CAP Payments to the South Dorset Hunt from the European Union

[Judgemental]

I argue that myself on other threads Judgemental, but what on earth has it got to do with hunts? They can't claim unless they farm land. If they farm land, what's the problem?

Look, it may not be the most obvious feature but if one is an OUT politician or campaigner, all they have to do is get on TV or in front of an audience and spray the audience with a spin on wealthy hunting folk, being given tax payers money to run their hunts. Believe me they are and will. The piece in the Telegraph is indicative what's to come. The Daily Express mentioned money going to hunts last week. Along with the issue of EU money being handed out for land and little or no requirement to do anything as a result of receiving the money.

The old adage, "you can fool some of the people some of the time but you can't fool all the people all the time", could not be more appropriate.

Referendums are curious beasts, we haven't had one for 40 odd years, when incidentally we were lied to by Harold Wilson and the most unexpected features are suddenly thrown up in 'neon lights'

 

[ester]

Ah well maybe they should come to you for advice then?

 

[Judgemental]

J_M, I'm struggling with the point that you're trying to make. Are you claiming, as it seems, that there are packs of hounds which are also 'Active' Farmers? To claim SFP it's vital that the claimant be 'ACTIVELY' farming.

If by a spurious route, you're pointing out that there are those who farm and are in receipt of SFP, AND they also Hunt, then you might just as well claim that anyone who farms and is a claimant and who has an interest out side of agriculture, is also having that interest or hobby supported.

£11,761 of benefit from SFP appears the figure which you tell us that the Cotswold are receiving in benefits. Are the Cotswold as a pack, actively farming? It also seems that you're unclear as to who actually owns the land which has the entitlements attached to it.

Currently old chap, your argument seems to be more of a rambling and one with nothing to support it.

Alec.

Alec you are so good at bringing me down to earth. However if you consider what I have said since your last post and the fact Hunting and ownership of land, is synonymous with PRIVILEGE and Dodgy Dave and Osborne are representative of the unacceptable face of privilege. Dodgy Dave calls it 'being aspirational' but in the case of land it is almost always inherited, so to have an 'aspirational' inheritance of land and then to be funded by the tax payer in order to keep it, will prove to be the Achilles heel of British agriculture whether it is IN or OUT of the EU.

 

[Alec Swan]

The strange thing about land which is passed down from father to son is that it usually arrives complete with an understanding of rural ways and tradition and they both matter. The successful business man, on the other hand, who sells out his world for £squillions and decides that he'd like to be the lord of the manor, and buys in accordingly, generally hasn't got a clue what he's doing.

Now then, there are pricks in all walks of life, and I'm not saying that inheritance is a right of passage and should be considered to always be ideal, or that the self made man would be anathema, but 'generally' I find that rolls are filled and again 'generally', fairly predictably.

There is within the CAP colossal wastage and a deal of corruption, and if we leave the EU, then the problems will be simply addressed. If we stay, then nothing will change, for as long as we remain.

Our countryside is not ours to do with as we please, we have it in trust and must account for it to those who come after. (plagiarised from elsewhere, King George V1, from memory!).

Alec.

 

[Judgemental]

The strange thing about land which is passed down from father to son is that it usually arrives complete with an understanding of rural ways and tradition and they both matter. The successful business man, on the other hand, who sells out his world for £squillions and decides that he'd like to be the lord of the manor, and buys in accordingly, generally hasn't got a clue what he's doing.

Now then, there are pricks in all walks of life, and I'm not saying that inheritance is a right of passage and should be considered to always be ideal, or that the self made man would be anathema, but 'generally' I find that rolls are filled and again 'generally', fairly predictably.

There is within the CAP colossal wastage and a deal of corruption, and if we leave the EU, then the problems will be simply addressed. If we stay, then nothing will change, for as long as we remain.

Our countryside is not ours to do with as we please, we have it in trust and must account for it to those who come after. (plagiarised from elsewhere, King George V1, from memory!).

Alec.

Alec the interesting and very curious part in all this, is the position of the Labour Party. Bearing in mind their zealous opposition to hunting and all that it represents.

