A public "good" must be paid for from the public purse

[drinksloe]

Why don't u become unemployed and claim benefits??

 

Then someone else would fund ur lifestyle.

 

That bloke will probably work bloody hard for wot he's got, possibly handed down for generations.

It wouldof been profitableor at least a subsistance living back in the old days, it had to be as no subs. In his grandfathers day (50+ yrs ago) the shearing/wool money would of covered the rent or shepherds wage now the wool doesn't cover the cost of shearing most years

 

Also pretty sure there is no exemptions from planning regs (althou in theory the 'crown estate' doesn't need to apply but they still do go throu the regs)

Reduced council tax?? Possibly only because they have no water rates (private) or sewerage

Rebated desiel? Do u not use Red desiel for non road going machines/plant, never meet a timber harvester/plant contractor yet that runs his machines on 'white'

 

Wot about owners of woodlands being free from inheritance taxes??

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Why don't u become unemployed and claim benefits??

 

Thanks for the career advice!

 

Then someone else would fund ur lifestyle.

 

Not likely, well, not unless DWP adopts the Kevin Bridges approach to financial planning

 

That bloke will probably work bloody hard for wot he's got, possibly handed down for generations.

 

Wouldn't suggest otherwise..... But why should it be paid for by others?

It wouldof been profitableor at least a subsistance living back in the old days, it had to be as no subs. In his grandfathers day (50+ yrs ago) the shearing/wool money would of covered the rent or shepherds wage now the wool doesn't cover the cost of shearing most years

 

Also pretty sure there is no exemptions from planning regs

 

Pretty sure? https://www.gov.uk/planning-permissions-for-farms/when-you-dont-need-it

 

Reduced council tax?? Possibly only because they have no water rates (private) or sewerage http://manuals.voa.gov.uk/corporate/publications/Manuals/CouncilTaxManual/council_tax_man_pn/f-ct-man-pn2-appb.html

 

Farmers could receive £14,000 council tax rebate - Farmers Weekly

 

Rebated desiel? Do u not use Red desiel for non road going machines/plant, never meet a timber harvester/plant contractor yet that runs his machines on 'white'

 

Wot about owners of woodlands being free from inheritance taxes??

 

Yes I do use Red (where appropriate) and yes woodlands are exempt inheritance tax.

 

Does exampling a concession elsewhere in some way lessen the cumulative number of concessions in ag sector?

[wrsni]

Not sure about the planning system over there but in Northern Ireland farm buildings are exempt from planning permission, but that exemption is within certain preset criteria.

 

Therefore if you take the p1ss and it's brought to the attention of the planning department they are still fully entitled to investigate. Then if it turns out you've been trying to exploit a concession for non-farming use, not only will that particular work be sanctioned but you will have a "restricted development" clause put on the entire farm whereby you will have to apply via the usual planning process for anything at all which you wish to do on the farm in future.

 

So there is concession, but not a free for all!

[drinksloe]

Have u read ur link?

The exemptions for planning pretty much mean u can move around some inside walls of a shed. Really can't see a big deal in that and i bet it's similar in most industries.

 

U can do that with a normal house without planning, hell u can even extend ur house without planning, (as long as a permitted development criteria) althou u would have to involve BC.

 

If u want to build a new shed/tower etc u have to get PP just like everyone else

 

All i was trying to say is many of the perks are not just for farmers and plenty of other sectors have perks too.

I mentioned earlier about the planting grants for woodlands and subsidies for Boimass timber/firewood. Are they ok as they suit u?

There is all sorts of subsidies grants and incentives flying about for all sorts of businesses

[gooseflight]

subsidies for Boimass timber/firewood

Farmers are best placed to take advantage of most renewable incentives, whether wind, solar or biomass. They have land, storage and machinery.

 

Many have also diversified into self-catering accommodation, converting empty properties with diversification grants and heating them with domestic heating schemes [biomass] for which they get RHI. And we all know the [true] stories of double RHI for woodchip producers.

 

The system is what it is but the playing field is far from level.

Edited March 28, 2017 by gooseflight

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Have u read ur link?

 

Yes, however, in my haste, I perhaps omitted to mention Class Q GPDO 2015 which is what I was referring to....

 

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

[quote I mentioned earlier about the planting grants for woodlands and subsidies for Boimass timber/firewood. Are they ok as they suit u?

There is all sorts of subsidies grants and incentives flying about for all sorts of businesses

 

I take your point, it's a fair one. What I would add to the mix though is:

 

planting grants don't provide any specific advantage to myself but RHI for biomass does. Subsidies are a carrot rather than stick approach. I installed a Biomass boiler for a number of reasons - personal desire to reduce CO2 footprint through lower dependence of fossil fuels and the volatility of fluctuations in the world market. There was a small cash incentive for installation and, at the time, the domestic tariff was some years off with many people believing it would never materialise. I went ahead anyway at reasonable personal expense. The "cash" to fund RHI payments was that which would have been paid by UKPLC to EU in fines for failing to reduce CO2. Hence, carrot rather than fine.

