The Irish Farmer

Climber

Before I start, I haven't posted this just to get on peoples backs and start a never ending slag-fest. I genuinely want to hear peoples opinions with a view to increasing my understanding.

As a Dubliner I just can't understand the mentality of the Irish Farmer.

On the one hand they are convinced that they are the backbone of Ireland, true patriots etc. Dubliners just "don't understand" their attachment to the land, their trade is a "way of life", to be preserved at all costs.

But on the other hand, they had no problem in selling off a corner of their field to a developer for exorbitant profit making. They have their hand out every time the subsidies/grants are paid out and they refuse to retrain, modernise etc. When the Cobbler profession became irrelevant we didn't see the ICA (Irish Cobblers association) expecting the people of the country to prop up their dead industry.

Discuss

spank_inferno

Things tend to fall somewhat in between.

Essentially they create food.
However consumers don't want to pay much for food.
Retailers/vendors & wholesalers don't want to pay much for food.
So the burden of cost falls to the producer.

Costs rarely if ever go down so all farmers in Europe & the western world by & large rely on direct & indirect subvention to make the task of producing food cost effective.


Of course this tax dependency can irk the taxpayer however if farming assistance was not in place every morsel of food you eat would cost a lot more.


Farmers also see themselves as the "custodians of the countryside" however as someone raised on a farm I can say their general ignorance / contempt / hostility to almost everything environmental does them no favours.

DJCR

spank_inferno wrote: »

Of course this tax dependency can irk the taxpayer however if farming assistance was not in place every morsel of food you eat would cost a lot more.

Oh, Tut tut............... that isn't true at all. What you ment to say is, most of the food you would then eat would be imported.

The Story:- http://www.kilkennypeople.ie/news/business/ifa_protest_at_dunnes_stores_over_new_zealand_lamb_1_2166817

The Proof:- (Market prices page 4)
http://www.teagasc.ie/research/reports/sheep/4016/eopr4016.pdf

So why does New Zealand Lamb and Irish Lamb now cost the same?

The IFA got the government to Tax it.

liammur

Climber wrote: »

Before I start, I haven't posted this just to get on peoples backs and start a never ending slag-fest. I genuinely want to hear peoples opinions with a view to increasing my understanding.

As a Dubliner I just can't understand the mentality of the Irish Farmer.

On the one hand they are convinced that they are the backbone of Ireland, true patriots etc. Dubliners just "don't understand" their attachment to the land, their trade is a "way of life", to be preserved at all costs.

But on the other hand, they had no problem in selling off a corner of their field to a developer for exorbitant profit making. They have their hand out every time the subsidies/grants are paid out and they refuse to retrain, modernise etc. When the Cobbler profession became irrelevant we didn't see the ICA (Irish Cobblers association) expecting the people of the country to prop up their dead industry.

Discuss

The potatoes I buy are from a farmer in Dublin.

spank_inferno

Thats a fair point.

Removing farming subventions in the West would allow the developing world farmers to compete on a more fair playing field.

Your correct, we would eat more imported food.

The cost would still rise though because of the increased costs in bringing the produce from another part of the planet to our plate.
There is also a secondary element of the sustainability of the developing world deforesting themselves to grow crops to feed us.

So... in a nutshell.... regarding the likes of CAP, I'm happy for it to stay though it could do with reform.

Tora Bora

DJCR wrote: »

Oh, Tut tut............... that isn't true at all. What you ment to say is, most of the food you would then eat would be imported.

The Story:- http://www.kilkennypeople.ie/news/business/ifa_protest_at_dunnes_stores_over_new_zealand_lamb_1_2166817

The Proof:- (Market prices page 4)
http://www.teagasc.ie/research/reports/sheep/4016/eopr4016.pdf

So why does New Zealand Lamb and Irish Lamb now cost the same?

The IFA got the government to Tax it.

You are correct. Let's select one simple example, and I leave you to do the test.
I will arrange to give you / send you a small bundle of carrots I produce on my farm.
On the same day, you can go to your local friendly supermarket, and buy yourself an equivalent quantity of "imported carrotts".

Bring both bundles home and store in your garage or other cool place!

Wait a week. Go check out both bundles. See which one you decide to eat:D .

Wait for it, wait for it .................... you are thinking that I believe you will eat my produce. But no. You won't eat mine. You will eat the imported stuff. Why? Because it will look better, feel better, smell better.
Why? Because mine are what they are meant to be. Carrotts. Just plain simple old fashioned carrotts.
The imported were once upon a time carrots, plain simple carrots. However to keep them fresh and wholsome for you, and more importantly, your young chid, or maybe aged mother, there is a nice sweet smelling stuff sprayed on, to prepare them for the rigours of transport, refrigeration, warehousing, shelf life etc.

Oh, and that piece of nice beef, to go with your imported carrotts, can be a nice bit from Brazil, Argentina, etc, etc, ................ where there is ZERO control of medicines, and or growth promoters etc,.
Here, even if I wanted to and absolutely needed to, I have to get a vet to administer such drugs. The vet has to issue a cert. I have to recored the transaction. The record in the vets office can be inspected at a moments notice by dept of Agfood. It can be cross checked in my records, right down to the specific animal treated. The food chain can be followed right through, to ensure I did not have that animal slaughtered within the safe withdrawal period for the specific drug.

Now ................... lets talk about white meat .......... Chicken. Good safe low cholestral food is chicken. If you would like me to tell you the difference in how your home produced chicken is brought to market, and the imported one, just ask. You might learn something, which might make you want to get to know more about how the food you eat is produced.

One last point. I was looking through some old sales invoices a few weeks ago.
In 1989 I sold a beef animal to a major abbatoir, for £1128 PUNTS (€1,410)
Last March I sold a similar animal size and weight to the same abbatoir for €1,554.
Twenty two years on, the nominal value of my sales of a prime beef animal has gone up by 10%. Adjusted for inflation it's gone down by probably 55 to 60%.
Cost of producton is up by probably 100%, to take account of regulations etc.

