Sustainable Farming Incentive - Pilot Information (including PAYMENT RATES)

beefandsleep

Member
Location
Staffordshire
Income foregone creeping in again. The same reason wayleave payments for power poles in grassland are about 1/3 of the arable rate.

A false generalisation.

Quite, IF I enter into any kind of agreement, trees definitely won’t be included, what if one blows down halfway through? Will they want all the money back? If you forget to inform them will there be an arbitrary fine/claw back?
The track record on things like this is not good. The original stewardship agreements years ago were actually quite sensible, had dedicated case officers with discretion and often common sense, they really need to get back to that.
 

holwellcourtfarm

Member
Livestock Farmer
Quite, IF I enter into any kind of agreement, trees definitely won’t be included, what if one blows down halfway through? Will they want all the money back? If you forget to inform them will there be an arbitrary fine/claw back?
The track record on things like this is not good. The original stewardship agreements years ago were actually quite sensible, had dedicated case officers with discretion and often common sense, they really need to get back to that.
There's a strong commitment from DEFRA to be more "collaborative" in their regulation of these new schemes, much like the EA aim to "encourage" compliance rather than "enforce" it. Only time will tell if they deliver.

The question is can you trust them?
 

delilah

Member
Subsidy: A subsidy is a benefit given to an individual, business, or institution, usually by the government. ...

People keep saying it's not a subsidy.
It's a subsidy.
Lets say there's two farms identical in every respect; size, soil, enterprises, staffing, turnover.
Then introduce a new element into one of them that means they are no longer identical: 20 hours a week of free admin support.
That farm will take full advantage of all of the elements of SFI/ELMS open to them. They have a benefit over the other farm. They are subsidized.
Which is absolutely fine. One of the fundamental roles of Government is to interfere in the economy to the benefit of society.
The issue with ELMS is not "is it a subsidy ?", but "who do we wish to subsidize ?"
As these SFI proposals stand, the answer to that question, unequivocally, is "Large landholders who have a significant chunk of their land in arable".
Is that Governments intention ? If so they should spit it out and say so. If not, they should change it.
 

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
I had a look today at the proposals, not very inspiring really, looks like a bureaucratic nightmare, payments for drawing up lots of nice plans and splitting up areas into lots of small inefficient bits. I’m sure they will all need mapping, remapping, hours spent achieving naff all on the computer. I’m sure it will provide plenty of employment in government offices. How very depressing.

Chatting with my old mate from NE. We both agreed that the Pilot will struggle to get much traction for essentially, all the above!

The final product will change quite substantially... if the Govt wants these outcomes.
 

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
There's a strong commitment from DEFRA to be more "collaborative" in their regulation of these new schemes, much like the EA aim to "encourage" compliance rather than "enforce" it. Only time will tell if they deliver.

The question is can you trust them?

I don't. Leopards and Spots comes to mind...

DEFRA need to be more collaborative in their design of these schemes too...
 

delilah

Member
"The support will be offered free of charge to farmers and land managers by organisations known and trusted in the farming community."

Are there any?

Quite.
This support scheme is the thin end of what will be a hideously thick wedge. The administrative burden of the proposals as they stand is going to consume many millions of pounds. If they learn anything from the pilots it has to be that the options need drastically simplifying (or in the case of arable area payments, dropping completely).
 

onesiedale

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Derbyshire

At 1.30 this morning, DEFRA started a new thread about it!
 

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
Quite.
This support scheme is the thin end of what will be a hideously thick wedge. The administrative burden of the proposals as they stand is going to consume many millions of pounds. If they learn anything from the pilots it has to be that the options need drastically simplifying (or in the case of arable area payments, dropping completely).

Will they learn from the Pilots? Past experience of similiar schemes, is that once they have been "designed", the individuals and groups who have created various parts/option to try and produce an outcome, will fight to keep it going/

DEFRA seemed to be rowing back on the simplicity idea already!
 
Last edited:

midlandslad

Member
Location
Midlands
Reading through the guidance the requirements are so vague at this stage to determine what the cost will be of each scheme.

Also, how are the treasury going to be certain that good value for money is achieved without an army of inspectors. We currently moan about inspectors measuring margins, however they haven’t before had any input on the actual farming and now they are going to be required to judge whether the amount of cultivation-has reduced or organic manure has been applied and incorporated correctly.
 

delilah

Member
Also, how are the treasury going to be certain that good value for money is achieved without an army of inspectors.

They can't be. It's just one reason why the arable area payments need scrapping. Meanwhile they are admitting that they are short of applications for livestock pilots (Deadline midnight tonight.) Whole things a shambles not even got past first base yet.
 

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
Reading through the guidance the requirements are so vague at this stage to determine what the cost will be of each scheme.

Also, how are the treasury going to be certain that good value for money is achieved without an army of inspectors. We currently moan about inspectors measuring margins, however they haven’t before had any input on the actual farming and now they are going to be required to judge whether the amount of cultivation-has reduced or organic manure has been applied and incorporated correctly.

As I have said before regarding CS options, any scheme that requires a subjective Inspection should be avoided at all costs.
 

steveR

Member
Mixed Farmer
They can't be. It's just one reason why the arable area payments need scrapping. Meanwhile they are admitting that they are short of applications for livestock pilots (Deadline midnight tonight.) Whole things a shambles not even got past first base yet.

First thing they needed, was to get decent, experienced Advisers* out on the farms to "sell" the pilots and work with Farmers as happened with earlier Pilots, they also needed to make it more financially appealing for all the buggeration that will inevitably ensue.


*Independent or NE, however, I doubt that NE, who still have one or two experienced people, are really that excited about the SFI pilots...
 

Wombat

Member
BASIS
Location
East yorks
Reading through the guidance the requirements are so vague at this stage to determine what the cost will be of each scheme.

Also, how are the treasury going to be certain that good value for money is achieved without an army of inspectors. We currently moan about inspectors measuring margins, however they haven’t before had any input on the actual farming and now they are going to be required to judge whether the amount of cultivation-has reduced or organic manure has been applied and incorporated correctly.

Yeah but then they want direct drilling but you have to incorporate manure, not sure how that works.
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 78 43.1%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 63 34.8%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 30 16.6%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.7%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 4 2.2%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,286
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top