Irish Times: Coveney confirms agriculture faces cuts in Budget

Dampintheattic

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/coveney-confirms-agriculture-faces-cuts-in-budget-1.1537136

Coveney confirms agriculture faces cuts in Budget

Minister for Agriculture Simon Coveney has confirmed that there will be cuts to both current and capital expenditure on agriculture in next month’s budget.
Speaking in Brussels this morning ahead of a meeting of EU agriculture ministers, Mr Coveney said that agriculture had to take its “fair share” of expenditure reductions.
“We as a department have to take our fair share of expenditure reductions. This year is no exception. We will have to see some reductions in [current] expenditure. The targets would suggest that we have to make cuts in terms of capital expenditure also,” the Minister said, though he added that this year’s budget is likely to be the last tough budget.




[MOD]

In line with site policy regarding Sherlock's Law, most of the article quoted above has been removed.
The full article can be read at the posted link.

[/MOD]

rancher

Dampintheattic wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/coveney-confirms-agriculture-faces-cuts-in-budget-1.1537136

Coveney confirms agriculture faces cuts in Budget

Minister for Agriculture Simon Coveney has confirmed that there will be cuts to both current and capital expenditure on agriculture in next month’s budget.
Speaking in Brussels this morning ahead of a meeting of EU agriculture ministers, Mr Coveney said that agriculture had to take its “fair share” of expenditure reductions.
“We as a department have to take our fair share of expenditure reductions. This year is no exception. We will have to see some reductions in [current] expenditure. The targets would suggest that we have to make cuts in terms of capital expenditure also,” the Minister said, though he added that this year’s budget is likely to be the last tough budget.

At least he admits that our cuts are ''significant'', but they are also way out of line with any other department

bbam

This no surprise.
Neither FG nor Lab have ever been fans of the agri sector. We'll do well not to see a land tax introduced during this government life.

reilig

Dampintheattic wrote: »

that’s why the real focus has been on trying to help farmers get as much from the market place as possible.”

Looks like he's paving the path for the suckler cow support scheme that i mentioned last week

nashmach

bbam wrote: »

This no surprise.
Neither FG nor Lab have ever been fans of the agri sector. We'll do well not to see a land tax introduced during this government life.

What is the bet of plenty of changes to Stamp Duty, CGT and CAT so that more young farmers will be discouraged.

yellow50HX

Dampintheattic wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/coveney-confirms-agriculture-faces-cuts-in-budget-1.1537136

Coveney confirms agriculture faces cuts in Budget

Minister for Agriculture Simon Coveney has confirmed that there will be cuts to both current and capital expenditure on agriculture in next month’s budget.
Speaking in Brussels this morning ahead of a meeting of EU agriculture ministers, Mr Coveney said that agriculture had to take its “fair share” of expenditure reductions.
“We as a department have to take our fair share of expenditure reductions. This year is no exception. We will have to see some reductions in [current] expenditure. The targets would suggest that we have to make cuts in terms of capital expenditure also,” the Minister said, though he added that this year’s budget is likely to be the last tough budget.




[MOD]

In line with site policy regarding Sherlock's Law, most of the article quoted above has been removed.
The full article can be read at the posted link.

[/MOD]

cuts to bujdet for agri.... no sh*t sherlock

(pardon the pun, i thought the sherlock law was for removing items that were stating the blindingly obvious)

Pharaoh1

It's hard to see where the cuts are going to come from.

There is very little expenditure on any schemes now other than the REPS and AEOS already contracted - could these payments be trimmed again?

DAS will probably be reduced in some way - maybe eligibility criteria shifted again.
The flat rate addition is another easy target that people don't notice that much.

Possibly the payment for BTAP could be drastically reduced or even abolished.
Small enough money but we are down to the bone now.

Farm Assist all disregards gone so no scope there - I see IFA lobbying for the restoration of these disregards no chance.

The big savings will come from the numbers falling out of REPS this is by far the biggest "silent cut" that is happening to families every day of the year.