My sources indicate they were, I stress were, completely oblivious of all these features, bearing in mind they are largely urban orientated.

Indeed I am told they are generally, now in something of a dilemma over Europe

Quite what Kerry McCarthy, the Shadow Minister of Agriculture, is going to make of packs of hounds receiving EU Benefits remains to be seen. I believe neither she nor Jeremy Corbyn were aware of this.

In the context of your post Ms McCarthy has a Private Members bill going through Parliment concerning Food Waste.

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2015-16/foodwastereduction.html

It won't surprise me if the Labour Party do a complete U-Turn concerning Europe.

 

[ester]

well if they weren't aware they are even dimmer than first apparent.

Do we actually care that much about the position of the labour party right now?

Personally I think you are making rather a storm in a teacup given all of the other important parts of the Europe debate.

 

[Alec Swan]

……..

Do we actually care that much about the position of the labour party right now?

…….. .

No party in opposition can be effective, when most view them as an irrelevance.

The SNP now have greater influence in Westminster.

Alec.

 

[Orangehorse]

Since we have been in the EU it has been Government policy, of whatever political party, to fight for all the subsidies for the UK they can get. That is why there was never a cap on acreage, which for some was an attractive idea, because since the UK has more larger farms than others in the EU, it would mean that we would be affected by this more than other countries whose farms were generally small - think of Greece and France for instance.

The origin of the Common Agricultural Policy was to ensure that there was plentiful food for the population and to try to bring farming and countryside incomes up to be equal to urban living standards. There was a huge flight from the land into towns and factory/urgan jobs and the countryside was being de-populated. There is one caveat about this of course. In Europe unless you were aristocracy and owned a large estate, if you worked the land you were (are) considered a peasant.
(And I remember a YFC trip to an East European country where one of our party who lived in one of the gorgeous Georgian farmhouses in Shropshire was outraged by the attitude of her host family and their friends as they considered her a peasant - we were amused.)

So you are fitting a Europe wide policy of small farms and tiny incomes to UK agriculture where there is kudos in being a landowner/yeoman farmer, but it was a price the UK Government was willing to pay to join the EU. I just want to say that over the years there have been ups and down in agriculture prices and although there were certainly prosperous times in the 1970s and 1980s for farmers, in recent years Ihave heard it time and time again that the only thing keeping farmers in business is the EU subsidy, in other words farmers get more in subsidy than the annual profit from farming. That is why so many have branched out into livery yards, wedding venues, shooting, B & B, etc. etc.

As for the price of land - that is a whole different story, who has the time to examine that?

There have been several different systems for the administration of EU subsidies to farmers, it seems that we just were used to one system when there was a change to a different one. I must remind those who are exercised by the Dorset Hunt saga that it was a Labour minister of Agriculture who decided how the EU money was to be distributed.

 

[fburton]

Whatever you think about the financial support the EU gives farmers you can't blame people for claiming the money the scheme allows them to .
The fault lies with the those who set up the system not those claiming the money .

Like Winter Fuel Payments, I suppose.

 

[Judgemental]

Like Winter Fuel Payments, I suppose.

fburton what a splendid comment and how very appropriate, because DEFRA figures and statistics show that 800 titled folk i.e Dukes, Duchesses, Lords, Ladies and Baronets etc collected £30 million in 2014.

That is an average of £37,500.00 each I suppose they would need that to heat some of the monstrous and inappropriate piles they inhabit.

No doubt those over 60 still get their £200.00 per household as well.

 

[popsdosh]

fburton what a splendid comment and how very appropriate, because DEFRA figures and statistics show that 800 titled folk i.e Dukes, Duchesses, Lords, Ladies and Baronets etc collected £30 million in 2014.

That is an average of £37,500.00 each I suppose they would need that to heat some of the monstrous and inappropriate piles they inhabit.

No doubt those over 60 still get their £200.00 per household as well.

God you must lead a boring life and its even sadder you seem to be the only one who cares!!

 

[Alec Swan]

fburton what a splendid comment and how very appropriate, because DEFRA figures and statistics show that 800 titled folk i.e Dukes, Duchesses, Lords, Ladies and Baronets etc collected £30 million in 2014.

