Farming leaders are quite rightly calling on the RPA to take a lenient attitude to genuine mistakes made by farmers this year as the new Basic Payment Scheme is in such chaos.
The RPA have had to delay the application deadline by a month following the abandonment of their online application process in favour of a paper based system.
The failure to get the online process up and running means farmers will now have to carry out calculations manually which previously were supposed to be done automatically by the online system.
So farmers are now exposed to making errors which could have a significant impact on the payments they will receive as penalties are applied.
Also, having printed out a number of the forms that I have received by email on behalf of clients, there is clearly plenty of scope for basic mistakes to creep in.
For example, in contrast to the old paper forms which were printed in a booklet where all the information on one field could be completed on one line crossing two facing pages of the booklet, this is no longer possible because the two pages now have to be printed separately.
Therefore part of the information for each field will have to be completed on two separate sheets of paper. There are 11 fields per sheet and 10 columns to be completed for each field, four on the first page and six on the second page.
What used to be a reasonably straightforward task of following one line across two pages in a booklet has been made more complicated than it should.
A facility to print two A4 pages on one A3 sheet of paper would have been a great help both to farmers and the RPA but that does not seem possible at present.
So if your farm receives a visit from an RPA inspector this year, you should not sign off the inspector’s findings without looking at them very carefully and ensuring you have a witness present as to what is said.
In my experience such inspectors often downplay the potential consequence of their findings, partly so they can complete their task and possibly also because they do not always appreciate the consequence their findings may have on a farmer’s support payments.
Therefore utmost care is required this year in completing the BPS application form and advice should be sought if an inspector comes to call later in the year.
James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk
A property blog written and authored by our specialist blogging team, discussing all and any matter relating to the residential, rural and commercial property markets.
Showing posts with label farming agency. Show all posts
Showing posts with label farming agency. Show all posts
Monday, 27 April 2015
Monday, 12 January 2015
The Common Agricultural Policy has been reformed yet again
The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) has been reformed yet again and at midnight on 31st December 2014 it was out with the old, as the Single Payment Scheme (SPS) ceased and in with the new, as the Basic Payment Scheme (BPS) was introduced. This is the mechanism through which farmers will receive support payments via the EU.
The new scheme is also meant to be at the forefront of the Government’s drive for “digital by default”; the idea being that in the first instance every farmer was meant to be able to verify their identity online. But in reality it appears the BPS has come too soon for this online verification process which is causing frustration to the farmers who have been invited to register so far.
This must be a big headache to the Rural Payments Agency (RPA) which is tasked with implementing the BPS. Therefore the RPA has decided to open up its helpline to allow farmers to verify their identity over the telephone which will then enable the RPA to allow farmers to access their online BPS system.
Having now done this with a few clients myself I am pleased to report that the telephone verification system appears to be working well and is reasonably easy although whether the RPA will be able to cope with the volume of calls that are now likely to flood in over the coming weeks remains to be seen.
Once farmers have then accessed the RPA’s online BPS system they need to check their business details are correct, that the appropriate people are registered against the business and that the plans of their land are up to date. At present there is not much else that can be done online but with only 4 months to go until the application deadline, there is clearly still a lot of work to be done to ensure the system becomes functional in time for farmers to be able to make their claim.
Memories of the disastrous implementation of the SPS back in 2005 are etched into the memory of many a farmer and thus there is nervousness that the faltering start to the online identity verification process may be a prelude of much worse to come. However, I do hope that this time the RPA will have learnt from the mistakes of the past.
The fact that they have organised a telephone identity verification system at relatively short notice is to be commended and I just hope the RPA’s new BPS software will be similarly user friendly.
James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk
The new scheme is also meant to be at the forefront of the Government’s drive for “digital by default”; the idea being that in the first instance every farmer was meant to be able to verify their identity online. But in reality it appears the BPS has come too soon for this online verification process which is causing frustration to the farmers who have been invited to register so far.
