Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Cowen heckled by farmers in home county

«1345

Comments

  • #2
    Jumpy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,606 ✭✭✭Jumpy


    Any chance we could get a banning for this Zanu FF crap?

    It wasnt funny the first time.

    I cant stand them as a party, but repeating this poor attempt at a joke is getting really old.


  • #3
    Pete_Cavan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,607 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Cork boy 55 wrote: »
    "Ye're paying ye'reselves too much," he said. "[Do] you think that's right and fair, do you?"

    Any farmer making comments like that should be asked to provide proof that their farm is viable and that they actually produce something and that they are not simply living off Single Farm Payment/REPS/other farm subsidies. The words pot, kettle and black spring to mind.


  • #4
    meathstevie
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,778 ✭✭✭meathstevie


    Can I bring it to your attention that agricultural subsidies come from the EU and that their historical raison d'etre is food security and not macro economics.

    The EEC and subsequently the EU has chosen a model of many viable independents over a few giant corporations and to secure food suplies it appears to have been a success.


  • #5
    mikemac
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,968 ✭✭✭✭mikemac


    REPS is ending in Ireland, it was an excellent scheme.

    The subsidies lower food prices for you in the supermarket. They could be abolished and then shoppers will pay the real price of food.
    A farmers might get 23c a litre for mik so who do you think is getting the margin when you four times that in a shop?
    Or you can eat your cheap Brazilian beef with no traceability if you wish

    And if you end many schemes, it wouldn't be the farmers being the first to protest, it would be staff in the Department of Agriculture who are now redundant.
    The form filling, bureaucracy and paper forms is staggering. Revenue has ROS, Dept of Environment/Transport has motortax.ie, Dept of Agriculture wants forms of tag numbers and pay people to type them into computers.

    As for public statements on income in 2008 the Department published online how much each person received under one grant scheme.
    Fair enough, it's public money so people can see it. If you claim mortgage interest relief or any tax scheme can I view your details online?

    I've searched around, it's gone now, if I find a link I'll add it it was two years ago though
    We had a thread on it, it's all I can find
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055390350


  • #6
    20Cent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,943 ✭✭✭20Cent


    Cowen should be heckled everywhere he goes.

    If Cowen goes to Indochina, I want a farmer waiting in a bowl of rice ready to heckle his ass.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Pete_Cavan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,607 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    meathstevie wrote: »
    Can I bring it to your attention that agricultural subsidies come from the EU and that their historical raison d'etre is food security and not macro economics.

    The EEC and subsequently the EU has chosen a model of many viable independents over a few giant corporations and to secure food suplies it appears to have been a success.

    They have been anything but a success. Many farmers are being paid not to produce anything. Farmers are actually paid not to farm certain lands. Other farmers simply give the allusion of being farmers by buying and selling a few cows every now and then in order to get farm payments but they do not actually produce anything. Grants and subsidies keeps the price of farm land artificially high meaning efficient farmers who do produce can not expand their farms. The existance of these grants holds back the industry in terms of efficiency and productivity, a productive industry does not need to be subsidised.

    Unfortunitely the farming lobby in this country is too power and will not allow reform that would improve the industry to happen. It is an industry with too many stubborn auld men with backwards ideas. If we were so concerned with security of food suplies we would encourage unproductive farmers to get out of it and allow people who can manage farms effectively take over.


  • #8
    Einhard
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,919 ✭✭✭Einhard


    meathstevie wrote: »
    The EEC and subsequently the EU has chosen a model of many viable independents over a few giant corporations and to secure food suplies it appears to have been a success.

    Strange argument to make. The fact that we have enough food is somehow down to EU grants to farmers? I was under the impression that our food supplies were fairly secure prior to EU accession. As were those of Poland, Hungary, Austria...

    Anyway, farmers protest about everything, so forgive me if I'm not surprised when they heckle Cowen.


  • #9
    paulaa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,184 ✭✭✭paulaa


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    They have been anything but a success. Many farmers are being paid not to produce anything. Farmers are actually paid not to farm certain lands. Other farmers simply give the allusion of being farmers by buying and selling a few cows every now and then in order to get farm payments but they do not actually produce anything. Grants and subsidies keeps the price of farm land artificially high meaning efficient farmers who do produce can not expand their farms. The existance of these grants holds back the industry in terms of efficiency and productivity, a productive industry does not need to be subsidised.

    Unfortunitely the farming lobby in this country is too power and will not allow reform that would improve the industry to happen. It is an industry with too many stubborn auld men with backwards ideas. If we were so concerned with security of food suplies we would encourage unproductive farmers to get out of it and allow people who can manage farms effectively take over.

    I would invite you to take over any small farm and run it for a year, you can start with my 50 acres. Most farmers are not allowed produce to the capacity of their farms like they were years ago. We have caps on how many animals per acre we can keep and almost everything else. The paperwork is horrendous and most farmers had to retrain and take off-farm jobs to rear and educate their families.