Believe you me, farming is one tough, tough, tough business to be in.
But I don't really expect you would understand. You can probably knock off a five this evening. Most farmers in this country, this time of year, will knock off at 11 p tonight. Come autumn, grain will be harvested in a big way. More midnight shifts. Come winter, spring calving / lambing .... 18 hour days and nights. Then spring long days come .......... get the fertilizer out ............ seed in ................... hey, who cares, just get it done, if it takes till ten pm, so be it,

mikemac

Climber wrote: »

As a Dubliner I just can't understand the mentality of the Irish Farmer.

Dubliners just "don't understand" their attachment to the land, their trade is a "way of life", to be preserved at all costs.

It's not a Dublin vs the rest issue, take a drive around North County Dublin, it has some of the most intensive agriculture in the country.
A good chance the vegetables you buy came from Dublin

reilig

I have a small enough farm, in comparison to some, about 200 acres, and I work full time. But with the help of my wife and my parents, we keep it going. I'm not going to bitch and moan to you, you'll have enough people doing that about life on an irish farm. But I'll tell you a few home truths.

Firstly, the subsidies. I'd love to see them removed. It would put us on such an even playing field. Then we could justifyably sell our food at the cost of production. All across Europe, meat, bread, fruit, veg and dairy products would double in price. It would probably hit the city dwellers worst of all. After all, i can produce all of the above for my own use. At the moment, most food on our supermarket shelves are sold at a price which is about 50% below the cost of production. This, as I understand, is the reason why the subsidies are paid - in order to maintain cheap food prices for urban dwellers. Now you could import your food from south America. Brazilian Beef is tasty, but due to the fact they they have no regulation of agriculture over there, you never know how much hormones were pumped into the beef that you are eating. And the BSE crisis that exists in Argentina shouldn't put you off eating their beef. Its only Mad Cow Disease. Make sure your steaks are well done (as burned as possible) to ensure that you're safe from CJD. Or on the other hand, import all your fruit, Veg and dairy products from cheaper producers - make sure that all are chemically treated to ensure that they will last the trip. Forget about the claims that these chemicals cause cancer. Sure the money saved will go a long way to treating it!!

Like 95% of farmers in this country, we do not have sites to sell - you should have seen the trouble that I had to go to to get planning permission to build a small house on my own land for my own use. They wanted me to buy a house in an estate in a town 7 miles away. That would have been useful for checking cows calving at night. A couple of neighbours did sell land during the boom. Most of them reinvested it into land or facilities to make their farms more sustainable and profitable.

My farm is operated on a par with the most modern suckler farms in the country. I have invested heavily to ensure that there is zero pollution from my animals or feed storage. My cows have comfortable lying and eating facilities. My handling facilities are extremely modern and efficient. Both my wife and I have completed agriculture college. I have attended numerous training events through my farm planners. We are trained and as modern as you will get in the world!!

I won't lie to you. Its a great way of life. Fresh air, green environment, peace and quiet. Its a great place to raise the kids. But subsidies have nothing to do with the way of life. The subsidies are only there to make food cheaper for the end purchaser. As farmers, we don't make big profits. On our farm, its a good year if we have the subsidy paid to us as a profit.

We're definitely not the back bone of ireland. Sure everyone knows that's the property developers. There's a lot of money to be made by growing and selling houses, and it will go on forever. Oh wait a minute!! I forgot!!

While the farmer may not be the back bone of Ireland, food is. It accounts for a huge part of our exports. Food processing facilities employ tens of thousands of people across the country. Our tourism and restaurant industry have huge reliance on irish Food and the irish food image.

Now, I'll agree with you about the hand being out every time there is a grant going - well at least you hear about it every time. But in my experience, its always the ones who deserve it least that get the most because they know how to make the most noise. From the business point of my farm, subsidies have decreased year on year for the last 10 years. Unfortunately sale prices have also decreased year on year. We were getting higher prices for our beef in the 1970's than we are now. Yet you are paying a lot more in the supermarkets for the beef that you buy. Our feed, fuel and fertilizer costs have increased by 500% since then too.

But I agree with you and the other poster. A removal of subsidies would be great for us. It would put us on a level playing field.

Would it suit you to pay double your weekly food bill in order to achieve this??

Climber wrote: »

Before I start, I haven't posted this just to get on peoples backs and start a never ending slag-fest. I genuinely want to hear peoples opinions with a view to increasing my understanding.

As a Dubliner I just can't understand the mentality of the Irish Farmer.

On the one hand they are convinced that they are the backbone of Ireland, true patriots etc. Dubliners just "don't understand" their attachment to the land, their trade is a "way of life", to be preserved at all costs.

But on the other hand, they had no problem in selling off a corner of their field to a developer for exorbitant profit making. They have their hand out every time the subsidies/grants are paid out and they refuse to retrain, modernise etc. When the Cobbler profession became irrelevant we didn't see the ICA (Irish Cobblers association) expecting the people of the country to prop up their dead industry.

Discuss

reilig

spank_inferno wrote: »

Thats a fair point.

Removing farming subventions in the West would allow the developing world farmers to compete on a more fair playing field.

Developing world farmers aren't able to produce enough food to feed themselves. Second world countries like those in South America are able to produce excess to their needs because their production system is totally unregulated. Disease is uncontrolled among herds. Animals are regularly injected with hormones to increase the rate and size of growth.