This must be a big headache to the Rural Payments Agency (RPA) which is tasked with implementing the BPS. Therefore the RPA has decided to open up its helpline to allow farmers to verify their identity over the telephone which will then enable the RPA to allow farmers to access their online BPS system.
Having now done this with a few clients myself I am pleased to report that the telephone verification system appears to be working well and is reasonably easy although whether the RPA will be able to cope with the volume of calls that are now likely to flood in over the coming weeks remains to be seen.
Once farmers have then accessed the RPA’s online BPS system they need to check their business details are correct, that the appropriate people are registered against the business and that the plans of their land are up to date. At present there is not much else that can be done online but with only 4 months to go until the application deadline, there is clearly still a lot of work to be done to ensure the system becomes functional in time for farmers to be able to make their claim.
Memories of the disastrous implementation of the SPS back in 2005 are etched into the memory of many a farmer and thus there is nervousness that the faltering start to the online identity verification process may be a prelude of much worse to come. However, I do hope that this time the RPA will have learnt from the mistakes of the past.
The fact that they have organised a telephone identity verification system at relatively short notice is to be commended and I just hope the RPA’s new BPS software will be similarly user friendly.
James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk
Tuesday, 6 January 2015
Slump in Milk Prices
Unfortunately for our dairy farmers the closing theme of 2014, which was characterised by a slump in milk prices, is being continued unabated in to 2015.
At the end of December, Dairy Crest announced a price cut of 1.2p/litre from 1 February 2015 for liquid and cheese milk prices, which follows hot on the heels of the 1.25p/litre cut which was announced to take affect from 1st January.
Also, just before Christmas, the farmer owned dairy co-operative Arla announced a cut of just over 2p/litre which is to take effect on 5th January. This cut will affect many dairy farmers in this area who used to belong to the British dairy farmer owned co-operative, Milk Link.
Milk Link merged with Arla back in 2012 to create a co-operative owned and run for the benefit of its 13,500 dairy members and 18,000 staff or “colleagues” as they are known. The dairy farmers come from UK, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg and together Arla has become one of the top ten largest dairy companies in the world.
Thus it shows that no organization, however large, however vertically integrated or however democratically run, is immune from the downturn in the world dairy commodity markets. So all our dairy farmers, to a greater or lesser extent will have to endure difficult times over the coming months.
Rather like the recent slump in oil prices, no-one had anticipated such a sudden and dramatic fall in milk prices but unlike the oil markets where supply could be quickly reduced if oil producing countries decide to cut back production, one cannot simply cut back on milk production because unlike oil wells, cows carry on producing milk daily.
So, with the world dairy commodity markets oversupplied and no quick fix to reducing global milk supply there is no obvious end to the slump in the milk price being offered to UK dairy farmers. However, this imbalance in supply and demand will not last forever and at some stage enough dairy farmers will cease production and/or demand will pick up thereby pushing up commodity prices to a level that that farmers will once again be able to make a sensible profit.
However, in the meantime this will inevitably mean that 2015 will be the end of the road for some dairy farmers in the UK but for those that survive there should be good profits to be made at some stage in the future – the big question is when that will be?
James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk
At the end of December, Dairy Crest announced a price cut of 1.2p/litre from 1 February 2015 for liquid and cheese milk prices, which follows hot on the heels of the 1.25p/litre cut which was announced to take affect from 1st January.
Also, just before Christmas, the farmer owned dairy co-operative Arla announced a cut of just over 2p/litre which is to take effect on 5th January. This cut will affect many dairy farmers in this area who used to belong to the British dairy farmer owned co-operative, Milk Link.
Milk Link merged with Arla back in 2012 to create a co-operative owned and run for the benefit of its 13,500 dairy members and 18,000 staff or “colleagues” as they are known. The dairy farmers come from UK, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg and together Arla has become one of the top ten largest dairy companies in the world.
Thus it shows that no organization, however large, however vertically integrated or however democratically run, is immune from the downturn in the world dairy commodity markets. So all our dairy farmers, to a greater or lesser extent will have to endure difficult times over the coming months.
