Bailing Out The Farmers.... What's Different?

[deiseach]

There's also a general point to be made about subsidising farmers in terms of maintaining a critical mass of people in rural areas. Services like schools and hospitals become proportionately more expensive as people leave rural areas to move to urban areas where the work is, which means they're the first thing to get cut in bad times which leads to more people leaving rural areas and so on in a vicious downward spiral. Admittedly this isn't the primary reason for farm subsidies, but the sooner we get some joined-up thinking with respect to rural policy, the better.

[tintin25]

They should be able to get insurance for the collapsed outbuildings and livestock. I have no doubt that the majority are decent folk, but there are a number of farmers who feel society owes them something when it comes to such events.

[johnneycool]

I guess its part of the whole subsidies which farmers get from both government and the EU. The idea behind this is that if farmers didnt get such support, then they would have to sell their animals, milk etc for a much higher fee to shops and supermarkets in order so they are not operating at a loss due to cost of animal feed, diesel, fertiliser etc-then its people like Norf who would be crying "those bloody farmers, look how much I am paying for a pint of milk, or a fillet of steak-they must be bloody loaded!"

If they weren't "bailed out" as Norf so elequently puts it, it wouldnt just be the farmer who is left out of pocket but, the ordinary man on the street who would have to pay a much higher price for their food!

Surely Norf Tyrone you aren't that naive not realise this given the nature of your locality??

Farmers don't sell their produce to shops for you and me to buy from, they sell them to meat processors, etc, etc where they're royally screwed and we the consumer for these products buy at the butchers at highly inflated prices due to the cartel of the meat producers who after the horse meat scandal really need taken to task if there was enough political will to do so.

[Bearly on loose]

I would not like to imagine that!  I see what your saying and don't disagree, my point is to simply highlight that many people associate the price they pay for products reflects what farmers receive.  This in no way is true.  Anyway, i may get back to the slurry!

[Bearly on loose]

I guess its part of the whole subsidies which farmers get from both government and the EU. The idea behind this is that if farmers didnt get such support, then they would have to sell their animals, milk etc for a much higher fee to shops and supermarkets in order so they are not operating at a loss due to cost of animal feed, diesel, fertiliser etc-then its people like Norf who would be crying "those bloody farmers, look how much I am paying for a pint of milk, or a fillet of steak-they must be bloody loaded!"

If they weren't "bailed out" as Norf so elequently puts it, it wouldnt just be the farmer who is left out of pocket but, the ordinary man on the street who would have to pay a much higher price for their food!

Surely Norf Tyrone you aren't that naive not realise this given the nature of your locality??

Farmers don't sell their produce to shops for you and me to buy from, they sell them to meat processors, etc, etc where they're royally screwed and we the consumer for these products buy at the butchers at highly inflated prices due to the cartel of the meat producers who after the horse meat scandal really need taken to task if there was enough political will to do so.

Agree wholeheartedly

[Norf Tyrone]

Agreed Rois.  Points well made.  I do feel however, despite claims made to the contrary, Norf is indeed on the wind up!

To digress somewhat from the topic at hand and to expand briefly on Bogball's sentiments - there already is a massive disparity between what a farmer is paid for milk/meat etc and what consumers pay for said products in shops/butchers etc.  Obviously there are numerous costs to be considered from when the product leaves the farm premises to it reaches the store.  But my point is the money you may pay for your litre of milk, or your fillet steak is in no way even close to what the farmer receives.

Farmers incomes may not be what you think Norf!

I am honestly not on the wind, but perhaps haven't articulated my question very well. Just wishing to hear people's views on the topic. Some are what I already knew, and some enlightening.

Most of my question has arisen from the weekend's events.

The farming community getting a bail out to help them and their industry, and the same community being able to put a stick in the wheels of other industries with their hijacking of the road investment here in the North West. I appreciate that there are different farmers involved in either issue, but as a collective it's hard to swallow.

The A5 alliance were formed due to the impact on their livlihood, but then we learn that they are getting a fair sum for a livlihood that is just north of 'minimum wage'.

