Is your SFP under €400 h/a ?

Conmaicne Mara

If it is, I would like to suggest that you go along to Eamon O'Cuivs meetings around the country.

Listen to what he has to say then make up your own minds.

AFAIK the meetings are as follows:

Ballaghadereen 18 Feb,
Dungarvan 21 Feb,
Gort 25 Feb,
Scarriff 28 Feb,
Bantry March 7.

There may be more I don't know about.

I've never voted for him, or his party, so I want it noted I am not making a political point.

I found tonight's fare quite interesting. The figures he uses came from the Department of Agriculture.

For anyone who may come on this thread trying to get me to defend him, thats not my job, what I am asking people to do is go along and make up their own minds. There are the meetings, question the man himself.

cj maxx

Why does he have meetings from dungarvan to ballaghdreen and down to bantry but not further north or east ?
Whats he on about in a nutshell?

Conmaicne Mara

cjmc wrote: »

Why does he have meetings from dungarvan to ballaghdreen and down to bantry but not further north or east ?
Whats he on about in a nutshell?

He may have more meetings that haven't been published yet, you could try contacting him to find out.

I am reluctant to go into what he said because I'll be accused of a whole host of things. I am not promoting him, but I do think people in the category of the thread title do need to hear what he has to say, then make up their own minds.

Damo810

A bit more information would be nice Con, I don't think anyone on here will accuse you of anything. Ours would be well below 400/ha and Ballaghaderreen wouldn't be too far from me.

coolshannagh28

O Cuiv has a set of proposals which set out a fairer redistribution of payments along the lines originally proposed by Cialos with the payments cut from the top down and no cuts under 400 per ha. He has a point in that under the new regime anything over 250 per ha is cut and a serious amount of farmers fall into the 250 to 400 bracket .
It may be populist but for all his faults O Cuiv has a good understanding of the sector from an angle that Coveney is probably not aware of.

solerina

I would prefer O Cuiv's ideas than a lot the stuff brought out by Coveney a few weeks ago, as far as I can see it if your a small farmer who needs subsidies then he is really not interested, but if your a big lad with a huge single farm payment then he is right behind you !! He has a very narrow view of farming in my opinion (and hasn't a clue about the reality of commonage farming).

rancher

coolshannagh28 wrote: »

O Cuiv has a set of proposals which set out a fairer redistribution of payments along the lines originally proposed by Cialos with the payments cut from the top down and no cuts under 400 per ha. He has a point in that under the new regime anything over 250 per ha is cut and a serious amount of farmers fall into the 250 to 400 bracket .
It may be populist but for all his faults O Cuiv has a good understanding of the sector from an angle that Coveney is probably not aware of.

O'Cuiv was responsible for changing the parameters of Reps that let thousands of dairy farmers into Reps and eventually broke reps and for the last few years the majority of recipients of the €10000 reps money was dairy farmers selling maybe €100,000 -159,000 worth of milk.... maybe more.
He had a huge influence in making the rollover of Reps impossible for you guys and now he wants to destroy another sector.....those suckler farmers with 30 - 40 ha getting €400 -600/ha.
He's flying the maximum payment flag and he knows well that it hasn't a hope
He's not in power, he can say what he likes.

hurling_lad

coolshannagh28 wrote: »

O Cuiv has a set of proposals which set out a fairer redistribution of payments along the lines originally proposed by Cialos with the payments cut from the top down and no cuts under 400 per ha. He has a point in that under the new regime anything over 250 per ha is cut and a serious amount of farmers fall into the 250 to 400 bracket .
It may be populist but for all his faults O Cuiv has a good understanding of the sector from an angle that Coveney is probably not aware of.

Very unlike Fianna Fáil to be promoting populist policies.

solerina

rancher wrote: »

O'Cuiv was responsible for changing the parameters of Reps that let thousands of dairy farmers into Reps and eventually broke reps and for the last few years the majority of recipients of the €10000 reps money was dairy farmers selling maybe €100,000 -159,000 worth of milk.... maybe more.
He had a huge influence in making the rollover of Reps impossible for you guys and now he wants to destroy another sector.....those suckler farmers with 30 - 40 ha getting €400 -600/ha.
He's flying the maximum payment flag and he knows well that it hasn't a hope
He's not in power, he can say what he likes.