    Our beet industry was sold out to facilitate the Eastern European countries coming into the EU. Coughlin didn't even attend some of the crucial meetings dealing with this.

    Grants and subsidies have very little to do with the price of land, which has dropped in value just like every other property. It was farmers being offered huge sums of money to sell sites that drove up land prices. They took it because our industry had been sold out and neglected so much by our Government (I use that word lightly) that they had no other choice to clear debts that had built up due to the drop in farm income.

    Yes farmers were paid under the REPS scheme not to farm small pieces of their land. This was called Habitat and was supposed to help bring back native birds and animals that were dying out in the countryside due to years of intensive farming, sprays etc. Under the REPS scheme a lot of money had to be spent by the farmer in some cases to comply with the scheme which made their final payments very small but at least the farm "looked nice".

    You would not believe the amount of rules you have to comply with to stay in any of these schemes and if you're not efficient and productive you don't get your money.

    If farming was such a great life why are the rates of depression and suicide growing at an alarming rate among farmers. Why do their children want nothing to do with farming ? There has been plenty of reform in the farming industry and not for the better.

    I can tell you for a fact that most farmers I know (except for the few lazy ones who are in every walk of life) would like nothing better than to work their farms to their capacity rather that getting cheques for filling in forms.

    As they say "Walk a mile in my shoes"


  • #10
    bleg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,847 ✭✭✭bleg


    I don't always see eye to eye with farmers but I'm glad they're giving Cowen a rough time.


  • #11
    NewHillel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 736 ✭✭✭NewHillel


    feelingstressed wrote: »
    Or you can eat your cheap Brazilian beef with no traceability if you wish

    Yeah, the standards in Irish Farming are so high. How about Angel Dust, pumping antibiotics into cattle, illegal abattoirs, cattle smuggling, contaminated feeds ...

    Give us a break.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    paulaa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,184 ✭✭✭paulaa


    NewHillel wrote: »
    Yeah, the standards in Irish Farming are so high. How about Angel Dust, pumping antibiotics into cattle, illegal abattoirs, cattle smuggling, contaminated feeds ...

    Give us a break.

    Like with all sensational stories only a small minority were involved in those things many of which happened years ago. The vast majority of farmers are members of schemes like the Beef assurance scheme which guarantees traceability and quality . If you want to eat South American meat that's been scraped off the floor, processed by people who smoke and spit on the processing line by all means feel free to do so and enjoy:)


  • #13
    Pete_Cavan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,607 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    paulaa wrote: »
    I would invite you to take over any small farm and run it for a year, you can start with my 50 acres. Most farmers are not allowed produce to the capacity of their farms like they were years ago. We have caps on how many animals per acre we can keep and almost everything else. The paperwork is horrendous and most farmers had to retrain and take off-farm jobs to rear and educate their families.

    Our beet industry was sold out to facilitate the Eastern European countries coming into the EU. Coughlin didn't even attend some of the crucial meetings dealing with this.

    Grants and subsidies have very little to do with the price of land, which has dropped in value just like every other property. It was farmers being offered huge sums of money to sell sites that drove up land prices. They took it because our industry had been sold out and neglected so much by our Government (I use that word lightly) that they had no other choice to clear debts that had built up due to the drop in farm income.

    Yes farmers were paid under the REPS scheme not to farm small pieces of their land. This was called Habitat and was supposed to help bring back native birds and animals that were dying out in the countryside due to years of intensive farming, sprays etc. Under the REPS scheme a lot of money had to be spent by the farmer in some cases to comply with the scheme which made their final payments very small but at least the farm "looked nice".

    You would not believe the amount of rules you have to comply with to stay in any of these schemes and if you're not efficient and productive you don't get your money.

    If farming was such a great life why are the rates of depression and suicide growing at an alarming rate among farmers. Why do their children want nothing to do with farming ? There has been plenty of reform in the farming industry and not for the better.

    I can tell you for a fact that most farmers I know (except for the few lazy ones who are in every walk of life) would like nothing better than to work their farms to their capacity rather that getting cheques for filling in forms.

    As they say "Walk a mile in my shoes"

    I dont think you understand the point I was making. I was not saying that all farmers are lazy and sponge off the state, although some do (but as you say there are people like that in every walk of life). The point I was making is that a farm is a business and should be run as such. There are to many people in this country with small holdings who treat it as a hobby while collecting all the grants going. This is a drain on resources and takes away from proper farmers. I think if you are not going to farm right you should be allowed to fail. That is the way with almost every other business in the country.

    The difference in price between what a farm sells for and what a supermarket sells their products for proves that farms can be viable and that the current level of grants are not needed. The problem is that almost all of the money from the final product being sold goes to the supermarket and very little goes to the farmer. Serious reform in this area is needed and this would help to revitalise the farming sector. Having said that, the sector also needs to reform itself and prove that efficiency can be achieved and that it can survive without millions of euros in subsidies every year.

