10 Aug 2015
Market
I deliberately left writing this article until after the general election – the repercussions of which are important to every one of us.
What are a farmer’s views on it? Farmers produce food; it’s their driver in life. You would have thought it was number one for everyone else too. You would think it drives everyone’s life, which it does, but it never gets a real mention in an election.
The major parties address agriculture in their manifestos, but food was never a topic for any interview I read or heard. That’s because food is taken for granted, and it’s not easy to be working in an industry taken for granted.
The only party that mentioned food and sustainability of its production regularly was the Green Party. A lot of its ideas do not stand the scrutiny of realism, but at least it is an issue for it to be on the board of a dairy industry body that was considered sufficiently important to merit the time of senior politicians occasionally.
I clearly remember one time when there was a Labour government and we were to have a visit from the “other” Miliband brother, who was, at the time, head of Defra. These sorts of occasions are well orchestrated beforehand – the executive conjure up half a dozen questions the organisation would wish to ask of the minister and his department would have prior notice.
Those of us on the board would each be allocated a question to ask the minister – I suppose it was part of the game to give an impression of spontaneity (of which there was none). I was always allocated the last, least important question, which is exactly where I sat in the scheme of things.
It always used to amuse me how all these sorts of visits were stage managed. The minister – any minister – would arrive with a small posse of advisors. From my usual seat I could always see them arrive in the lobby. They would arrive at the speed of studied nonchalance, but when they were invited into the boardroom they would adopt a very fast, brisk sort of power walk. This was contrived to give an impression they were involved in important, urgent matters and we were fortunate indeed they had taken time out of their important, urgent lives to visit us. Sometimes the posse of advisors would be so big, extra chairs would have to be fetched and we would have to shuffle around to make room for them.
So, the minister would address us for about 20 minutes, then we would have the opportunity to ask our questions.
Finally, it came to my turn and in front of me, on a slip of paper, was the question I was to ask. I’ve always had a problem with doing what I was told, so I told the minister I had the wrong glasses with me and couldn’t read it. You could see he wasn’t best pleased because he knew immediately I was about to go off script.
What I said was he had, in the hour he had been there, used the word environment about 20 times and that the environment was part of his ministerial remit. But food was also part of his remit and he hadn’t used the word once. He wasn’t best pleased – if looks could kill, the looks I got from him and his entourage would have meant the following week it would be two o’clock at the church, family flowers only. I can’t remember what his reply was, but you could tell he wasn’t happy. As the only farmer in the room I felt it was a sort of duty to ask the question, or make the point, on behalf of other farmers.
That story is an illustration of my point. Politicians will talk about the importance of food, but only if asked about it. It’s not high on their agenda. In a way that is understandable, why would they worry about it? Their electorate don’t – they all take food for granted. I hate the bureaucratic burden of the stuff that comes out of Brussels and the interference that pervades our lives, but I wouldn’t want us to leave the EU.
Consumers and politicians alike in the UK are not overly concerned about agriculture. The sad thing is – and it’s a reality as well – if British farmers want someone to fight their corner they would need to look to the militancy of the farmers on the continent.
My overriding concern about the outcome of the election had to be what would happen to the bovine TB issue? It was fairly clear whatever the permutation of a hung parliament, culling of wildlife would stop. Most farmers feel the wildlife issue is a part of a problem and, therefore, it is a part of the solution. The outcome of the election gives me some hope of a wildlife cull continuing, where it is appropriate.
We live alongside a B road, which stretches about seven miles between the junctions with other roads. At a rough count, nine farms keep cattle that border the road; five are down with TB. Those are the farms I know about; I don’t know what the status is of two of them. Do I live in a hot spot, or is it a hot strip? Whatever, it is something that worries us as we approach our next TB test in August.
There was much talk of austerity during the election. After the milk price I have suffered over the past six months, austerity is something I know all about. A TB breakdown and the expense and losses it would involve are too awful to contemplate, but quantify them and we have a good idea – and statistics and losses take no account of the heartbreak and distress.