Totally agree, dairy being included has ruined the beef and sheep sector which were the areas the SFP was originally intended to assist, in my opinion dairy should have never been left in (ye might all disagree, but I'm entitled to my opinion). However as I cant see that changing at least if O Cuiv is making an effort to try help the smaller man I am all in favour of at least listening to his proposals !!!
I know a few suckler men in my area who are getting out after the recent proposals simply because it is no longer viable to continue, and we are def cutting back our sheep numbers this autumn (and letting far less ewes to the ram also), its just not viable into the future.

freedominacup

hurling_lad wrote: »

Very unlike Fianna Fáil to be promoting populist policies.

Shocking, the blind fella must be spinning in the grave:rolleyes:.

hurling_lad

rancher wrote: »

O'Cuiv was responsible for changing the parameters of Reps that let thousands of dairy farmers into Reps and eventually broke reps and for the last few years the majority of recipients of the €10000 reps money was dairy farmers selling maybe €100,000 -159,000 worth of milk.... maybe more.
He had a huge influence in making the rollover of Reps impossible for you guys and now he wants to destroy another sector.....those suckler farmers with 30 - 40 ha getting €400 -600/ha.
He's flying the maximum payment flag and he knows well that it hasn't a hope
He's not in power, he can say what he likes.

An excellent point.

We were one of those dairy farms that you're talking about and even I would say that we had no business getting that Reps money.

[edit]It would be great if someone brought this point up at one of O'Cuiv's meetings.[/edit]

coolshannagh28

I would place more blame on Mary Coughlan who broke the dept budget in general particularly with the grant scheme from which it hasn't recovered . It is a fait accompli now but I definitely feel that a fairer redistribution could have been worked out it seems senseless to be cutting farmers on 250 per ha while the max payment remains 150k

rancher

hurling_lad wrote: »

An excellent point.

We were one of those dairy farms that you're talking about and even I would say that we had no business getting that Reps money.

Fair dues to you, hope you didn't think I was attacking you....you took advantage of a scheme within the rules.....good business move I'd say

Conmaicne Mara

What I am asking farmers to do is to go and listen. That costs the price of the diesel or petrol to get you there and maybe a soft drink or mug of tae.

Then individual farmers can make up their own minds as to whether he is talking sense or rubbish.

My opinion before I went last night was he had a "Santy list", not a hope of achieving anything on it, and had a laugh at O'Cuiv's expense with a couple of lads yesterday before the meeting.

I came out of the Station House hotel with an entirely different opinion of it. Lads who are a lot smarter than me, and a lot better off than me were giving it serious thought too, in a positive way.

For anyone on or under €400 H/A it is worth the investment in time going to hear him out.

For lads coming on rubbishing the man here (and I have often have a go at him, and to his face), I wonder will ye be brave enough to go and put it up to him?

hurling_lad

rancher wrote: »

Fair dues to you, hope you didn't think I was attacking you....you took advantage of a scheme within the rules.....good business move I'd say

I would put the loosening of the Reps criteria up there with the €1,000 p.a. early childhood payment (which I also took advantage of while it was going) as some of the most nakedly populist, vote-catching policies that FF dreamed up during the Celtic Tiger.

Conmaicne Mara

Damo810 wrote: »

A bit more information would be nice Con, I don't think anyone on here will accuse you of anything. Ours would be well below 400/ha and Ballaghaderreen wouldn't be too far from me.

It's like coolshannagh said, a fairer CAP based on real Department of Agriculture figures. He breaks them all down, current SFP versus production, levels of payment through out each county. More farmers gain under O'Cuivs proposals than what Coveney/IFA/high earners have come up with.

I am quite a sceptical person, and before I went into that meeting I thought he's in opposition with his Santy list and hasn't a hope in hell.

It's how the proposal is put forward in the meeting, and the plan to use leverage that changed my mind.

He is in opposition, but the plan can work. If you're under €400HA it's my opinion you should at least go along and hear him out.

Listen, and make up your own mind.

rancher

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

What I am asking farmers to do is to go and listen. That costs the price of the diesel or petrol to get you there and maybe a soft drink or mug of tae.

Then individual farmers can make up their own minds as to whether he is talking sense or rubbish.

