Don’t miss your chance to win £600 in our National Beef Stockman of the Future competition, celebrating young talent in the UK beef industry.
Defra to table cost sharing Bill 'within months'
DEFRA is to table a Bill on Responsibility and Cost Sharing (RCS) within the next few months, the chair of the joint Government and industry group developing the policy has revealed.
Rosemary Radcliffe said the Bill is likely to be tabled early in the New Year but stressed however that publication of the bill did not mean the policy was a ‘done deal’.
The Bill will outline the broad principle of the RCS policy including the legal basis of the proposed new independent body for animal health.
It will also outline the body’s powers such as its ability to raise funds from the farming industry.
It will not however go into details such as where the body will be located nor how exactly money will be raised from farmers.
Share
Readers' comments (10)
P. Onions | 13 November 2009 3:57 pm
Is this the sharing of the real costs of a disease outbreak, or the costs of government spin to silence the hysterical rantings of the urban press? Surely we can't be expected to pay for more of Labour's lies?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
cyberdoyle | 13 November 2009 4:25 pm
Its time someone told defra you can't get blood out of a stone. As long as farm gate prices remain low there is no profit to be made in farming and no money to put into the defra pot to spend on bureaucracy, spin and wages for quangos.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
martin | 13 November 2009 5:00 pm
Just another tax made to employ more bureaucracy, to come back and bite us. Environment agency charge comes to mind
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Martin Morrison | 13 November 2009 6:08 pm
So much for encouraging more production to feed a hungary world. Less incentive, more tax, much more useless pen pushers clueless to the real world environment, WHY BOTHER.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
JCJ | 13 November 2009 7:00 pm
Martin Morrison hits the nail on the head. Why bother? Here we have a Government that is rapidly backing away from the conclusions of its own Competition Commission in recommending an Ombudsman to oversee the behaviour of the multiples with regard to their producers. We have a minister that has at long last recognised the need for greater production to help feed a hungry world. The biggest carrot that can be offered is one of profitability for farming businesses, not burdening them with disproportionate costs for dealing with disease outbreaks when they can least afford them. Why does Government find it so difficult to wake up to the real world of agricultural economics at the moment? The NFU have reminded them on countless occasions as to the really precarious state of so many farming businesses where the price of their produce is dictated by the multiple retailers, oblivious to the reality of the need of farmers to actually earn a profit.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Geoff | 13 November 2009 9:51 pm
The only reason this is an issue is the 2001 foot and mouth epidemic. This will never happen again as it was caused by government incompetance. An agreement on a levy if it happened again is all we need.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
david | 14 November 2009 11:46 am
As I run a closed herd will those who protect badgers be liable for the disease they spread?... in my dreams
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
David | 16 November 2009 10:21 am
Whislt I agree with the comments so far, I believe we have to face the fact that most governments,and certainly this one, look mainly at two facts. Is there plenty of food and is the price of food producing land high. If the answer to both is yes (and it is) they will hinder farmers whenever possible. Why - because this is a vote winner.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
charlotte | 17 November 2009 11:25 pm
we farmed very well before we had all these bodies paid a wage telling us how and what to do and i think the enviroment didnt get to messed up as we want it to be there for the future so why not get rid of a few pen pushers or reduce the number of forms so the powers that be dont need so many people to collate the information the money saved could be used to pay for a fund in case of a disease outbreak.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Ken Tyson | 19 November 2009 6:29 pm
There should be a complete industry blockage of this until the government,
1 Gives us better import controls of ' bushmeat' coming into the country, not much hope of that as they cannot police illegal immigrants.
2. A 50 % share in the way decisions are made as at the moment there is little or no say as to where the money is spent, and whar crackpot rules and regulations will be pushed through.
3. an ability to vote for and get an effective control of TB in cattle which at the moment is spread from cattle to wildlife and back. How much longer will the Government play russian roulette with our health. TB cannot get into milk at the moment as it is processed to such a degree it cannot survive, but how many out there drink raw milk prior to it going to the dairy.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment