Should we voluntarily lose glyphosate as a pre harvest desicant in food crops

[Chrisw]

I don't disagree that council members are properly elected, what I did say was that some council members voting intentions were changed by some impassioned speeches. If they are not voting based on their memberships wishes, then they are not representing their membership.
How much money has the Nfu spent on getting information out, because I haven't seen any info, and members in my area are asking me directly for guidance on the EU issue as the Nfu is silent!

 

[Pedders]

We do complain about the way certain anti pesticide NGOs get EU funding and if you come along to Cereals you will hear me make the point on a public stage.

Well I'm sure the colleagues are running scared of that !
Just think How much more effective such a complaint would have been had the NFU come out in favour of exit because of the rampant corruption in The EU

 

[T C]

Well I'm sure the colleagues are running scared of that !
Just think How much more effective such a complaint would have been had the NFU come out in favour of exit because of the rampant corruption in The EU

The way the campaign is going there must be opportunities to negotiate beyond the vote - eg get some strong assurances that glyphosphate will continue beyond December 2016. I know that the ag vote is not that significant but single issues like this will swing voters.

 

[Guy Smith]

I don't disagree that council members are properly elected, what I did say was that some council members voting intentions were changed by some impassioned speeches. If they are not voting based on their memberships wishes, then they are not representing their membership.
How much money has the Nfu spent on getting information out, because I haven't seen any info, and members in my area are asking me directly for guidance on the EU issue as the Nfu is silent!

Chris, with respect I take that with a large pinch of salt. We've distributed thousands of copies of two extensive documents on the INs and OUTs of the referendum debate.Weve held countless meetings, most very well attended, where we've allowed both sides and members to air their views. BFG has had numerous articles on the subject. We are tallying up the total amount spent but it will run into tens of thousands.

As for Council members representing members views, that's up to demicratically elected Council members. I meet these people regularly and they do their jobs diligently and well. Personally I'm happy the surveys we did are the best insight into where are members are on this issue.

 

[Chrisw]

Fair enough @Guy Smith , I take your word for it, but I have not seen any Nfu leaflets about in or out, just the report the Nfu commissioned. I will speak with the members again, but no one had mentioned any literature when they have contacted me!

 

[T C]

The Nfu claimed that they needed to take a position (to their members) so they could keep the membership informed. Prior to that the majority of members actually wanted the Nfu to remain neutral. Forgive me if I am wrong, but I have seen NO information coming from the Nfu about either in or out, except bringing Phil Hogan over to the Devon county show (apparently that's not campaigning).
Interesting how the vote should be solely on the views of the membership in each area, but from what I have heard about the Council meeting, there were impassioned speeches which changed the views of some of the delegates and their votes. Those council members who changed their view, are not representing the membership in their area, but merely voting on their own behalf and highlights exactly why the issue if one member one vote keeps coming up!
I still can't believe the membership (survey) actually came back with a majority wanting to remain, when the polls on here are for exit, farmers weekly readers favour exit, young farmers prefer exit, in fact almost every other source of farming (who have actually shared their survey results) shows the majority supporting brexit...... maybe I am just more cynical as I get older.

Apparently Owen Patterson wanted to debate with Phil Hogan at Devon but Hogan would not - they debated in Edinburgh where I think Hogan felt would be more friendly territory. As Owen Patterson put it he had to "chase Hogan around to get a debate" !!

 

[Guy Smith]

Fair enough @Guy Smith , I take your word for it, but I have not seen any Nfu leaflets about in or out, just the report the Nfu commissioned. I will speak with the members again, but no one had mentioned any literature when they have contacted me!

Chris , I'm really disappointed you haven't seen this. We've distributed thousands.

http://www.nfuonline.com/nfu-online/news/nfu-reports/uk-farmings-relationship-with-the-eu/

 

[Chrisw]

No, I haven't seen it, and neither have the other 2 Nfu members here. I am glad I haven't seen it to be honest, because just like the "impartial" presentations held around the country, the Nfu focused on Norway, with no mention of the Switzerland model where they have adopted no EU regulations, compared to Norway at about 50% and the UK at somewhere between 59% and 75%. Also the link you sent shows Norway paying about the same as the UK in terms of payment per person, no mention that Switzerland only pays £600m compared to the UK's £16bn gross, or the actual Norway figure of less than £1bn, which supports projects or goes direct to EU countries, and not a contribution to support the EU project. A direct comparison (as done in the Nfu report) is not only disingenuous, it is blatantly false!!
http://www.eu-norway.org/eu/Financial-contribution/#.V10m6cvTXqA
It is no wonder some people really struggle to trust the Nfu on some issues!!

 

[Pedders]

The way the campaign is going there must be opportunities to negotiate beyond the vote - eg get some strong assurances that glyphosphate will continue beyond December 2016. I know that the ag vote is not that significant but single issues like this will swing voters.

you'll never get that assurance as it can't be given ..... the way the system works with EU funded lobby groups dictating EU policy is so deeply ingrained it can never be refomed ..the whole system is so rampantly corrupt it positively stinks ..the green lobby has instant access to the higher corridors of power ... yet people like @Guy Smith choose to believe that reform is possible and that the EU can be changed by complaining a bit ....it's not and it can't and if we stay in then the fight over Neonics and Glyphosate will turn out to be just be the beginning of a long battle with a well organised and well funded enemy that we simply have no hope of winning ...
vote to remain if you will but don't complain when they systematically remove more chemicals from our arsenal with little or no scientific reasoning .
surely of all the reasons for farmers to vote one way or another the corruption of the scientifc debate over agrochemicals must be the strongest ? how as a farmer can you choose to stay with an organisation as corrupt and wrong as the EU on this matter and think that it's a good idea ?

 

[T C]

you'll never get that assurance as it can't be given ..... the way the system works with EU funded lobby groups dictating EU policy is so deeply ingrained it can never be refomed ..the whole system is so rampantly corrupt it positively stinks ..the green lobby has instant access to the higher corridors of power ... yet people like @Guy Smith choose to believe that reform is possible and that the EU can be changed by complaining a bit ....it's not and it can't and if we stay in then the fight over Neonics and Glyphosate will turn out to be just be the beginning of a long battle with a well organised and well funded enemy that we simply have no hope of winning ...
vote to remain if you will but don't complain when they systematically remove more chemicals from our arsenal with little or no scientific reasoning .
surely of all the reasons for farmers to vote one way or another the corruption of the scientifc debate over agrochemicals must be the strongest ? how as a farmer can you choose to stay with an organisation as corrupt and wrong as the EU on this matter and think that it's a good idea ?

I had been floating between IN and OUT - the thought that there will be no agriculture left in UK if we were out of EU is laughable.
The glyphosate issue (along with the nationalisation of hedgerows) has swayed me - I have said here before if glyphosphate is not relicensed for questionable carginogenic risk then at least 50% of our products will fall, many are staples that we have used for many years (Bravo, Opus, Starane, Duplosan etc.). There is no way that food produced using non EU licensed products in the rest of the world would be banned from our market. This would be a much bigger threat to UK agriculture than loss of CAP support.

 

[Guy Smith]

No, I haven't seen it, and neither have the other 2 Nfu members here. I am glad I haven't seen it to be honest, because just like the "impartial" presentations held around the country, the Nfu focused on Norway, with no mention of the Switzerland model where they have adopted no EU regulations, compared to Norway at about 50% and the UK at somewhere between 59% and 75%. Also the link you sent shows Norway paying about the same as the UK in terms of payment per person, no mention that Switzerland only pays £600m compared to the UK's £16bn gross, or the actual Norway figure of less than £1bn, which supports projects or goes direct to EU countries, and not a contribution to support the EU project. A direct comparison (as done in the Nfu report) is not only disingenuous, it is blatantly false!!
http://www.eu-norway.org/eu/Financial-contribution/#.V10m6cvTXqA
It is no wonder some people really struggle to trust the Nfu on some issues!!

I don't want to get into the substance of the debate because experience tells me it's endless, there's always another fact or another bit of analysis that either side can throw in. And there are a myriad of different issues to consider many not involving agriculture which the NFU haven't commented on.

If you are saying the NFU have set out to deceive - I strongly disagree. I think we have tried to provide information as best we can.

The NFU is a broad church and members will feel differently on this issue and that is fully respected by the organisation. We've engaged with both sides of the debate and given both platform.

 

[Chrisw]

Thanks for the reply @Guy Smith . I agree that we should leave it there, as I do not believe that the Nfu has given a fair representation of the information, which they promised to do.
You are right that this would end up going round endlessly, so we should just agree to disagree.