That is an average of £37,500.00 each I suppose they would need that to heat some of the monstrous and inappropriate piles they inhabit.

No doubt those over 60 still get their £200.00 per household as well.

Finally J-M, I've rumbled you; you're really Monbiot masquerading as a mental judge, aren't you?!

A cryptic user name? For you? Very good! Deny it and your rather reduced level of credibility will sink in to the basement.

Alec.

 

[Judgemental]

God you must lead a boring life and its even sadder you seem to be the only one who cares!!

Considering Priti Patel has criticized Cameron and Osborne, (posh boys from Eton) her own party because they are so wealthy and are out of touch with reality and immigration.

Comments that have been well received in the media and man/woman on the street.

My comments are therefore fully justified about the privileged inherited estates, belonging to titled aristocrats who have done absolutely nothing, but inherit the land and now do nothing for the massive benefits they are paid by the EU, that is attached to the land. Then of course, the poor old tenant has to pay 82% of his/her EU money to the landlord.

Don't take my word for it. Read the following

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/67...atel-Tory-EU-Referendum-luxury-mass-migration

 

[Alec Swan]

……..

My comments are therefore fully justified about the privileged inherited estates, …….. , but inherit the land and now do nothing for the massive benefits they are paid by the EU, that is attached to the land. Then of course, the poor old tenant has to pay 82% of his/her EU money to the landlord.

……..

Your comment would imply that the Landowner is in receipt of CAP benefits and 'Then' of course, the poor old tenant has to pay 82%' etc. …….. so that the Landlord also claims from the tenant. If that was what you intended, then you're wrong.

SFPs are now paid out on land rather than by IAX or headage payments. Either the Landlord or the Tenant will be in receipt of the CAP payments, but not both. If the Landlord claims the payments, then the rent to the tenant will be heavily reduced, and to possibly 18% of the going rate. If the Tenant claims the payment, then the commensurate rent will be levied working on the basis (as you seem to suggest), that it's money for nothing, and that the Landlord is entitled to his share.

ETS, I'm no more in favour of the system than you, believing that CAP payments should support those who produce our food, but it's how it is, and I can't see any change, in or out of the EU.

Alec.

 

[Judgemental]

Your comment would imply that the Landowner is in receipt of CAP benefits and 'Then' of course, the poor old tenant has to pay 82%' etc. …….. so that the Landlord also claims from the tenant. If that was what you intended, then you're wrong.

SFPs are now paid out on land rather than by IAX or headage payments. Either the Landlord or the Tenant will be in receipt of the CAP payments, but not both. If the Landlord claims the payments, then the rent to the tenant will be heavily reduced, and to possibly 18% of the going rate. If the Tenant claims the payment, then the commensurate rent will be levied working on the basis (as you seem to suggest), that it's money for nothing, and that the Landlord is entitled to his share.

ETS, I'm no more in favour of the system than you, believing that CAP payments should support those who produce our food, but it's how it is, and I can't see any change, in or out of the EU.

Alec.

The semantics of who gets what and how it is calculated is academic.

The point is very wealthy people and I am not talking about all those 'poor subsistence dog and stick farmers' in East Anglia, I am talking about Titled Aristocrats who have inherited estates, passed down the years, for which they have done nothing and for which the EU are paying money for nothing.

They don't need the money and they are not producing any more or less food.

If it is less, then they better get up in the morning, drag themselves out of their stately homes, castles, mansions and get on the tractor, milk the cows, do the hedge trimming, ruddle the rams, foot rot the sheep, clean out the calves, pigs themselves, run the grain drier etc.

 

[ester]

Ah yes, of course, those estates pay for themselves

It isn't semantics it is accuracy.

I shall decline to read the daily express, thanks.

 

[Judgemental]

Ah yes, of course, those estates pay for themselves

Why should the titled inherited agricultural estates have any benefits, more than any other business?

 

[Alec Swan]

…….. I am not talking about all those 'poor subsistence dog and stick farmers' in East Anglia, …….. etc.