Also if Joan Burton does increase the self employed PRSI contribution this will affect the vast majority of farmers.

Conmaicne Mara

Completely unfair, Ag has already had higher cuts than any other sector. Coveney should be representing us farmers a lot better at cabinet, a poor job done if even more cuts are on the way. He's conveniently forgetting to mention that the EU farm budget has also been cut! I wonder how this will play into the co funding issue of Pillar two. I can't see him leaving money behind in Europe but will Peter be robbed to pay Paul internally?

bbam

So how will these cuts sit with the article on the journal about a new suckler Cow scheme for 2014?

If he's making such significant cuts And introducing a new scheme, there will have to be savage cuts somewhere.

Really get the impression this guy has the backbone of an amoeba.

reilig

Will the amount of farmers that will exit REPS 4 over the coming months do anything to help?

Dampintheattic

reilig wrote: »

Will the amount of farmers that will exit REPS 4 over the coming months do anything to help?

Here's my thinking.

This guy has form you know. Come up with a scheme like BTAP, which gives X amount of money, to qualifying farmers who join the said scheme.
Now, make it a condition that the farmers has to attend a certain number of waffling shops, held by Teagasc. Farmer pays most of the income from the scheme, back to the government, via Teagasc, for the pleasure of attending the waffle shops.

Budget headline "more money for agriculture":cool:
Email from Coveney, to Michael Noonan in Dept of Finance, "dont fret Mick, we will get most of the money back, via Teagasc",.

reilig

Dampintheattic wrote: »

Here's my thinking.

This guy has form you know. Come up with a scheme like BTAP, which gives X amount of money, to qualifying farmers who join the said scheme.
Now, make it a condition that the farmers has to attend a certain number of waffling shops, held by Teagasc. Farmer pays most of the income from the scheme, back to the government, via Teagasc, for the pleasure of attending the waffle shops.

Budget headline "more money for agriculture":cool:
Email from Coveney, to Michael Noonan in Dept of Finance, "dont fret Mick, we will get most of the money back, via Teagasc",.

As an active BTAP member I would disagree. I pay more than 30% of my BTAP payment back to Teagasc for the pleasure of attending the BTAP meetings, but the extra profit gained from the changed that i made as a result of BTAP more than covers it.

As farmers, do we really expect that any additional scheme like this will be money for jam?

Isn't that what happened in the past and lead to unfair distribution - money given out to everyone regardless of what they did? (Armchair farmers) ??

Making farmers work for it ensures that the most productive and hard working get the majority share of it.

Conmaicne Mara

reilig wrote: »

As an active BTAP member I would disagree. I pay more than 30% of my BTAP payment back to Teagasc for the pleasure of attending the BTAP meetings, but the extra profit gained from the changed that i made as a result of BTAP more than covers it.

Same as with STAP, only a fraction of money went back to Teagasc/Gov.

reilig

if tomorrow's indo is anything to go by

Early indications on the Minister for Agriculture’s intentions for the up-coming budget suggest that there will be no replacement scheme for REPS as savings of €453m are sought from the agriculture budget

hugo29

reilig wrote: »

if tomorrow's indo is anything to go by

in with the machine so and level a few of the habitats,

hugo29

reilig wrote: »

As an active BTAP member I would disagree. I pay more than 30% of my BTAP payment back to Teagasc for the pleasure of attending the BTAP meetings, but the extra profit gained from the changed that i made as a result of BTAP more than covers it.

As farmers, do we really expect that any additional scheme like this will be money for jam?

Isn't that what happened in the past and lead to unfair distribution - money given out to everyone regardless of what they did? (Armchair farmers) ??

