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

[flatyre]

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

 

As WRSNI says over here farmers can do a lot more than move a few internal walls. My previous employer was from a farming family though they stopped farming decades ago. He built playgrounds for a living, but still had a herd number which meant he could throw up new sheds without needing permission. There were a number of benefits to being a 'farmer' without owning a farm:confused1:

[gdh]

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?

 

Not in terms of the mapping exercises no but general regulations yes.

 

I should just point out I don't have an issue with most of it, it's just a comparison to other countries that have very few rules I'm making but examples include restrictions on cutting hedges, hedges can't be removed, movement licences/passports and a record of all animals on holding and all movements, animal movement licences/tests for hauliers, medicine records, tagging with 27 days of birth, spraying licences, buffer zones, having to pick up and pay for the disposal of any dead animals (then registering the death online). Obviously there's a lot more and the general environmental /HSE regs you mentioned.

 

Edit: sorry that's hard to read. For some reason quotes aren't working for me.

[Richard 1234]

Just answer these 2 likely lads first, then get back to catching up with the rest of the thread.....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I thought it would get round to banking and bale-outs... Kind of inevitable. Whilst being as far removed from supporting chair shiners as a person could probably be, I just want to highlight that financial services contributes to the UK economy something like: employing over 7% of the UK workforce, producing nearly 12% of total economic output, contributing £66bn in taxes and generating a trade surplus of £72bn.

 

 

 

That there is too big a chunk of contribution to UK GDP to lose and thus the bale out.

 

 

 

+ of course, that particular bale-out resulted in public ownership of large parts of the establishments baled out and significant regulatory changes to operating procedure.

 

 

 

What part of any farm that has ongoing subsidy now belongs to the public estate?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Enjoyed that..... Was it the SNP party conference after show?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The list isn't endless Mr E, but it IS a good deal longer for those claiming ag subsidy than it is for most others: Rebated diesel, reduced council tax, excemption from capital gain tax, exemption from business rates, exemptions from planning regs to name but a few.....

 

 

All this is probably true. Look at it this way if half the food we eat is imported half is produced here feeding the masses yes? Without this food produced here people would starve and die and in turn produce nothing for the economy in whatever they do. So could it not be argued that agriculture actually gives us half our GDP?

 

 

Utter rubbish I know but just a thought

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[agg221]

------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?-------

 

Not in terms of the mapping exercises no but general regulations yes.

 

I should just point out I don't have an issue with most of it, it's just a comparison to other countries that have very few rules I'm making but examples include restrictions on cutting hedges, hedges can't be removed, movement licences/passports and a record of all animals on holding and all movements, animal movement licences/tests for hauliers, medicine records, tagging with 27 days of birth, spraying licences, buffer zones, having to pick up and pay for the disposal of any dead animals (then registering the death online). Obviously there's a lot more and the general environmental /HSE regs you mentioned.

 

Edit: sorry that's hard to read. For some reason quotes aren't working for me.

 

Obviously you are not required to satisfy the BPS demands if not drawing BPS, but very few of the regulations relate to the BPS.

 

Those that do which I am aware of are mainly environmental (post-CAP), so headland sizes, areas of set-aside and minimum distance between cultivation and established hedges.

 

Things I still have to comply with include buffer zones, use of approved pesticides, record-keeping etc. so you pretty much need to do everything anyway.

 

The one advantage I get is that I do not have any restrictions on my rotation pattern, so am not suffering from the obligation to grow field beans (pretty much the only N-crop option in most places) which has knocked the bottom out of the market.

 

Alec

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Obviously you are not required to satisfy the BPS demands if not drawing BPS, but very few of the regulations relate to the BPS.

 

That's what I would have thought, but I wasn't sure - never met anyone that doesn't claim to ask!

 

Those that do which I am aware of are mainly environmental (post-CAP), so headland sizes, areas of set-aside and minimum distance between cultivation and established hedges.

 

That makes sense - carrot to mitigate environmental degradation

 

Things I still have to comply with include buffer zones, use of approved pesticides, record-keeping etc. so you pretty much need to do everything anyway.

 

These are good things no? Generally introduced after advances in scientific knowledge or as a result of major pathological disease outbreaks?

 

The one advantage I get is that I do not have any restrictions on my rotation pattern, so am not suffering from the obligation to grow field beans (pretty much the only N-crop option in most places) which has knocked the bottom out of the market.

 

Alec

 

Are you an BPS "opted-out" farmer / landowner Alec? Can't recall if you may have said that earlier in the thread and not sure if I'm reading it right here?

[Mull]

You seem to be concentrating very hard on farming Kevin, why no toe the party line and give the disabled a good bashing too?

In fact, if you put farmers out of work, nobody will want a scarecrow[emoji38].

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[agg221]

Are you an BPS "opted-out" farmer / landowner Alec? Can't recall if you may have said that earlier in the thread and not sure if I'm reading it right here?

 

In effect, but not voluntarily. The threshold was moved to a minimum holding of 5ha and ours is only 1.8ha so I no longer have the option. Obviously I am not trying to make a living from it but I prefer to keep the land farmed so I have transferred the entitlements to our neighbour (foc) rather than them just disappear and we carry on. It is run on a proper commercial basis and is small enough that I can afford the loss

 

Our position has given me a fairly good insight into the economics. Our land is bounded by roads and a river so you couldn't use larger plant by merging it. It is not great quality - lower end of Grade 2, but the circumstances do give me an opportunity to see fairly clearly how much of an improvement I can get by working on the soil structure with techniques such as green manuring, mulching with woodchip (hence my constant availability as a tip site) and adding biochar when I can make/get it. It's a long-term experiment.

 

To give a context, this year's crop of spring wheat went in today (Group 4 feed wheat KWS Alderon) and improvement to the soil so far is marginal so I would be surprised if we can exceed 6.5t/ha, compared with an average quoted yield of 7.4t/ha. This would represent around £180 less return, which is likely to be around the value of the loss, ie if we were at average yield we would break even with no subsidy. The world record is 16.5t/ha, which was achieved with far more intensive input but even so would make a decent return. We won't ever get near that but it will be interesting to see how far I can get.

 

Alec

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

You seem to be concentrating very hard on farming Kevin, why no toe the party line and give the disabled a good bashing too?

In fact, if you put farmers out of work, nobody will want a scarecrow[emoji38].

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

 

See 99 Mull.

 

There would have been another post to follow up what I see as the inequity of this funding system but I got distracted.

 

I did a quick search on the DEFRA webpage linked earlier for 3 local farms. Each received between 15-25k in 2015. Now since I know each of them personally I have some visibility of their general lifestyles and business status which include ownership of sunny climes villas, extensive foreign travel / holidays, extension of farming activity into hotel & tourism and more leisure activities than actual farming. I've no problem with any of that of course, work hard, play hard - fair game!

 

But do any of those deserve 15-25k grant funding more than, say a student starting their life under the burden of considerable debt, an octogenarian having to sell their home to fund later years care, a disabled person losing DLA?

 

If you answer yes to any of the above, it could be possible that we have inadvertently changed sides on the political divide!!

 

I just can't reconcile how those "in the system" can, with a clear social conscience, justify it.....

[Mull]

 

 

 

I just can't reconcile how those "in the system" can, with a clear social conscience, justify it.....

 

 

Are you talking about politicians or farmers?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[Mull]

Night Kev!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk