WHILE it might not be fair to liken two of the country’s leading politicians to these nursery rhyme characters, there were certainly plenty of promises of arguments and battles and allusions to toys being thrown out of prams last week.

While a battle over who controls the strategy and purse strings of post-Brexit farm policy was always likely to be on the cards – it became clear at the NFU Scotland agm just how fiercely contested this will be.

And, although Scottish Conservative leader, Ruth Davidson and First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, both presented reasonably cogent arguments at the union’s conference, the talk was all of a war lying ahead – despite the fact that their actual visions weren’t all that far apart.

For while Westminster wants a UK-wide agricultural policy framework, with Scotland having some specially differentiated powers in order to address the distinctive needs of Scottish agriculture, Holyrood wants a Scottish-run policy with some UK-wide framework for certain regulatory areas in order to address the distinctive needs of Scottish agriculture.

To an outsider the differences between these two approaches might seem marginal – but they strike right to the heart of the turf war which is kicking off over who holds the power and the purse strings in the post-Brexit scene.

Outgoing president, Allan Bowie, had spoken of keeping both ideological dogma and political baggage out of the discussions over the industry’s future.

But the picture painted by the ladies in question certainly put me in mind of the two applying of camouflage face paint, donning a combat vest and strapping a few hand grenades to their belts rather than a cosy fireside chat over a cup of tea.

While the imagery might have humorous overtones, though, the scary fact is that farm policy looks to be set to be the bone over which the UK and Scottish Government’s fight their big Brexit battle.

No phoney war this either. And while it might seem flattering that the industry is seen as being so important, it’s really only going to be an excuse for a punch-up which was going to happen anyway – one which is likely to do more harm than good to our industry.

In the past, with agriculture being a devolved issue, the Scottish Government has had the freedom to draw up and develop its own policies within the fairly flexible frameworks created by the EU.

While the money paid into the EU came from the UK as a whole, when it was recirculated via the Common Agricultural Policy, the devolved administrations knew what their share would be – and had control of how their own budgets would be spent.

But after we leave the EU, there is no financial mechanism which will automatically come into play to decide how any pot of support money – be it large or small – is shared out by the UK Treasury.

So the big battle will be waged not only over who controls actual policy but also on how any funds put aside for farm support are shared out.

As mentioned, the UK Government has argued that since the money is likely to come from central coffers, a UK-wide approach with some differentiation for the devolved administrations will be the way forward.

However, the Scottish Government has taken the opposite approach of 'tell us what we’re due and we’ll draw up the policy' – and only then will they discuss what areas might benefit from a wider UK approach.

The whole situation hasn’t been helped by the apparent going to ground of Defra ministers – with all trips to the devolved nations apparently cancelled and all meetings with their representatives put on hold.

Not only has this got under the skin of the administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland but it has also raised serious doubts over the much heralded White Paper consultation proposed by Westminster to look at plans for suture farming policy.

So far, the Scottish Government has argued that without at least some indication of what level of budgetary support they might expect under any new settlement, this intransigence from the UK Government as far as providing clarity means they cannot do any meaningful work of their own on drawing up a strategy.

But on many occasions the Scottish Government has pointed out that the Brexiteers committed themselves – 'beyond the shadow of a doubt' – to maintain the level of support spending when the UK left the EU.

So – and I should take none of the credit for this out of the box thinking for someone else suggested it to me – why don’t we in Scotland simply take the initiative and draw up our own plan based on our previous budget? Wales and Northern Ireland could do the same, as could England.

One thing everyone agrees on is that one of the few benefits of Brexit is the chance to get a policy which is better tailored to the needs of our own agriculture.

But, for God’s sake, it’s long past time to realise that the clock is ticking and, rather than facing up for a fight, our political leaders need to break this log jam now and get on with the job.