Rather like the recent slump in oil prices, no-one had anticipated such a sudden and dramatic fall in milk prices but unlike the oil markets where supply could be quickly reduced if oil producing countries decide to cut back production, one cannot simply cut back on milk production because unlike oil wells, cows carry on producing milk daily.
So, with the world dairy commodity markets oversupplied and no quick fix to reducing global milk supply there is no obvious end to the slump in the milk price being offered to UK dairy farmers. However, this imbalance in supply and demand will not last forever and at some stage enough dairy farmers will cease production and/or demand will pick up thereby pushing up commodity prices to a level that that farmers will once again be able to make a sensible profit.
However, in the meantime this will inevitably mean that 2015 will be the end of the road for some dairy farmers in the UK but for those that survive there should be good profits to be made at some stage in the future – the big question is when that will be?
James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk
Tuesday, 23 December 2014
The highs and lows of 2014
As 2014 draws to a close, now is the time to reflect on the highs and lows of the farming year which has proved to be a mixed bag.
The year opened with torrential rain and floods on the Somerset Levels which became international news, but as the rain stopped it gave way to one of the best periods of “growing weather” we have seen for some time. Arable crops generally yielded well, grass and maize grew strongly filling the silage clamps and barns with an abundance of good quality winter fodder.
Livestock also enjoyed the pleasant spring and summer and incredibly mild autumn, resulting in high milk production and beef cattle growing and fattening well.
However, good as the weather may have been, farmers have been buffeted by some extreme conditions on the commodity markets.
Beef farmers were the first to be hit as prices plummeted by around 20% in the first six months of the year. But since then, the market has firmed and the year ends with prices back by about 10% on a year ago with modest hope now emerging for a better 2015.
It was then the turn of arable farmers to feel the cold wind of falling world commodity markets as feed wheat prices slumped from around £170 per tonne in the spring to a low of around £100 per tonne in mid autumn. From there prices have thankfully improved somewhat, approaching £130 per tonne at the yearend.
However, the most unpleasant surprise of the year was the unexpected slump in milk prices which started reasonably gently, but in recent months has gathered pace with some dairy farmers now being paid as much as 10p per litre less than they were being paid at the start of the year. This remains a worrying situation and there will undoubtedly be casualties as the months go on and what is particularly worrying is that there does not seem to be an obvious end to this decline in milk prices.
Having said that, unlike other sectors, not all dairy farmers are suffering at the same rate because the price each farmer receives depends on the terms of the contract they hold with one of the numerous milk buyers in the market. This is demonstrated by the latest DairyCo data which shows the top monthly milk price offered in October was 36.7p per litre as compared to the bottom price of 24.98p per litre; a staggering difference for more or less the same commodity.
So, it has been a mixed year with generally good weather after a disastrously wet start but this has not been enough to offset the effects of falling commodity prices which will undoubtedly impact on farming profits in 2014. However, with oil prices also falling fast this should help reduce costs of production as we move in to 2015 thereby offsetting at least some of the effect of falling produce prices which have proved to be the dominant factor effecting farmers in 2014.
James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk
The year opened with torrential rain and floods on the Somerset Levels which became international news, but as the rain stopped it gave way to one of the best periods of “growing weather” we have seen for some time. Arable crops generally yielded well, grass and maize grew strongly filling the silage clamps and barns with an abundance of good quality winter fodder.
Livestock also enjoyed the pleasant spring and summer and incredibly mild autumn, resulting in high milk production and beef cattle growing and fattening well.
However, good as the weather may have been, farmers have been buffeted by some extreme conditions on the commodity markets.
Beef farmers were the first to be hit as prices plummeted by around 20% in the first six months of the year. But since then, the market has firmed and the year ends with prices back by about 10% on a year ago with modest hope now emerging for a better 2015.
It was then the turn of arable farmers to feel the cold wind of falling world commodity markets as feed wheat prices slumped from around £170 per tonne in the spring to a low of around £100 per tonne in mid autumn. From there prices have thankfully improved somewhat, approaching £130 per tonne at the yearend.