You're on rather thin ice there, old bean! Whilst not gifted with a spectacular intellect, I've earned my living by my modest abilities, hard graft and the vision to see s*** for what it is.

Alec.

 

[popsdosh]

You're on rather thin ice there, old bean! Whilst not gifted with a spectacular intellect, I've earned my living by my modest abilities, hard graft and the vision to see s*** for what it is.

Alec.

Very true Alec and what JM seems to miss is that to claim any benefits as he would like to put it, the claimant now has to be an active working farmer sort of blows his argument out of the water!

I really do question his figures sometimes where has this 82% figure come from all of a sudden as I would love to see the source of that was it somebody who actually knows anything about how the system works.

Jm may like to know that I was declared bankrupt at 23 when milk quotas came in , with nothing behind me moved to another part of Britain and through bloody hard work now have control over a sizeable business . None of this I could have achieved without the landlord and tenant system that has evolved over the years it actually works well for both sides and at the end of the day they get a return on their capital that no other busness would accept so get off your high horse JM unless you can really suggest any alternative

 

[Judgemental]

I do wonder if some of you live in the real world. All so you can line your pockets with free hand outs from the EU. Granted most have never been in the firing line of a terrorist but that could all change unless the majority wake up to the risks.

32 British Citizens were cruelly murdered as they were holidaying and sun bathing on a Tunisia beach by a terrorist rocking up in a Rubber Rib .

Now that the summer months are here it is easy to pick up Immigrants from the French
Coast in a Rubber Rib which are virtually undetectable at night and slip across the channel.

So called immigrants who could easily be members of Isil who could rock up in any West Country town or village and similarly murder and blow up innocent British Citizens.

If we issue some draconian measures and exit the EU rapidly some realistic controls can be put in place without interference from Brussels.

Brussels simply want to dump as many migrants in the UK irrespective of whether or not they are legal, illegal or terrists.


Alec I would have thought you would be awake to the risks, the others who post on this forum are probably too young to recognize what can happen.

Suggest folk have a read of the following and forget their Benefits and Subsidies and think about security.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...inside-the-arrogant-imperial-and-dangerously/

 

[ester]

Sorry all line our pockets with free handouts? Not likely round here!

the rest, well, ermm.

 

[Lizzie66]

JM are you seriously trying to argue that being in the EU has made the world unsafe ? Or that if we weren't in the EU people wouldn't be able to slip through our borders ? Or that Brussels is actively sending terrorists and illegal immigrants our way ?

To then try and suggest that this is linked to the CAP payments is ludicrous in the extreme.

I'm sorry but you are up there with the MRL party.

 

[Orangehorse]

AHH - how many more times? EU farm subsidies are paid to keep farmers on the land and to subsidse the cost of food production to the consumers, i.e. the people going round the supermarket every week for their shopping. Also farmers have to comply with rules and regulations and have inspections and breach of the rules means a reduction in payments.

The Lords and Ladies, the Church and Universities, Pension Funds and other landowners (including hunts) have to do something with their land so they can either let it out to tenants who may or may not receive the EU subsidy and pay rent according to the tenancy agreement or farm it "in hand" like farmers. In which case they are treated like any other farmer and can claim whatever is available. As I stated before, the DEFRA officials negotiating within the EU fought very hard to ensure that all farmers in the UK, whatever their size, should be able to claim all subsidies, otherwise the UK would have been at a very big disadvantage and get a lot less out of the CAP.

That there are still large landowners is down to politics. The fact that our family own some land is because in previous generations land had to be sold off to pay death duties. There are still a great many families that own estates and large tracts and is due to being clever and working what assets they have and the fact that recent Labour Governments have stopped short of "making the pips sqeak." For instance a local Lord put his estate into a Trust, so that it continues as a whole and it doesn't matter who the heir to the title is. You may or may not know that agricultural land is exempt from inheritance tax (along with some business assets) hence the popularity and price of agricultural land among people who have made their millions from what ever source.