    A lot of the problem the farming sector faces is to do with perception. Most people see farmers as old men who will take all the grants going but not spend a penny. They complain about everything and protest at the drop of a hat. There seems to be no willingness from the farmers to work with the government to improve things. If they did this they would have to find something else to complain about. Reading things like the quote in the OP highlight my point, that king of heckling is counterproductive and does nothing to help the farmers case.

    I still think the price of farm land is kept too high. There are farmers who hold onto their land despite the fact that they produce nothing, so that they can keep collecting the grants. Filling out a few forms is a small price to pay for several grand a year. Without the grants these people would sell their land, either to young people who want to start their own farm, or other farmers who want to expand.

    Im on a farmer but I have experience of it, maybe I havent walked a mile in your shoes but Id say I've gone close to a kilometre. Just so you know, I think REPS is a good scheme and would like to see it retained. I dont like when farmers complain about filling forms, it is a big part of most businesses and is something that just has to be done. Also, on your point about EU destroying our beef industry to facilitate the Eastern European countries coming into the EU, Im sure the EU did the same to industries in other countries to facilitate us.


  • #14
    NewHillel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 736 ✭✭✭NewHillel


    paulaa wrote: »
    Like with all sensational stories only a small minority were involved in those things many of which happened years ago. The vast majority of farmers are members of schemes like the Beef assurance scheme which guarantees traceability and quality . If you want to eat South American meat that's been scraped off the floor, processed by people who smoke and spit on the processing line by all means feel free to do so and enjoy:)

    The scaremongering to avoid competition is wearisome.
    Some points:
    1. A significant number of farmers were involved in various scams. (As a percentage, far more than in the case of Brazil - despite the best efforts of the IFA to get evidence.)
    2. The Beef assurance scheme should guarantee traceability and quality. (If you work in the farming area, you know there are ways to circumvent it.)
    3. Where's your evidence in relation to Brazil?? (I have seen first hand examples of (very) poor practice in the Irish Industry.)


  • #15
    ei.sdraob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,364 ✭✭✭ei.sdraob


    Food security my arse, the subsidies are there since the market worked as its meant to, EU farmers were producing alot of food and therefore driving down the prices (the infamous wine lakes and butter mountains). We cant have low prices now can we? no none of that lets continue handing half of the EU budget to a lobby group.


  • #16
    Poly
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,806 ✭✭✭Poly


    Jumpy wrote: »
    Any chance we could get a banning for this Zanu FF crap?
    Lighten up a bit, if you start banning for that, then where do you draw the line?
    Mc Carthyism, Pravda or Gubu?


  • #17
    round tower huntsman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 804 ✭✭✭round tower huntsman


    thats excellent. im sure cowen thought he was safe on his home turf. he and the rest of em should be booed and heckled where ever they go.


  • #18
    paulaa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,184 ✭✭✭paulaa


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    I dont think you understand the point I was making. I was not saying that all farmers are lazy and sponge off the state, although some do (but as you say there are people like that in every walk of life). The point I was making is that a farm is a business and should be run as such. There are to many people in this country with small holdings who treat it as a hobby while collecting all the grants going. This is a drain on resources and takes away from proper farmers. I think if you are not going to farm right you should be allowed to fail. That is the way with almost every other business in the country.

    Most farms now have to be and are run as a business or there are penalties to pay. Accounts have to be filed every year, bank have to see a business plan to sanction seasonal loans, taxes have to be paid etc, etc just like any business. As an accountant before I had to take over this farm I know a lot of farmers who do treat it as a business, they have pared back their expenses to the bone, they had to because of the drop in their farm incomes and constantly increasing feed and contracting prices.
    Those who "treat it as a hobby" are the ones who have had to get jobs outside the farm. Then there are people who have inherited small parcels of land from elder relatives and like to play farmer. The vast majority though are doing their best to make good what is becoming an almost impossible situation.

    The difference in price between what a farm sells for and what a supermarket sells their products for proves that farms can be viable and that the current level of grants are not needed. The problem is that almost all of the money from the final product being sold goes to the supermarket and very little goes to the farmer. Serious reform in this area is needed and this would help to revitalise the farming sector. Having said that, the sector also needs to reform itself and prove that efficiency can be achieved and that it can survive without millions of euros in subsidies every year.

    Are you not contradicting yourself there ? How can the huge discrepancy in the price farmers get for their products and what the supermarkets charge prove that grants are not needed in the current set up. It is precisely this that has so many dependent on grants. I would like to see either farmers get a fair price for their goods and grants done away with but as someone else said their would be riots because the coast of food would escalate. It could be said that shoppers are being subsidised by these grants too.