Tipp Man

The regulations imposed by the EU cost Irish farmers a huge amount annually either directly or in comparison to their rivals. The subsidies come at a cost

for example in Brazil the use of hormones is rampant - in Ireland it is banned. Using hormones could mean that you would have your animal killed maybe 3-6 months sooner - think of the cost for keeping a full grown animal for that time (I am completly with the EU on this by the way - no need for hormones)

Another example would be milk in New Zealand - their laws on water pollution are a lot more lax than in Ireland which is why Irish farmers have spent a small fortune on sheds and pollution control in the last 10 years - costs which are not incurred to date by Kiwi dairies . This will change for them and they will find that pollution control will raise their production costs - just like it has done to Irish dairies.

Another example is the nitrates directive means that i can't spread as much fertiliser as we want - which means that we aren't growing as much grass as is possible which means you can't hold as much stock as is possible. By implementing such laws Ireland, and the EU in particular, are strangling the production capabilities of farmers. We are being stopped from being as efficient as possible by the rules - that is costing us money. Other countries (non EU) don't have rules such as the nitrates which are severly hampering farmers

This list of rules is endless by the way

So the EU has set up all of these rules at a cost. You as a taxpayer need to decide do you want farmers to produce as much as possible with no restraints, no subsidies and lax environmental and animal welfare controls or do you want a guaranteed supply which has met all the rules the EU deems necessary for quality food

I don't think farmers think they are the backbone of the country at all but it would be foolish to disregard the impact that agriculture has on rural economies - a lot of the subsidies are spent on local businesses - builders, mechanics etc etc. so although you don't see it in Dublin the non city areas of this country would be in even worse shape than they currently are. We produce enough milk and beef to feed in excess of 30m people that's alot of work and a lot of exports - it would be foolish to underestimate it

Scofflaw

reilig wrote:

Now, I'll agree with you about the hand being out every time there is a grant going - well at least you hear about it every time.

I don't think that's in any sense restricted to farmers. I was speaking to someone from the Sustainable Energy Institute, and he said that when they do an energy audit on a business, and point out how much could be saved if the business did x and y, their first question is always "is there a grant for it?" - and that often decides the matter, even though doing x and y would save the business money overall.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Tipp Man

Climber wrote: »

Before I start, I haven't posted this just to get on peoples backs and start a never ending slag-fest. I genuinely want to hear peoples opinions with a view to increasing my understanding.

As a Dubliner I just can't understand the mentality of the Irish Farmer.

On the one hand they are convinced that they are the backbone of Ireland, true patriots etc. Dubliners just "don't understand" their attachment to the land, their trade is a "way of life", to be preserved at all costs.

But on the other hand, they had no problem in selling off a corner of their field to a developer for exorbitant profit making. They have their hand out every time the subsidies/grants are paid out and they refuse to retrain, modernise etc. When the Cobbler profession became irrelevant we didn't see the ICA (Irish Cobblers association) expecting the people of the country to prop up their dead industry.

Discuss

So if you had an acre of land with an agricultural value of 10,000 and because it was beside a town a builder comes along and offers you 100,000 you wouldn't take it?? What would be your reasons for not taking it?

Regarding your point on refusing to retrain or modernise - what exactly are you referring to and what examples have you??

murphaph

As far as I understand CAP, it exists solely to ensure that the EU remains self-sufficient in food production. I wish there was a better way but I support the notion of the EU being able to feed itself without the need to import from the second world tbh.

I would like to see Irish farming consolidate and I know this is already happening. Small time farmers need to sell up and the larger, more efficient producers need to remain. This process however needs to be carefully managed to prevent hedgerow destruction etc. which ruined the look of much of the continental countryside in the 1960's.

Tipp Man

Scofflaw wrote: »

I don't think that's in any sense restricted to farmers. I was speaking to someone from the Sustainable Energy Institute, and he said that when they do an energy audit on a business, and point out how much could be saved if the business did x and y, their first question is always "is there a grant for it?" - and that often decides the matter, even though doing x and y would save the business money overall.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I agree - there are a lot of subsidies etc going for all kinds of business but subsidies in agri are easy to see, easy to target and the public has a bit of knowledge about them

Tipp Man

murphaph wrote: »

As far as I understand CAP, it exists solely to ensure that the EU remains self-sufficient in food production. I wish there was a better way but I support the notion of the EU being able to feed itself without the need to import from the second world tbh.

I would like to see Irish farming consolidate and I know this is already happening. Small time farmers need to sell up and the larger, more efficient producers need to remain. This process however needs to be carefully managed to prevent hedgerow destruction etc. which ruined the look of much of the continental countryside in the 1960's.

you can't remove a ditch (hedge) now without first having planted the equivilant length of ditch in another location

I think in some counties you might even need planning permission to remove a ditch but not 100% on that

In the last decade Irish farmers planted enough hedge to go from Dublin to Moscow and back

Nijmegen

Farm subsidies are, in effect, transfer payments. While farmers can tell us about all the wrongs of foreign food (I would say that the market would correct itself: a few cases of food poisoning and then to export to the EU you need X, Y and Z regulation and our price goes up a little bit), I would say that having a secured local food supply has advantages of regulation and of ecology and sustainability.

The economics of farming are so intrinsically linked with the basics of human economic survival it's difficult to fathom how a small change here or there effects the total sum of output and pricing and wider economic output.

I think a trouble has been small farms. It's a way of life. But it's not as efficient as the massive food suppliers, like the US, where farms can be the size of a few counties. In hanging on to those perhaps we have to provide disproportionate subsidies to make up for inefficiencies.

This is a purely economic argument, however. By the same token I could argue that the most efficient way to house those on social housing is in massive blocks of flats rather than on wide tracts of housing estates. There are considerations beyond pure economic efficiency.

Ultimately I think a question we need to address, in an ecological sense, is how much food can we afford to eat and at what price? Ever cheaper food is not a reality. How do we change our habits, eat more sustainable and have a secured food supply over the next few decades and centuries? Maybe higher food prices that encourage us to eat less (closer to what we need than what we desire) is a good thing......?