Making farmers work for it ensures that the most productive and hard working get the majority share of it.

i agree with what you are saying reilig, but i also agree to a certain extent with damp, Teagasc are overpaid for the service they provide

maybe different teagasc reps are better than others

reilig

hugo29 wrote: »

in with the machine so and level a few of the habitats,

We had the ringfort option. Sure they'd never miss it . . . . . . :eek:

reilig

hugo29 wrote: »

i agree with what you are saying reilig, but i also agree to a certain extent with damp, Teagasc are overpaid for the service they provide

maybe different teagasc reps are better than others

of course all teagasc reps differ. They're humans. But that was not the point of my reply. Regardless of the quality of my Teagasc Rep, I had to implement a number of different measures on my farm each year in order to qualify for the BTAP payment. The implementation of these measures alone offers many times the return of the cost for me to be in BTAP with Teagasc.

Secondly,
Regardless of whether I am with Teagasc or a private planner for BTAP, the quality of the planner should not matter. Their job is only to organise the meeting and chair it. They are not contracted to teach at the meetings. it's a discussion group - farmers there are supposed to learn from each other rather than learning from the planner! In addition to the measures taht I took up to qualify for the BTAP payment, I also learned a lot from listening to other farmers and seeing what others have done when I visited their farms.

So whether the money is paid to private planners or to teagasc, they provide a service which is beneficial to me and helps me improve my farm and put me in a better place to make profit so the small fee that is paid offers huge dividends.

In my opinion, this is the cheapest and most sustainable way that the government can put more money into Farmers pockets

As i said before, too many people didn't take up BTAP because all that they could see was the €1000 payment and the €300 planner cost. It's important to think outside the box!

hugo29

reilig wrote: »

of course all teagasc reps differ. They're humans. But that was not the point of my reply. Regardless of the quality of my Teagasc Rep, I had to implement a number of different measures on my farm each year in order to qualify for the BTAP payment. The implementation of these measures alone offers many times the return of the cost for me to be in BTAP with Teagasc.

Secondly,
Regardless of whether I am with Teagasc or a private planner for BTAP, the quality of the planner should not matter. Their job is only to organise the meeting and chair it. They are not contracted to teach at the meetings. it's a discussion group - farmers there are supposed to learn from each other rather than learning from the planner!

true i have enjoyed Btap and learned a lot , but tell me, how many of the measures had you already in place prior to joining BTAP

I would be very surprised if you were not already in Herdplus, Agfood and had used a Profit Monitor or had done Reseeding,

Precisely their job is to send out a text to organise the meeting, photocopy a few handouts and we do the rest, of a 15-17 man group at €100 per head thats €1500 to €1700, nice earner would you not think

reilig

hugo29 wrote: »

true i have enjoyed Btap and learned a lot , but tell me, how many of the measures had you already in place prior to joining BTAP

I would be very surprised if you were not already in Herdplus, Agfood and had used a Profit Monitor or had done Reseeding,

Precisely their job is to send out a text to organise the meeting, photocopy a few handouts and we do the rest, of a 15-17 man group at €100 per head thats €1500 to €1700, nice earner would you not think

A nice earner, but you get paid €150 per meeting to attend also.

I chose the 5 star bull measure which I hadn't been doing before.
I was not in herdplus.
I had no paddocks but have now.
I now have a whole herd health plan and lower vet bills.
My calves are now forward grazing out of the shed on surrounding fields.
I feed less meal and have better calves.
I have a reseeding plan in place which maps out the fields for reseeding each year - before it was haphazard.

Would farmers be happier if teagasc did it for free?

I work with people and the majority of things that you provide for free are a failure. A small charge usually means full attendance, better participation and better results at the end because people will want to get the most that they can for the money that they have spent!

hugo29

reilig wrote: »

A nice earner, but you get paid €150 per meeting to attend also.

I chose the 5 star bull measure which I hadn't been doing before.
I was not in herdplus.
I had no paddocks but have now.
I now have a whole herd health plan and lower vet bills.
My calves are now forward grazing out of the shed on surrounding fields.
I feed less meal and have better calves.
I have a reseeding plan in place which maps out the fields for reseeding each year - before it was haphazard.

Would farmers be happier if teagasc did it for free?

