product at below the CoP. In other words to support a cheap supply of food.

Will the supermarkets crank up their rates, or simply buy from wherever is cheapest.....? we all know the answer to that!!

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Any further ideas for things we can do to earn your trust very gratefully received!

I struggle with this Janet. I, like many, am old enough to remember a locally based MAFF adviser who was akin to what is called an "Extension officer" abroad. He (or she) was qualified and experienced enough in farming to offer advice to farmers on how to improve their farms and to act as the link to gevernment schemes in doing do. Their role was one of working with farmers on a local basis.

DEFRA simply don't have the budget or staff to do that now. It appears that you don't have the skillset within DEFRA either judging by how hard to actually incorporate into our businesses many of the proposals are. The problems that we point out here on TFF and in the T&T's we take part in would be evident to such suitably experienced staff in the early scheme design phase.

DEFRA are also "tarred by the same brush" due to being the sponsoring body for the RPA, the EA and Natural England, all of whom are seen by many farmers as existing simply to catch farmers out for even innocent mistakes and apply harsh penalties. Changing the engagement culture within these other bodies will be crucial to regaining trust.

 

[steveR]

Hello - thanks for your question

We're not planning for Red Tractor or any other assurance scheme to police environmental schemes on our behalf.

However, we are looking at possibly having some kind of earned recognition scheme for assurance schemes like Red Tractor, LEAF and organic certification so that people in those schemes can be recognised within government schemes.

What do you think? Does that seem like a good idea to you?

No. Sounds like the thin end of the wedge. Farming has already seen enough of Red Tractor and it's machinations.

Voluntary creeps into compulsion.

 

[white_stuffed]

We are already in an HLS scheme, so we weren't able to sign up to the pilot.
Consequently, I am very conscious that I haven't paid enough detailed attention to the proposed standards, proposed payment rates etc.
This is human nature (laziness!) on my part. I don't have to study it yet, because it doesn't directly affect me yet.
However, I do wonder if you are missing the input from the very subset of farms which should be/will be the main participants in the scheme once our current stewardship schemes expire? (And the bits that I have looked at seem very complex. I was sent an improved grassland questionnaire by email which I tackled today but gave up as too complex.

 

[Clive]

how is income forgone being calculated? Surely it’s very dependant on quality of farm, soil etc ?

my biggest issue with our pilot application so far is many options I really want to do simply don’t cover my REAL income forgone

is there scope for this to change given budget constraints? Sadly it will represent a significant barrier to the extent of our participation if not

 

[Scrambler]

Hi Janet, thanks for coming on here.
I have a smallish arable farm with plenty of hedges and some woodland. I significant portion of my income comes from the SFP and a CS Arable offer. Do you think the net income from the new schemes will be able match what we currently get? I believe we were promised it would, but from what I've seen so far, it won't even get close.

 

[onesiedale]

Given that permanent pasture achieves all of main aims of ELMS, ( biodiversity, carbon sequestration, public goods, and food production) do you think a much higher valuation for payments than you have suggested so far would attract more land managers to retain permanent pasture, and therefore help the environment at least cost for everyone

 

[Greythundercloudys]

Hi, how are ordinary family farms going to make up the loss of say 25000 grand in the next few year, buy 2025 fertiliser will be 400£ a ton, everyone can't do B&B or holiday let's, obviously the prise of stock, milk, barley will need to double like everything a farmer needs has.

 

[manhill]

common sense says that food production (security) must be the number one priority.
Does DEFRA agree and on a scale of 1 to 10 where does production and environment sit?

 

[Janet Hughes Defra]

Thanks very much everyone for such a wide range of questions - we've not quite answered them all but I hope I and my team have done them justice!

Let us know what you think, if this has been helpful we'll be happy to do this again

 

[topground]

Hello - thanks for your question

We're not planning for Red Tractor or any other assurance scheme to police environmental schemes on our behalf.

However, we are looking at possibly having some kind of earned recognition scheme for assurance schemes like Red Tractor, LEAF and organic certification so that people in those schemes can be recognised within government schemes.

What do you think? Does that seem like a good idea to you?

Any schemes that have any link with organisations such as Red Tractor which are controlled by the supermarket cartel will not be adopted here.

 

[StormInATeaCup]

How does organic farming fit into ELMS? There seems to have been no mention of it to date

 

[Jo28]

Hi Janet, I’ve seen DEFRA mention numerous times that they want to make this process simple for the farmer to do without the need for any agents leading to additional costs. I’m 24 and have qualifications in IT and computing and I would say I’m computer minded yet struggle to understand endless information which isn’t very clear. How do you expect my 65 year old dad with a basic nokia phone and very little computer knowledge to enroll himself into these new schemes? IMO things need to be made much much clearer and simpler.

Let's be honest the biggest bulk of this money will go to either huge farms or groups like rspb who will push defra into what they want and small family farms will be a thing of the past.

 

[bobk]

Environmental schemes only work for large estates , To the average farmer your schemes are tickling the edges ,

Looked at countryside stewardship , SFI and ELMS , I'm oot as they say .

Let us feed the nation , dismantle Red Tractor and watch us go .

 

[snarling bee]

I have a nationally important grassland/marsh SSSI on my farm. At the moment with Mid Tier I am struggling to claim much money for an area of ground I am unable to do much with, in fact it costs me money. I notice I would also be unable to enter the arable offer, if I was not in stewardship already. What is going to be available for SSSIs, and other high wildlife value sites, within the SFI that will be easy to claim and implement? At the moment I am very disillusioned with all the Environmental schemes on offer and proposed. It would be a shame if this SSSI was to loose its value if I was not incentivised to manage it well.

 

[2tractors]

Is it correct that if I were to enter into a hedgerow agreement under SFI, say the advanced level, that I would obliged to continue with that regime indefinitely, even if I withdrew from SFI in, say 4 years time?

 

[Jo28]

Hello - thanks for your question

We're not planning for Red Tractor or any other assurance scheme to police environmental schemes on our behalf.

However, we are looking at possibly having some kind of earned recognition scheme for assurance schemes like Red Tractor, LEAF and organic certification so that people in those schemes can be recognised within government schemes.

What do you think? Does that seem like a good idea to you?

Where is the benefit?

 

[spin cycle]

Hello - thanks for your question

We're not planning for Red Tractor or any other assurance scheme to police environmental schemes on our behalf.

However, we are looking at possibly having some kind of earned recognition scheme for assurance schemes like Red Tractor, LEAF and organic certification so that people in those schemes can be recognised within government schemes.

What do you think? Does that seem like a good idea to you?

ANY link to assurance is 'down vote' IMO

 

[StormInATeaCup]

Would Defra consider a ‘pasture for life’ livestock standard given its known environmental, animal welfare and human health benefits?