Climber

reilig wrote: »

I'll tell you a few home truths.
Would it suit you to pay double your weekly food bill in order to achieve this??

Thank you Sir for your intelligent response, I feel that I have learned a lot.

Maybe my problem is that the Agricultural policy, whilst sound from an economic point of view, does have its negative societal consequences.

I refer to a conversation I had with a Wexford girl who's father was a farmer. When She complained that he "just couldn't make a living" out of farming anymore I suggested that he should re-train in some other industry (at the time there were tons of jobs in the country, especially IT). She looked me as if I had two heads with a response "Sure that's rediculous, Daddy has been a farmer all his life (he's 42) he can't do anything else"

enda1

Tipp Man wrote: »

So if you had an acre of land with an agricultural value of 10,000 and because it was beside a town a builder comes along and offers you 100,000 you wouldn't take it?? What would be your reasons for not taking it?

:mad:It's my field!:mad:

Tipp Man

Climber wrote: »

Thank you Sir for your intelligent response, I feel that I have learned a lot.

Maybe my problem is that the Agricultural policy, whilst sound from an economic point of view, does have its negative societal consequences.

I refer to a conversation I had with a Wexford girl who's father was a farmer. When She complained that he "just couldn't make a living" out of farming anymore I suggested that he should re-train in some other industry (at the time there were tons of jobs in the country, especially IT). She looked me as if I had two heads with a response "Sure that's rediculous, Daddy has been a farmer all his life (he's 42) he can't do anything else"

If daddy was 42 how old was this girl and how much of a grasp on reality did she have?

Good job you didn't advise him to retrain as a builder

Scofflaw

Another example is the nitrates directive means that i can't spread as much fertiliser as we want - which means that we aren't growing as much grass as is possible which means you can't hold as much stock as is possible.

And also can't pollute watercourses and lakes as much as previously. It's not there simply to make life difficult for the farmers - it's there to balance the interests of the farmers with the interests of other people and the environment. The amount of pollution from agricultural run-off was (and still is, in some places) something that seriously contributed to algal blooms and undrinkable water.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Tipp Man

Scofflaw wrote: »

And also can't pollute watercourses and lakes as much as previously. It's not there simply to make life difficult for the farmers - it's there to balance the interests of the farmers with the interests of other people and the environment. The amount of pollution from agricultural run-off was (and still is, in some places) something that seriously contributed to algal blooms and undrinkable water.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I'm not complaining Scofflaw - I was merely highlighting the fact that this rule which in place in the EU puts farmers at a comparative disadvantage to their competitors who can spread as much fertiliser as they like - regardless of consequences

Hasn't agriculture been bypassed by the county councils as the biggest polluter now?

thebman

Climber wrote: »

Before I start, I haven't posted this just to get on peoples backs and start a never ending slag-fest. I genuinely want to hear peoples opinions with a view to increasing my understanding.

As a Dubliner I just can't understand the mentality of the Irish Farmer.

On the one hand they are convinced that they are the backbone of Ireland, true patriots etc. Dubliners just "don't understand" their attachment to the land, their trade is a "way of life", to be preserved at all costs.

But on the other hand, they had no problem in selling off a corner of their field to a developer for exorbitant profit making. They have their hand out every time the subsidies/grants are paid out and they refuse to retrain, modernise etc. When the Cobbler profession became irrelevant we didn't see the ICA (Irish Cobblers association) expecting the people of the country to prop up their dead industry.

Discuss

Most farmers that sold farms during the boom for property didn't have much choice as their farms were unprofitable.

Besides they can't just sell the land, it has to be re-zoned so if it is in a place where you disagree with houses being built then that is the local councils fault.

Where have farmers refused to retrain/modernise? I imagine the only case of that would be if they cannot afford to buy new machinery.

reilig

Scofflaw wrote: »

I don't think that's in any sense restricted to farmers. I was speaking to someone from the Sustainable Energy Institute, and he said that when they do an energy audit on a business, and point out how much could be saved if the business did x and y, their first question is always "is there a grant for it?" - and that often decides the matter, even though doing x and y would save the business money overall.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Totally Agree!

DJCR

Ok, before I write this I better state that I'm not anti-Irish Farmer and I very much believe it needs to be supported and kept going. It's an area where major reform is needed though.

I agree that food produced here is fresher, sure it should be, it was produced here.
I agree that they don't contain preservatives (Though they shouldn't need them being from around the corner).
I understand that traceability in Ireland is amazing and knowing where your meat/Veg comes from is very important.
I also understand that the farmer in Ireland is getting screwed as is the consumer (2nd most expensive in the EU).

When you can buy something far cheaper that came from the other side of the worlld something is evidently not working and the standard reaction is the one that Tora Bora gave (all extreemly relevant and true), but not exactly full of solutions.

I mean long story short, we all went very PC and Cosmopilitan during the Celtic Tiger splashing out on Organic produce, now, parents are more concerned about feeding their children rather than making sure that the chicken they are eating had loads of space to chill out in (Yes I realise the grass feed Vs. grain feed arguements as well).

The fact is that Irish farms for the most part are unsustainable. Relying on grants from Europe are going to destroy farming in this country for the simple reason that Farmers are too reliant on it, and in the situation we are in, it is inevitably going to be cut. So farmers are going to get a smaller slice of a smaller pie.
So unless farmers are taking the piss when they say they are barely turning a profit and in some cases not even turning a profit and needing their grant to make a living, farming in this country is in serious trouble (A reality I sadly believe in - Farming is in trouble).

The way I see it, and I'm well open to correction, the EU places quotas on farmers and will withhold their cheques if the farmer goes over this quotas. World food shortages are ever increasing and Irish exports, with food being a major part of them are booming.

So why don't Irish farmers just produce more? Forget their cheques and go mental producing food for export? There is obviously a market for the food out there.

