Having your UKIP porky pie and eat it?

After severe food shortages during and after the last world war the EU instigated the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to ensure we had food security in Europe. Kippers love to moan about CAP.

cap

Who remembers the food-rationing-coupons after the war? Remember WWII Atlantic convoys with grain shipments from Canada, torpedoed out of the water by ‘das bot’ ? Think there will never be another fuel crisis? Think terrorists will never take a pop at food exports from the third world? Imagine Boko Haram threatening to lace kenyan beans? Would you be glad the French could still fill some Waitrose shelves with ‘Haricot verts’?

So we protect our agricultural sector in the EU for good reason. The cheapest possible food price in the shops for EU consumers is not the be all and end all of EU agricultural policy. Today taking care of our countryside and bio-diversity is an important secondary goal. Anyway who do you think will profit most if we just left it to the market: EU consumers, poor villagers in Africa or the likes of Tesco, Sainsburys?

Back to CAP. Although reduced in size, CAP still is one of the most costly EU programmes we all benefit from in different ways, taking up about 40% of the EU’s budget. UKIP likes to say this adds nearly £400 a year to the household bills of poor British families, but funnily enough they plan to continue subsidising British farmers exactly the same!

UKIP farmer with EU axe to grind

UKIP farmer with EU axe to grind

So how is #UKIP going to save £55 M. a day if their Agricultural spokesman Stuart Agnew MEP proposes to pay UK farmers roughly the same amount per acre as the current EU’s CAP Single Farm Payment, typically worth approximately £210 per hectare (£85 per acre), per annum?

Is this another case of having your #UKIP pie and eat it?

Sources:

  • £80 per acre on lowland, pro-rata decrease on marginal and hill land, capped at £120,000 (1,500 lowland acres, pro rata higher acreage limits on other land)

http://www.stuartagnewmep.co.uk/images_server/stuart_agnew/documents/8_AgriculturePolicyE-version.pdf

  • See last paragraph: Is it worth it? current EU’s CAP Single Farm Payment £85 per acre

http://www.savills.co.uk/promotions/country-house-consultancy-update/october-2012(1)/subsidies-and-the-non-farmer.aspx

  • Leave the EU and save £55 million every day (p. 10)

http://www.ukip-ynl.org/ukip-manifesto-2014.pdf

  • CAP shareof EU budget has decreased very sharply over the past 25 years, from 73% in 1985 to 41% in 2012

http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/cap-post-2013/graphs/graph1_en.pdf

Advertisements

About lasancmt

Passionate about Identity Management Disgusted at #ukip and #brexit
This entry was posted in EU and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Having your UKIP porky pie and eat it?

  1. Charles Efford says:

    The food security angle is simply bogus. If you want to insure food security, you promote the most efficient forms of farming. The CAP does not do this, because it was never meant to. The CAP was a bribe to France, from Jean Monnet and Conrad Adenauer to get France to agree to form the EEC. Successive French governments had bribed farmers and part-time farmer smallholders, of which there are many in France, to vote for them, with ever increasing farm subsidies. This had got to be such a problem that was threatening to bankrupt the French government. France insisted on agriculture, being part of the package as a condition of them joining the EEC. This is the truth behind the often repeated jibe “German industry pays for French agriculture.” At that time. 25% of the French population was involved with agriculture. This was a large and very vocal social group. Add the romantic notion of the French “paysan” living in some kind of bucolic idyll, which is still held by many French townsfolk and you have a large and significant pressure group. It is this group that the CAP is meant to placate. This is why it is France that so tenaciously clings to the CAP

    The following is taken from the Wikipedia entry on The Common Agricultural Policy “By 1962, three major principles had been established to guide the CAP: market unity, community preference and financial solidarity.” There is no mention of food security here. The CAP actually harms food security by encouraging inefficient forms of production to persist long after, they should have been abandoned. It does not help food security, to encourage farmers to produce less from a given area of land than they would if they used the most efficient methods The food security argument simply not true. It is also morally unsustainable to artificially increase the price of food for low income families. The care for the countryside and biodiversity arguments are simply excuses for encouraging inefficiency. These notions are part of the bucolic idyll fantasy of many townsfolk.

    Bribing French farmers not to riot on the streets of France is not a good enough reason for consuming 40% of the European Union budget.

  2. lasancmt says:

    The only thing I will grant you Charles, is that France may have benefitted more from CAP than the UK. That doesn’t mean UK farmers will applaud UKIP for proposing to scrap it. That is why Stewart Agnew wrote his pamphlet that probably few kippers ever read. The way supermarkets have driven down prices of things like milk, would mean that also UK farmers could not survive without CAP or something equivalent. That also means that ukip would save less money with #brexit than they lead Jo Public to believe.

    A staunch British Eurosceptic like yourself may posture CAP is not about food security all you like. After all you are from an island that has depended on food imports to meet the needs of its population for more than a century. The UK is simply more dependent on food imports than some comparable EU countries end more than 50% of that comes from mainland Europe. Europe as a whole is by and large self sufficient on food and that’s how those of us who believe in the EU would like to keep it.

    The kind of ‘Free trade’ that ukip aspires to is nothing more than another race to the bottom.