My opinion before I went last night was he had a "Santy list", not a hope of achieving anything on it, and had a laugh at O'Cuiv's expense with a couple of lads yesterday before the meeting.

I came out of the Station House hotel with an entirely different opinion of it. Lads who are a lot smarter than me, and a lot better off than me were giving it serious thought too, in a positive way.

For anyone on or under €400 H/A it is worth the investment in time going to hear him out.

For lads coming on rubbishing the man here (and I have often have a go at him, and to his face), I wonder will ye be brave enough to go and put it up to him?

But Con I did say it to him when he had the last travelling circus two years ago and he had a ICMSA guy at the top table with him and the two of them were positively beeming with pride that I was giving them the credit for letting all those thousands of dairy farmers in.

coolshannagh28

Strictly speaking an environmental scheme such as reps must be focused on farmers who have the potential do most damage . I have no issue with the focus of pillar 2 payments as there must be some transparency to justify Europe giving the funds. on the other hand pillar 1 is pure financial support and using our historical system to determine its distribution is harder to credit

Conmaicne Mara

rancher wrote: »

But Con I did say it to him when he had the last travelling circus two years ago and he had a ICMSA guy at the top table with him and the two of them were positively beeming with pride that I was giving them the credit for letting all those thousands of dairy farmers in.

I am going to stick to today and the topic at hand. As a farmer who lost €1,000 off DAS, and REPS which was worth €11-€12k I wager I know what financial pain is more than most.

We can't change the past, but maybe we can address those wrongs today. O'Cuiv has a plan which I believe will get legs under it. In the document last night it says 105,000 farmers will be better off under his proposals, while 16,000 farmers are better off under Coveney.

He outlined a strategy to give that plan leverage. That strategy does include small farmers, like me, doing a couple of things. Now, I am prepared to give it a lash and see what comes of it.

You should read the FF CAP policy document, I'm sure you already have, and go and disagree with him based on the figures if you believe he is wrong.

My belief, from a background of voting FG since I was 18 years old, is that he is on to something here. That farmers under €400 HA owe it to themselves to hear him out, despite past actions. Coveney won't do much for those same farmers, so what is there for them to lose.

Conmaicne Mara

I'll be very interested to see what reaction he get's in other parts of the country.

rancher

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

I am going to stick to today and the topic at hand. As a farmer who lost €1,000 off DAS, and REPS which was worth €11-€12k I wager I know what financial pain is more than most.

We can't change the past, but maybe we can address those wrongs today. O'Cuiv has a plan which I believe will get legs under it. In the document last night it says 105,000 farmers will be better off under his proposals, while 16,000 farmers are better off under Coveney.

He outlined a strategy to give that plan leverage. That strategy does include small farmers, like me, doing a couple of things. Now, I am prepared to give it a lash and see what comes of it.

You should read the FF CAP policy document, I'm sure you already have, and go and disagree with him based on the figures if you believe he is wrong.

My belief, from a background of voting FG since I was 18 years old, is that he is on to something here. That farmers under €400 HA owe it to themselves to hear him out, despite past actions. Coveney won't do much for those same farmers, so what is there for them to lose.

And you were well entitled to your REPs and pillar 2 should always be there for farmers such as you but he is trying to take pillar 1 money SFP to make up for what he took off you which came from pillar 2 They'd all be far better off to target pillar 2 money at disadvantage areas, most of us are used to doing without our REPs now, no business can withstand the cuts that we're going to get without at least putting it over a few years

Conmaicne Mara

I disagree with you on P2 fundamentally, it's proven to be completely vulnerable and unreliable. P1 is protected money.

I'm going to get back on the topic which was last night.

O'Cuiv had a very smart idea last night. He passed out a pre printed letter, which most people signed including address and herd number. The letter stated that the undersigned do not give consent to IFA to collect a levy on their animals at the marts and factories.

I will be interested to see how many signatures and her numbers he will get country wide.

A letter, was it last year, came from the West, signed by over 800 IFA members and their herd numbers and was dismissed by then president John Bryan as a "silly letter".

But that letter didn't remove any money from IFA, this does. It goes to show what lengths people have to go to to get heed from IFA.

(Rancher, none of that is a pop at you, but it is historical fact).

rancher

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

I disagree with you on P2 fundamentally, it's proven to be completely vulnerable and unreliable. P1 is protected money.