Right now, farmers are being limited to the amount of what they produce which is:-

1) Artificially raising prices (Cutting supply, with a rising demand [our population grew]
2) Actively encouraging farmers not to improve - whats the point, they can't get anything out of it.
3) Encouraging waste - if your not making the best use of the land its wasting it.

I mean whats the point in modernising and making advancements in Irish farming if you get you cheque in the post anyway.

If Irish farmers stopped taking those cheques and focused on modernisation and production imagine the export boom. Imagine the drop of food prices in Ireland due to increased supply. Any excess food would be sold abroad (yes there would be some wastage), but farmers would have direct control over how much they produce and sell alowing for bigger profits.
If prices fall too low (due to over supply) for some farms to survive, should they be subsidised? Are businesses that are under the line being given a cheque to get them out of trouble?

It is very easy to see animosity arise when people talk of bank bailouts, but farmers have been bailed out for years.

Again, I'm going to say that I admire the work of farmers (its tough) and I believe that they contribute to a very important part of the economy (they feed our people - quite an important job). However, reform is needed due to issues I've outlined. I have also put forward one solution (probably about to be shot down - I don't claim to be an expert in farming), however, it would be interesting to hear other peoples thoughts, farmers and non farmers and see if there is a solution out there.

Scofflaw

Tipp Man wrote: »

I'm not complaining Scofflaw - I was merely highlighting the fact that this rule which in place in the EU puts farmers at a comparative disadvantage to their competitors who can spread as much fertiliser as they like - regardless of consequences

Sorry - similarly, I'm not criticising. I appreciate that however good the reasoning, the effect is still restrictive, and as you say, there has to be some way of levelling the playing field between those who are obliged to follow the restrictions and those who aren't, be that subsidies or tariffs.

Tipp Man wrote: »

Hasn't agriculture been bypassed by the county councils as the biggest polluter now?

I think that's been the case for quite some time...but it comes about because local authorities are responsible for treating everyone's waste, which is a slightly different stream full of dead fish.

cordially,
Scofflaw

reilig

Tipp Man wrote: »

Hasn't agriculture been bypassed by the county councils as the biggest polluter now?

I understood this too. A combination of reduced farm pollution along with an increase in Urban Sewerage Systems which pump "agitated" rather than treated effluent into the waterways has seen the Local Authorities pass out the Farmers.

bb12

Don't forget the supermarkets have a scandalous role to play in food prices also. They try to pay their food suppliers as little as possible and have no qualms in holding them to ransom eg. dublin meath growers.

in the long run however, the world's population is skyrocketing, no extra land is being made, so food shortages will inevitably become an issue in the future. add to that dwindling oil and cheap food imports will evaporate. i think people will be a lot more respectful of the farmer in the future. especially when all those city centre food shelves are empty.

DJCR

Scofflaw wrote: »

I don't think that's in any sense restricted to farmers. I was speaking to someone from the Sustainable Energy Institute, and he said that when they do an energy audit on a business, and point out how much could be saved if the business did x and y, their first question is always "is there a grant for it?" - and that often decides the matter, even though doing x and y would save the business money overall.

cordially,
Scofflaw

This is true but those companies getting their grant isn't based on them restricting output... if anything it will help them increase output.

bb12

So why don't Irish farmers just produce more? Forget their cheques and go mental producing food for export? There is obviously a market for the food out there.

there aren't in fact many quotas out there. one of the big problems is that many farmers left the land during the boom times or their sons left to go building etc where the big bucks were and they haven't returned...there is actually a shortage of farmers now.

reilig

Quite simply, its not Irish Agriculture or European Agriculture that is unsustainable. Its merely the prices that are unsustainable. The EU wishes to keep prices low (and unsustainable for farmers) but they are willing to compensate farmers with subsidy because of this.

When subsidies are cut, food will rise in price - simple as. Farmers simply won't be able to produce food at a loss if they don't have a subsidy to compensate them.

How many times do we have to say it. Farmers are not the ones being bailed out by the subsidies. Farmers are merely been compensated to sell their food at lower than the cost of production so that the ordinary EU Citizens have access to cheap food!!! It is the supermarket shoppers that are being bailed out!!
If the subsidy cheques stop and the quotas are removed then we will produce more intensively and access more markets.

But if the cheque stops, food prices will rise. You will pay more for your food. Farmers will not sell their food to supermarkets at a loss. They will pay the cost of production or the farmer won't produce it!!

DJCR wrote: »

Ok, before I write this I better state that I'm not anti-Irish Farmer and I very much believe it needs to be supported and kept going. It's an area where major reform is needed though.

I agree that food produced here is fresher, sure it should be, it was produced here.
I agree that they don't contain preservatives (Though they shouldn't need them being from around the corner).
I understand that traceability in Ireland is amazing and knowing where your meat/Veg comes from is very important.
I also understand that the farmer in Ireland is getting screwed as is the consumer (2nd most expensive in the EU).

When you can buy something far cheaper that came from the other side of the worlld something is evidently not working and the standard reaction is the one that Tora Bora gave (all extreemly relevant and true), but not exactly full of solutions.

I mean long story short, we all went very PC and Cosmopilitan during the Celtic Tiger splashing out on Organic produce, now, parents are more concerned about feeding their children rather than making sure that the chicken they are eating had loads of space to chill out in (Yes I realise the grass feed Vs. grain feed arguements as well).

The fact is that Irish farms for the most part are unsustainable. Relying on grants from Europe are going to destroy farming in this country for the simple reason that Farmers are too reliant on it, and in the situation we are in, it is inevitably going to be cut. So farmers are going to get a smaller slice of a smaller pie.
So unless farmers are taking the piss when they say they are barely turning a profit and in some cases not even turning a profit and needing their grant to make a living, farming in this country is in serious trouble (A reality I sadly believe in - Farming is in trouble).

