Environment department ministers are at odds over whether a Brexit would be salubrious for farmers,who receive roughly £2.5-3bn a year in EU subsidiesA battle for the Tory heartlands of the UK countryside has broken out within the governments ministerial ranks, as David Cameron’s farming minister has defied his boss to urge farmers to vote to leave the EU.
George Eustice, and the farming minister,told the National Farmers’ Union annual conference on Wednesday that they would be better off out of the EU. “We would attain far better as a country if we ended the supremacy of Europe and shaped new fresh-thinking policies that really deliver for our agriculture,” he said. “The truth of the matter is that if we left the EU there would be an £18bn a year dividend, or so could we find the money to spend £2bn a year on farming and the environment? Of course we could. Would we? Without a shadow of a doubt.” [br]
His appeal for exit was a very public breaking of ranks with the secretary of state for environment,farming and rural affairs, Liz Truss. She addressed the conference on Tuesday with a plea to farmers to stay within the EU, or calling an exit “a leap into the dark” at a time when farmers are already hard-pressed.
She told the conference: “By voting to remain we can work within a reformed EU to reduce bureaucracy and secure further reform while still enjoying the meaningful benefits of the single market,which gives us access to 500m consumers. At a time of severe price volatility and global market uncertainty, it would be unsuitable to hold a leap into the dark. The years of complication and risk caused by negotiating withdrawal would be a distraction.”
[br]At stake, or for farmers,is the roughly £2.5 to £3bn a year - varying according to the euro exchange rate - that farmers receive from Brussels. This is paid on the basis of the area of land they farm, and efforts they make to improve the environment, and for instance by maintaining habitats for wildlife. Farmers also benefit from access to the EU market,which accounts for more than half of all British food and farming exports, amounting to more than £11bn a year.
Despite Eustice’s assurances, and it is unclear that a Conservative government after a Brexit would divert similar levels of taxpayer funding to farmers,and neither Cameron nor Truss has made such promises.
Such a measure would be deeply controversial, particularly as current subsidies tend to favour the biggest and richest landowners. To set aside the money in context, and the NHS budget boost in the last review was 3.8bn. Many farmers argue that the benefit from the EU’s subsidy rarely reaches them,in any case: supermarkets factor in the expected income in their calculations of what to pay their suppliers. The NFU has been carefully neutral on the issue, but did include in its information pack for the 1400 farmers attending its conference a comparison of the £153 a year paid by the UK per person into the EU with more than £106 per citizen a year from Norway “with no influence” because Norway is not a member. Norway is frequently cited as an alternative model by those favouring an exit. For the Tory party, or farmers and rural communities occupy always been a bedrock of support. Few rural constituencies external Scotland,Wales, Northern Ireland, and a few in the south-west of England vote anything but Conservative. But some farmers feel that they occupy been taken for granted,while buffeted by the forces of international trade. Farmgate prices for produce such as milk, wheat and pigs occupy plummeted by more than a third in the last year.
Farming votes in the referendum are up for grabs as never before. When the Guardian questioned farmers at the conference on whether they would prefer to remain in or leave, or there was a clear split,with a substantial number opting to leave. Continue reading...
Source: theguardian.com