I'm going to get back on the topic which was last night.

O'Cuiv had a very smart idea last night. He passed out a pre printed letter, which most people signed including address and herd number. The letter stated that the undersigned do not give consent to IFA to collect a levy on their animals at the marts and factories.

I will be interested to see how many signatures and her numbers he will get country wide.

A letter, was it last year, came from the West, signed by over 800 IFA members and their herd numbers and was dismissed by then president John Bryan as a "silly letter".

But that letter didn't remove any money from IFA, this does. It goes to show what lengths people have to go to to get heed from IFA.

(Rancher, none of that is a pop at you, but it is historical fact).

You probably saw on the journal that IFA's accounts shows a surplus of 300,000 for last year or if you like €3 too much collected off each member.
The officers of IFA are doing their best and if that's not enough, sure we'll go home,
I said here two years ago that its unlikely that IFA would be lobbying reduce anyones income and that's the way it turned out.
Coveney said he has the support of all the main farming organisations on his decisions why target IFA

rancher

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

I disagree with you on P2 fundamentally, it's proven to be completely vulnerable and unreliable. P1 is protected money.

I'm going to get back on the topic which was last night.

O'Cuiv had a very smart idea last night. He passed out a pre printed letter, which most people signed including address and herd number. The letter stated that the undersigned do not give consent to IFA to collect a levy on their animals at the marts and factories.

I will be interested to see how many signatures and her numbers he will get country wide.

A letter, was it last year, came from the West, signed by over 800 IFA members and their herd numbers and was dismissed by then president John Bryan as a "silly letter".

But that letter didn't remove any money from IFA, this does. It goes to show what lengths people have to go to to get heed from IFA.

(Rancher, none of that is a pop at you, but it is historical fact).

I'm very surprised at O,Cuiv doing that, can't believe it....any way back to the rugby

Username John

I am wondering what difference does it make if FF have an alternative proposal to what FG currently have?

I mean FF are in opposition, what will get their proposal used as opposed to the current FG one?

I am sure there is a populist / political agenda as well - but I don't understand how his proposal would become real?

Conmaicne Mara

rancher wrote: »

You probably saw on the journal that IFA's accounts shows a surplus of 300,000 for last year or if you like €3 too much collected off each member.
The officers of IFA are doing their best and if that's not enough, sure we'll go home,
I said here two years ago that its unlikely that IFA would be lobbying reduce anyones income and that's the way it turned out.
Coveney said he has the support of all the main farming organisations on his decisions why target IFA

The officers with pull in IFA aren't working for the majority of farmers. Anyone with ears who goes to a meeting will only hear concern about big entitlements, and protecting those big entitlements.

A letter signed by over 800 IFA member farmers last year was described by John Bryan as "a silly letter", that's some work.

Coveney and IFA are working for the higher entitlement farmers, that's why at the heel of the hunt they're happy out agreeing with each other.

ICSA have O'Cuiv speaking at their meeting in Roscommon next week (I think that's the right meeting).

That'll be nearer you than me if you want to tackle him on it. He had figures on the level of SFP versus the level of production as well.

This is about farmers not IFA. When a far organisation isn't representing the majority of it's members then there's something very wrong.

Conmaicne Mara

Username John wrote: »

I am wondering what difference does it make if FF have an alternative proposal to what FG currently have?

I mean FF are in opposition, what will get their proposal used as opposed to the current FG one?

I am sure there is a populist / political agenda as well - but I don't understand how his proposal would become real?

I'm not concerned one bit about the politics if the goal, or some of the goal can be achieved i.e. a fairer CAP.

If enough people withdraw the levy it will give IFA pause for thought about what their members want. It's only through pressure that Coveney will change. That's how it works.

Conmaicne Mara

rancher wrote: »

I'm very surprised at O,Cuiv doing that, can't believe it....any way back to the rugby

There you go again

The meetings are listed for you to go tell him.

Conmaicne Mara

rancher wrote: »

why target IFA

From the Connacht Tribune Facebook page:

Galway West TD Éamon Ó Cuív claims that the majority of farmers in the west are being treated unfairly by the Agriculture Minister under the new Common Agriculture Policy.
Deputy Ó Cuív also said that the Irish Farmers Association are supporting this policy and protecting the minority of farmers who are better off.
A campaign to stop payments to the IFA and marts and factories was launched at a public meeting in Clifden last night.

rancher

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

There you go again

The meetings are listed for you to go tell him.