    What needs to be reformed are the limits of productivity set on farmers here by the EU with quotas etc.
    A lot of the problem the farming sector faces is to do with perception. Most people see farmers as old men who will take all the grants going but not spend a penny. They complain about everything and protest at the drop of a hat. There seems to be no willingness from the farmers to work with the government to improve things. If they did this they would have to find something else to complain about. Reading things like the quote in the OP highlight my point, that king of heckling is counterproductive and does nothing to help the farmers case.

    The perception you talk about is from the non farming public who know virtually noting about farmers and have stereotyped us as you have. I would like to see these people work 7 days a week out in all weather for 60% less that they were earning 10 years ago or less.

    They should have thrown their under-priced eggs and milk at Cowen and forget the heckling. Him and his cronies have all but wiped out a whole way of life for so many in this country in favour of their buddies in the construction and business sectors. They neglected farming during the celtic tiger years and put one of the most incompetent people in the Dail, Coughlin, in charge. She was more interested in partying with the boys in Brussels than actually speaking up for the agricultural sector of her country.
    I still think the price of farm land is kept too high. There are farmers who hold onto their land despite the fact that they produce nothing, so that they can keep collecting the grants. Filling out a few forms is a small price to pay for several grand a year. Without the grants these people would sell their land, either to young people who want to start their own farm, or other farmers who want to expand.

    Most farmers hold onto their land because they are not trained to do anything else and because they don't want to live and work in towns and cities. They keep hoping things will improve and that someday their kids will take over land that has probably been in their families for generations. Why should they sell their lifestyle ? It's a lot more than just "to collect grants". As I said in the other post, most of us would rather work our farms to their capacity that depend on handouts from the EU. Most young people, including my own, don't want to know about farming because they know they won't be able to rear a family on it or have any kind of lifestyle remotely resembling what they have by getting degrees and professions. I can't say I blame them.

    You really have no idea, it's far more that a "few forms". I'm used to paperwork but even I was staggered by the sheer volume of paperwork for a small farm.
    Im on a farmer but I have experience of it, maybe I havent walked a mile in your shoes but Id say I've gone close to a kilometre. Just so you know, I think REPS is a good scheme and would like to see it retained. I dont like when farmers complain about filling forms, it is a big part of most businesses and is something that just has to be done. Also, on your point about EU destroying our beef industry to facilitate the Eastern European countries coming into the EU, Im sure the EU did the same to industries in other countries to facilitate us.

    My point was about the beet industry not beef. Not only farmers were affected by it's closure, hundreds of people and businesses in places like Carlow and Mallow were big losers too. Poland now has a thriving beet industry, a country much larger that Ireland. We couldn't afford to lose the income from it, that is one of the reasons so many are in debt. Many sowed corn and cereal crops to make up the shortfall and had several disasterous years when the bottom fell out of world prices, plunging them further into debt.
    I haven't seen a FF TD since the last election but I know what I'll be saying to them when they do land on the doorstep with their fake smile and their limp handshakes. The last word will be "off".


  • #19
    paulaa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,184 ✭✭✭paulaa


    NewHillel wrote: »
    The scaremongering to avoid competition is wearisome.
    Some points:
    1. A significant number of farmers were involved in various scams. (As a percentage, far more than in the case of Brazil - despite the best efforts of the IFA to get evidence.)
    2. The Beef assurance scheme should guarantee traceability and quality. (If you work in the farming area, you know there are ways to circumvent it.)
    3. Where's your evidence in relation to Brazil?? (I have seen first hand examples of (very) poor practice in the Irish Industry.)

    So is the constant slagging off of farmers !

    I was talking about the EU official's visits to South America a couple of years ago to voice concerns about the meat production practices there. I have no time for the IFA so I discount most of what they say.

    No I don't know how to circumvent the BA. I'm too busy trying to breed and rear good quality animals to get the best price to bother finding out.

    What have you done about these poor practices ? Did you report them and was anything done about it.


  • #20
    edanto
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,802 ✭✭✭edanto


    meathstevie wrote: »
    The EEC and subsequently the EU has chosen a model of many viable independents over a few giant corporations and to secure food suplies it appears to have been a success.

    But as far as I know, the vast majority of farming subsidies are paid to large companies? And then, bizarrely, the well-organised farmers get out and protest to protect subsidies... the bulk of which are going to companies which sometimes drive small farmers out of business?!? Mad.

    Someone above was making the point that the supermarket prices show that subsidies aren't needed. I agree. The supermarket prices show that customers are willing to pay those prices for the goods.

    It's up to the farmers to use their organisation skills to co-operate with each other and negotiate for better prices for their produce and reduce the margins the shops are getting.

    That way, if the farmers are getting more, the shops are getting less, and the shoppers are paying the same, then there might be enough farm income to wind down farm subsidies.

    I don't see a future for farm subsidies - they are something like 40% of the EU budget at the moment and that will have to be reduced. It's not sustainable to spend so much money supporting one sector at the expense of others. Remember, that money is mostly going to big companies.

    But hey, on the subject of the thread, I'll back anyone that's putting pressure on Clowen. Give us our election!


