​“Cow’s muck is more valuable than its milk”, said Mr Metcalfe a Yorkshire farmer. He is earning £50,000 a year, and saves £100,000, by generating electricity from the manure from his cows, which feeds an aerobic digestion plant, which turns it into biogas, which is then burnt to generate power. This power qualifies for subsidies, funded by energy bill-payers (you and me), under the Government’s “feed-in tariff” scheme.

However, the milk from his 900 dairy cows, is costing more to produce than the 20p a litre he receives. European milk production is now so high that supply is far higher than demand.

It has been suggested that if we stopped importing milk and dairy products, and re-instated the Milk Marketing Board, which would control the production of milk by British dairy farmers, they would then receive a sustainable and profitable income.

The public could then be guaranteed British milk with their cornflakes and cup of tea.  However, as long as we remain within the European Union this will never happen, and we will continue to lose up to three British dairy farms each week.

Local Sussex dairy farmer Steve Hook, star of the 2013 film Moo Man which highlighted the plight of milk producers struggling to stay profitable, has turned to crowdfunding in an attempt to raise £300,000 to help keep his business going.

Steve is appealing to investors for cash, after losing 16ha of rented grazing land to developers.  He needs to purchase some replacement land to remain in business. If successful, it will be the first privately run dairy farm in the country to use crowdfunded equity. Backers are invited to invest from £50 to £10,000, the share issue went live on 23 April. Let us hope Steve is successful with this project.

243 British businesses have received the Queen’s Award which recognises firms that have excelled in exporting, social or environmental good works, or innovation. These companies range from tiny start-ups to FTSE 100 giants.

This prestigious award can generate international recognition, and help companies win new business. This year seven businesses received awards for sustainable development, 92 for innovation and 150 for international trade.

As a nation our businesses and innovators are not standing still, they are creative, energetic and ambitious. As the opportunity for British companies to expand and trade globally opens up when we leave the European Union on 24 June, it will be these companies, and others not even dreamt about yet, that will prove Mr Osbourne’s predictions of a negative trade balance and GDP in 2030, to be somewhat excessive.

Ethiopia is in the grip of a drought, worse than in 1984. Two successive rainy seasons have failed, resulting in the loss of crops needed to feed the rural population and their cattle, leaving as many as 18 million Ethiopians in need of food aid. The drought has already killed up to 90 per cent of the crops in some areas, and at least a million cattle.

In recent years the national economy has been one of the fastest growing in the world, and there is a booming population of 90 million. However, three quarters of them depend entirely on agriculture for survival.
Aid organisations say that emergency food stocks could run out within weeks, and an estimated 430,000 children are expected to add to the numbers already suffering malnutrition. 11lbs of wheat are supplied to each family in the drought zone, which represents just a third of an average person’s nutritional requirement.
At a time when there is a global surplus of wheat, and arable farmers are struggling to cope with prices well below the cost of production, our International Aid Budget would be well spent buying up surplus wheat and transporting it to Ethiopia and other African nations.
​
This would direct Britain’s foreign aid away from convicted terrorists and wealthy dictators, and lining the pockets of private individuals, and instead support struggling British farmers by raising the global price of wheat. Surely the public would prefer to support our farmers and feed millions of Africans who are starving through no fault of their own.

Has the NFU has been got at by David Cameron and his pro-European chums? Having attended one of the 28 NFU (National Farmers Union) roadshows, which we were led to believe were to consult farmers, gather their views, and debate the pros and cons of European membership, it is hard to believe they have not.

The meetings were scheduled to take place prior to the NFU Council meeting on Monday. If the intention was to consult farmers, we could assume the principle speaker would have put both sides of the argument evenly and without bias.

However, NFU Deputy Director General Martin Howorth, concentrated his presentation purely on the findings of a study carried out by the research institute from the Netherlands, the LEI Wageningen UR, which had been commissioned by the NFU.

As Martin Haworth and indeed Meurig Raymond, President of the NFU, pointed out in his Foreword to the paper, “Ultimately, economic models make predictions based on assumptions”. It is worth reminding ourselves that assumptions are not facts.