I got it confirmed, that's why I said I couldn't believe it, The story I've got is that O'Cuiv is stopping the levies because we're afraid of the factories not collecting them for us anymore if we upset them. There's big farmers up here with big SFP that'll sign that for you. My information came from a fianna fail guy that was at the meeting, was it in Clifden. I think he said Clifden any way.

just after reading the press release.....clifden

Conmaicne Mara

rancher wrote: »

I got it confirmed, that's why I said I couldn't believe it, The story I've got is that O'Cuiv is stopping the levies because we're afraid of the factories not collecting them for us anymore if we upset them. There's big farmers up here with big SFP that'll sign that for you. My information came from a fianna fail guy that was at the meeting, was it in Clifden. I think he said Clifden any way.

just after reading the press release.....clifden

You've lost me on the believe it bit

Yes, it was in the Station House Hotel in Clifden, I attended. It's the beginning of a series of country wide public meetings. I have emailed O'Cuiv to find out if there are other meetings not yet published.

The reasoning behind the letter withdrawing the levy permission is to use that as leverage to get IFA to change policy in favour of the majority not the minority of farmers. If IFA change policy it is more likely Coveney will change policy due to pressure. The levy isn't the issue, the levy is just a tool to exert leverage.

All of this is late in the CAP day, but I believe it's worth the effort. I believe it's worth farmers time to go and listen, like I said let individuals make their own minds up.

red bull

Dairy farmers were eligible to apply for REPs from the begining

rancher

red bull wrote: »

Dairy farmers were eligible to apply for REPs from the begining

The rules were changed at the end that left it easier to comply, a friend went in and he supplying 100,000 gals milk at the time. He never could comply before . Got his last cheque lately.....nice on top of the present milk price

paddysdream

Having read through this thread ,have a few questions.

What is O Cuiv trying to achieve?The new SFP regime is done dusted and delivered,set in stone etc etc.The budget,Ireland's options,etc are decided and there is no going back.Is he telling people that if he gets in power after 2016 that he is gonna change pillar 1?Not a chance methinks

As regards the IFA "levy";have never paid it and the first thing I do when dealing with a factory/mart for the first time is to emphasise that it is not to be stopped from my cheque.Once or twice it was stopped "by mistake" but refunded when I kicked up a fuss about it.So whats the non political point of getting people to sign letters etc etc?Just tell the mart/factory to stop the levy.Its voluntary .

Suppose the sneaky thing about it is that it is stopped as a matter of course unless you request it not to be and that on some dockets marts do not make it clear what its for eg "european levy" etc instead of IFA levy.
Have no problem with factories and marts collecting this for IFA or people paying it if they want.

The "less than 400 " bit.Well that includes the vast majority of Irish farmers(hold my hand up and say mine is a bit north of that).Most large tillage farmers would be on less than this per hectare.Think area aid was about 145 per acre or 358 per hectare.Add in lower set aside entitlements and average would come down.Why doesn't he hold a few meetings in south Kildare ,Wexford,Carlow ,Laois etc?

Very few people are in excess of 150k(4 I think last year ) and there weren't that many over 100k.Smells like begrudgery.Guys on 300 per hectare are well in excess of the average .Contrary to popular belief,very few are on very high per hectare entitlements and many of those have small hectares ie total payment ain't that large.Average total is about 10.5k or so.

To me the big winners (not many I admit)are those,mostly west of the Shannon,who have lots of hectares (on a map anyways) and low entitlements.

To me it always comes back to the basic question;What is Area Aid,SFP,Pillar 1 etc, for?. Support to those producing food at near to or below cost or a social engineering scheme to sustain rural areas?

Extreme example I know but?
90 hectares of my land(not bragging);1100 lowland ewes or 180-200 dairy cows or 900 ton winter wheat or ?suckler cows finishing progeny.

90 hectares west Cork,Leitrim,Cavan(just an example ,don't take it personally!) ? ewes ,cows etc?

If you believe its option1(support to producers) then its one way and if you believe its option 2(social support) its another.

Know what I think and believe Pillar 2 is the one for social support,increased targeting to ANCs etc.

