The Seeker
Member
were gonna end up voting for no one tho coz none of the rest are any better
Anyone would be better than her
Anyone would be better than her
Public Accounts Committee enquiry into ELMS
- Thread starter delilah
- Start date
- Location
- Northumberlandia
maybes her predercessor mr AB wasnt much more use mind... there all the same well most of them are.
Lets get a photo & were doings so much for the area. Yeah right
Tubbylew
Member
- Location
- Herefordshire
George never heard of inflation, I had a bit of a reckon up the other day, my store lamb average was up 20%, store cattle up not quite as much, but everything I seem to want to buy has gone up by about 20%, and I reckon it'll be a good while yet before prices settle down. They seem to be making it up as they go along.
Have just emailed Sir Geoffrey, pointing him to this thread and asking him what we should do next.
As said, it really needs folks who farm in his constituency to talk to him.
- Location
- Cirencester
He is my local but be warned he is a real "yes" man and is rated 650th worst MP out of 650. I am sure his best mate Allen will be talking to him as he only has 15K acres to play with
- Location
- Northumberland
Mr Beith fought our corner. A bit before my time, but in the late 80s we de-stocked cattle over winter while we built a new shed. I think it was something like they pre-dated how much BSP you could claim to the period when we had no cattle. MAFF not interested but Alan Beith helped us to get it sorted out. I can’t see AMT going in to bat for us in the same way.
- Location
- Essex
What's the best payment rate per hectare if you can cut all or most of your costs out at the same time?
- Location
- Yorks
Can't remember. Is max SFI going to be about £150/ha.
What we know now is Introductory SFI arable soils standard is £22/ha. Intermediate is £40/ha, so a £18/ha uplift to get the intermediate.
But, to get the extra £18 you need multi species winter cover on 20% of area. That should hopefully being long term benefits, but what will it cost? And some chaps around here use those winter barley stubbles to establish stubble turnips for their sheep (stubble turnips won't count if they are grazed in Nov, Dec, Jan).
So, for each 100 ha in intermediate we need 20ha cover crops. Say £35/ha seed, £35 drilling cost, £20 destruction cost???? (Use your own figures)
That's £95/ha X 20ha = £1,900 cost. To get an extra £1,800 income from the intermediate level over the introductory level income.
Is it worth it? Depends what value you put on the benefits, but there is certainly a cost involved, so it isn't a free lunch of an extra £18.
Those neighbours of ours are probably better off sticking with grazing their stubble turnips in November.
Encouraging cover crops might shift more people to direct drilling, so that could add up financially for some, but might not help spud, beet, carrot, parsnip, turf, grass leys battered by silage trailers, or veg growers, who probably plough a lot of their ground.
I'd prefer to live in a world of no subs, although BPS does help smooth out the peaks and troughs of farming incomes. I don't know what the answer is, bit it looks like we need to be prepared for a lot less subsidy income.
Get more efficient, improve yields, cut costs, add value (difficult for a commodity, and most of the country produce commodity crops and livestock to supply processors/supermarkets - the end consumer pick most of their food up from the supermarkets, so I think it's very very niche to think many farmers can develop supply chains to add value and retail locally, that market is only small). The salad and veg boys are hammered on price by the supermarkets, so I'm not going to grow cut lettuce for ASDA. Many of us grow grain to supply either large scale feed or flour mills - that's where the demand is. It's nearly impossible for average farmer to add value in that scenario imho.
Get more efficient. Well we try to constantly do that. Always looking to cut costs or increase yield.
All I can hope is commodity prices and margins are increased sufficiently to plug the gap. Why would that happen? Rest of EU will still be getting their BPS.
All very pessimistic from me, whereas I should be looking to progress and increase turnover and profit.
I can see a situation where DEFRA pay out a similar amount of cash subsidy, but compared with BPS there is a cost for the farmer associated with getting the sub. Hence farmer has less profit and less money to reinvest. I think that's a huge issue, and where ministers and the team with @Janet Hughes Defra might have failed. It's going to be the same amount of tax payer subsidy paid, but leaving a lower amount of profit for the farmer. That could be a disaster, and it will be the smaller family farms and rural communities that will be hit the hardest. If a small farm only makes say £25k, they need that to cover the household bills. Knock £20k off that profit and they are in trouble. The bigger guy who makes £100k, but has £40k knocked off his/her profit can still pay the household bills. I think that's where we are at.
If the subsidy is to remain at the same level (same cost to taxpayer), couldn't it have been designed to MAINTAIN the farm profit level. That would be a public good to fragile rural communities.
- Location
- Essex
Say £35/ha seed, £35 drilling cost, £20 destruction
Doesn't need to be that much. Don't forget, plenty of farms are doing this out of a normal farming budget. Obviously there is a cost, but he cs option SW6 for cover crops is going to pay £114 a ha, so quite handy if you are already doing it.
