CAP Reform

paddysdream · 26-06-2013 09:54PM #1

Well whats the opinion on here re. what Coveney has dealt us for the next 7 years?

Satisfied? Unhappy?Couldnt care less?

In specific terms how (considering we only have a vague idea still) will it affect people?

Conmaicne Mara · 26-06-2013 10:17PM

I don't know yet. In my case it will depend on certain details yet to be thrashed out. This is just a European political agreement, internal work will be done in various countries yet, as far as I understand it.

Capercaille · 26-06-2013 10:37PM

Ireland's much threatened farmland wildlife going to be crushed even further:
http://www.birdwatchireland.ie/News/CAPdealJune2013/tabid/1334/Default.aspx

merryberry · 26-06-2013 10:46PM

You might be interested in this link.

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-621_en.htm

Legal text not due until Autumn.

ellewood · 26-06-2013 11:24PM

merryberry wrote: »

You might be interested in this link.

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-621_en.htm

Legal text not due until Autumn.

Does that memo put 2013 as reference year??

merryberry · 26-06-2013 11:44PM

ellewood wrote: »

Does that memo put 2013 as reference year??

Eligible hectares – The rules foresee setting 2014 as a new reference year for land area, but there will be a link to beneficiaries of the direct payments system in 2013 in order to avoid speculation.

Your guess is as good as mine...the above extract makes reference to 'link' to SPS'13. Wonder what this means. What was declared on SPS'13 has some significance and probably there to minimise inflation of the land rental market

Upstream · 26-06-2013 11:57PM

ellewood wrote: »

Does that memo put 2013 as reference year??

Just from reading through it now it looks like there is a move away from historical reference periods.

In order to move towards a fairer distribution of support, the CAP system for Direct Payments will move away from one where allocations per Member State - and per farmer within the Member State - are based on historical references.

The convergence of payments, greening and move towards local and national averages are likely to take away some of the significance of the reference period anyway

RaggyDays · 27-06-2013 07:18AM

Based on the Hectares in 2014, but how much per Hectare? Is the amount you get paid per Hectare in 2014 based on the original historic payment system of 2009/10 ?
So in reality were still based on them years too if that is the case

grazeaway · 27-06-2013 08:19AM

just wondering what the deal with those of us in reps. we have to put all the land in for the sps but not all of it woul dbe farming (habitats, nature corridors, unculitvates areas around headlands, etc).

From what i figures out anyway was that each ountry would get a fixed amount but how that was divided up was up the country its self. TBH any reform would be good for me. My place was a dairy farm in the old reference years with a samll bit of tillage so my SPF in quite small comapred to lads with similar sized farms that werent in dairy at the time. I was repeatly told i wasnt eligible for extra entitlements even though i was a "young farmer" starting off.

kevthegaff · 27-06-2013 08:22AM

did i hear a base figure of around 170 a hectare, and top ups if ur a young farmer and greening. pretty vague any information at the moment

bob charles · 27-06-2013 08:25AM

its a dangerously low figure, will the dept of Ag be able to keep use under their thumb paying peanuts, doubt it

kevthegaff · 27-06-2013 08:30AM

firstly if the main ref year is 2014, this is gona skyrocket rent even further:(, ya alot of farmers making peanuts as it is, this aint gona help

reilig · 27-06-2013 10:31AM

It's starting again.

Letter in today's IFJ from a Laois Farmer:

- Leased land during reference years.
- land was sold since.
- Now farming only 27ha and stacked entitlements to the value of €540.
- Going to lose approx €8k in the new system
- Has loans and a family

Is this guy being treated unfairly?

For feck sake, this is the type of billsh1t that our country has been swimming in for the last 20 years. This guy thinks he's entitled to keep getting €540 per ha for 2 reasons:

1. He was farming more land in 2002 than he is now.
2. He has a family.

What entitles him to keep getting this level of payment for doing nothing?

What about the guy who bought the land that this guy had leased and has no SFP on it?

What about the vast majority of people who are still farming the same amount of land now that they were farming in 2002? Should they be cut just to ensure that this chancer keeps getting the same amount of money.