Said a long time ago on here that those of us who are living from and depend on farming are very protective of our supports and ,as they make up the vast proportion of our income many years,will fight to keep as much as we can.


How is it that its those who are gaining from the reform are the ones always complaining about it?

Conmaicne Mara

paddysdream wrote: »

Having read through this thread ,have a few questions.

What is O Cuiv trying to achieve?The new SFP regime is done dusted and delivered,set in stone etc etc.The budget,Ireland's options,etc are decided and there is no going back.Is he telling people that if he gets in power after 2016 that he is gonna change pillar 1?Not a chance methinks

As regards the IFA "levy";have never paid it and the first thing I do when dealing with a factory/mart for the first time is to emphasise that it is not to be stopped from my cheque.Once or twice it was stopped "by mistake" but refunded when I kicked up a fuss about it.So whats the non political point of getting people to sign letters etc etc?Just tell the mart/factory to stop the levy.Its voluntary .

Suppose the sneaky thing about it is that it is stopped as a matter of course unless you request it not to be and that on some dockets marts do not make it clear what its for eg "european levy" etc instead of IFA levy.
Have no problem with factories and marts collecting this for IFA or people paying it if they want.

The "less than 400 " bit.Well that includes the vast majority of Irish farmers(hold my hand up and say mine is a bit north of that).Most large tillage farmers would be on less than this per hectare.Think area aid was about 145 per acre or 358 per hectare.Add in lower set aside entitlements and average would come down.Why doesn't he hold a few meetings in south Kildare ,Wexford,Carlow ,Laois etc?

Very few people are in excess of 150k(4 I think last year ) and there weren't that many over 100k.Smells like begrudgery.Guys on 300 per hectare are well in excess of the average .Contrary to popular belief,very few are on very high per hectare entitlements and many of those have small hectares ie total payment ain't that large.Average total is about 10.5k or so.

To me the big winners (not many I admit)are those,mostly west of the Shannon,who have lots of hectares (on a map anyways) and low entitlements.

To me it always comes back to the basic question;What is Area Aid,SFP,Pillar 1 etc, for?. Support to those producing food at near to or below cost or a social engineering scheme to sustain rural areas?

Extreme example I know but?
90 hectares of my land(not bragging);1100 lowland ewes or 180-200 dairy cows or 900 ton winter wheat or ?suckler cows finishing progeny.

90 hectares west Cork,Leitrim,Cavan(just an example ,don't take it personally!) ? ewes ,cows etc?

If you believe its option1(support to producers) then its one way and if you believe its option 2(social support) its another.

Know what I think and believe Pillar 2 is the one for social support,increased targeting to ANCs etc.

Said a long time ago on here that those of us who are living from and depend on farming are very protective of our supports and ,as they make up the vast proportion of our income many years,will fight to keep as much as we can.


How is it that its those who are gaining from the reform are the ones always complaining about it?

Not a bit in the world stopping you putting those questions to him.

paddysdream

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

Not a bit in the world stopping you putting those questions to him.

Wouldn't bother really as my opinion of him ain't that good right now and can't see how it might improve!

To be honest believe he is a populist who jumps on every bandwagon after it has left the station ie when he can talk and propose ideas but never has to deliver or make decisions.

If there was (a) any chance of the new CAP being altered or (b) O Cuiv being in an agricultural ministry this side of never then I might go to a meeting of his.

All this from a house where FF have got 95% plus of all votes cast since they were formed in the 30s.

Conmaicne Mara

paddysdream wrote: »

Wouldn't bother really

There you go then. This thread was created to let people know the meetings were taking place.

paddysdream

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

There you go then. This thread was created to let people know the meetings were taking place.

Ok then if he holds one within 100 miles of me then I might!.

Can I be so bold as to ask what the main points of his idea is ie how does he propose to level out the job,make life fairer,etc etc.Not being smart but dont really want to wade through a policy document tonight.
Just the main bullet points please as I know that when you hear it explained at a meeting it makes much more sense than just reading through page after page.

Conmaicne Mara

paddysdream wrote: »

Ok then if he holds one within 100 miles of me then I might!.