    For more information don’t listen to Charles or ukip, read what your own UK experts have to say about food security in…..

    http://www.soilassociation.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=wCYoHYSHsy8%3D&tabid=215

    http://www.foodsecurity.ac.uk/assets/pdfs/gfs-and-uk-food-imports.pdf

  3. Charles Efford says:

    Let’s a few things clear. I’m not a member of UKIP. I want Britain to leave the European Union on constitutional and trade grounds. Wherever I say, is my opinion and not derived from the opinion of any other individual or political party.

    You say, you will grant me only one thing: that France benefits most from the CAP. But you make no mention of the fact that the CAP fossilises inefficient farming methods to the detriment of food security in the European Union.

    If your statement about the current situation of British food imports is true, then our departure from The European Union will make little difference. We will simply continue to apply, what our European suppliers has to sell.. We were also be able to import cheap food from Australia New Zealand and Canada, who are the world’s most efficient producers of either arable or pastoral agricultural products, at far lower prices for the benefit of low income families and the of the country as a whole, while Europe acquiesces to some managed trade fallacy that makes the population of Europe poorer.

    You mentioned that I can “… posture about food security, all I like.” When it was you postured about food security, which is the subject I challenge you on and prove you wrong.

    Yes. We import a lot of food for the rest of Europe, because we are free trade country. If we could return to the situation prior to 1973, when: cereals, meat and dairy products were imported from the world’s most efficient and cheapest producers, prices for many foodstuffs would be much lower.

    You seem rather desperate in the claims you make at the end: “a race to the bottom.” The race to the bottom of prices would benefit the low income families you seem to ignore.

    The move to an agricultural economy, without farm subsidies, will take some time and planning. It is difficult to wean a seriously distorted economy off of the heroin of subsidies; but the objective will be to achieve a situation where the farming economy stands on its own two feet, without subsidies. This was done during the 1980s and 90s in New Zealand, whose farmers would not go back to the previous situation, because now they are now businessmen, in their own right, not relying on a subsidy from their fellow citizens.

    You have done nothing to justify the economic obscenity of the CAP, which entrenches inefficient farming practices to the detriment of the EU economy, which increases food prices to the detriment of low income families and prevents the European Union from participating in world free trade agreements to the detriment of the economy as a whole.

    It is obvious that the CAP benefits no one, but the small inefficient farmers, it was originally meant to benefit, not the rest of Europe that has to continually pay the cost of bribing France, to be a member of the EU.

  4. lasancmt says:

    As always Charles, you are entitled and very welcome to your opinions. I explained how a country that has been dependent on food imports for over a century probably came to under rate it.

    You are not a very good listener though and obviously didn’t take the time to browse the document references from your own government about food security. I cut and paste:

    How safe is the UK food supply chain from existing and potential malicious threats to food security? Is the extent of these threats fully understood?

    Whose door will the UK be knocking on when again it all ends in tears in the next food crisis?

    I also think your concern for poor families is ‘tea-party’ bogus. How about the families of farmers who live below the poverty line because they care about their live stock, the environment, your guaranteed plate of food on your table.

    Poor families are not at all well served by the lowest prices when their mass produced food is full of chemicals, growth hormones, salt and sugar. Why do you think when families income increases the first thing they do is start buying more healthy sustainable food, start visiting their local farm shop for the quality they crave for their families.

    I stand by my argument that your ‘Free Trade’ way is nothing but a race to the bottom at a risk to national security and the nation’s health and a countryside laid to wreck and ruin.

  5. Charles Efford says:

    Yesterday, 12th February 2015, on the BBC2 Daily Politics, the Liberal Democrat spokesman, Tom Brake MP, was asked by Andrew Neal, in reference to the euro, “Are you glad we didn’t join?” “Yes.” He replied. “I think the position we have got now is a realistic one… The time is not right and may never be right for the UK to join the euro.” He later said “It is difficult to see, for the foreseeable future, that the circumstances could be right for the UK to join the euro.” He went on to state that his party had changed his position on the euro. “I can’t foresee the circumstances, in the near future, where the UK would want to join.” It is amazing how the realities of government can bring such enlightenment.

    • lasancmt says:

      No UK politician three months before a general election would say that it was a mistake not joining the Euro or that they can forsee circumstances where the UK might join after all. Poisonous anti EU and anti EURO propaganda by foreign owned British media made sure of that. Economic illiterate ignoramuses like Dan Hannan go even further by constructing an imaginary parallel universe , where Britain had joined the Euro. Incredibly for someone who says he believes in Britain he then pictures Britain to be languishing alongside Greece and Portugal at the bottom of the EU growth league, where I could argue with the same amount of conjecture that it is more likely that Britain would share top positions alongside it’s Northern European neighbours Netherlands and Germany. The question you have to ask is who believes more in Britain’s capabilities, a pessimist like Hannan or an optimist like me.

      Coming back to the facts: The Volkskrant today published growth percentages of the last three months for all EU countries. Would it be fair to ask Hannan, with Britain not having made de mistake of joining the EURO, that that should be reflected in Britain taking top position in these growth tables. After all they were not fettered by the disastrous EURO shackled to their economy. But Hang on: Eurozone members Spain, Germany,Poland and a few liitle ones all performed better than the UK. In fact the UK growth figure of 0.5% puts it only 0.1% above the EU average and that is with all the advantages of keeping the pound. Please explore that anomaly Charles

  6. Pingback: Disingenuous UK europhobes | IdentitySpace

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s