[Tony Baloney]

Back to one of the earlier posts. What about other businesses affected by inclement weather - where is their bailout? They don't get 10s of thousands in government and EU subsidies every year before they even get out of bed. In private enterprise they just have to suck it up.

[trileacman]

Agreed Rois.  Points well made.  I do feel however, despite claims made to the contrary, Norf is indeed on the wind up!

To digress somewhat from the topic at hand and to expand briefly on Bogball's sentiments - there already is a massive disparity between what a farmer is paid for milk/meat etc and what consumers pay for said products in shops/butchers etc.  Obviously there are numerous costs to be considered from when the product leaves the farm premises to it reaches the store.  But my point is the money you may pay for your litre of milk, or your fillet steak is in no way even close to what the farmer receives.

Farmers incomes may not be what you think Norf!

I am honestly not on the wind, but perhaps haven't articulated my question very well. Just wishing to hear people's views on the topic. Some are what I already knew, and some enlightening.

Most of my question has arisen from the weekend's events.

The farming community getting a bail out to help them and their industry, and the same community being able to put a stick in the wheels of other industries with their hijacking of the road investment here in the North West. I appreciate that there are different farmers involved in either issue, but as a collective it's hard to swallow.

The A5 alliance were formed due to the impact on their livlihood, but then we learn that they are getting a fair sum for a livlihood that is just north of 'minimum wage'.

Two completely different issues. The farmer's getting reimbursed for their dead livestock are in the mountains of Mourne, Antrim glens and the Sperrins, not in the dairy production along the A5 corridor. You said "the farming community getting a bailout" thats off the mark, only a small percentage of farmers are being reimbursed for the loss of livestock.

Secondly the A5 opposition group and it's actions can not be blamed on all of the North's farmers. That's like me abusing the local cleaner or clerk at my Ulster Bank for destroying the banking sector.

Thirdly you can't singularly blame the farmers for the failure of the A5 to go ahead. There are some farmers who stand to lose a farm that has been in their family for 3 generations, men with 2 sons at greenmount who hope to return home and fufill their lifelong ambition of farming in the footsteps of their family. Some farms will be all but wiped out, some will be divided, destroying the potential for grass-based milking and others will be curtailed. You can't blame these men for opposing the A5 by all legal means. They haven't killed anyone or set fire to anyone's machinery.

If as a businessman you feel cheated by the delaying of the A5 then you need to redirect some of your anger at the courts who sided with the farmers or the roads department who failed to close the loop-holes or properly appease the farmers during this process.

[Norf Tyrone]

Agreed Rois.  Points well made.  I do feel however, despite claims made to the contrary, Norf is indeed on the wind up!

To digress somewhat from the topic at hand and to expand briefly on Bogball's sentiments - there already is a massive disparity between what a farmer is paid for milk/meat etc and what consumers pay for said products in shops/butchers etc.  Obviously there are numerous costs to be considered from when the product leaves the farm premises to it reaches the store.  But my point is the money you may pay for your litre of milk, or your fillet steak is in no way even close to what the farmer receives.

Farmers incomes may not be what you think Norf!

I am honestly not on the wind, but perhaps haven't articulated my question very well. Just wishing to hear people's views on the topic. Some are what I already knew, and some enlightening.

Most of my question has arisen from the weekend's events.

The farming community getting a bail out to help them and their industry, and the same community being able to put a stick in the wheels of other industries with their hijacking of the road investment here in the North West. I appreciate that there are different farmers involved in either issue, but as a collective it's hard to swallow.

The A5 alliance were formed due to the impact on their livlihood, but then we learn that they are getting a fair sum for a livlihood that is just north of 'minimum wage'.

Two completely different issues. The farmer's getting reimbursed for their dead livestock are in the mountains of Mourne, Antrim glens and the Sperrins, not in the dairy production along the A5 corridor. You said "the farming community getting a bailout" thats off the mark, only a small percentage of farmers are being reimbursed for the loss of livestock.