Can I be so bold as to ask what the main points of his idea is ie how does he propose to level out the job,make life fairer,etc etc.Not being smart but dont really want to wade through a policy document tonight.
Just the main bullet points please as I know that when you hear it explained at a meeting it makes much more sense than just reading through page after page.

The policy document is on FF's main page. That is the basis for his talk, but in truth like you said it's explained better in person. It doesn't take long to read online in fairness.

But I suppose he has a per hectare cap of €400 by 2019, and for lower entitlement farmers to come up to €193 I believe. He's taking money out of Pillar 2 to help fund this, but also committing to proper 50:50 co-funding.

There was I believe some mention given to high SFP but low hectare farms.

He goes into detail about the disproportionate reward to production for the very high SFP recipients, compared to low SFP recipients and their production.

The idea is for the absolute highest earners to start dropping first, year by year, so you could say the middle of the road SFP recipients would get to keep that level of SFP for longer than under Coveneys proposals.

It's not my idea, that's why I say go to the meetings and ask questions, I can't explain it as well.

As for the 100 miles, when I attend an IFA county executive meeting I've to make a 140 mile round trip!

He does also mention fair price for produce and referenced the bull beef protest. That would be of benefit to larger producers if it were to come to pass.

What part of the country are you in by the way?

rancher

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

Not a bit in the world stopping you putting those questions to him.

There's an interesting one for you Con and I'm sure you'll agree. How much money do you think IFAs lobbying has put in Paddysdreams pocket. he says his SFP is a bit north of 400 so we'll say 600 and if Ciolos got his way it'd be 250 this year so he'd be down 350/ha, I doubt he's a member, but we'll say he has the average members acreage 40ha, he's gained €14000 or if you like the levy off 10000 cattle
Also its not the IFA levy, its divided between ICMSA IFA and macra.
Any way just a bit of fun, really hooked on this now, I'll never get time to lamb the ewes this year. Other years I use to say that I might have an ''IFA lamb'' or maybe even an ''IFA ewe'' but this year its likely to be a'' boards lamb'' iykwim.

Conmaicne Mara

rancher wrote: »

There's an interesting one for you Con and I'm sure you'll agree. How much money do you think IFAs lobbying has put in Paddysdreams pocket. he says its a bit north of 400 so we'll say 600 and if Ciolos got his way it'd be 250 this year so he'd be down 350/ha, I doubt he's a member, but we'll say he has the average members acreage 40ha, he's gained €14000 or if you like the levy off 10000 cattle
Also its not the IFA levy, its divided between ICMSA IFA and macra.
Any way just a bit of fun, really hooked on this now, I'll never get time to lamb the ewes this year. Other years I use to say that I might have an ''IFA lamb'' or maybe even an ''IFA ewe'' but this year its likely to be a'' boards lamb'' iykwim.

Something I've never hid from anyone, here or face to face regardless of who they are is that I believe in the family farm, keeping farmers in rural communities through out the country.

The SFP system is an unfair system. In the CAP policy document SFP payments were compared to LU/HA based payments. I'll take one example from that document:

A farmer in receipt of €150-200 SFP would receive €214 based on his LU/HA production. Where as a farmer getting €1000+ H/A SFP would get €416 based on his LU/HA production.

Now Dev Óg said he got his figures from the Department of Agriculture, don't question me on them, they're not my figures, question him. But that example shows how unequal and unfair the SFP system is.

The SFP payments are somewhat accurate (not very) up to €400 HA. When you go above €400 HA in that document the SFP payment versus LU/HA production payment gap expands rapidly.

Now IFA, I don't believe I said they were useless. I wouldn't criticise most of the IFA people I know. BUT as an organisation led by the leadership - at least until the recent changing of the guard as Downey hasn't been there long enough yet - it has become a vehicle used by high SFP earning farmers, and not an organisation working for the majority of it's members.

rancher

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

Something I've never hid from anyone, here or face to face regardless of who they are is that I believe in the family farm, keeping farmers in rural communities through out the country.

The SFP system is an unfair system. In the CAP policy document SFP payments were compared to LU/HA based payments. I'll take one example from that document:

A farmer in receipt of €150-200 SFP would receive €214 based on his LU/HA production. Where as a farmer getting €1000+ H/A SFP would get €416 based on his LU/HA production.

Now Dev Óg said he got his figures from the Department of Agriculture, don't question me on them, they're not my figures, question him. But that example shows how unequal and unfair the SFP system is.