What this and other threads are doing is help farmers plan ahead. I can't see them bringing back any of the old, do what you like, area based subs. So people are rightly looking at the unsubsidised part of the business and how it will stand up on its own.
What I see is free money; and depending on what I am prepared to do and spend to get it, might or might not be worth the arseache. Treat is as another crop in the rotaion if you like. If it doesn't pay enough, don't do it. Then concentrate on making a living from the rest of the farm.
A lot is going to have to change. We all know how much food you can get from a veg patch. Growing malting barley or sugar beet is hardly going to save the world, but at current values, it's the safer and easier option. Beer and sugar are both luxury items and the bi products go for animal feed. Plenty of food at the moment, otherwise the market or the govt would be forcing change now rather than the next 5 to 10 years.
Doesn't need to be that much. Don't forget, plenty of farms are doing this out of a normal farming budget. Obviously there is a cost, but he cs option SW6 for cover crops is going to pay £114 a ha, so quite handy if you are already doing it.
What this and other threads are doing is help farmers plan ahead. I can't see them bringing back any of the old, do what you like, area based subs. So people are rightly looking at the unsubsidised part of the business and how it will stand up on its own.
What I see is free money; and depending on what I am prepared to do and spend to get it, might or might not be worth the arseache. Treat is as another crop in the rotaion if you like. If it doesn't pay enough, don't do it. Then concentrate on making a living from the rest of the farm.
A lot is going to have to change. We all know how much food you can get from a veg patch. Growing malting barley or sugar beet is hardly going to save the world, but at current values, it's the safer and easier option. Beer and sugar are both luxury items and the bi products go for animal feed. Plenty of food at the moment, otherwise the market or the govt would be forcing change now rather than the next 5 to 10 years.
Exactly, I am surrounded by large estates, they certainly aren't going to invite little old me on to the gravy train, just wait for me to go under then hey presto, rub tummy time, all done at tax payers expense, as per normal.
- Location
- S.E
Its not free money
Sorry I missed this - the Government is required to do a formal written response to the recommendations, which the Committee will then normally publish. This process takes a couple of months, normally, to come to fruition.
In the response, the Government has to say whether it accepts the recommendations and if so what it's going to do in response, and if not why not. (The Committee can't force the Government to do things, but it can require Government to respond and explain its position, and then hold Government to account for any commitments made / responses given).
Yes, I and my team along with delivery partners and other colleagues in Defra will generally be responsible for implementing any commitments made in response to the recommendations (unless they are outside my team's remit).
In terms of accountability: ministers are accountable to Parliament for the actions and decisions they take, including in response to reports like this one, and as a civil servant I'm responsible along with my colleagues and delivery partners for executing their policies and decisions.
- Location
- Yorks
Wonder if they'll allow SW6 to tick the box for SFI Intermediate level cover crops?
Seem to think Janet said they won't pay for things twice if already funded from stewardship??? Haven't read any detail about the rules on this one.
Would the existing SW6 tick the SFI box, or would the SFI cover crop need to be additional? If they are saying they won't fund things twice, then I'm guessing the SW6 won't count for the SFI requirement???
Sorry please can I clarify: do you mean a cap on how much funding any individual farm could get from the scheme?
Yes that's correct, we won't pay you twice for the same things so if you're already being paid through CS, you couldn't get paid twice to do the same thing on the same piece of land
- Location
- Yorks
Thanks Janet.
So I'm currently in a mid-tier agreement. I've got some AB15, AB1, AB11, AB9. They all grow and add OM back into the soil, as the growth/residues get chopped back in.
I don't think you've announced the detail on this as yet, but is it likely these stewardship options won't be allowed to be used for my calculation of adding OM to 33% of my arable land for SFI soils Introductory level? So therefore I'd need to add FYM or chop straw or cover crops on my remaining fields?
For Landscape Recovery, you have imposed a lower cap by saying that the bid has to be for a minimum of 500 Ha.
A number of posters on here have suggested that there should be an upper cap on some SFI options. To give a random example, a payment of £220/Ha for permanent pasture for the first 40 Ha.
You have said that Defra will not consider an upper cap on SFI options. I am trying to find out why that is. Why is there merit in a lower cap for LR, but not in an upper cap for the SFI ?
I know that you will respond by saying that the reason for the lower cap on LR is that it needs to be at scale for the objectives (eg rewilding) to be met. That isn't what I am asking. What I am asking is that if reasons exist for an upper cap on SFI options - and there are many - why can't you implement them ? Is it a political decision that has been made ? Or a procedural decision under your jurisdiction ?