  • #21
    baalthor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,243 ✭✭✭baalthor


    Fine Gael have the farming vote sewn up, look at the FG website's agriculture policy.

    Around 50% of the ag spend in Ireland comes from the Irish taxpayer, the remainder from EU. After the next round of CAP negotiations expect the EU percentage to decline dramatically.

    Form filling: from my own experience, in the early days of the EU schemes, individual tag numbers had to be entered onto forms. But the dept then computerised the animal registration and tracking process so they pretty much know all the time how many animals the farmer has. This meant the form arrived with all the details filled in so if there were no changes, all the farmer had to do was sign their name at the bottom. Same for the area aid application.

    Are the current forms much more complicated and detailed? Maybe someone could post them up so we can see how bad they are ...

    They key issue though, is that at indpendence Ireland had far too many farms and farmers and government policy ever since has been to maintain as many farmers on the land on the land as possible. However even with all the intensification in the world, most farms in Ireland are economically unviable at their current scale.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Pete_Cavan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,607 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    paulaa wrote: »
    Most farms now have to be and are run as a business or there are penalties to pay. Accounts have to be filed every year, bank have to see a business plan to sanction seasonal loans, taxes have to be paid etc, etc just like any business. As an accountant before I had to take over this farm I know a lot of farmers who do treat it as a business, they have pared back their expenses to the bone, they had to because of the drop in their farm incomes and constantly increasing feed and contracting prices.

    I know that there is a lot of office/administration work that goes into running a farm, I did not say there ins't. My point was that while other businesses fail if they are not run productively, farms are subsidised. We should be aiming to move to a situation where farmers are a viable business, keep reading and please do not reply to this part of my post without taking the rest of it into consideration.
    Those who "treat it as a hobby" are the ones who have had to get jobs outside the farm. Then there are people who have inherited small parcels of land from elder relatives and like to play farmer. The vast majority though are doing their best to make good what is becoming an almost impossible situation.
    Those who "treat it as a hobby" are happy with their job outside the farm. I know plenty of so called farmers who have other jobs but keep farms and do the bare minimum to collect the grants as supplementary income. I also know plenty of young people who would love to take on the challenge of one of these farms and do what they love doing, but cannot afford to buy out these farms because they would also have to compensate the farmer for loss of grant money into the future. We should be encouraging young, enthusiastic farmers to revitalise the industry, instead of paying old men who have no clue about modern farming to hold onto what they have. But once again the closed shop mentality of farmers in general is actually conterproductive to what they want to achieve.
    Are you not contradicting yourself there ? How can the huge discrepancy in the price farmers get for their products and what the supermarkets charge prove that grants are not needed in the current set up. It is precisely this that has so many dependent on grants. I would like to see either farmers get a fair price for their goods and grants done away with but as someone else said their would be riots because the coast of food would escalate. It could be said that shoppers are being subsidised by these grants too.
    No I am not contradicting myself. I was saying that there is room for farmers to receive more money for their produce without increasing the price of the final product. The huge discrepancy in the price farmers get for their products and what the supermarkets charge proves this. If farmers received a greater (fairer) percentage of the final sale price they would not need to be subsidised. This area needs serious reform. Your point that shoppers are also being subsidised by these grants is a very good one.
    What needs to be reformed are the limits of productivity set on farmers here by the EU with quotas etc.
    Im sure you have no problems with EU quotas imposed on farmers in other countries where farms are bigger and farmers here would not be able to compete with.
    The perception you talk about is from the non farming public who know virtually noting about farmers and have stereotyped us as you have. I would like to see these people work 7 days a week out in all weather for 60% less that they were earning 10 years ago or less.
    It is this poor farmer mentality that holds reform back. The farmers as a group are unwilling to give an inch on any issue and for this reason they have no public support. I am actually on your side in that I would like to see farmers receive a fairer price for their products, I am form an agricultural based community but you treat me like I am against you. Farmers think everyone who isnt a farmer is against them. The farmers should be working with the government to bring about the reforms I talked about above but instead they see the government as the enemy. Farmers would be able to achieve a lot more of they got rid of this us against everyone else mentality.
    They should have thrown their under-priced eggs and milk at Cowen and forget the heckling. Him and his cronies have all but wiped out a whole way of life for so many in this country in favour of their buddies in the construction and business sectors. They neglected farming during the celtic tiger years and put one of the most incompetent people in the Dail, Coughlin, in charge. She was more interested in partying with the boys in Brussels than actually speaking up for the agricultural sector of her country.
    It is that type of hysterical over-reaction that turns public opinion against farmers. If farmers were more reasonable they would have a lot more public support. The government is only interested in winning votes so if the general public supported the farmers the government would take them more seriously. Every time a farmer appears in the media they only do more damage to the farmers as a groups reputation. They are there own worst enemy, not the government.
    Most farmers hold onto their land because they are not trained to do anything else and because they don't want to live and work in towns and cities. They keep hoping things will improve and that someday their kids will take over land that has probably been in their families for generations. Why should they sell their lifestyle ? It's a lot more than just "to collect grants". As I said in the other post, most of us would rather work our farms to their capacity that depend on handouts from the EU. Most young people, including my own, don't want to know about farming because they know they won't be able to rear a family on it or have any kind of lifestyle remotely resembling what they have by getting degrees and professions. I can't say I blame them.
    First of all, there are degrees and qualifications available in farming and farm related businesses. Like I said before, IMO the farm industry here does more to deter young people here from perusing a career in farming than anything else. Not being trained to do anything else is a ridiculous reason to hold onto a farm. It is very easy for people today to retrain to do something else and with technology, it is possible to run a business from outside a town. I said it already, we should be getting people who dont want to farm out of it and people who do want to do it into it. If the only reason you are farming is because the land has been in our family for generations you have no business being on a farm.
    You really have no idea, it's far more that a "few forms". I'm used to paperwork but even I was staggered by the sheer volume of paperwork for a small farm.
    You would be staggered by the sheer volume of paperwork involved with running any business. Red tape is a part of the modern world, farmers have to accept that.
    My point was about the beet industry not beef. Not only farmers were affected by it's closure, hundreds of people and businesses in places like Carlow and Mallow were big losers too. Poland now has a thriving beet industry, a country much larger that Ireland. We couldn't afford to lose the income from it, that is one of the reasons so many are in debt. Many sowed corn and cereal crops to make up the shortfall and had several disasterous years when the bottom fell out of world prices, plunging them further into debt.
    The EU does farmers more good than it does harm. Of course there are improvements that can be made to EU agricultural policy, but once again the farmers would rather take a pessimistic view of the whole thing and cry that everything the EU does is to hurt farmers. If ye could cop yourselves on and work with the EU on all issues ye would achieve a lot more.
    I haven't seen a FF TD since the last election but I know what I'll be saying to them when they do land on the doorstep with their fake smile and their limp handshakes. The last word will be "off".
    Yip its all FFs fault now, and after the next election it will all be FG/Labs fault. Certainly none of the blaim can be attributed to any farmer in this country.rolleyes.gif