The SFP payments are somewhat accurate (not very) up to €400 HA. When you go above €400 HA in that document the SFP payment versus LU/HA production payment gap expands rapidly.

Now IFA, I don't believe I said they were useless. I wouldn't criticise most of the IFA people I know. BUT as an organisation led by the leadership - at least until the recent changing of the guard as Downey hasn't been there long enough yet - it has become a vehicle used by high SFP earning farmers, and not an organisation working for the majority of it's members.

Sorry... my post was only a bit of crack, think you and I have it all dicussed, I wish you the best of luck with this, I'm coming near retirement ...doesn't matter what way it goes...contributory pension in 5 yrs.
I was just saying after all the work we put in that paddysdream is still stopping the levy although he's avoided a 250/ha cut in his SFP.......there's no accounting for folks, is there

Conmaicne Mara

rancher wrote: »

Sorry... my post was only a bit of crack, think you and I have it all dicussed, I wish you the best of luck with this, I'm coming near retirement ...doesn't matter what way it goes...contributory pension in 5 yrs.
I was just saying after all the work we put in that paddysdream is still stopping the levy although he's avoided a 250/ha cut in his SFP.......there's no accounting for folks, is there

Don't worry about it, I don't Freedominacup and myself spent most of the last year tearing shreds out of one another and we're still able to have a civil discussion Everyone has their opinion and it'd be a boring world if we all agreed on everything.

It's the system I have issue with, I've no doubt if I had a high SFP I'd be doing my level best to keep it high too.

Most places I've been to, whether it's the ploughing, or a farm walk, or a mart, or a show. When you take the paperwork and politics out of it farmers do have great craic together.

paddysdream

rancher wrote: »

Sorry... my post was only a bit of crack, think you and I have it all dicussed, I wish you the best of luck with this, I'm coming near retirement ...doesn't matter what way it goes...contributory pension in 5 yrs.
I was just saying after all the work we put in that paddysdream is still stopping the levy although he's avoided a 250/ha cut in his SFP.......there's no accounting for folks, is there

Don't think the IFA is the only show in town!

ps My subs were(are) more dependent on the work I put in rather than some suit from Bluebell .No offence intended.
Going for a pint .Will return to this after pint and quick look at ewes tonight!!

hurling_lad

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

Not a bit in the world stopping you putting those questions to him.

Not a bit stopping you from addressing the points in the post either.

Conmaicne Mara

hurling_lad wrote: »

Not a bit stopping you from addressing the points in the post either.

There sure is, it's not my proposal, it's FF/O'Cuiv's proposal. I don't speak for them, I just happen to think they have an idea farmers on and under €400 HA should hear and like I have said many times on this thread make up their own minds about.

Though it does seem to have caused a bit of a stir from one side of the house on here

rancher

paddysdream wrote: »

Don't think the IFA is the only show in town!

ps My subs were(are) more dependent on the work I put in rather than some suit from Bluebell .No offence intended.
Going for a pint .Will return to this after pint and quick look at ewes tonight!!

Well there's no one else getting the blame/credit as far as I can see

hurling_lad

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

There sure is, it's not my proposal, it's FF/O'Cuiv's proposal. I don't speak for them, I just happen to think they have an idea farmers on and under €400 HA should hear and like I have said many times on this thread make up their own minds about.

Though it does seem to have caused a bit of a stir from one side of the house on here

The side of the house that attaches zero credibility to anything that Fianna Fáil has to say?

Conmaicne Mara

hurling_lad wrote: »

The side of the house that attaches zero credibility to anything that Fianna Fáil has to say?

The side of the house that feels most threatened by a fair CAP deal.

Conmaicne Mara

Least people think I am advocating that they support or vote for Fianna Fail, I am not. They can and will do whatever they want on that score.

I am saying they should go to a meeting, hear the idea, and decide for themselves whether the idea has merit for them, and whether they think the idea is worth supporting.

paddysdream

Conmaicne Mara wrote: »

Least people think I am advocating that they support or vote for Fianna Fail, I am not. They can and will do whatever they want on that score.

I am saying they should go to a meeting, hear the idea, and decide for themselves whether the idea has merit for them, and whether they think the idea is worth supporting.

Whats the idea?