 

I'd agree there are a broad range of "subsidies" flying around, it's only my opinion, but it seems to me, through those I speak to daily and that which I monitor on NFU websites and the media, that the biggest moaners are those that have the greatest degree of benefit from a broad range of financial and regulatory support.

 

What really grates, and resulted in a recent, fairly energetic argument with a good friend was when farmers say they depend upon subsidies but then whine like billy-o about the regulations that are attached to receiving them. If I stop burning biomass, my RHI stops, simple really. You can't have it both ways - the subsidies are tied to actions which are intended to mitigate the environmental impact of agriculture as an industrial activity. No one, so far as I am aware, is compelled to draw down the subsidy - it's a choice. The consequence of that choice is compliance.

 

I also struggle to reconcile how literally 10's, sometimes 100's of £1000's can be paid to farms which could be (many are) successful in their own right, but DLA/JSA/ESA, libraries, school crossing patrols, social care, NHS etc, etc, etc are all in decline.

 

There is no threshold test to pay sub's to ag areas that would go-under without it as distinct from those that are doing very well and just getting more cash.

 

Perhaps means testing would be a fairer way?

[agg221]

 

Depends on the ground and type of farm ur talking about but most rougher/higher/LFA type farms will never make a profit anyway no matter who runs them, unless u amagalmate them all sack and all the staff and let animal husbandry go down the chutes.

 

Wot would u prefer all our meat and milk came from battery type farms where cattle are raised entirley in sheds as that is more profiable?

 

Personally i'm more than happy to see subsidies to try and keep farms smaller more family orientated units rather than big factory farms.

If the farms merge and workers are slashed, where's the work going to come from in rural areas? Who's kids are going to fill vilage schools and keep local village shops open (if there is many left)

 

This contains contains the key points

 

You can't meet environmental and ethical standards at the same time as competing with other countries where these are not being met.

 

You can take a conscious decision to abandon these requirements and have a free market, or you can let them keep them and abandon the industry in favour of imports, accepting the social consequences.

 

If you want to retain the industry and the standards then you either subsidise or protect against imports.

 

If you have a non-productive factory you can close it down and redevelop the site for production of something profitable, or more likely housing or an out-of-town shopping warehouse. If you have a non-productive farm you can't do that unless you allow change of use to turn it into housing or an out-of-town shopping warehouse. Non-productive is usually a function of the soil and the microclimate, neither of which can practically be changed. That makes land which is uneconomic to farm useless in commercial terms.

 

Alec

[gdh]

[quote I mentioned earlier about the planting grants for woodlands and subsidies for Boimass timber/firewood. Are they ok as they suit u?

There is all sorts of subsidies grants and incentives flying about for all sorts of businesses

 

I take your point, it's a fair one. What I would add to the mix though is:

 

planting grants don't provide any specific advantage to myself but RHI for biomass does. Subsidies are a carrot rather than stick approach. I installed a Biomass boiler for a number of reasons - personal desire to reduce CO2 footprint through lower dependence of fossil fuels and the volatility of fluctuations in the world market. There was a small cash incentive for installation and, at the time, the domestic tariff was some years off with many people believing it would never materialise. I went ahead anyway at reasonable personal expense. The "cash" to fund RHI payments was that which would have been paid by UKPLC to EU in fines for failing to reduce CO2. Hence, carrot rather than fine.

 

I'd agree there are a broad range of "subsidies" flying around, it's only my opinion, but it seems to me, through those I speak to daily and that which I monitor on NFU websites and the media, that the biggest moaners are those that have the greatest degree of benefit from a broad range of financial and regulatory support.

 

What really grates, and resulted in a recent, fairly energetic argument with a good friend was when farmers say they depend upon subsidies but then whine like billy-o about the regulations that are attached to receiving them. If I stop burning biomass, my RHI stops, simple really. You can't have it both ways - the subsidies are tied to actions which are intended to mitigate the environmental impact of agriculture as an industrial activity. No one, so far as I am aware, is compelled to draw down the subsidy - it's a choice. The consequence of that choice is compliance.

 

I also struggle to reconcile how literally 10's, sometimes 100's of £1000's can be paid to farms which could be (many are) successful in their own right, but DLA/JSA/ESA, libraries, school crossing patrols, social care, NHS etc, etc, etc are all in decline.

 

There is no threshold test to pay sub's to ag areas that would go-under without it as distinct from those that are doing very well and just getting more cash.

 

Perhaps means testing would be a fairer way?

 

I agree with most of that. The only thing I would add is that unlike your RHI example if you stop receiving subsidies you still have to stick to all the rules so the complaints are genuine in that it's not a straight choice as compared to other countries.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

I agree with most of that. The only thing I would add is that unlike your RHI example if you stop receiving subsidies you still have to stick to all the rules so the complaints are genuine in that it's not a straight choice as compared to other countries.

 

I'm not clear on that, appreciate if you could expand?

 

I'm just shooting off the top of my head here, I'm thinking there will be aspects of HSE, Environmental, Protected species legislation for example that we are all bound by.

 

There are additional, comprehensive and complex cross compliance regulations, requirements and reports attached to BPS eligibility.

 

Are farmers obliged to satisfy the eligibility demands of BPS if they are NOT drawing down BPS funds?