The study did show that if we left the EU there could well be a favourable outcome for farmers, but the line taken by the speaker suggested that the only outcome would be a serious risk to farm income. This was based on the ‘assumption’ that the UK government would not continue to support British farmers, and the remaining members of the European Union would not wish to trade with the UK, despite the economics leaning heavily in their favour to do so. 

Mr Howarth’s prediction was that we would probably all go to hell and damnation in a hand cart if we leave! As the President stated, it comes down to a matter of judgement as to which of the two scenarios appears most likely.

The audience were subjected to a bombardment of facts and figures which leaned heavily towards trying to persuade us that we should vote to remain, on 23rd June.

There was plenty of time to ask questions, but it rapidly became clear that anyone asking a question who expressed the merest hint of leaning towards voting OUT, were dismissed as not worthy of a reply, and those showing a leaning towards remaining IN were warmly praised for joining in the debate.

It was interesting that throughout the presentation both Norway and Switzerland were used as examples of non EU members who traded with the EU but to their disadvantage, because as non-members they have no influence, but must comply with EU regulations. Norway does pay a small tariff, and Switzerland does not.
Why these two countries were repeatedly portrayed as miserable poor cousins outside the European Union is a mystery. Norway is the richest country in the world, followed closely by Switzerland. They trade with whom they choose, live by their own laws, have full control over who they allow to cross their borders, and it is certain would never in a month of Sundays consider becoming a member of the European Union. Would we vote to join now if we too were non-members? Of course not.

There have been times over the years when the NFU has failed to show leadership, or be seen to question and demand action from the government of the day. Regarding the referendum, I believe it should remain neutral and not take sides. However, now is the time to press the government to disclose a Plan B. It is not good enough for Secretary of State Liz Truss to say there is not one.
​
The NFU has decided not to actively campaign in the referendum, it recognises the diversity of views amongst its members. However, the Council has issued a statement saying, “On balance of existing evidence, the interest of farmers are best served by our continuing membership of the European Union.”
I hope they will stop peddling pro-European propaganda, and Mr Howorth who is due to retire as Deputy Director General, will now be handed his P45.

Statistics showing that a majority of the British are overweight and in many cases obese, are shocking. Why are we as a nation so fat? Could it be that we are lazy, eat too many calories, and much of what we do eat is over processed rubbish? Is this state of affairs our fault or can we blame our genes? I believe we all know the answer to that.

Not only are we the fattest nation in Europe, it seems that the powers that be in Brussels have been considering legislation which would result in our pets and livestock becoming equally unfit. Some clever Dick or Deidre, has come up with a plan to limit the amount of exercise or work, our farm animals, horses, pets and working dogs may take. Technicians are designing pedometers for all manner of livestock, although it has been decided that cats catching mice is a leisure pursuit!

Bulls, rams and boars would be monitored to ensure they are not serving too many females, and if they do, we farmers will be penalised, fined or jailed for ‘cruelty’. How did they survive for the past thousand or so years?
Dairy cows would be monitored to ensure they do not produce too much milk, and beef cattle checked to ensure they do not become exhausted walking to the next grazing field.

Is all this in the name of animal welfare? Who knows what the optimum amount of hours, miles or effort that our working dogs, pets and livestock can cope with to keep them fit, happy and healthy? No doubt the same people who are telling us that it is not our fault for becoming obese and unable to work or walk, due to faulty genes, or the fault of the government!

This and other events brings to mind George Orwell’s Animal Farm, written in 1944 when the UK was still in a war time alliance with the Soviet Union, and Stalin was held in high esteem.

Old Major the boar had a dream in which humans are the enemy, which he repeats to the other farm animals and then he dies. Two of the pigs Snowball and Napoleon then plan a rebellion against farmer Jones and chase him and his men off the farm.

To begin with the farm animals are content, eat well and get along, and they adopt seven commandments including ‘All Animals Are Equal’.

