- Location
- Near Derby
It looks like Bradshaw will get elected president as he's the only one nominated. Sad really if they can't find someone better than him.
Red tractor stakeholder survey on governance
- Thread starter ajd132
- Start date
- Location
- Essex
Remind me who is standing against Putin this year?
Zelensky
- Location
- Northleach, Gloucestershire
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I’ve every confidence that Tom Bradshaw will make an effective NFU President. However, single candidate elections are not good for NFU democracy. His predecessors - Ben Gill, Peter Kendall, Meurig Raymond and Minette - all had to fight a two candidate race to win the Presidency.</p>— Guy Smith (@essexpeasant) <a href=" ">January 9, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
SilliamWhale
Member
Not really.
Yes it’s really difficult trying to debate people who are good talkers.
They have probably had training in how to deal with difficult questions and know how to make the questioner feel stupid.
The best thing about being on here is that you have time to think about what you want to say and present a reasoned argument. It’s much harder for them to counter that, and that is the real reason you don’t see these people on here.
- Location
- N.Lincs
......oh, I don't know Nick, you may be being a tad harsh there - the lass says she's a researcher .......
....... with a misplaced post like that, she's likely to fit in really well with an outfit like Campbell Tickell - they're not very good at getting things right either
Other than you and TFF Clive... if the forum didn't exist none of this would have come to light! TFF damaged NFU by exposing NFUs absolute disregard for general farmers. Just saying.........no one will ask any difficult questions ……. not the “done thing” within the NFU
you just say “yes” a lot if you want to get on
“ fairwell tour” does she think she’s a pop star
she shouldn’t be allowed to make the AGM as president - a vote of no confidence should be called at the 22nd Jan council meeting, she needs keeping way from any board room that can further damage this industry
i can’t think of any individual who has damaged the NFU as much as this in farming history
Any 1500+ acre Estate can suck up GFC easily. e.g. Where we used to live, the local Manor had their land registered off-shored in trust so RT was chicken feed to them.
The NFU-RT argument goes a bit like this:
1. Farmers produce on land either owned (or just possessed if your the tenant) for which they are paid already.
2. The processors/supermarkets need carbon credits in return for buying farmer's produce.
3. If Farmers wont sign away their carbon credit then they may lose out to those who will.
4. Anyone who wont trade will have to go into 100% SFI and cease arable/livestock and just trade carbon credits.
Heads they win, Tails we lose (if we want to actively farm). Win-win for the green economy
So what can farmers say to counter this?
1. Farmers are paid too little already.
2. Giving away carbon credits in exchange for being able to do what we were already doing, does not make business sense.
3. Therefore can medium and small farms withhold these credits so the Retailers and Processors go without and can we farmers still trade?
Only if farmers are organised and hold their nerve. This comes mainly down to rights to property and Rule of Law. The question then is, come NetZero, what carbon taxes will these big corporates have to pay and how many small and medium farms and their accompanying carbon credits do they need to balance their books?
If the Big Corps are short of carbon credits then that means food price rises to cover it!
Little independents and direct sales will then see the beginning of an upturn!
Defra's Magic Maps and their SFI database will have these answers.
Last edited:
Elected?
Really??
I am sure I can find another word here..... "anointed" comes to mind as a polite term. Other expressions are less.... charitable!
The AHDB use the term ‘confirmed’ for their single candidate elections
gone up the hill
Member
- Location
- Devon
£5000 YEARLY cost to do the RT GFC for a 300 acre mixed farm.
( According to RT research into the cost of doing it )
And the £5000 CANNOT be recouped from selling RT produce so a NET cost for being allowed to be RT assured, add on another £2000 for the current RT cost to comply with scheme rules will = £7000 net costs for a 300 acre family mixed farm to be assured.
Or put another way that 300 acre farm will have to buy and fat 700 store lambs and use the £10 head net profit or buy 70 store cattle and fatten at the net £100 profit to cover the cover the costs of being GFC RT assured before they even start making any profit for themselves or to re-invest in the business/ farm!
Totally unviable
Another bunch of self serving *1*&! at the top end of the Organisation.
I'm just looking at the legal/moral/contractual argument.
Are you saying the that RT-GFC costs mean that, in your 300 are example, that production will have to increase to cover those Farm Assurance Green (FAG) costs?
It's been a long day so small words please
what a ridiculous (and clearly engineered) situation
why won’t ( or can’t?) anyone else stand ?
Andrew Ward said he wouldn’t now due to the damage his farm has suffered from the flooding this autumn and winter. He felt he needed to prioritize that and so couldn’t see how he make the time commitment this year.
I think that’s a fair enough reason given the circumstances.
SilliamWhale
Member
Probably because it doesnt work like that
SilliamWhale
Member
I'm just looking at the legal/moral/contractual argument.
Are you saying the that RT-GFC costs mean that, in your 300 are example, that production will have to increase to cover those Farm Assurance Green (FAG) costs?
It's been a long day so small words please
Production will probably have to decrease to meet the GFC GHG targets.
Anderson did a report and it was published in FW