The way I see it, and I'm well open to correction, the EU places quotas on farmers and will withhold their cheques if the farmer goes over this quotas. World food shortages are ever increasing and Irish exports, with food being a major part of them are booming.

So why don't Irish farmers just produce more? Forget their cheques and go mental producing food for export? There is obviously a market for the food out there.

Right now, farmers are being limited to the amount of what they produce which is:-

1) Artificially raising prices (Cutting supply, with a rising demand [our population grew]
2) Actively encouraging farmers not to improve - whats the point, they can't get anything out of it.
3) Encouraging waste - if your not making the best use of the land its wasting it.

I mean whats the point in modernising and making advancements in Irish farming if you get you cheque in the post anyway.

If Irish farmers stopped taking those cheques and focused on modernisation and production imagine the export boom. Imagine the drop of food prices in Ireland due to increased supply. Any excess food would be sold abroad (yes there would be some wastage), but farmers would have direct control over how much they produce and sell alowing for bigger profits.
If prices fall too low (due to over supply) for some farms to survive, should they be subsidised? Are businesses that are under the line being given a cheque to get them out of trouble?

It is very easy to see animosity arise when people talk of bank bailouts, but farmers have been bailed out for years.

Again, I'm going to say that I admire the work of farmers (its tough) and I believe that they contribute to a very important part of the economy (they feed our people - quite an important job). However, reform is needed due to issues I've outlined. I have also put forward one solution (probably about to be shot down - I don't claim to be an expert in farming), however, it would be interesting to hear other peoples thoughts, farmers and non farmers and see if there is a solution out there.

Scofflaw

DJCR wrote: »

This is true but those companies getting their grant isn't based on them restricting output... if anything it will help them increase output.

Not necessarily, although it is in the case I gave - but why do you think businesses are often resistant to climate change legislation?

cordially,
Scofflaw

thebman

Scofflaw wrote: »

Not necessarily, although it is in the case I gave - but why do you think businesses are often resistant to climate change legislation?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Because sometimes there is no benefit to them.

Often though it is because even if it works out cheaper for them in the long run, most companies only think in the short term and then run into long term problems.

mikemac

If subsidies were cut, the first people on the street would be staff in the Department of Agriculture threatened with redundancy. Though I understand a lot were redeployed in recent years when the single farm payment came in.

How is it the Revenue are efficient and have their online system ROS yet the Department want stock numbers written on forms which have to be typed into their system and they won't accept excel files and have no online data entry system?
They are backward compared to the Revenue

There are a lot of administrators and their job depends on the "cheque in the post"

DJCR

reilig wrote: »

Quite simply, its not Irish Agriculture or European Agriculture that is unsustainable. Its merely the prices that are unsustainable. The EU wishes to keep prices low (and unsustainable for farmers) but they are willing to compensate farmers with subsidy because of this.

When subsidies are cut, food will rise in price - simple as. Farmers simply won't be able to produce food at a loss if they don't have a subsidy to compensate them.

How many times do we have to say it. Farmers are not the ones being bailed out by the subsidies. Farmers are merely been compensated to sell their food at lower than the cost of production so that the ordinary EU Citizens have access to cheap food!!! It is the supermarket shoppers that are being bailed out!!
If the subsidy cheques stop and the quotas are removed then we will produce more intensively and access more markets.

But if the cheque stops, food prices will rise. You will pay more for your food. Farmers will not sell their food to supermarkets at a loss. They will pay the cost of production or the farmer won't produce it!!

Why can't farmers produce food at a competitive rate?!?!?!?!?!?
Why can't they produce enough food to make a living off of ???
Why are farmers happy to have the amount they produce limited thereby cutting off their maximum sales/profits?!!?

Where do you think the money for your "compensation" is coming from?
Ans:- The Supermarket shoppers!!! - They have paid a portion for the "subsidised" food they are going to buy before they even buy it!!!

And whats with the hostility?

Tipp Man

DJCR wrote: »

Why can't farmers produce food at a competitive rate?!?!?!?!?!?
Why can't they produce enough food to make a living off of ???
Why are farmers happy to have the amount they produce limited thereby cutting off their maximum sales/profits?!!?

Where do you think the money for your "compensation" is coming from?
Ans:- The Supermarket shoppers!!! - They have paid a portion for the "subsidised" food they are going to buy before they even buy it!!!

And whats with the hostility?

I don't think farmers were ever happy to have the amount of food they produce limited. However we are part of the EU and they have been calling the shots in agriculture since we joined 40 years ago

It's easy to say why not expand etc. The reality is that for a lot of that 40 years farmers have had their production restricted either directly or indirectly - we have to operate with the framework set out by CAP - there is no point saying why not do this or that when we are simply not allowed to do it. I would love to milk 300 cows and have the land to do so - however the milk quota dictates that we can only milk 100. That is a simple hard fact that you cannot get away from

DJCR

Tipp Man wrote: »

I don't think farmers were ever happy to have the amount of food they produce limited. However we are part of the EU and they have been calling the shots in agriculture since we joined 40 years ago

It's easy to say why not expand etc. The reality is that for a lot of that 40 years farmers have had their production restricted either directly or indirectly - we have to operate with the framework set out by CAP - there is no point saying why not do this or that when we are simply not allowed to do it. I would love to milk 300 cows and have the land to do so - however the milk quota dictates that we can only milk 100. That is a simple hard fact that you cannot get away from

Thank you, this is my point. Farmers arn't happy, consumers arn't happy no one who matters is happy.

Hypothetical Question:-

What would happen if a farmer modernised his farm (Basically made it top notch, all up to date, basically has an unreal farm). He obviously builds this up over a few years respecting quotas etc. but now everything is ready for his farm to explode with producing animals/wheat/barley you name it he/she has the land and the machinery to do it.

So the next year, the farm produces 100 times what it was supposed to.