Napoleon and Snowball struggle for dominance, and Snowball due to Napoleon’s deceit and narcissism, is driven off the farm by the dogs. Over time Napoleon and the remaining pigs become increasingly dominant, move into the farmhouse and take on the characteristics of humans, including walking on their hind legs. They also reduce the seven commandments to one – ‘All Animals Are Equal, But Some Are More Equal Than Others’. They then betray their fellow farm animals who eventually find it hard to tell the pigs from the humans.

Can one draw a similarity between Animal Farm and what is happening today in Europe? There is a distinct whiff that unelected European Commissioners and government leaders, have an unhealthy lust for power and crave a totalitarian dictatorship. Nor can it be disregarded that some British politicians who are enthralled by this notion of control and dominance, do consider themselves to be superior to the rest of us.

Do we roll over and accept the inevitable outcome by remaining part of this hotbed of control freaks, which in time will have total control over our lives from how long we may walk our dogs, how we run our farms, to how many hours we too can work? Or do we wake up and demand the right to shape our lives, govern our own community and Nation, and restore our sovereignty?
​
Let the scales fall from our eyes, we must not allow the politics of fear influence us. We are strong, we are successful, and we are very independent, because we are British.

If you took advantage of the right to buy your own council house, your home has been in your family for generations, or the land you farm is bought with new money, or has been farmed by you and your ancestors for hundreds of years, you should be entitled to pass it on to whoever you wish to pass it on to.
​
It is not, as Scottish landowner David Johnstone said, for someone else to dictate to you what should happen to your property. How can you run a modern democracy where the right to own property, your house, your shop, your business is respected, and others aren’t?

David Johnstone and his ancestors before him have owned land in Dumfries and Galloway, 25 miles north of the English border, since the late 13th century. The family supported Robert the Bruce’s cause in the war against the English.

The estate is 15,000 acres, employs 12 people, has 20 tenant farmers, and spends £600,000 a year on local contractors, and supports the local community. There is a mixture of sheep, beef, and dairy farming, combined with forestry, wind power and hydroelectric schemes.

The future of this and other Scottish estates are now at the mercy of the land reforms which Nicola Sturgeon and her SNP ministers are determined to drive through the Scottish parliament. Local communities will be able buy out landowners, ‘to benefit the community and deliver “sustainable development” to the land’.
If the community cannot afford to pay for the land themselves, a third party can subsidise them. And who decides if all these conditions are satisfied? The Scottish ministers.

At the SNP conference last October, party members refused to endorse the bill because they wanted to put a cap on the amount of land an individual can hold. There is also a clause stating that tenants can sell their tenancies to another tenant, putting the farm beyond reach of the owner for ever, unless the landlord steps in to pay a premium.

Scottish landowners are understandably unwilling to make any comparisons with Robert Mugabe’s land confiscations from white farmers in Zimbabwe. They understandably do not wish to appear to be seen as victims of this back handed land grab by Miss Sturgeon and the SNP, and are unwilling to raise their heads above the parapets, as they fear reprisals if they speak out in favour of land rights.

As one landowner said: “There is a genuine and profound belief, felt viscerally by hard core nationalists that we are all bastards who got our land unfairly.” To the laird-bashers, it makes little difference that our family are native Scots who bought their land legitimately in the 17th century.

Most farming and sporting Scottish estates barely cover their costs, many run at a loss, but they are managed well, bring employments, and tourism into the community, thus supporting the local and national economy. Keepers and stalkers are employed, game dealers, feed merchants and support services all benefit from their connections to these estates. People coming to stalk, fish and shoot stay in local hotels and support local businesses in many ways.

This potential land grab is indeed not dissimilar to what Robert Mugabe did to  Zimbabwe, once the ‘bread basket of Africa’. He drove the white farmers off the land, which is the most fertile farmland on the continent. Over 2,900 white farmers had their land seized and given to Mugabe’s black cronies. Today over half the people are on the brink of starvations, and the land which once produced crops to feed the nation, and export along with tobacco, is now an unproductive dust bowl.

Mugabe does not care that his people are hungry and the country destitute, and I wonder if Miss Sturgeon will care in years to come when her land reforms result in local businesses closing down, unemployment rife, and valuable tourism bringing significant income to the regions dries up.

This is the politics of envy, it is destructive and corrosive.