THE great divide between the UK's three devolved administrations on the importance of farming has never been put in such blunt terms as it was by Frank Langrish, chairman of the British Wool Marketing Board (BWMB) at the organisation's annual conference in Bradford.
Langrish's essential point was that the Department for Environment and Rural Affairs (Defra) and the Westminster government could not care less about farming and that sheep farmers and livestock producers in general have no sustainable prospects in t
he thinking of politicians in London.
He said: "It's all part of Defra's policy to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases. The UK government believes a reduction in livestock numbers will have a marked effect on the statistics. This is the logic of the asylum, where the lunatics are now completely in charge."
Langrish, who farms sheep in Sussex, is normally relatively restrained in his comments, but he was determined to make the conference delegates aware of his concerns and frustrations.
He added: "The UK government no longer wishes to have anything more to do with agriculture; and thoughts of food security have, for the time being, disappeared."
James Withers, the deputy chief executive of NFU Scotland, while agreeing with the thrust of Langrish's comments, stressed the benefits of devolution when he spoke to The Scotsman.
He said: "We are fortunate in Scotland to have a government and a parliament which is taking food policy seriously. Obviously, we will only be able to judge a new national food policy by what it actually delivers, but the noises are encouraging.
"The same cannot be said of Defra and the UK government. Their policies sit in silos and 'joined-up' government has become a catchphrase rather than a reality."
Withers and his office bearers have shown increasing signs over the last few months of being at odds with Whitehall. The unwillingness of Defra to accept any responsibility for the small, but disastrous, outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in Surrey in August and September is very much a case in point. Representations for compensation have so far met with little joy, but there are many wider issues.
Withers said: "There is a culture within the UK government of target-chasing, particularly on environmental and energy issues. Fewer livestock will, obviously, mean less greenhouse gas emissions, but how on earth can presiding over a demise of livestock production be consistent with the other big national and international challenges?
"Environmental protection and reducing food miles, food security, healthy eating and high animal welfare standards rely on a sustainable farming industry throughout the UK. That is a point that all parties at Holyrood, to a greater or lesser degree, are now taking on board."
On the broader aspect of wool prices, which have been on the floor for at least two years with the cost of shearing in many instances exceeding the annual cheque, Ian Hartley, managing director of the BWMB, was decidedly more positive.
He said: "We had a sale last week and achieved a 95 per cent clearance rate, better than for some time. I believe we will see prices improve, mainly because of the improving US dollar, the weakening of sterling against the euro and a more favourable rate of exchange against the New Zealand dollar."
However, much will depend on the future of the BWMB. Defra initiated a consultation in July 2006 indicating that a firm decision on the board's role would be made by January 2007, but that deadline has long since passed. Most farmers thought Defra wanted to consign the board to the history books.
Langrish said: "The submissions received were, whilst acknowledging the concern about current prices, almost universal in their support for the board's activities. However, this was apparently not what Defra wished to hear and following a further 17 drafts it seems the whole process has been a waste of time. It is clear to anyone with an understanding of the sheep industry that the BWMB should continue."
The full article contains 671 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