 

[Judgemental]

The words, views and warnings of Enoch Powell are more relevant today than at any other time

Particularly his 1968 Rivers of Blood speech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc26aTCwyYM

In order to make my point one has to watch the whole clip

 

[Judgemental]

JM are you seriously trying to argue that being in the EU has made the world unsafe ? Or that if we weren't in the EU people wouldn't be able to slip through our borders ? Or that Brussels is actively sending terrorists and illegal immigrants our way ?

To then try and suggest that this is linked to the CAP payments is ludicrous in the extreme.

I'm sorry but you are up there with the MRL party.

Yes, because we are enslaved to unelected officials, who want to see our population infiltrated by a whole host of ethnic non-British people, immigrants of one sort or another, in order to weaken our right thinking Anglo Saxon values and way of life.

CAP payments are a bribe to the landowners and farmers to retain support for the EU, in order for such as Jean-Claude Juncker The unelected president of the EU, a Luxembourger by birth, to finish the work Hitler set out to do in 1939. To subjugate the British people to Europe.

I have posted a clip concerning the late great Enoch Powell (whose driver at elections was Nigel Farage) who took up hunting, largely as he said, because it was symbolic of something that had been arbitrarily outlawed by shooting the hounds and hunt staff in Germany, by Hitler's Bavarian henchmen and members of the Gestapo.

Plainly those who wish to remain in the EU are pandering to rich, privileged Eton educated cronies of Dave's chums in such as The East Anglian Turnip Taliban.

 

[Orangehorse]

The Nazi Party started out as a sort of "green" party and one of the reasons for banning hunting was to please the farmers who didn't like the local aristos galloping all over their land. Hunting does now take place in Germany, a sort of drag hunt, as I met three hunting-mad Germans while on holiday last year although my german and their english didn't let us go into the finer details.

 

[Judgemental]

The Nazi Party started out as a sort of "green" party and one of the reasons for banning hunting was to please the farmers who didn't like the local aristos galloping all over their land. Hunting does now take place in Germany, a sort of drag hunt, as I met three hunting-mad Germans while on holiday last year although my german and their english didn't let us go into the finer details.

Orangehorse, what absolute rubbish.

Hunting was banned by the Nazi's in 1936, because Hitler was afraid of the German Aristocracy.

Don't you dare dilute the evils of the Nazi party or their disgusting policies.

Also, the huge acres of armaments that where sheeted down, were something Hitler and his generals did not want seen, for obvious reasons.

Coupled to the various Concentration Camps that were being built.

His prime intention so far as the banning of hunting was set out, to senior officers in his speech at Obersalzberg Bavaria, when he was staying at the Berchtesgaden on 22 August 1939.

 

[popsdosh]

Still waiting for the armagedon from the press over this issue and the referendum is only around the corner! LOL

 

[Judgemental]

Still waiting for the armagedon from the press over this issue and the referendum is only around the corner! LOL

Armageddon, (with 2 x d's if you are going to use these 'big' words) will ensue if we are fooled into voting Remain, because Cameron has not achieved any sort of a deal with EU leaders, other than the flimsy agreement similar to that Neville Chamberlain had with Adolf Hitler in 1939, when Chamberlain stepped off the plane from Munich, waving a piece of paper with Hitler's signature. Chamberlain saying "peace in our time".

Mr Superiority Cameron, does not even have the piece of paper!

The so called deal he has with the EU leaders, has not been ratified or set down on paper, merely a verbal agreement which any one of them can Welch on.

popsdosh you are remarkably naive if you do not understand the scenario.

Cameron has been rattled on BBC's Question Time and invoked the position of Sir Winston Churchill. The difference between Churchill and Cameron is that the former was a mature man, but more importantly he was trusted by the British people

The adage, "you can fool some of the people some of the time but you can't fool all the people all the time" could not be more apt.

 

[Judgemental]

Still waiting for the armagedon from the press over this issue and the referendum is only around the corner! LOL

Well popsdosh, I trust the result of the EU Referendum is a sufficient Armageddon for you?

The Prime Minister has resigned, the pound has plummeted from $1.50 to $1.35 and the Stock Market has fallen dramatically.

In all probability farmland values will fall by about 90% without EU subsidies.