It clearly shows how inadequate the old system was - rewarding people for sitting on their ass.

Why didn't this guy go out and rent more land when he lost the other land? The answer is that he was too well rewarded for not renting land by just claiming his SFP. He made more money by making his farm smaller and just claiming the grants instead of farming.

The guy in his letter mentions how productive farmers should be rewarded - how the hell does he consider himself to be a productive farmer?????

I sincerely hope that the new CAP deal does not have provision in it to reward people like this!!!

kevthegaff · 27-06-2013 10:50AM

reilig wrote: »

It's starting again.

Letter in today's IFJ from a Laois Farmer:

Is this guy being treated unfairly?

For feck sake, this is the type of billsh1t that our country has been swimming in for the last 20 years. This guy thinks he's entitled to keep getting €540 per ha for 2 reasons:

1. He was farming more land in 2002 than he is now.
2. He has a family.

What entitles him to keep getting this level of payment for doing nothing?

What about the guy who bought the land that this guy had leased and has no SFP on it?

What about the vast majority of people who are still farming the same amount of land now that they were farming in 2002? Should they be cut just to ensure that this chancer keeps getting the same amount of money.

It clearly shows how inadequate the old system was - rewarding people for sitting on their ass.

Why didn't this guy go out and rent more land when he lost the other land? The answer is that he was too well rewarded for not renting land by just claiming his SFP. He made more money by making his farm smaller and just claiming the grants instead of farming.

The guy in his letter mentions how productive farmers should be rewarded - how the hell does he consider himself to be a productive farmer?????

I sincerely hope that the new CAP deal does not have provision in it to reward people like this!!!

your dead right! what did he do with the windfall from the sale, probably invested it in property. What does he expect?? did it say anything on IFJ about what will the payment be?

reilig · 27-06-2013 11:33AM

kevthegaff wrote: »

your dead right! what did he do with the windfall from the sale, probably invested it in property. What does he expect?? did it say anything on IFJ about what will the payment be?

he didn't get a winfall. He was renting the land from the owner, then the owner sold it.

leg wax · 27-06-2013 11:36AM

reilig wrote: »

It's starting again.

Letter in today's IFJ from a Laois Farmer:

Is this guy being treated unfairly?

For feck sake, this is the type of billsh1t that our country has been swimming in for the last 20 years. This guy thinks he's entitled to keep getting €540 per ha for 2 reasons:

1. He was farming more land in 2002 than he is now.
2. He has a family.

What entitles him to keep getting this level of payment for doing nothing?

What about the guy who bought the land that this guy had leased and has no SFP on it?

What about the vast majority of people who are still farming the same amount of land now that they were farming in 2002? Should they be cut just to ensure that this chancer keeps getting the same amount of money.

It clearly shows how inadequate the old system was - rewarding people for sitting on their ass.

Why didn't this guy go out and rent more land when he lost the other land? The answer is that he was too well rewarded for not renting land by just claiming his SFP. He made more money by making his farm smaller and just claiming the grants instead of farming.

The guy in his letter mentions how productive farmers should be rewarded - how the hell does he consider himself to be a productive farmer?????

I sincerely hope that the new CAP deal does not have provision in it to reward people like this!!!

you shold be replying to him in the ifj not here, and we will all agree to stand ,knell, duck,hide behind you. legs

towzer2010 · 27-06-2013 11:42AM

I saw an article in either the journal or the independent about a dairy farmer who buys weanlings for finishing on the side. He was saying that if his CAP payment was cut he wouldn't be able to buy weanlings anymore and that would have a knock on affect.

It's amazing the cheek of some people in my opinion. Did he think he was being charitable? Was he making nothing on the deal? He seemed to think the whole country would collapse if he couldn't finish his few weanlings for the good of humanity.

RobertKK · 27-06-2013 11:59AM

I'm sick of most of the farm organisations, in particular the IFA, they continued the mantra of those on higher payments need them to stay productive...and these are our most productive farmers.
Lets call a spade a spade, they have been our most privileged farmers who have had the luxury of having the biggest farm organisation in the ear of the minister.

John Bryan had a cheek at some of the stuff he said during the CAP discussions.