However, the most unpleasant surprise of the year was the unexpected slump in milk prices which started reasonably gently, but in recent months has gathered pace with some dairy farmers now being paid as much as 10p per litre less than they were being paid at the start of the year. This remains a worrying situation and there will undoubtedly be casualties as the months go on and what is particularly worrying is that there does not seem to be an obvious end to this decline in milk prices.
Having said that, unlike other sectors, not all dairy farmers are suffering at the same rate because the price each farmer receives depends on the terms of the contract they hold with one of the numerous milk buyers in the market. This is demonstrated by the latest DairyCo data which shows the top monthly milk price offered in October was 36.7p per litre as compared to the bottom price of 24.98p per litre; a staggering difference for more or less the same commodity.
So, it has been a mixed year with generally good weather after a disastrously wet start but this has not been enough to offset the effects of falling commodity prices which will undoubtedly impact on farming profits in 2014. However, with oil prices also falling fast this should help reduce costs of production as we move in to 2015 thereby offsetting at least some of the effect of falling produce prices which have proved to be the dominant factor effecting farmers in 2014.
James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk
Tuesday, 9 December 2014
Elizabeth Truss blinded by last year's stats
Last week I read a news item released from a recent government report entitled “Making the food and farming industry more competitive while protecting the environment”
The headline was that, “The UK agricultural industry is going from strength to strength in its contribution to economic growth, with new statistics revealing that increased production and prices boosted farming income to £5.6 billion last year”.
It was stated that total income from farming rose by 15%, between 2012 and 2013 as the industry stepped up its output of top-quality food.
Environment Secretary Elizabeth Truss said, “These figures underline that food and farming really is a powerhouse of the UK economy. From potatoes to poultry, our farming industry is showing that it is leading the way in producing top-quality food that is desired across the world. Our farming sector employs over 400,000 people and their success is helping us deliver the government’s long term economic plan.
We know British consumers value British food but we want UK farming to be a world-leader, exporting quality products far and wide as well as thriving on the home front. Our push for better food labelling across Europe is just one of a host of ways we are working to help this crucial sector to grow and drive growth.”
However, I do hope that Elizabeth Truss understands that this rosy picture represents a “snapshot” from the past, before the world commodity markets took a nose dive plunging many farmers in to a very different situation today from that which existed only a year ago.
It is true that in 2013 commodity prices were reasonably high and the weather in the UK was certainly better than was experienced in the very wet summer of 2012. So in general farm incomes did rise in 2013, but 2014 has proved to be a very different scenario.
First the beef sector plummeted during last spring and summer which was followed by dramatic falls in cereal prices. Both these markets have made modest recoveries in recent months but the dairy sector is in freefall, with many farmers now being paid 8-10p/litre less for their milk than they were being paid in the spring.
So I trust Elizabeth Truss is not being blinded by last year’s statistics and that she has real grasp of the difficult situation which is affecting many farmers in the UK at present. There may be little that she can do about world market prices but there are things government should do to ensure the retail giants are prevented from passing cost savings down the food supply chain in an unfair manner so as to bolster their dwindling profits at the cost of primary producers.
James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk
The headline was that, “The UK agricultural industry is going from strength to strength in its contribution to economic growth, with new statistics revealing that increased production and prices boosted farming income to £5.6 billion last year”.
It was stated that total income from farming rose by 15%, between 2012 and 2013 as the industry stepped up its output of top-quality food.
Environment Secretary Elizabeth Truss said, “These figures underline that food and farming really is a powerhouse of the UK economy. From potatoes to poultry, our farming industry is showing that it is leading the way in producing top-quality food that is desired across the world. Our farming sector employs over 400,000 people and their success is helping us deliver the government’s long term economic plan.
We know British consumers value British food but we want UK farming to be a world-leader, exporting quality products far and wide as well as thriving on the home front. Our push for better food labelling across Europe is just one of a host of ways we are working to help this crucial sector to grow and drive growth.”