What would the ratifications for this farmer be in Ireland?


ps. I know this situation would probably never happen and I may have exagerated slightly but the points remains the same. What happens if the farmer goes over their quota?

Scofflaw

Tipp Man wrote: »

I don't think farmers were ever happy to have the amount of food they produce limited. However we are part of the EU and they have been calling the shots in agriculture since we joined 40 years ago

It's easy to say why not expand etc. The reality is that for a lot of that 40 years farmers have had their production restricted either directly or indirectly - we have to operate with the framework set out by CAP - there is no point saying why not do this or that when we are simply not allowed to do it. I would love to milk 300 cows and have the land to do so - however the milk quota dictates that we can only milk 100. That is a simple hard fact that you cannot get away from

CAP seems to have as part of its objectives the maintenance of the small farming sector. Were it not for the milk quota, you would presumably have bought up the land of other small(er) farmers, and they would have left farming, land being a limited resource and a requirement for farming.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Tipp Man

DJCR wrote: »

Thank you, this is my point. Farmers arn't happy, consumers arn't happy no one who matters is happy.

Hypothetical Question:-

What would happen if a farmer modernised his farm (Basically made it top notch, all up to date, basically has an unreal farm). He obviously builds this up over a few years respecting quotas etc. but now everything is ready for his farm to explode with producing animals/wheat/barley you name it he/she has the land and the machinery to do it.

So the next year, the farm produces 100 times what it was supposed to.

What would the ratifications for this farmer be in Ireland?


ps. I know this situation would probably never happen and I may have exagerated slightly but the points remains the same. What happens if the farmer goes over their quota?

Well it depends what area you are talking about

In milk we have seen a huge investment in infrastructure in the last 5 or 6 years and some farmers are increasing cow numbers dramatically despite the quota i.e. they are producing above quota to pay for the investment.

The situation if you go over quota is tricky and out of your hands. If Ireland as a whole is over quota then farmers who milked more than their quota will be forced to pay a severe levy. If Ireland as a whole is under then you would not pay a levy despite milking more than quota.

Its a very risky game to play but you will be delighted to now that a lot of farmers are playing it

DJCR

Tipp Man wrote: »

Well it depends what area you are talking about

In milk we have seen a huge investment in infrastructure in the last 5 or 6 years and some farmers are increasing cow numbers dramatically despite the quota i.e. they are producing above quota to pay for the investment.

The situation if you go over quota is tricky and out of your hands. If Ireland as a whole is over quota then farmers who milked more than their quota will be forced to pay a severe levy. If Ireland as a whole is under then you would not pay a levy despite milking more than quota.

Its a very risky game to play but you will be delighted to now that a lot of farmers are playing it

Would they still recieve their cheque though? And what happens to the extra Milk?

Scofflaw

Tipp Man wrote: »

Well it depends what area you are talking about

In milk we have seen a huge investment in infrastructure in the last 5 or 6 years and some farmers are increasing cow numbers dramatically despite the quota i.e. they are producing above quota to pay for the investment.

The situation if you go over quota is tricky and out of your hands. If Ireland as a whole is over quota then farmers who milked more than their quota will be forced to pay a severe levy. If Ireland as a whole is under then you would not pay a levy despite milking more than quota.

Its a very risky game to play but you will be delighted to now that a lot of farmers are playing it

And it will all be gone by 2015, apparently. I don't think there are a lot of cases where production is subject to the same sort of quota system as are dairy products, though.

cordially,
Scofflaw

DJCR

Scofflaw wrote: »

And it will all be gone by 2015, apparently. I don't think there are a lot of cases where production is subject to the same sort of quota system as are dairy products, though.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Does this mean that farmers will be allowed to produce however much they want and recieve their "little" contribution from Europe?

reilig

DJCR wrote: »

Why can't farmers produce food at a competitive rate?!?!?!?!?!?
Why can't they produce enough food to make a living off of ???
Why are farmers happy to have the amount they produce limited thereby cutting off their maximum sales/profits?!!?

Where do you think the money for your "compensation" is coming from?
Ans:- The Supermarket shoppers!!! - They have paid a portion for the "subsidised" food they are going to buy before they even buy it!!!

And whats with the hostility?

What is a competative rate? European food prices are artificially low because of the subsidy. If there was no subsidy, then food prices all over europe would be much higher. Then we would be able to produce food at an unartificial, competative rate.

Most farmers can make enough food to make a living off. If there was no subsidy, then food prices all over europe would be much higher. Farmers would be selling their food at above the cost of production and making a profit.

Our farm produces to its capacity. Nitrate rules prevent us from spreading a lot of extra fertilizer for extra grass growths. However, as pointed out, these rules protect the environment. (90% of farms in the country are in the same boat.)

"My Compensation" money comes from EU coffers as opposed to Irish Funds collected from irish Tax Payers. But, As I said, I'll gladly give up my "compensation" payments if you are willing to buy the food that I produce at its actual cost of production. So will every other farmer in the EU. I get no benefit from the compensation. It is you , the ordinary supermarket shopper who benefits from it by having lower prices for your everyday groceries. So why shouldn't the "supermarket shoppers" pay for it. It costs them much less this way than paying twice as much for their weekly groceries.

I'd rather get the full value of my farm produce as opposed to you getting cheap food. At least I wouldn't have a bureaucrat in Brussles determining how much I can earn and how much I can produce. But the system is set up to keep non-farmers with cheap food supplies, yet give them no Knowledge as to why their food is so cheap.

Scofflaw

DJCR wrote: »

Does this mean that farmers will be allowed to produce however much they want and recieve their "little" contribution from Europe?

Certainly they'll be able to produce as much as they want - I'm not sure what happens to any subsidies they may have received in respect of dairy.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

reilig wrote: »

What is a competative rate? European food prices are artificially low because of the subsidy. If there was no subsidy, then food prices all over europe would be much higher. Then we would be able to produce food at an unartificial, competative rate.

