Victoria Prentis at NFU Tenants Conference!

[Frank-the-Wool]

On the first day of this year's virtual NFU Tenant Farmers' Conference, farming minister Victoria Prentis announced that subsidies for farmers would change from year to year.

The minister explained that a new mindset was needed, as behaviours the government wants farmers to engage with might not be known when the Sustainable Farming Incentive is written. Find out more about this, and other challenges faced, in our NFU Tenant Farmers' Conference write-up as Tenants Forum chair Chris Cardell addressed members on day two today.

Now I know that most on hear think the NFU is a waste of time but the comments from Victoria Prentis above do show what a mess the whole ELMS/SFI is turning into.
How on earth do you do a budget when any environmental payments change from year to year!!!

 

[delilah]

Heard that on farming programme this morning, thought I was still in the land of nod having a weird dream, what a complete and utter shambles.
Looking on the positive, maybe they do now accept that the whole thing needs rewriting and this is their cack-handed way of acknowledging that ?

 

[BrianV]

If Defra & the NFU had half a brain between them they would simply keep the SFP as it is for the first 100 hectares & then have any ELMS projects separate to that, this would give farmers a certain base level to have confidence in & plan for the future!

 

[SilliamWhale]

Its an interesting idea, but who can provide the environmental goods if not being properly paid for them?

 

[Mixedupfarmer]

Its an interesting idea, but who can provide the environmental goods if not being properly paid for them?

RSPB, National trust, etc because they would do it anyway

 

[SilliamWhale]

RSPB, National trust, etc because they would do it anyway

No they wouldn't! They couldn't afford to without funding of some sort

 

[BrianV]

Its an interesting idea, but who can provide the environmental goods if not being properly paid for them?

Farmers with less than 100 hectares will find it very difficult to keep a farm viable & get enough ELMS projects to balance up the productivity lost, with the certainty of a base payment they would at least be able to make a reasonable contribution, it is the larger estates that will be able to take most advantage of what is being proposed.
There would still be ample funds available for ELMS projects.

 

[topground]

Perhaps Victoria Prentis has asked about the the level of interest in the SFI pilot and has twigged that the scheme has been designed to fail by her civil servants.

 

[Steevo]

The government don’t seem to know what they want…..so will end up achieving nothing in the process.

Farms are businesses and will respond to the market opportunities that exist, if the government will just make up their mind.

 

[Hampton]

If Defra & the NFU had half a brain between them they would simply keep the SFP as it is for the first 100 hectares & then have any ELMS projects separate to that, this would give farmers a certain base level to have confidence in & plan for the future!

Can’t do that, the big farmers with thousands of acres would sh!t the bed and declare it unfair!

 

[BrianV]

Can’t do that, the big farmers with thousands of acres would sh!t the bed and declare it unfair!

Not sure what would be unfair they would get the base 100 hectares the same as everyone else & would be free to enter ELMS projects just as they are now.

 

[Mixedupfarmer]

No they wouldn't! They couldn't afford to without funding of some sort

Membership fees, money and property left in wills, entry fees to property, selling tat in gift shops, the list goes on

 

[Hampton]

Not sure what would be unfair they would get the base 100 hectares the same as everyone else & would be free to enter ELMS projects just as they are now.

I’ve made many posts both at the time and since about the ridiculous stance by many large farmers on what you are proposing.
I even remember bringing it up at NFU meetings and Guy smith said “ everyone wants the cut off to be just above what they receive” made a joke of it and killed any constructive conversation dead.

 

[BrianV]

I’ve made many posts both at the time and since about the ridiculous stance by many large farmers on what you are proposing.
I even remember bringing it up at NFU meetings and Guy smith said “ everyone wants the cut off to be just above what they receive” made a joke of it and killed any constructive conversation dead.

But it is not a case of the cut off being above what people want, it's about the cut off being at a level that enables a family to make a start in farming, all farmers would be entitled to this base amount & large farmers would in fact be better off than what is being proposed at the moment & still be able to do the ELMS projects they are at the moment considering.
At least with this DEFRA have a fighting chance of the majority of farmers getting involved in ELMS in one way or another!

