10 people were killed on UK farms during the month of February. These fatal accidents involved machinery, quad bikes, handling livestock, overturned tractors, falling big straw bales, and being run over, including a child.
 
A letter in the Farmers Weekly raised these tragic and shocking statistics, and make the point, that no business sets out to deliberately ignore the health, safety and welfare of employees, whether paid staff or family members.
 
As John Pitts noted, health and safety compliance requires large amounts of time and often significant financial investment. Therefore a business has to be able to afford both.

​However, businesses that are struggling often have to choose between financial investment, the need to feed the family, pay the VAT man or the feed supplier.
 
It may be a short-term view, but many farmers do not have the financial luxury to look further. Farmers, their families and staff work long hours, and when finances are tight, they work even longer hours. This leads to excessive tiredness, which is often when accidents happen.
 
As uncertainty arises; and there is a view that subsidies will be reduced, or become increasingly difficult to acquire, and national retailers and processors reduce farm prices, and consultants and academics demand that farmers become more efficient, the result will be that farmers work even longer hours, and cut costs as they come under increasing pressure.
 
As John Pitts makes clear, unless it is understood that there is a direct economic link between on-farm profitability and the health, safety and welfare of those working on farms, the death toll will continue to rise.
 
Every day there are incidents when individuals perform acts of heroism, often risking life and limb. Sometimes on our streets, more often it is just people going about their business in their work place, or in more private circumstances. In most cases these acts are carried out without a thought for personal safety. People act upon impulse because it is a natural to do so, and they are good, honourable, kind and thoughtful people. Too  often it is our service personal in war zones who give their lives, as many have done in Iraq and Afghanistan.
 
Occasionally such acts of bravery happen in the glare of national and international publicity, as with PC Keith Palmer. These incidents dominate the headlines and airwaves for weeks, and increasingly, in such circumstances, there are those who call for these now high profile brave people to be recognised as  ‘super heroes’.
 
Our country is full to bursting with ‘super heroes’,  and there will never be enough plinths, plaques and awards to acknowledge their selfless bravery. There will without question be many more incidents similar to that which occurred last week; they should be approached stoically as the British do best. Too much drama feeds the egos of those who wish to destroy our confidence.
 
Last week was dominated by extreme highs and lows. The 100th birthday of Dame Vera Lynn was wonderfully and appropriately celebrated. Dame Vera is a wonderful icon who has brought joy and pleasure to the troops during the war, to her adoring audiences and fans, and through raising funds for countless charities, including the unique “Dame Vera Lynn Children’s Charity”. This special school for children with Cerebral Palsy and other motor learning difficulties, is where parents and children work together in a supportive environment.
 
A notable funeral also took place in Sussex, for Roger Welch. ‘Uncle Roger’, as he was known to close friends and family, was Dame Vera Lynn’s elder brother. Had he lived just one more day he would have reached his 103rd birthday.
 
Roger, like his sister Dame Vera was highly respected in the music world, and during the War he and Max Bygraves performed a double act, together entertaining the troops, and audiences at home.
 
We learnt during his funeral at Worthing Crematorium, that he had promoted Abba and the Beatles in their early days with their first records. And he famously turned down a certain Elton John, saying, “That boy will never make the grade”!

Farmers across the country are facing huge bills for clearing up waste deposited on their land by illegal fly-tipping.
​
A Shropshire farmer is facing costs of £18,000  to clean-up after a fly-tipping gang deposited over 100 tons of industrial waste on his land. Andrew Nichols says that the cost of removing the waste will almost wipe out the whole value of his single farm payment for this year.
 
All farmers and landowners today padlock perimeter field gates, and block entrances with big bales, pieces of heavy equipment, or more permanent barricades. However, despite our efforts, criminals, for that is what they are, continue to find ways to dump loads of waste in private drives, farmyards, even cutting down hedges to gain access to fields.
 
Much of this is due to the high cost of official council dumps, and reduced landfill sites, as many have been closed over the past few years. The low number of official sites where waste can be tipped, and increased red tape and bureaucracy has resulted in this abuse of the countryside.
 
This matter must be taken seriously and a workable solution found. Farmers and landowners cannot be expected not shoulder the cost of removing illegal waste from their land, it is not their liability. Councils must be accountable, they should recognise their responsibility and foot the bill.
 
If they fail to take action by sending vehicles to collect the material, farmers should transfer it onto the high way, and let local governments deal with it from there. It is not acceptable for them to turn a blind eye to what is a problem of their making.
 
Criminals who are dumping this stuff, should be locked up or at the very least made to do community work at the nearest recycling plant. Fit them up with old fashioned prison overalls with arrows pointing upwards, shackles on their legs and have their mug shots plastered all over the area, drawing attention to their crimes. This needs to be taken seriously.
 
Jim Walker, a 71 year old volunteer at Carnforth Station has been banned from the premises after someone complained about an alleged ‘racist comment’. Mr Walker has for more than a decade, been winding the famous clock at the station.
 
He was overheard holding a private conversation during which he discussed a newspaper article about young migrants entering Britain from the French port of Calais.
 
The Carnforth Station Trust subsequently received a complaint from a visitor who was not happy about Mr Walker discussing this subject. Now, on the basis of one person’s complaint, Mr Walker a volunteer, has been banned from winding up the clock, and from all station property.
 
Not unreasonably Mr Walker, his family and friends are outraged that this action has been taken, just because he expressed a point of view. What ever happened to free speech?
 
According to government figures, over half the new homes built in the next five years will go to migrants. Soaring immigration means that Britain will need to accommodate as many as 243,000 new households each year for the next 22 years. It is estimated that an extra 5.3 million new properties could be needed to meet the growth in population, and an extra 2.4 million new homes will be needed for migrants alone. In other words, one new home must be built every five minutes to house Britain’s burgeoning migrant population.
 
With such a demand for new homes, one has to question the thinking behind local planning department’s decision to turn down planning applications because they fall within 20 miles of Ashdown Forest.
 
The reason being in case residents from these badly needed new homes, required for second and third generation locals, as well as those moving into the area, should drive in the direction of Ashdown Forest and cars pollute the environment.
 
The result of this questionable decision is that ideal and available sites for new homes, such as those close to railway stations, which would invariably reduce car journeys, are being turned down. How ridiculous is that?
​

Not a day has gone by since lambing began, when distressing images of mutilated, dead and dying sheep and lambs have not been posted across social media. Most cases have been in Sussex, the majority of which are within the South Down National Park.
 
Farmers expect to lose the odd lamb to fox attacks, particularly since the hunting ban. But foxes do not attack ewes, they mainly attack new born lambs before they get to their feet.

These brutal attacks on ewes and lambs, leaving their bowls, and in some cases unborn lambs, scattered across fields, are caused by people’s pets running wild and out of control.
 
The British system of open footpaths offering the public access to farmland is relatively unique. In Ireland there is no access to private farmland. There people may only walk in designated public parks.

My Spanish friends are horrified that here the public can roam freely across privately owned farmland, and in the USA the public have no right to roam without permission or a licence.
 
If these annual massacres continue, and it is certain they will, as dog owners become increasingly irresponsible, and few appear to have a genuine interest in the countryside, let alone the livestock and wildlife, maybe now is the time to re-evaluate the rules of the countryside.
 
The South Down National Park authority originally had notices asking dog walkers to keep their dogs on leads. These have now been replaced with notices asking the public to keep their dogs under control! Clearly they are not.
 
It is time for the SDNP to take a more responsible stand. Instead of bending over backwards to accommodate the public, they should ensure that their priority is to protect wildlife, farmers and their livestock. It is farmers who are the custodians of, and responsible for, the stunning down land landscape. Without them the Downs would become an impenetrable wilderness.
 
In 1992 the Rio Convention on Biodiversity expressed some caution about the potential effect of unlimited access, especially in tropical rain forests. For this reason, broad public access rights are challenged in some countries’, resulting in the Biodiversity Action Plan.
 
