who is going to defend DEFRA on this one?

[onesiedale]

Government taken to court over meat and dairy emissions - Farmers Weekly

Green campaign group Feedback has taken the government to the Court of Appeal claiming that it has acted unlawfully by failing to implement measures to

www.fwi.co.uk

 

[onesiedale]

on a serious note, if Gov loses on this one we are all screwed.
If the Gov wins then it overturns the last 10 years narrative that ruminants are bad for the planet.
But who is going to have the balls within Gov. to say;
"errrr, we are sorry, we listened to bad science and got the narrative wrong, ruminants are actually good for the planet" .

 

[topground]

The government will put Janet Hughes in the witness box so that she can explain how DEFRA policy on the replacement for BPS is designed to undermine the livestock industry and so achieve Govt net zero targets.

 

[onesiedale]

@Isabella_fish
maybe this is one for you.

 

[delilah]

Rowan Smith, acting on behalf of Feedback, said: “It would completely undermine the effectiveness of the Climate Change Act, and set a bad precedent for other policies, if the government could arbitrarily choose when and by whom that duty can be discharged.

“Our client has held the government to account on its promise that the Food Strategy would contribute to meeting the carbon budgets.”

Have just emailed Rowan asking how a farmer representative body can input to the process.

 

[delilah]

An independent review into the Food Strategy by Henry Dimbleby was also discussed, which stated that one of the most effective ways to reduce carbon emissions and free up land for nature is to cut back on animal proteins.

And that's the NFU's problem, right there. They co-wrote the Dimbleby strategy. Are they going to now say that they were wrong to do so ? They have given themselves the opportunity, with their recent about turn on GWP100/GWP* .

 

[DrWazzock]

When I see rationing of air travel or road fuel then maybe I’ll take this kind of court action seriously. In the meantime it should be viewed with the contempt it deserves. But of course there’s money in it for the wigs and tights brigade so it’s gained traction. Wonder how much more these parasites will cost the taxpayer ?

 

[wanton dwarf]

An independent review into the Food Strategy by Henry Dimbleby was also discussed, which stated that one of the most effective ways to reduce carbon emissions and free up land for nature is to cut back on animal proteins.

And that's the NFU's problem, right there. They co-wrote the Dimbleby strategy. Are they going to now say that they were wrong to do so ? They have given themselves the opportunity, with their recent about turn on GWP100/GWP* .

"Henry Dimbleby" is a fudging Cookery Writer.

Livestock farming takes nutrients from Grass and makes it available for insects -> birds & small mammals -> large mammals. Livestock can do this magic on marginal land that is not productive for any other crop.

Without livestock we'd just have scrubland and a few insects sucking plant juice - maybe not even the insects in the case of Gorse & Ferns.


Fudging Cookery Writer is just a Fudging Cookery Writer.

 

[DrWazzock]

An independent review into the Food Strategy by Henry Dimbleby was also discussed, which stated that one of the most effective ways to reduce carbon emissions and free up land for nature is to cut back on animal proteins.

And that's the NFU's problem, right there. They co-wrote the Dimbleby strategy. Are they going to now say that they were wrong to do so ? They have given themselves the opportunity, with their recent about turn on GWP100/GWP* .

Nothing like digging a hole for your own industry is there? The NFU should never have jumped on the methane bandwagon. Fortunately they seem to have had a rethink but the damage has been significant.

 

[Suffolk Serf]

"Henry Dimbleby" is a fudging Cookery Writer.

Livestock farming takes nutrients from Grass and makes it available for insects -> birds & small mammals -> large mammals. Livestock can do this magic on marginal land that is not productive for any other crop.

Without livestock we'd just have scrubland and a few insects sucking plant juice - maybe not even the insects in the case of Gorse & Ferns.


Fudging Cookery Writer is just a Fudging Cookery Writer.

Yeah but he talks posh and is a Dimbleby. So must be right. Probably.

 

[Hindsight]

Nothing like digging a hole for your own industry is there? The NFU should never have jumped on the methane bandwagon. Fortunately they seem to have had a rethink but the damage has been significant.

Yeah but he talks posh and is a Dimbleby. So must be right. Probably.