  • #23
    Pete_Cavan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,607 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    baalthor wrote: »
    They key issue though, is that at indpendence Ireland had far too many farms and farmers and government policy ever since has been to maintain as many farmers on the land on the land as possible. However even with all the intensification in the world, most farms in Ireland are economically unviable at their current scale.

    +1


  • #24
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 22,785 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    Any farmer making comments like that should be asked to provide proof that their farm is viable and that they actually produce something and that they are not simply living off Single Farm Payment/REPS/other farm subsidies. The words pot, kettle and black spring to mind.
    When you are being asked to do your job for the same pay as you got in 1984,then you'll have some right to say that...


  • #25
    paulaa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,184 ✭✭✭paulaa


    Pete_Cavan wrote: »
    I know that there is a lot of office/administration work that goes into running a farm, I did not say there ins't. My point was that while other businesses fail if they are not run productively, farms are subsidised. We should be aiming to move to a situation where farmers are a viable business, keep reading and please do not reply to this part of my post without taking the rest of it into consideration.

    Those who "treat it as a hobby" are happy with their job outside the farm. I know plenty of so called farmers who have other jobs but keep farms and do the bare minimum to collect the grants as supplementary income. I also know plenty of young people who would love to take on the challenge of one of these farms and do what they love doing, but cannot afford to buy out these farms because they would also have to compensate the farmer for loss of grant money into the future. We should be encouraging young, enthusiastic farmers to revitalise the industry, instead of paying old men who have no clue about modern farming to hold onto what they have. But once again the closed shop mentality of farmers in general is actually conterproductive to what they want to achieve.

    How do you know all these people are happy to work outside the farm?There are lazy people in every business. In my own case my late husband had to look outside the farm for income to supplement the falling income. We were lucky in that we had no loans but we did have children who were in secondary and third level to educate. I have always worked in my profession but it wasn't going to be enough. He worked from 5am until 11pm, doing farm work before he went off at 6.30 to drive a truck all day and farm work when he got back at 8 pm. He worked all weekend on the farm and eventually he, a non smoker, non drinker, dropped dead at 46 . I believe to this day it was the stress and exhaustion that killed him. (Sorry to go off topic a bit)

    If these young men are so anxious to farm why don't they rent these farms. Many older farmers, whose own families are not interested would be only too delighted to get rid of the responsibility and the red tape.The problem is I don't see many young men or women the slightest bit interested in going into this lifestyle, not around here anyway. It's next to impossible to even get anyone to do a few days work to help out on the farm as it is.
    No I am not contradicting myself. I was saying that there is room for farmers to receive more money for their produce without increasing the price of the final product. The huge discrepancy in the price farmers get for their products and what the supermarkets charge proves this. If farmers received a greater (fairer) percentage of the final sale price they would not need to be subsidised. This area needs serious reform. Your point that shoppers are also being subsidised by these grants is a very good one.

