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

[Duncansimpson]

Read it, interesting but not conclusive. The price of land will never come down far enough for us to compete with NZ or Argentina. We don't need to change farming so much but change what people buy and when they eat it. If the government doesn't give grants that encourage farmers to farm in an environmentally friendly way they won't and we will all lose out.

[daveindales]

Please......

 

Please......

 

Please.....

 

Read the link on page 1:

 

https://iea.org.uk/publications/research/liberating-farming-from-the-cap

 

Land prices are so high BECAUSE of subsidy!

 

NZ is a perfect example of how it COULD / SHOULD be done AFTER subsidy!

 

Correct, and correct. I've been saying that for years.

[matelot]

If the government doesn't give grants that encourage farmers to farm in an environmentally friendly way they won't and we will all lose out.

 

However many farm grants encourage farmers to be environmentally unfriendly....

 

Without grants we would have a lot less upland sheep farming. Without the sheep we'd have more trees and the land would act like a sponge to absorb rain

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

Read it, interesting but not conclusive. The price of land will never come down far enough for us to compete with NZ or Argentina. We don't need to change farming so much but change what people buy and when they eat it. If the government doesn't give grants that encourage farmers to farm in an environmentally friendly way they won't and we will all lose out.

 

Totally agree! It should be local and it should be seasonal. If only we could break away from a big beast that forbids and prevents policy incentives to support that.....

 

Correct, and correct. I've been saying that for years.

 

 

However many farm grants encourage farmers to be environmentally unfriendly....

 

Without grants we would have a lot less upland sheep farming. Without the sheep we'd have more trees and the land would act like a sponge to absorb rain

 

A seemingly small issue (in isolation) but with huge down stream (!) implications, albeit paling into insignificance in the broader environmental negatives.....

 

Grants were paid to grub out upland scrub and grants are reduced if the number of trees per acre exceeds predetermined maximum....

 

Result.... Soil erosion, run off and flash flooding resulting in huge expense downstream.

 

Solution? Pay more grants to block up rivers.....

 

You couldn't make it up!!

 

It's time we took a long hard look at the sector and stopped trying to kidd on that farming and environmental / conservation issues make for good bed fellows.

[matelot]

All the payments are passed on to you in the way of cheap food.

 

Is "cheap food" really a good thing though? Society has a problem with people eating too much.... I don't know if my memory is playing tricks, but there does seem to be a lot more land whales these days

[matelot]

Result.... Soil erosion, run off and flash flooding resulting in huge expense downstream.

 

Solution? Pay more grants to block up rivers.....

 

You couldn't make it up!!

 

It's time we took a long hard look at the sector and stopped trying to kidd on that farming and environmental / conservation issues make for good bed fellows.

 

A lot of flood defences alongside rivers cost big money. It would seem reasonable to get rid of the sheep in the catchment and save the £50m that flood defences will cost.

 

I'm always amazed at how little economic output a lot of farms produce. A hill farm might produce 1000 sheep a year worth £100 each. In the great scheme of things it's small change. I'd prefer more trees to sheep.

[Duncansimpson]

Cheap food is definitely wrong. Ideally we would do away with subsidies so that price like meat go up by 20-30%. Subsidies should be given to farmers who farm in an environmentally friendly way otherwise why shouldn't plough everything up.

I'm not sold on the flooding issue though, Lake District hat 16" rain in 24 hrs last flood. No amount of tree planting can cope with that. Global warming I think.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

A lot of flood defences alongside rivers cost big money. It would seem reasonable to get rid of the sheep in the catchment and save the £50m that flood defences will cost.

 

I'm always amazed at how little economic output a lot of farms produce. A hill farm might produce 1000 sheep a year worth £100 each. In the great scheme of things it's small change. I'd prefer more trees to sheep.

 

Despite +/- 50% of total EU expenditure on CAP, Ag delivers no more than 0.7% of UK GDP.

 

You don't need a doctorate in Economics to spot the policy deficiency in that delta!

[matelot]

Despite +/- 50% of total EU expenditure on CAP, Ag delivers no more than 0.7% of UK GDP.

 

You don't need a doctorate in Economics to spot the policy deficiency in that delta!

 

I guess a lot of politicians etc have farms.... It also annoys me that farmers don't pay business rates...

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

+/- 50% EU budget given over to CAP

 

You'd think that, as a policy and supported by so much cash, it would result in EU wide improvements and efficiencies leading to economic growth in the Ag sector over the decades?

 

Maybe the figures are suppressed by abnormal growth in other sectors which are causing a reduced % share for Ag....

 

Oh, no, that's not the case...

 

(http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NV.AGR.TOTL.ZS?locations=GB-EU)