B
Baling twine
Guest
Now I’ll go for an aul controversial one, in your opinion where is the money in beef. Is it in finishing or what or are we all better off to go dairy
Processing
Which ever, it certainly isn't while they're still alive.Retailing I'd say
It's in the subsidies and farmers dole.Now I’ll go for an aul controversial one, in your opinion where is the money in beef. Is it in finishing or what or are we all better off to go dairy
Go to dairy, it’s money for noting. No work whatsoever in it, it’s just a licence to print money...... that’s what most that are not dairy farmers think anyway
If there was money in cattle there would be no such thing as sfp.
We get it to subsidise a loss making enterprise.
Up to last year there were opportunities to make money at times but that fairly blew up.
That's no consolation to those with low or no sfp.
It looks like more convergence coming so no one will have much to spend anyway in future. The last 15 yrs have seen a lot of money washing through the system.
Unfortunately most of it did wash through
I'd agree with you and in the opposite situation here. About a 20% reduction in the last 4 years already.Are there any figures out there on how many farmers will lose and how many will gain from convergence. Certainly in favour of it here as we are reasonably well below the quoted sfp figure for it. Also, what's the argument for not going ahead with convergence? Is it not reasonable to expect that after 18 years of the same payments, the whole system should be reset in order to compensate farmers for what they are doing in 2020 as opposed to what they did in 2002?
Im pretty sure it's in the journal this weekAre there any figures out there on how many farmers will lose and how many will gain from convergence. Certainly in favour of it here as we are reasonably well below the quoted sfp figure for it. Also, what's the argument for not going ahead with convergence? Is it not reasonable to expect that after 18 years of the same payments, the whole system should be reset in order to compensate farmers for what they are doing in 2020 as opposed to what they did in 2002?
Convergence isnt related to what anyone is doing currently, it's just flat rate for everyone or that general idea/direction.Are there any figures out there on how many farmers will lose and how many will gain from convergence. Certainly in favour of it here as we are reasonably well below the quoted sfp figure for it. Also, what's the argument for not going ahead with convergence? Is it not reasonable to expect that after 18 years of the same payments, the whole system should be reset in order to compensate farmers for what they are doing in 2020 as opposed to what they did in 2002?
Convergence isnt related to what anyone is doing currently, it's just flat rate for everyone or that general idea/direction.
Another reference period from recent years could be a good option.
Armchair farmers getting big sfp and pocketing it Is a bugbear of mine but with environmental considerations it's hard to know what the policy makers will decide
land value to a certain extend has to come into how SFP is calculated.
South and East also have on average better land so a greater natural advantage, shorter winters, ability to grow their own crops, and ability to grow more grass per year. Therefore have lower costs. If sfp is paid in order to compensate for lower profit then its obvious that these lads should get lower payments?I think the problem with a new reference period, is that the EU doesn't want to be seen to reward production. They still hark back to when we were paid per head or unit of production and that led to food mountains.
Hard to see that a flat rate per acre would be fairer than what's there now. The higher level of payment are mostly in the East and South of the country, but these are the areas of greatest output.
The ifa policy (recently anyhow) is that payments should only go to the farmer who is producing or the farmer who is "delivering public goods"
i.e. environmental
The tricky bit is defining "the Active Farmer"