Secondly the A5 opposition group and it's actions can not be blamed on all of the North's farmers. That's like me abusing the local cleaner or clerk at my Ulster Bank for destroying the banking sector.

Thirdly you can't singularly blame the farmers for the failure of the A5 to go ahead. There are some farmers who stand to lose a farm that has been in their family for 3 generations, men with 2 sons at greenmount who hope to return home and fufill their lifelong ambition of farming in the footsteps of their family. Some farms will be all but wiped out, some will be divided, destroying the potential for grass-based milking and others will be curtailed. You can't blame these men for opposing the A5 by all legal means. They haven't killed anyone or set fire to anyone's machinery.

If as a businessman you feel cheated by the delaying of the A5 then you need to redirect some of your anger at the courts who sided with the farmers or the roads department who failed to close the loop-holes or properly appease the farmers during this process.

All fair points, and I don't mean to generalise.

[deiseach]

Back to one of the earlier posts. What about other businesses affected by inclement weather - where is their bailout? They don't get 10s of thousands in government and EU subsidies every year before they even get out of bed. In private enterprise they just have to suck it up.

I would say the difference is that other industries have low barriers to entry and exit. Take tourism, the most obvious example of another industry affected by inclement weather. When the business is bad, you lay off staff. When it's good, you take them on. Businesses go bust, but they're replaced pretty quickly when things improve. You can't say that about farming. The employees of most farms, in Ireland anyway, are their family. They head off to the smoke for employment and don't return. The average age of a farmer is 54, and they're only getting older. When a farmer retires with no one to replace him, his land either lies fallow or is bought up for buttons by a neighbour. There's no extra employment, just greater productivity. It's much the same story if there is a bad harvest which causes the farm to go to the wall. Good weather in tourism, people flood in to serve the tourists. Good weather in agriculture, try sending it back to the spring when the sowing was taking place or the autumn when you were trying to harvest a crop destroyed by rain. Farming is different to other industries. If you don't think it should be subsidised to the extent it is, or even at all, fine. I'm all ears for market-driven solutions. But I suspect there isn't one.

[Stall the Bailer]

Agreed Rois.  Points well made.  I do feel however, despite claims made to the contrary, Norf is indeed on the wind up!

To digress somewhat from the topic at hand and to expand briefly on Bogball's sentiments - there already is a massive disparity between what a farmer is paid for milk/meat etc and what consumers pay for said products in shops/butchers etc.  Obviously there are numerous costs to be considered from when the product leaves the farm premises to it reaches the store.  But my point is the money you may pay for your litre of milk, or your fillet steak is in no way even close to what the farmer receives.

Farmers incomes may not be what you think Norf!

I am honestly not on the wind, but perhaps haven't articulated my question very well. Just wishing to hear people's views on the topic. Some are what I already knew, and some enlightening.

Most of my question has arisen from the weekend's events.

The farming community getting a bail out to help them and their industry, and the same community being able to put a stick in the wheels of other industries with their hijacking of the road investment here in the North West. I appreciate that there are different farmers involved in either issue, but as a collective it's hard to swallow.

The A5 alliance were formed due to the impact on their livlihood, but then we learn that they are getting a fair sum for a livlihood that is just north of 'minimum wage'.

That is disingenuous. The A5 is a separate issue and the A5 alliance does not only include farmers.
If there are GAA members on the A5 alliance are you going to give out about GAA getting funding for the new Casement Park?
There are plenty of farmers who hope the A5 does go ahead.

[Lazer]

Back to one of the earlier posts. What about other businesses affected by inclement weather - where is their bailout? They don't get 10s of thousands in government and EU subsidies every year before they even get out of bed. In private enterprise they just have to suck it up.

This is what I don't get either

Thousands of people were affected by the bad weather and aren't getting any "compensation"

These include:
1) Anyone snowed in and not able to get to work - they may have lost up to a weeks wages which considering how hand to mouth a lot of people live the loss of a weeks wage could be very bad, they could be arrears with the mortgage now etc.
2) Self Employed - take someone in construction for example - if they were meant to be building something in one of the worst hit areas, they will have massive delays on it and as a result might have lost more work as the projects they were to do in the coming weeks may want the work done quicker
3) Rural shops - think of the amount of perishable goods that may have had to have been destroyed if the shop couldn't open.