Some years ago when plans were afoot to create the Diamond Jubilee E above Firle, one of the arguments against the idea, put forward by the SDNP, was that the South Down’s open grassland was ‘more precious than tropical rain forests’! If that is the case, then I would suggest that open access to the public and in particular their out of control dogs, should be re-examined.
 
As was stated at the Rio Convention, All People’s Rights threatens the essence of ownership and the “management practises” of property owners. They may or may not have created and preserved environmentally important qualities, but their efforts and the environment which they create, is unique, and therefore should be protected not abused.
 
It was said last week, that the Labour party will not stick up for the middle-class, as now they only support hippies, activists and people who read the Guardian, but not people who actually work. And the Lib Dems just appear to represent Brussels, and their own eccentric hobby horse.
 
Mrs May said that she wanted to stand up for those who are ‘Just About Managing’ or ‘Ordinary Working People’. It seems that neither she nor the Chancellor have grasped the fact that many of these are self-employed, and run small businesses which employ people, and take risks. The very people who decided to stand on their own two feet, rather than resort to the state.
 
They work unlimited hours, often well beyond the normal retirement age, with no sick pay, no maternity pay, and no paid leave. They already pay a huge amount in taxation and overheads, without any of the perks and ‘entertainment allowances’ that salaried people get.
 
These are the ‘working people’ who are now the middle class. These are the people that a conservative government should be supporting, not kicking. Many will jump ship to a party who does support them – when there is one. So, who will speak up for the ‘working middle class’?

 I recently accepted an invitation to lunch with the ‘chairman’ of a local organisation. My host was seeking advice regarding recruiting a new member of staff; he is keen to find the ‘best man for the job’. The post is for the director’s ‘right-hand man’, who can amongst other duties, ‘man the desk’. They are keen to find not just any ‘man on the street’, but someone who can deal with delegating ‘manpower’ appropriately, and someone who recognises the value of ‘sportsmanship’.
 
The organisation is active in its field, and they hope to attract someone who has a ‘workmanlike’ attitude. Their preference is to offer the position to a retired nurse, ‘fireman’, ‘tax man’, ‘policeman’, or ‘housewife’ - someone with good people skills.
 
Our ‘waitress’ was most efficient and the food excellent, but we were disappointed by the ‘man-made’ flowers on the table. Fresh daffodils would have been so much nicer.
 
The occasion was agreeable but I was disconcerted by a little man sitting at the next table, who took rather too much interest in our conversation, and copious notes on a clip board. I rather suspect anytime soon, I will receive a letter from the ‘thought police’ for using the words which I have noted ‘thus’, which are apparently no longer acceptable or ‘politically correct’!  
 
The banning of such words and phrases is being driven, it is suggested, by left wing lecturers and academics. They are indoctrinating students in many of our universities, by brain washing them into becoming intolerant, narrow minded and manipulative. Who, we should ask, are these people who are taking issue with what we can and cannot say?
 
Young people should appreciate that life is not a bed of roses, they must learn about ‘life’, which includes experiencing how to lose, cope with disappointment and failure, and even learning to accept other people’s views, which they may not feel comfortable with.
 
To condone and accept that these academics have a right to ban such terms is dangerous. Who are they to tell anyone what is acceptable or not? We should stand our ground, and continue to use words and phrases which are part of our heritage and which our ‘forefathers’ (another banned word) have used for centuries.
 
These people are ridiculous and young people should be made aware that to ‘obey’ this rhetoric, makes them look ridiculous too. 
 
The difficulties facing the NHS continue to be headline news. Having recently consulted widely with nurses, ambulance staff and doctors, from as far afield as Nottingham, Manchester and Sussex, it is quite clear that the main cause of the problem is down to the unacceptable escalation in numbers of patients churning through the system, particularly in A & E.
 
The UK is full to capacity, we should not be accepting new arrivals until the NHS, housing, policing and schools can efficiently cope with the numbers here already.
 
The chronic lack of social care facilities makes it impossible for elderly patients to be discharged from acute hospitals beds, and causes huge problems and delays.
 