I also think it disgusting that there has been stuff written in the IFJ (in past few weeks) about talks that people who farm on lowland should receive higher payments than those of us who farm on land over 200 metres above sea level.
It is hard enough farming on higher ground with the shorter growing season/higher rainfall without wanting to further penalise the disadvantage.
I just hope this is not part of the deal, it would deserve a court case.

razor8 · 27-06-2013 12:07PM

and to think that some of these most productive farmers he rants about could buy a farm a land each year with the sfp they were getting

they were at some advantage and ones that put the rental market mad

Dampintheattic · 27-06-2013 12:10PM

Bit of drizzle this morning. Sun just come out. Makings of a right good second half to the day.

Marooned75 · 27-06-2013 12:10PM

towzer2010 wrote: »

I saw an article in either the journal or the independent about a dairy farmer who buys weanlings for finishing on the side. He was saying that if his CAP payment was cut he wouldn't be able to buy weanlings anymore and that would have a knock on affect.

It's amazing the cheek of some people in my opinion. Did he think he was being charitable? Was he making nothing on the deal? He seemed to think the whole country would collapse if he couldn't finish his few weanlings for the good of humanity.

Front page of journal last week buys in 80 weanlings to finish every year with his payment was the jist of story.

reilig · 27-06-2013 12:13PM

towzer2010 wrote: »

I saw an article in either the journal or the independent about a dairy farmer who buys weanlings for finishing on the side. He was saying that if his CAP payment was cut he wouldn't be able to buy weanlings anymore and that would have a knock on affect.

It's amazing the cheek of some people in my opinion. Did he think he was being charitable? Was he making nothing on the deal? He seemed to think the whole country would collapse if he couldn't finish his few weanlings for the good of humanity.

We can take it to the simplest level. Ann and Barry from Baby Infants.

Ann and Barry sell apples outside their school for 50c each. They buy the apples from the local orchard @ 30c each and they get 20c pocket money from their Mammy and Daddy for every apple that they sell. They can have profit of 40c per apple.

Daddy loses his job and can only afford to pay them 10c per apple that they sell as pocket money.

What are their options?

- They can accept a reduced profit of 30c per apple?
- They can negotiate with the orchard for to pay the orchard 10c less per apple - but this will be highly dependent on supply and demand.

- They can charge 10c more per apple to the buyers - how?
They can restrict supply by holding back stock. They can restrict supply by finding another outlet for apples outside another school or by juicing apples and selling juice.

They can buy a pig, fatten it on apples. Only have half the amount of apples available for sale in the stall, ensuring that demand outstrips supply and that they can increase the sale price of the apples by 50c thus increasing the original profit by 40c per apple. On top of this, they can sell the pig at the end of the apple season for a profit too.

My point is that there's more than 1 way to sell an apple, fatten a pig, skin a cat etc.

If the CAP payment is reduced to a level that won't allow this dairy guy to buy weinlings, those producing weinlings will lose out short term, but will be either forced to find alternative markets for their weinlings (export) or forced out of the weinling producer game and into an alternative type of farming (the very profitable dairy game, forestry, beef finishing or contract rearing). Virtually the same amount of money will come in as CAP payments for the next 7 years (per year) as came in for the last 10 years. It will just be spread around differently. Hopefully it will be done so in a way that will allow young farmers to get into farming, those with no SFP to get some, and those with inflated SFP's not related to their current level of farming activity to be brought back down to earth and receive payments related to the actual amount of land that they are farming and the level of produce from their land instead of rewarding armchair farmers!

This Scare Mongering by the current high SFP receivers is just a ploy to try to maintain their high payments!

kevthegaff · 27-06-2013 12:56PM

i believe it should be capped anyway, 50k is a huge amount as it is. Think ur on the money rellig

reilig · 27-06-2013 12:58PM

kevthegaff wrote: »

i believe it should be capped anyway, 50k is a huge amount as it is. Think ur on the money rellig

€50k isn't very big if you're farming 500 acres.
I'm more in favour of rewarding equally based on land units and output!
The problem was that in the old system, you could have €200k in SFP and only be farming 50 acres!