    Im sure you have no problems with EU quotas imposed on farmers in other countries where farms are bigger and farmers here would not be able to compete with.

    I agree with you on fair prices but I wish you luck trying to get better prices from any of the supermarket chains . It has been tried several times and failed as they insist on dictating the prices. What many have done is to open Farmer's markets around the country. That has provided an outlet for their goods and additional income .

    Quotas were brought in to get rid of over production and ,as someone else said,to get rid of the food mountains that had built up .
    IMO they should now be abolished for all countries and if Irish people supported their local farmers by buying Irish grown produce it would also be a huge help.
    It is this poor farmer mentality that holds reform back. The farmers as a group are unwilling to give an inch on any issue and for this reason they have no public support. I am actually on your side in that I would like to see farmers receive a fairer price for their products, I am form an agricultural based community but you treat me like I am against you. Farmers think everyone who isnt a farmer is against them. The farmers should be working with the government to bring about the reforms I talked about above but instead they see the government as the enemy. Farmers would be able to achieve a lot more of they got rid of this us against everyone else mentality.

    It is simply facts on the ground not the "poor farmer" whinge that people like to dismiss it as without really listening. The farmer's organisations have been talking to the Government for years and still see no improvement. As I said during the Celtic Tiger years the powers that be didn't want to know, maybe the brown envelopes were not as big from the farming sector as they seemed to be from the construction industry !!! This government IS the enemy to most sectors in the country, look what they have done to the country as a whole. We're bankrupt, the laughing stock of Europe, looked on as so incompetant and not fit to manage our own affairs.

    I really don't think "everyone is against us". I think most people are stuck with the old stereotype of farmers and don't know or don't want to know anything else. They feel uncomfortable when you ask them if they would do our kind of work because they know the true answer would be , no way in hell.
    "It is that type of hysterical over-reaction that turns public opinion against farmers. If farmers were more reasonable they would have a lot more public support. The government is only interested in winning votes so if the general public supported the farmers the government would take them more seriously. Every time a farmer appears in the media they only do more damage to the farmers as a groups reputation. They are there own worst enemy, not the government.

    lol. You think that's hysterical, wait until social welfare is cut and the paye sector are screwed by higher taxes and lower credits. Then you will see hysteria.
    First of all, there are degrees and qualifications available in farming and farm related businesses. Like I said before, IMO the farm industry here does more to deter young people here from perusing a career in farming than anything else. Not being trained to do anything else is a ridiculous reason to hold onto a farm. It is very easy for people today to retrain to do something else and with technology, it is possible to run a business from outside a town. I said it already, we should be getting people who dont want to farm out of it and people who do want to do it into it. If the only reason you are farming is because the land has been in our family for generations you have no business being on a farm.

    Most people who don't want to farm are already out of it and their children go on to train and study to do other things. Loads of small farms have been sold around the country. It's easy to say retrain, and do what ? Where are all these jobs. Many farmers have diversified into other things and had to closed down as the recession hit. I started an internet retail business which went very well for 4 years and I had to close it last year because sales fell away, and not just from Ireland.
    You would be staggered by the sheer volume of paperwork involved with running any business. Red tape is a part of the modern world, farmers have to accept that.

    As a former accountant I'm not staggered at all, paperwork was my business for 25 years. Most farmers do accept this.
    The EU does farmers more good than it does harm. Of course there are improvements that can be made to EU agricultural policy, but once again the farmers would rather take a pessimistic view of the whole thing and cry that everything the EU does is to hurt farmers. If ye could cop yourselves on and work with the EU on all issues ye would achieve a lot more.

    Yip its all FFs fault now, and after the next election it will all be FG/Labs fault. Certainly none of the blaim can be attributed to any farmer in this country.rolleyes.gif

    I agree with you about the EU to a certain extent. It has brought prosperity to a lot before this recession and regulation and accountability in the trade. The farming organisations are forever trotting off to Brussels to work with the EU but nothing much has changed. We need to get together with other small EU countries to really get our points across imo.

    As to FF no it's not all their fault but they must take responsibility for the neglect of the farming industry in this country in favour of big business. And look at who we had fighting our corner in Europe, Mary "The lights are on but no ones home" Coughlin. God help us all !!!!


  • #26
    NewHillel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 736 ✭✭✭NewHillel


    paulaa wrote: »
    So is the constant slagging off of farmers !

    I was talking about the EU official's visits to South America a couple of years ago to voice concerns about the meat production practices there. I have no time for the IFA so I discount most of what they say.

    You referred to "South American meat that's been scraped off the floor, processed by people who smoke and spit on the processing line by all means feel free to do so and enjoy". An easy, and scurrilous, claim to make.