And the vast number of vomiting intoxicated imbeciles being mopped up from city streets, night after night, by hard pressed paramedics and delivered to A & E should not be tolerated. Ambulance crews should be dealing with real emergencies, not the results of self-inflicted over indulgence.
 
The tide must be turned; this epidemic of drink and drugs is not only disgusting behaviour, but wholly unacceptable. We are now viewed by every other civilized country as a nation of out of control drunks. Not exactly an image to be proud of.
 
Pru Leith raises the matter of Permitted Agricultural Development, introduced to make easier the process to turn redundant farm buildings into housing. She was recently refused permission to turn a small barn into a cottage for the widow of her tenant farmer. The reason for refusal? It is in a farmyard and tractors might be audible or visible. What do councils not understand about ‘permitted’ and ‘agriculture’? You couldn’t make it up.

​Farmers are a soft target for rural crime, there is an escalating problem with fly-tipping on farmland, rampaging dogs are increasingly leaving a trail of dead and mortally injured ewes and lambs scattered across the countryside, and Scottish farmers and landowners, thanks to Mrs Sturgen, face the reintroduction of Business rate tax for commercial shoots, from 1st April.
 
Last week Defra secretary Andrea Leadsom yet again had nothing new to tell farmers at the NFU conference, leaving farmers still facing uncertainty.
​
Other industries would consider they were under siege if they had to face similar daily difficulties, but farmers battle on regardless.
 
We need to make plans, not just for next season, but years ahead so decisions can be made regarding investment, succession, livestock breeding programmes and cropping.
The mystery is what are we waiting for?
 
We need leaders driving the agenda, not waiting ‘cap in hand’, for Mrs May and her ministers to decide the future for our industry, the most important in the UK.
 
We should have people representing us who are prepared to demand what is required. If Mrs Leadsom and NFU president Meurig Raymond are not prepared to lead from the front, and tell the government how to deal with British farming and food production post Brexit, which isn’t rocket science, they should stand aside and leave it to someone who will.
 
Regrettably few politicians understand the connection between food production, the environment and land management. They do not appreciate or understand that ‘farming’ embraces all three elements. They think they are unrelated, which will be demonstrated when the long awaited Green Paper eventually emerges from the bowls of Defra. I am told, not one but two Green Papers will appear, one on the environment, the other on food production. I sincerely hope that I have been misinformed.
 
French farmers are facing huge problems which they blame on the EU’s “straitjacket” of regulations and political inaction. French agriculture is now in deep crises, ‘the worst since the Second World War’.
France is currently the biggest beneficiary of EU farm aid, but as reported in The Sunday Telegraph, more than a third of farmers earned less than £3,560 last year. A result of falling food prices and cheaper imports from other member states.
 
More than 600 French livestock farmers have gone bankrupt, and distressingly on average one farmer committed suicide every two days, according to France’s public health agency.
This crises amongst the agricultural industry is now driving farmers to look favourably towards supporting Marine Le Pen’s anti-EU Front National. They believe that if France leaves the EU things will get better, and they would not be competing with cheap imports of German pork and Spanish fruit, where labour costs are cheaper due to lower taxes and welfare costs, and where they use temporary workers from Eastern Europe on lower wages.
 
Not all these difficulties can be attributed on ‘globalisation’, nor for that matter can Jeremy Corbyn blame it for the way the public decided to vote in last week’s by-elections. Farming like charity should begin at home. Get that right, which should happen post Brexit, and then we and the French can look beyond the horizon.
 
The looming hike in business rates at a time when small businesses are already struggling, is indefensible. High streets are already becoming ghost towns, as independent shops and small companies close due to competition from mega stores and internet shopping. So too will some trading from business units in both rural and urban locations.
 
Instead of raising additional income for councils, the opposite will occur as many businesses will flounder, resulting in higher unemployment, and less taxable income. George Osborne’s ill thought out hike in stamp duty has resulted in the treasury taking £500 million less each year, as the top end of the property market has seized up. Philip Hammond must address this regressive tax in the Budget, and if he and Sajid Javid do not wish to see the Conservatives take a thrashing in the local elections in May, they must listen to the people.