I work with people and the majority of things that you provide for free are a failure. A small charge usually means full attendance, better participation and better results at the end because people will want to get the most that they can for the money that they have spent!

again i am not downgrading the merits of BTAP. thats an impressive list of measures to have implemented in 2 years since joining BTAP, fair play to you for grasping the scheme fully, im sure you would possibly have /or thought about implementing some of those prior to BTAP

I am a member of BTAP and pay my fee and enjoy the meetings and seeing various methods of farming, its the fee to teagasc which i think is excessive, nobody is asking them to do it for free, we are allowed question the cost of the service being provided, to me its dear for what they provide and sure i get paid €150 but my time is worth something too is it not.

i work with people too and believe you me they will question mine or any one else fee if they think its excessive for the end product and we have to adjust fee accordingly or else they will take their custom elsewhere

reilig

Why do it if you don't feel that its value for money or if the time that you put into it is more valuable than the financial gain from it?

hugo29 wrote: »

again i am not downgrading the merits of BTAP. thats an impressive list of measures to have implemented in 2 years since joining BTAP, fair play to you for grasping the scheme fully, im sure you would possibly have /or thought about implementing some of those prior to BTAP

I am a member of BTAP and pay my fee and enjoy the meetings and seeing various methods of farming, its the fee to teagasc which i think is excessive, nobody is asking them to do it for free, we are allowed question the cost of the service being provided, to me its dear for what they provide and sure i get paid €150 but my time is worth something too is it not.

i work with people too and believe you me they will question mine or any one else fee if they think its excessive for the end product and we have to adjust fee accordingly or else they will take their custom elsewhere

hugo29

reilig wrote: »

Why do it if you don't feel that its value for money or if the time that you put into it is more valuable than the financial gain from it?

But that's not i am saying, I have just said I enjoy the programme, you told me I was getting 150 per meeting and i never said that was not enough, I said why shouldn't I get paid for my time

My biggest problem is what we have to pay for the service we get, I don't think we as a group are and I am not the only one, if you are lucky enough to have a good facilitator then great, we don't but still pay top dollar, a thread was started on this before and it transpired most btap groups had started as early as February, we had our first meeting in may,

reilig

hugo29 wrote: »

But that's not i am saying, I have just said I enjoy the programme, you told me I was getting 150 per meeting and i never said that was not enough, I said why shouldn't I get paid for my time

My biggest problem is what we have to pay for the service we get, I don't think we as a group are and I am not the only one, if you are lucky enough to have a good facilitator then great, we don't but still pay top dollar, a thread was started on this before and it transpired most btap groups had started as early as February, we had our first meeting in may,

I personally think that for the amount of work that the planner does for some people as part of our BTAP, the fee that we pay teagasc is quite cheap. Most people in our group can't use a computer. He does all of their ICBF suff such as AI service dates, scanning, etc.

Government could subsidise us, but then lads would take the pi$$, like with everything else that is got for nothing!!

If you are not happy with the service that you get, why pay for it? Plenty of private planners out there doing BTAP - charging more than teagasc for it too. Maybe they are giving better service?

Conmaicne Mara

From farming indo's preview:

"Environmental schemes scrapped
Early indications on the Minister for Agriculture’s intentions for the up-coming budget suggest that there will be no replacement scheme for REPS as savings of 453m are sought from the agriculture budget, writes Declan O’Brien"

moy83

If Coveney wants to cut something in the budget on farmers it should be the price of diesel and fertilizer , especially if he would like to hit these pie in the sky harvest 2020 figures .

hugo29

reilig wrote: »

I personally think that for the amount of work that the planner does for some people as part of our BTAP, the fee that we pay teagasc is quite cheap. Most people in our group can't use a computer. He does all of their ICBF suff such as AI service dates, scanning, etc.

Government could subsidise us, but then lads would take the pi$$, like with everything else that is got for nothing!!

If you are not happy with the service that you get, why pay for it? Plenty of private planners out there doing BTAP - charging more than teagasc for it too. Maybe they are giving better service?

Well if he does all that then fair play to the lad, he earns his money, our lad don't do that, maybe a policy of lads who can operate the computer get a reduced fee, you pay for what you get, hard to implement I suppose