    Mentioning EU officials, and that visit...
    European Health Commissioner Markos Kyprianou ..." dismissed the claims of Irish farmers, who he said were acting "in self-interest"". Reference here

    Concerning tracability...
    I suggest you read this EU Report from March 2010.
    Bottom line "Only minor shortcomings in relation to maintenance were identified. No shortcomings were identified in relation to official controls carried out at establishment level. The situation concerning certification of fresh meat intended for export to the EU and for products introduced into the territory of the EU for transit to third countries is satisfactory."


  • #27
    paulaa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,184 ✭✭✭paulaa


    NewHillel wrote: »
    You referred to "South American meat that's been scraped off the floor, processed by people who smoke and spit on the processing line by all means feel free to do so and enjoy". An easy, and scurrilous, claim to make.

    Mentioning EU officials, and that visit...
    European Health Commissioner Markos Kyprianou ..." dismissed the claims of Irish farmers, who he said were acting "in self-interest"". Reference here

    Concerning tracability...
    I suggest you read this EU Report from March 2010.
    Bottom line "Only minor shortcomings in relation to maintenance were identified. No shortcomings were identified in relation to official controls carried out at establishment level. The situation concerning certification of fresh meat intended for export to the EU and for products introduced into the territory of the EU for transit to third countries is satisfactory."

    Very selective quoting there NewHillel, You forgot to mention that it wasn't just Irish farming organisations who were concerned about Brazilian imports. The British backed the Irish in their concerns about growth hormones etc and the hygene standards. I think the US still don't import beef from Brazil.

    I haven't seen the other report you gave. I'll read it when I get time. Thanks


  • #28
    Nemi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 334 ✭✭Nemi


    paulaa wrote: »
    I would invite you to take over any small farm and run it for a year, you can start with my 50 acres.
    But what's the point? I mean, presumably those 50 acres have a capital value that means if you just sold out and left the industry, you'd have resources to put into a new enterprise. That's a better situation than, say, a taxi driver who similarly finds himself in a massively over-supplied market, but who only has a high-mileage vehicle as an asset. Who'd knowingly buy a car previously used as a taxi?

    For decades, agricultural policy has tried to frustrate the reality that food in Europe should be much cheaper than it is. Everything was done to try to deny this, like buying up surplus production and dumping it on third country markets. At this stage, its hard to see why it was even attempted. But it is fair to say there's just no future, under any scenario, for 50 acre farms.

    Shouldn't you just sell the damn thing, while it still has some value.


  • #29
    NewHillel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 736 ✭✭✭NewHillel


    paulaa wrote: »
    Very selective quoting there NewHillel, You forgot to mention that it wasn't just Irish farming organisations who were concerned about Brazilian imports. The British backed the Irish in their concerns about growth hormones etc and the hygene standards. I think the US still don't import beef from Brazil.

    I haven't seen the other report you gave. I'll read it when I get time. Thanks

    So, despite the documented evidence, you're not prepared to withdraw your scurrilous remarks? Given the seriousness of your assertion, I would have thought that you'd have made some time to read the report. You have plenty of time to write long posts. Nuff said!


  • #30
    paulaa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,184 ✭✭✭paulaa


    NewHillel wrote: »
    So, despite the documented evidence, you're not prepared to withdraw your scurrilous remarks? Given the seriousness of your assertion, I would have thought that you'd have made some time to read the report. You have plenty of time to write long posts. Nuff said!

    ok then I'll read it when I feel like it. No I will not withdraw my remarks because there were huge question marks over that industry. If they have now sorted themselves out and produce to the same standard as the EU farmers have to adhere to well good for them.
    Why is the US still not buying from Brazil ?

    Personally I try to buy only Irish goods


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Tipp Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,023 ✭✭✭Tipp Man


    NewHillel wrote: »
    So, despite the documented evidence, you're not prepared to withdraw your scurrilous remarks? Given the seriousness of your assertion, I would have thought that you'd have made some time to read the report. You have plenty of time to write long posts. Nuff said!


    you have some fu##ing cheek to call those remarks scurrilous after you posted the absolute crap below which was completly derogatory towards Irish and EU farmers. Whats more is it is complete lies (all of it) and until you provide evidence to back up these ridiculous claims then your post should be treated as the nonsense that they are

    Tell us now why the EU banned Brazilain beef agains?? Tell us why the US and a whole host of other countries won't import from Brazil??

    And lets see you back up your claim about poor practice in Irish Farming

    your a bullsh###er with an agenda

    NewHillel wrote: »
    The scaremongering to avoid competition is wearisome.
    Some points:
    1. A significant number of farmers were involved in various scams. (As a percentage, far more than in the case of Brazil - despite the best efforts of the IFA to get evidence.)
    2. The Beef assurance scheme should guarantee traceability and quality. (If you work in the farming area, you know there are ways to circumvent it.)
    3. Where's your evidence in relation to Brazil?? (I have seen first hand examples of (very) poor practice in the Irish Industry.)


Advertisement
Advertisement