 

[Steevo]

There’s probably a cut off point below which ELMS won’t be viable…..not much point applying if income level is less than £10k for example, let alone a sensible minimum required profit level!

If DEFRA want the majority of farms involved as they claim, unless payment rates rise significantly it just won’t happen.

£10k on a 200ac farm is £50/ac.

I can’t see payment rates being this level as an average across acres. Costs involved as well so profit level much much less. Not forgetting the farmer still has to have enough to be able to farm enough to try and make a living to support his family too.

Not forgetting the risk of penalties or fines for being determined to have fallen foul of any rules.

Put that £50 across 1000ac = £50k
Or across 2000ac = £100k

Those sorts of figures make it much more of a worthwhile enterprise worth considering and learning about even allowing for costs. It would take little more to design a scheme for 1000ac as opposed to 200ac. This still assumes the £50/ac figure across the average farmed though.

 

[J 1177]

Shambles. I farm just shy of 200 ac.
Its such a f**k up that it makes my mind up for me. Prepare for life with zero sub. I think i will be in the majority of farmers with this thinking.
Does the grade A weapon not realise that farm business decisions can take years to implement. Ffs what a moron.

 

[BrianV]

There’s probably a cut off point below which ELMS won’t be viable…..not much point applying if income level is less than £10k for example, let alone a sensible minimum required profit level!

If DEFRA want the majority of farms involved as they claim, unless payment rates rise significantly it just won’t happen.

£10k on a 200ac farm is £50/ac.

I can’t see payment rates being this level as an average across acres. Costs involved as well so profit level much much less. Not forgetting the farmer still has to have enough to be able to farm enough to try and make a living to support his family too.

Not forgetting the risk of penalties or fines for being determined to have fallen foul of any rules.

Put that £50 across 1000ac = £50k
Or across 2000ac = £100k

Those sorts of figures make it much more of a worthwhile enterprise worth considering and learning about even allowing for costs. It would take little more to design a scheme for 1000ac as opposed to 200ac. This still assumes the £50/ac figure across the average farmed though.

There is no reason why the SFP couldn't continue at the same rate as it is at the moment per hectare, maybe rising with inflation for those first 100 hectares, Defra already have all the maps & information for virtually all the farms in England so to continue with this base level payment should not cause any complications, everyone could then decide what level of ELMS involvement they were able to participate in. This would as now be a base payment for good farming practice.

 

[Hampton]

But it is not a case of the cut off being above what people want, it's about the cut off being at a level that enables a family to make a start in farming, all farmers would be entitled to this base amount & large farmers would in fact be better off than what is being proposed at the moment & still be able to do the ELMS projects they are at the moment considering.
At least with this DEFRA have a fighting chance of the majority of farmers getting involved in ELMS in one way or another!

I agree with you. I’m just saying why it didn’t happen

 

[Flat 10]

On the first day of this year's virtual NFU Tenant Farmers' Conference, farming minister Victoria Prentis announced that subsidies for farmers would change from year to year.

The minister explained that a new mindset was needed, as behaviours the government wants farmers to engage with might not be known when the Sustainable Farming Incentive is written. Find out more about this, and other challenges faced, in our NFU Tenant Farmers' Conference write-up as Tenants Forum chair Chris Cardell addressed members on day two today.

Now I know that most on hear think the NFU is a waste of time but the comments from Victoria Prentis above do show what a mess the whole ELMS/SFI is turning into.
How on earth do you do a budget when any environmental payments change from year to year!!!

If you are a tenant, why you would pay an Nfu sun is beyond me as the TFA are bloody brilliant.

 

[Adeptandy]

The government don’t seem to know what they want…..so will end up achieving nothing in the process.

Farms are businesses and will respond to the market opportunities that exist, if the government will just make up their mind.

I think that’s the plan, end sfp and fudge up elms so nobody wants to apply. Big pot of cash saved for hmg