However, I do hope that Elizabeth Truss understands that this rosy picture represents a “snapshot” from the past, before the world commodity markets took a nose dive plunging many farmers in to a very different situation today from that which existed only a year ago.
It is true that in 2013 commodity prices were reasonably high and the weather in the UK was certainly better than was experienced in the very wet summer of 2012. So in general farm incomes did rise in 2013, but 2014 has proved to be a very different scenario.
First the beef sector plummeted during last spring and summer which was followed by dramatic falls in cereal prices. Both these markets have made modest recoveries in recent months but the dairy sector is in freefall, with many farmers now being paid 8-10p/litre less for their milk than they were being paid in the spring.
So I trust Elizabeth Truss is not being blinded by last year’s statistics and that she has real grasp of the difficult situation which is affecting many farmers in the UK at present. There may be little that she can do about world market prices but there are things government should do to ensure the retail giants are prevented from passing cost savings down the food supply chain in an unfair manner so as to bolster their dwindling profits at the cost of primary producers.
James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk
Tuesday, 23 September 2014
Greening measures for arable crops
As the new Basic Payment Scheme (BPS) looms in to site on 1st January 2015, changes are already afoot with farmers having to make sure this autumn’s planting of arable crops will be compliant with the new Greening measures.
However, another date is also looming that may be of significance for some, which is the deadline for transferring single payment entitlements. This is of importance for several reasons.
First, if one is wanting to transfer entitlements under the new scheme, there are likely to be delays before the transfer is confirmed which may cause unnecessary hassle when completing next year’s forms for the first time. Therefore getting the entitlements transferred under the old scheme will mean they are automatically transferred to BPS entitlements ready for immediate use next year which may make life easier.
Second, and perhaps of more importance for some, the person acquiring the entitlements under the new scheme rules will have to qualify as an “active farmer”, the precise meaning of which is still not entirely clear. This may be of significance for organisations such as wildlife trusts or landowners who may have purchased land but who do not necessarily farm in a traditional sense.
To avoid any concern regarding the interpretation of these new rules, individuals or organisations who think they may be affected by the active farmer test should seriously consider acquiring entitlements prior to the 21st October deadline.
This is not likely to affect very many people or organisations but it could catch some people out who have up until now have been able to make legitimate claims under the existing Single Payment Scheme but this may not be quite so straightforward under the new scheme. Also, farmers who may sell land to such people will have to ensure that the recipient of the entitlements is eligible to receive them otherwise this may upset some land transactions.
No doubt there will be ways of manoeuvring around these rules to achieve the desired result, whether that be through some form of contracting farming arrangement or the like, but if one is looking for a simple life, now may be the time to think about transferring entitlements so as not to get tied up in unnecessary complications or delays in receiving BPS entitlements next year.
James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk
However, another date is also looming that may be of significance for some, which is the deadline for transferring single payment entitlements. This is of importance for several reasons.
First, if one is wanting to transfer entitlements under the new scheme, there are likely to be delays before the transfer is confirmed which may cause unnecessary hassle when completing next year’s forms for the first time. Therefore getting the entitlements transferred under the old scheme will mean they are automatically transferred to BPS entitlements ready for immediate use next year which may make life easier.
Second, and perhaps of more importance for some, the person acquiring the entitlements under the new scheme rules will have to qualify as an “active farmer”, the precise meaning of which is still not entirely clear. This may be of significance for organisations such as wildlife trusts or landowners who may have purchased land but who do not necessarily farm in a traditional sense.
To avoid any concern regarding the interpretation of these new rules, individuals or organisations who think they may be affected by the active farmer test should seriously consider acquiring entitlements prior to the 21st October deadline.
This is not likely to affect very many people or organisations but it could catch some people out who have up until now have been able to make legitimate claims under the existing Single Payment Scheme but this may not be quite so straightforward under the new scheme. Also, farmers who may sell land to such people will have to ensure that the recipient of the entitlements is eligible to receive them otherwise this may upset some land transactions.
