OUT-TAKE:
'The European Parliament has called on the EC to take steps to protect EU agriculture with support in order to create both certainty and more guarantees to maintain and ‘where necessary’ increase food production by European farmers'
Arable Matters by Brian Henderson
For those of a certain age, the announcement a couple of weeks ago that Scottish Government was setting up a food security taskforce might have conjured up expectations of the sort of urgent reaction which Maggie Thatcher swiftly threw into gear in the face of the Argentinean invasion of the Falkland Islands 40 years ago.
Within days a massive fleet of over 120 Royal Navy ships had been dispatched to the area, sparking one of the biggest naval and military undertakings since WW2.
Sad to say, in comparison to this, the response from ScotGov’s taskforce seems to lack a little in urgency. With a fair proportion of the spring crop now in the ground, if one of the taskforce’s aims was to shore up cereal plantings, then this particular ship has already sailed.
To be honest, we’re all pretty aware that Scotgov’s default answer to any crisis is to swiftly react by setting up committees and focus groups to look into the issue while kicking the can down the street.
Although some taskforce meetings have been held, there doesn’t seem to have been much in the way of an immediate response to the likelihood that, come harvest time, the world could be staring down the barrel of a genuine global grain and food shortage.
The background is too well known to need repeating. But let’s just say that when the effects which the conflict in Ukraine is likely to have on the production and export of grain from two parts of the world which usually account for almost a third of global trade are combined with a huge rise in fertiliser prices – at a time when cereal stocks were already at a historically low level – it’d be a safe bet that further shortfalls will be on the cards.
Whilst it might be mildly surprising that governments have actually realised that this might cause some problems down the line (although perhaps they are being driven by the fact that most countries are only two empty shelf days away from civil unrest), in several countries authorities have already reacted by bringing steps into play to support grain growing.
So what sorts of schemes have been introduced elsewhere to encourage more grain to be grown?
It’s possibly no great shock, but farmers in Southern Ireland seem to have been offered a pretty good package to increase what they term their tillage area.
Grants of €400 per ha are on offer to plough up grass and plant more cereals – and payments will be based any additional barley, oats, wheat, rye, oilseed rape, maize and beet grown and claimed in their 2022 BSP which is over and above that claimed in 2021.
There were complaints from farmers there that protein cops wouldn’t be included in the scheme – but an additional €300/ha was already on offer for growing such crops, so they’re not really being all that hard done by not being able to double claim the land.
More widely, the European Parliament has called on the Commission to take the necessary steps to protect EU agricultural businesses with supporting measures in order to create both certainty and more guarantees to maintain and, ‘where necessary’, increase food production by European farmers.
Against the backdrop of the European Green Deal, notably the Farm to Fork Strategy and the Biodiversity Strategy, it also called on the Commission to review targets and timings of some plans to mandate environmental measures. That's in order to ensure that their application doesn’t result in a loss of the productive potential of the EU’s agri-food sector and that it does not jeopardise European food security.
This included a call to sideline any new legislative initiatives in the Farm to Fork and Biodiversity strategies which would lead to a reduction in agricultural production – in particular to the revision of the Sustainable Use of Pesticides Directive, nature restoration targets and supply chain due diligence.
With most of the continent’s farmers calling for it for some time, it also put in a plea to carry out a comprehensive impact assessment on what the new measures will actually mean in terms of European food security and of the situation in neighbouring countries.
More importantly it should take the findings into account in future planning, including the likely effects of the proposals to reduce the overall area in production by 10%.
Perhaps it was a bit more of a surprise, though, that even our cousins south of the Border in England have been given the promise of some sort of help to ‘dig for victory’.
Just how effective these will turn out to be might be more of a moot point when Farmer George (Eustice), declared that, given current fertiliser prices, the priority must be to pioneer new technologies to manufacture more organic-based fertiliser products, and rediscover techniques such as using nitrogen fixing legumes and clovers as an alternative to fertiliser.
The fact that he’d already been told straight to his face that such an approach was a fairytale, didn’t seem to deter him. He pressed ahead with the Sustainable Farming Incentive which he said would help farmers move towards sustainable farming practices over time, supporting them to build the health and fertility of their soil and to reduce soil erosion.
These moves, he claimed, were essential for sustainable food production and to help bolster food security and the longer term resilience of the sector.
Eustice, to a certain extent, put his money where his mouth was by revealing that government will help farmers pay for the cost of sowing nitrogen fixing plants and green manures in their crops, or in advance of their crops to substitute some of their fertiliser requirements for the coming season – and in so doing reduce their dependence on manufactured fertilisers linked to the price of gas.
But perhaps a more realistic response was the delaying of new tightened restrictions on the use of urea-based fertilisers which were due to come into place this year – along with some relaxation on prohibition of manure spreading in the autumn months.
Stating that the changes to the use of urea fertiliser will be delayed by at least a year, he said this would help farmers manage their costs and give them more time to adapt in the light of a global rise in gas prices leading to pressures on the supply of ammonium nitrate fertilisers.
A consultation on restrictions was launched a year ago, in order to reduce ammonia pollution in the air. When restrictions are introduced, they will include the use of ammonia inhibitors, rather than a complete ban.
The guidance has been changed on plans to limit the use of slurry and other farmyard manure at certain times of year – with the proposals being changed to provide clarity to farmers as to how they can use slurry and other manures during autumn and winter to meet agronomic needs.
There will also be some additional grant funding for slurry storage measures designed to make the best use of this manure and to meet the latest Farming Rules for Water and reducing dependence on artificial fertilisers by storing organic nutrients until they can be used to best effect.
So, we should be calling on Scotgov’s short-life Food Security and Supply taskforce to live up to its name and come up with some with some swift proposals – before it risks missing the boat completely.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here