Conmaicne Mara · 27-06-2013 01:29PM

RobertKK wrote: »

I also think it disgusting that there has been stuff written in the IFJ (in past few weeks) about talks that people who farm on lowland should receive higher payments than those of us who farm on land over 200 metres above sea level.
It is hard enough farming on higher ground with the shorter growing season/higher rainfall without wanting to further penalise the disadvantage.
I just hope this is not part of the deal, it would deserve a court case.

That'll be the coefficient, just another word for regionalisation/marginalisation or 2nd class farmers because of their circumstance (land type/restrictions - basically things outside their control which they'll be punished for) not to put too fine a point on it.

It's in this "tool box", whether it'll be implemented or not I don't know. I'm not optimistic about it.

Also interesting to read about Pillar 2, comes across from some writers that certain farmers should be down on bended knee grateful to receive it from their betters - while they lap up the lions share of the SFP.

nashmach · 27-06-2013 01:40PM

To put some balance on this, farming 50% more ground since the reference years, tillage area up by 50% and stock numbers up near 100%, yet we are still looking at a large cut......

I wonder what the definition of active farmer will be.

May not be as prelevant in non tillage areas but lots of lads renting out the farm and claiming SFP on it - so all return and no risk - not what SFP was for IMV :mad:

My read on the average per hectare was graduating towards €270/ha over the next 7 years.

Tipp Man · 27-06-2013 01:50PM

So to summarise

The losers aren't happy

The winners aren't happy

yellow50HX · 27-06-2013 02:06PM

we all spend a lot of time looking the ditches complaining about the lad next door cheque.

my own 2 cent is that yes fellas running a good productive farm are entilted to get their payments. what is annoying is that soemone can make a mad burst over say 2-3 years and have have a huge turnover/production level but after the reference time there is no onus on them to maintain the level of production. any looses made in getting to that level could be carried during the reference time and then as the production level dropped back so too would the costs but the direct payments stayed the same

as for the lowland/upland debate the level of production is directly related to the quality of land as opposed to the quanity. The other schemes such as the disadvanged area and reps should be used to encourge farmers in these area to make the most of what they have or to maintan the land in land in enviormentlly friendly manner.

100acres of mountain side in west cork will not have the same production levels of 100ac of prime tillage land in east cork.

kevthegaff · 27-06-2013 02:11PM

will there be modulation?

Dampintheattic · 27-06-2013 02:24PM

nashmach wrote: »

To put some balance on this, farming 50% more ground since the reference years, tillage area up by 50% and stock numbers up near 100%, yet we are still looking at a large cut......

I wonder what the definition of active farmer will be.

May not be as prelevant in non tillage areas but lots of lads renting out the farm and claiming SFP on it - so all return and no risk - not what SFP was for IMV :mad:

My read on the average per hectare was graduating towards €270/ha over the next 7 years.

And to put even more balance.
Farmer, in the west of Ireland, producing weanlings, on marginal land.
He is lucky, most years to get reasonable quality silage harvested, given land quality and western seaboard rainfall levels.
This farmer has to back up his fodder situation, with expensive purchased concentrates.
Bale of bedding straw costs this guy, €20 and more.

Other side of the coin, you have tillage and cattle farmers. Big and bigger in scale than the typical west of Ireland farmer. These guys, also have the benefit of, lowest cost concentrate inputs, for their cattle, produced inside their own gates.
Bale of bedding straw costs this guy a couple of euros.

When Cromwell declared "to hell or to Connaught", he knew exactly the benefits of ownership of land in Leinster and the Golden Vale of munster.

The SFP of today, squeezes the successors of the guys banished to Connaught, as much as it benefits, the successors of the guys who remained in Leinster and the GV.

Time to cut out the ****, and balance up this situation, once and for all.

Username John · 27-06-2013 02:28PM

Was there any actual info in the journal? Or was it more speculation as to what could happen?

Has anything really been decided? I saw the headline re the CAP, and thought "oh, its all sorted"

But from what I can see, its still all up in the air...

What am I missing? Can someone tell me what has actually been agreed?

CAP Reform

Comments