Blog for article

This is an article by The Economist called A New Furrow.

The article talks about farming post brexit and how this affects the agricultural industry. When we leave the EU, we leave behind an EU program called CAP(Common Agricultural Policy). This program gives a subsidy of 233 pounds per hectare, which is crucial for farmers. Over the years, various government subsidies and CAP have shown their effectiveness and have done what they should have: increase food production.

However, the government have not got a detailed public plan to replace CAP. There is a divide over whether they should have. The article states that some say that subsidies have allowed farmers to stay in their unproductive state, and not get more efficient, have allowed landlords to just take the money by upping rent and some researchers believe that farming is the biggest cause for loss of biodiversity in the UK, and by giving subsidies, we incentivise this.

The government beleive that this is true and have created the Agriculture Act which will attempt to phase out subsidies in the coming 7 years and spend more on public goods like nature and protection. Subsidies will remain until 2024, and then will be removed. The hope is that rents will fall and biodiversity will recover. Obviously, many farmers will be driven out of work.

Some see this environmental scheme as a distraction, specifically politicians. The focus should be on making food, say these certain opposing politicians. They think that the public good most prioritised should be food. Furthermore, they believe that the amount of food imported is too much and we must do everything possible to produce more of our own food in the UK. Promoters of the government’s plans think that food is a private good and food security is garuanteed, so the plan does make sense for the long term.

Furthermore, some problems of subsidies can’t be solved by the environmental schemes. There is a larger problem of sheep farming that cannot be countered with schemes. Environmentalist groups claim that sheep farming is detrimental and leaves long fields of nibbled grass, but their opposers say that one should focus on the actual environment rather than the landscape: removing the sheep will just give way to deer who don’t give much more help. Also, one problem with the environmental schemes is that they are too much hassle for not much money, says the article’s interviewee and farm owner Jane Bassett.

This new daring scheme from the government to prioritise nature over per-hectare subsidies could be derailed very quickly, the upland farmers claim. They point to Welsh and Scottish farmers who will continue to receive subsidies for a long time. Overall many believe the Agriculture Act could be caring more about landscape than the environment.