Farming is already heavily subsudised, and I do not really object to compensation if is also available to others that have lost income due to the snow.

Also Compensation payments should be made on the average number of lambs per birth to avoid claims for doubles or triples when it was actually a single birth.

[deiseach]

Thousands of people were affected by the bad weather and aren't getting any "compensation"

These include:
1) Anyone snowed in and not able to get to work - they may have lost up to a weeks wages which considering how hand to mouth a lot of people live the loss of a weeks wage could be very bad, they could be arrears with the mortgage now etc.
2) Self Employed - take someone in construction for example - if they were meant to be building something in one of the worst hit areas, they will have massive delays on it and as a result might have lost more work as the projects they were to do in the coming weeks may want the work done quicker
3) Rural shops - think of the amount of perishable goods that may have had to have been destroyed if the shop couldn't open.

As I said in my previous post, there are low barriers to entry and exit in retail and construction. All other things being equal (which they are not in retail thanks to the rapacious cartels that are modern supermarkets, but that's another story), a shop/builder copes with adverse weather by making staff redundant and re-hiring when things improve. If the business does not survive, others will so there is no net loss to the industry as a whole. But when a farm goes under, that's it. You don't see new farms opening to replace it.  Now, you can argue that the loss of those farms is no big deal, that it leads to larger, leaner farms. Personally I think the loss of population in rural areas is not a price worth paying - and no organisation knows that better than the GAA. But that's what the policy debate is about.

[BarryBreensBandage]

Due  the inclement weather since November, Portavogie fishermen have been asking for assistance to keep their livelihood and their families, requests which have fallen on deaf Stormont ears.

On another topic but made me think about this bailout, and I know control was mentioned earlier, however - I was shown a copy of the inventory of businesses who were out of money due to the collapse of one certain construction company.

Over fifty businesses were owed a total of £58m. Ranging from big contractors to one man bands. Some small suppliers were owed over £100k.

What got me thinking was, where is the assistance for the companies that went to the wall over this collapse? And I know there are many cases of this scenario throughout Europe.

The men and women who owned companies and went working every day, buying supplies & materials, employing local staff, all in good faith, as their contract was with a reputable company - do they not deserve some sort of compensation?

This sort of fallout, in my eyes, is a lot more damaging to a society already heavily burdened with unemployment and emigration.

As a footnote, there was some money left in the company when it folded. You know who got it? Thats right - the banks, and when they had finished there weren't even scraps to fight over.

[Tony Baloney]

Due  the inclement weather since November, Portavogie fishermen have been asking for assistance to keep their livelihood and their families, requests which have fallen on deaf Stormont ears.

On another topic but made me think about this bailout, and I know control was mentioned earlier, however - I was shown a copy of the inventory of businesses who were out of money due to the collapse of one certain construction company.

Over fifty businesses were owed a total of £58m. Ranging from big contractors to one man bands. Some small suppliers were owed over £100k.

What got me thinking was, where is the assistance for the companies that went to the wall over this collapse? And I know there are many cases of this scenario throughout Europe.

The men and women who owned companies and went working every day, buying supplies & materials, employing local staff, all in good faith, as their contract was with a reputable company - do they not deserve some sort of compensation?

This sort of fallout, in my eyes, is a lot more damaging to a society already heavily burdened with unemployment and emigration.

As a footnote, there was some money left in the company when it folded. You know who got it? Thats right - the banks, and when they had finished there weren't even scraps to fight over.

Spotlight followed a few of Patton's direct employees and subbies and there are tilers etc owed lots of money for work done and stock bought for jobs that then got pulled. They are left owing suppliers as well as out of pocket for work done and having to pay their men out of savings etc. Loads of boys will go to the wall over the Pattons collapse.