Most farmers can make enough food to make a living off. If there was no subsidy, then food prices all over europe would be much higher. Farmers would be selling their food at above the cost of production and making a profit.

Our farm produces to its capacity. Nitrate rules prevent us from spreading a lot of extra fertilizer for extra grass growths. However, as pointed out, these rules protect the environment. (90% of farms in the country are in the same boat.)

"My Compensation" money comes from EU coffers as opposed to Irish Funds collected from irish Tax Payers. But, As I said, I'll gladly give up my "compensation" payments if you are willing to buy the food that I produce at its actual cost of production. So will every other farmer in the EU. I get no benefit from the compensation. It is you , the ordinary supermarket shopper who benefits from it by having lower prices for your everyday groceries. So why shouldn't the "supermarket shoppers" pay for it. It costs them much less this way than paying twice as much for their weekly groceries.

I'd rather get the full value of my farm produce as opposed to you getting cheap food. At least I wouldn't have a bureaucrat in Brussles determining how much I can earn and how much I can produce. But the system is set up to keep non-farmers with cheap food supplies, yet give them no Knowledge as to why their food is so cheap.

I'm not sure to what extent the compensation actually benefits the consumer, despite that being part of the purpose of it - there have certainly been suggestions that it's actually soaked up by the supermarket chains in the middle.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Tipp Man

Scofflaw wrote: »

And it will all be gone by 2015, apparently. I don't think there are a lot of cases where production is subject to the same sort of quota system as are dairy products, though.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Well beef and tillage can currently produce what they want. Sugar beet was subject to a quota until production was halted a few years ago.

It is important to remember though that your current subsidy is not linked to what you produce today but what you produced at the start of the century

Your are correct the milk quota is scheduled for abolition in 2015 but i believe it still won't be a milk as much as you want. some of the Coops have not invested in infrastructure because they didn't need to with the quota - so for the time being production will be limited by how much milk the coops can handle (Glanbia the biggest processor can't handle the current level of production) - a major issue yet to be resolved

Tipp Man

DJCR wrote: »

Would they still recieve their cheque though? And what happens to the extra Milk?

The extra milk is processed by the coop and sold the same as all other milk

By cheque i assume you mean the cheque from Europe - for dairying the direct subsidy was very small

If you mean cheque from the coop then historically you were paid for the amount of milk you sent to the coop and if you were over quoata at the end of the milk year (and there was a levy) then it was deducted from your milk cheques.

This year is different with some coops now only paying a fraction of the price for milk which exceeds the quota - a direct response to some farmers expanding with no regard for the quota (which i think you were advocating?)

Tipp Man

Scofflaw wrote: »

I'm not sure to what extent the compensation actually benefits the consumer, despite that being part of the purpose of it - there have certainly been suggestions that it's actually soaked up by the supermarket chains in the middle.

cordially,
Scofflaw

The supermarkets are robbing both the farmer and the consumer such is their buying power nowadays

You only need to look at how Tesco has expanded since the early 90's to see how they have been the main benefactors of CAP

Scofflaw

Tipp Man wrote: »

The extra milk is processed by the coop and sold the same as all other milk

By cheque i assume you mean the cheque from Europe - for dairying the direct subsidy was very small

If you mean cheque from the coop then historically you were paid for the amount of milk you sent to the coop and if you were over quoata at the end of the milk year (and there was a levy) then it was deducted from your milk cheques.

This year is different with some coops now only paying a fraction of the price for milk which exceeds the quota - a direct response to some farmers expanding with no regard for the quota (which i think you were advocating?)

There was a large expansion in milk production in 2010, certainly - an early response, I think, to the phasing out of milk quotas, although it may also be a response to the possibility (discussed but rejected) of re-allocation of unused country quotas or to Ireland getting a greater than 1% increase in national quota: http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/kfeyeyaucwid/rss2/

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

Tipp Man wrote: »

The supermarkets are robbing both the farmer and the consumer such is their buying power nowadays

You only need to look at how Tesco has expanded since the early 90's to see how they have been the main benefactors of CAP

That's my feeling on it, I have to admit. The power of the supermarket chains is now pretty grotesque in comparison to the organisations they deal with, and their profitability in recent years seems to have increased.

I'm not sure what would happen with the removal of subsidies, though - presumably, the power of the supermarket chains would still pressurise the farmers, which is likely to mean that smaller and less efficient farmers will go out of business faster than they would without subsidies.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Tipp Man

Scofflaw wrote: »

There was a large expansion in milk production in 2010, certainly - an early response, I think, to the phasing out of milk quotas, although it may also be a response to the possibility (discussed but rejected) of re-allocation of unused country quotas or to Ireland getting a greater than 1% increase in national quota: http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/kfeyeyaucwid/rss2/

cordially,
Scofflaw

It was a miracle that there wasn't a levy in 2010-2011

However it looks like a nailed on guarantee that it will apply in 2011-2012 and given the number of cows in the country at the moment i wouldn't rule a levy out every year from here to 2015

Irish dairy farmers are braced for expansion but (and many of them forgot/ignored this) the quota is still in place

Post 2015 the processing capability of coops will be the limiting factor - I don't think it will be a free for all

Scofflaw

Tipp Man wrote: »

It was a miracle that there wasn't a levy in 2010-2011

However it looks like a nailed on guarantee that it will apply in 2011-2012 and given the number of cows in the country at the moment i wouldn't rule a levy out every year from here to 2015

Irish dairy farmers are braced for expansion but (and many of them forgot/ignored this) the quota is still in place

Post 2015 the processing capability of coops will be the limiting factor - I don't think it will be a free for all

Markets are rarely if ever perfect, and often inefficient!

cordially,
Scofflaw