No doubt there will be ways of manoeuvring around these rules to achieve the desired result, whether that be through some form of contracting farming arrangement or the like, but if one is looking for a simple life, now may be the time to think about transferring entitlements so as not to get tied up in unnecessary complications or delays in receiving BPS entitlements next year.
James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk
Tuesday, 12 August 2014
Ragwort is bad news
I read an article which was recently published in this paper with incredulity. The article was promoting the idea that Common Ragwort should not be kept under control because of the benefits it brings to wildlife.
From memory I think it was an organisation called Buglife that was promoting this quite absurd idea, the premise being that ragwort is not a poisonous as some people think. Well anyone who has fed hay to horses or cattle which is contaminated with ragwort will confirm that ragwort is poisonous and does kill such livestock.
Sheep on the other hand are more resistant and can be used to graze the ragwort in early spring so as to reduce its growth but having acted for a number of conservation organisations, I have never heard of one actually promoting the spread of ragwort.
For the uninitiated, ragwort is a vigorous plant which produces a bright yellow flower that is often seen at this time of year on land which has limited management input such as roadside verges, railway embankments and extensively grazed grassland. One of the problems is that it is a very effective plant; it is estimated each plant can produce between 75,000 and 120,000 seeds.
Thus when one looks at a sea of yellow heads waiving beside a road as one whizzes by, one can see why it is of concern to neighbours who may find their land infested with a very heavy weed burden.
This is why common ragwort is one of the five plants named as an injurious weed under the provisions of the in the Weeds Act 1959. This legislation has been further bolstered by the Ragwort Control Act 2003 which provides a code of practice on how to prevent the spread of ragwort. This does not mean to say it is illegal to have ragwort on your land but the Weeds Act gives the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs the power to order a landowner to take action to control the ragwort on their land.
I hope this goes to demonstrate that if governments, of all political persuasions, think the control of ragwort is worth legislating about, then surely there is no reason why anyone should be given air time to promote the spread of ragwort. I do not deny that some insects, including some rare ones may well like ragwort, or perhaps even depend on it, but from an agricultural perspective it is nothing but bad news.
From memory I think it was an organisation called Buglife that was promoting this quite absurd idea, the premise being that ragwort is not a poisonous as some people think. Well anyone who has fed hay to horses or cattle which is contaminated with ragwort will confirm that ragwort is poisonous and does kill such livestock.
Sheep on the other hand are more resistant and can be used to graze the ragwort in early spring so as to reduce its growth but having acted for a number of conservation organisations, I have never heard of one actually promoting the spread of ragwort.
For the uninitiated, ragwort is a vigorous plant which produces a bright yellow flower that is often seen at this time of year on land which has limited management input such as roadside verges, railway embankments and extensively grazed grassland. One of the problems is that it is a very effective plant; it is estimated each plant can produce between 75,000 and 120,000 seeds.
Thus when one looks at a sea of yellow heads waiving beside a road as one whizzes by, one can see why it is of concern to neighbours who may find their land infested with a very heavy weed burden.
This is why common ragwort is one of the five plants named as an injurious weed under the provisions of the in the Weeds Act 1959. This legislation has been further bolstered by the Ragwort Control Act 2003 which provides a code of practice on how to prevent the spread of ragwort. This does not mean to say it is illegal to have ragwort on your land but the Weeds Act gives the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs the power to order a landowner to take action to control the ragwort on their land.
I hope this goes to demonstrate that if governments, of all political persuasions, think the control of ragwort is worth legislating about, then surely there is no reason why anyone should be given air time to promote the spread of ragwort. I do not deny that some insects, including some rare ones may well like ragwort, or perhaps even depend on it, but from an agricultural perspective it is nothing but bad news.
James Stephen MRICS FAAV
Partner
Rural Practice Chartered Surveyor, Wells
T: 01749 683381
E: james.stephen@carterjonas.co.uk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)