I listened to him last June in the Big Tent at Groundswell. He seemed to go down well with the audience. I thought that odd given the report he authored. And given the role for grazing livestock as I understand it in this regen ag thing that is fundamental to Groundswell. Hey ho.

 

[steveR]

I listened to him last June in the Big Tent at Groundswell. He seemed to go down well with the audience. I thought that odd given the report he authored. And given the role for grazing livestock as I understand it in this regen ag thing that is fundamental to Groundswell. Hey ho.

Too much of an over hot love-in for me, so I left

 

[DaveGrohl]

An independent review into the Food Strategy by Henry Dimbleby was also discussed, which stated that one of the most effective ways to reduce carbon emissions and free up land for nature is to cut back on animal proteins.

And that's the NFU's problem, right there. They co-wrote the Dimbleby strategy. Are they going to now say that they were wrong to do so ? They have given themselves the opportunity, with their recent about turn on GWP100/GWP* .

Although it makes the NFU appear (rightly) to be stupid as fekk, it might undermine the narrative by showing that stupid people can get something right eventually. Could be argued that the science has "improved" and so the narrative is not soundly based.

 

[DaveGrohl]

Should be easy for a half decent legal team to knock this one out of the park using quality evidence. Trouble is, who are the people tasked with defending this, how knowledgable are they? GWP* alone should be enough to defend UK farming, but do they know enough to present a defence, never mind things like hydroxyl ions, methane’s actual warming effect being less than previously assumed, fundamental differences in methane destruction between housed/grazing animals, etc, etc…?

 

[Jackov Altraids]

Feedback are applying a bit of pressure which could be very effective if we don't apply some pressure to counteract it and make sure the government has the WILL as well as the information to fight this.
This really is a do or die moment for the NFU.

 

[onesiedale]

This really is a do or die moment for the NFU.

and AHDB , NBA, NSA and all of those other organisations that have been apologising for our livestock heating the planet up.
This has presented a golden opportunity to get the real discussion out in the open .
Feedback will have done us a favour.... but only if they lose.

 

[Jackov Altraids]

and AHDB , NBA, NSA and all of those other organisations that have been apologising for our livestock heating the planet up.
This has presented a golden opportunity to get the real discussion out in the open .
Feedback will have done us a favour.... but only if they lose.

And the soil association.

They've said they support the legal challenge by Feedback.

It does beggar belief how ignorant our industry bodies are. All paid up members of the self-preservation society.

 

[Swarfmonkey]

"Henry Dimbleby" is a fudging Cookery Writer.

It's worse than that. The chubby little bugger made his ££££ off the back of the posh fast food chain he co-founded, but now has the temerity to lecture people on what they eat.

As to "Feedback" it's bankrolled by all your favourite tax-dodging so-called philanthropies. The Esmee Fairburn Foundation (yes, the same lot that are the Soil Association's single largest source of funds), Rowntree Foundation, Oak Foundation, Rothschild Foundation & the Waterloo Foundation. The ones that want the world shaped to their liking, but don't want to bother with anything troublesome, you know, like democratic process, so they just bankroll pressure groups like Feedback to engage in a bit of lawfare instead.

 

[Swarfmonkey]

And the soil association.

They've said they support the legal challenge by Feedback.

It does beggar belief how ignorant our industry bodies are. All paid up members of the self-preservation society.

No surprise. Both Feedback and the SA have taken a considerable amount of dosh from the Esmee Fairburn Foundation (guess whose pulling the strings there?). It wasn't the odious Rob Percival that said the SA would support it, by any chance?

 

[Jackov Altraids]

The response is simple.

Henry Dimbleby and the CCC were wrong in suggesting reducing meat and dairy reduces emissions.
Significant data has been collected which undermines many original assumptions as well as over use of the deeply flawed study by Poore and Nemecek.
Their main argument for reduction is land use change, not emissions anyway.
As meat and dairy CAN be produced at net-zero or better, such a ruling would be discriminatory.
It would be fairer and lawful to tax any emissions at source.
The UN's right to food says that everyone has the right to healthy food which should also be culturally appropriate.
We aren't called le Ros Boeuf for nothing.