The impact of a Brexit on British farming
I refer to your article Brexit will boost British farming, not destroy it – 2nd November.
As Editorial Director of the above-mentioned and recently-maligned Agra Europe, I find it a little distressing that so many intelligent people seem to be giving credence to the insinuations of a website like Guido Fawkes without checking their facts first.
Agra and its sister businesses are 100% INDEPENDENT (sorry, I had to put that in block capitals…). We provide news, data, analysis and consultancy services to those businesses and organisations in the public and private sector who value what we do – and that happens to include the European Commission. We take funding from no-one. Our clients value our independent analysis highly enough to pay a commercial rate for it.
Having put the record straight on that – I am pleased that you are engaging in the debate which the report was intended to provoke. There is a school of thought, expressed eloquently in your article, which suggests that UK agriculture could do very well without subsidy.
In the longer-term this may well be the case, but the point that the Agra report is making – and it’s the one that the Daily Telegraph was trying to make – is that you if you abolished subsidies overnight, there would be a lot of farm-level bankruptcies, as indeed there were in New Zealand in the 1980s.
So a post-Brexit UK government would need to quickly decide whether to go ‘cold turkey’ on subsidy withdrawal, as you seem to advocate, or to have some kind of interim subsidy scheme to soften the blow. It’s an open question, and one on which Defra have offered no guidance until now.
Chris Horseman, Tunbridge Wells, UK | @ChrisHorseman2
Scottish schools of thought
Regarding your article on educational reform in Scotland Well done Nicola Sturgeon, no, really, you state that Free Schools in London have had a positive impact in London that is “nothing short of breathtaking”. I would like to see some evidence of this, as I live and teach in central London and have seen nothing of this impact, only the negative impact of reduced funding. My daughter goes to school in Tower Hamlets, where free schools are increasing segregation and state education is being put under enormous pressure (though there is superb work being done, despite this increasing pressure). I would be delighted to see a positive picture if you provide me with some actual evidence.
Hana Flynn, London, UK | @hanabflynn
CapX Editor, Iain Martin
Dear Hana,
I meant the entire education reform process – academies, teach first etc. Yes, Free Schools are part of that, though it is early days.
This report on the extraordinary improvements achieved by pupils and teachers in London in the last 15 years is interesting.
Best regards,
Iain Martin,
Editor, CapX
On the subject of tuition fees in Scotland.
You write in How the SNP let down the poorest students that “…only 9.7% of Scots from the poorest fifth are going to University as of this year, up from 7.3% in 2011. In England, where tuition fees are up to £9000, the figure is 17%, up from 13.8%. ” The former is an increase of 32.8% and the latter is an increase of 23.2% – clearly not evidence that free tuition fees have hindered widening access.
There is much in the SNP’s approach to education that can and should be criticised. Getting the numbers wrong does not help anyone.
James Callender, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
Iain Martin writes that “All this while only 9.7% of Scots from the poorest fifth are going to University as of this year, up from 7.3% in 2011. In England, where tuition fees are up to £9000, the figure is 17%, up from 13.8%.”
It seems odd that he’d quote this statistic as a bad one for the Scottish Government. An increase to ‘only’ 9.7% from 7.3% in Scotland is an improvement of 33%. In England, an increase from 13.8% to 17% is an improvement of 23%.
So it could be argued that the Scottish Government’s policies, where students are not charged £9,000 per annum in fees, has resulted in a significantly better improvement amongst poorer students than in England.
In fact there are lots of possible reasons for this disparity, including that starting from a lower base gives you more room for improvement, but the statistic is in no way a stick to beat the SNP with. They started at a lower point than in England, but they are catching up.
Garve Scott-Lodge, Inverness, Scotland, UK | @g4rve
Osborne running out of credit
With reference to Osborne right to reform out of control tax credits system – 30th October. I think reform of the Tax Credits system is needed. But, there are probably better ways of doing it than George Osborne’s plan. Whatever the circumstances of lower paid workers, to suddenly hit them hard and remove a large percentage of their income in one fell swoop can not be right. £4billion (the claimed savings) is peanuts in the Government’s scheme of things whereas a hit of £1300 on an individual might be huge and mean the difference between eating and going hungry or being warm or cold. Don’t suppose Ms Hartley-Brewer has experience of either of those problems herself.
Ron Havenhand, Nantwich, UK
Your CapX articles are always stimulating and enjoyable. As a member of the Lords who abstained in last week’s vote on the Tax Credits as I was unable to be in London, may I simply confirm that the House of Lords was within its rights to delay – not kill- a Statutory Instrument (S.I.). None other than the past Leader of the House of Lords and a member of the Coalition Government Cabinet stated in 1999, speaking of the convention that the Lords should not vote down S.I.s “ I declare that Convention dead”. It is interesting that it is Lord Strathclyde who has been appointed by the Government to review the powers of the House of Lords.
I was disappointed to note that Tim Montgomerie appears to accept that proceeding with HS2 and ring-fencing the aid budget are good things. I disagree; HS2 is costing £40 billion at last estimate- without the rolling stock-while the aid budget is targeting spending, not outcomes. In any case neither are affordable in an economy that is currently overspending by £90 billion p.a. The Government’s Tax Credit’s problem would vaporise by cutting £4 billion from the aid budget.
Charity begins at home.
Willoughby de Broke, Moreton in Marsh, Gloucseter, UK
Congratulations to Bruce Anderson on his splendidly lucid exposition of the issues surrounding tax credits and the House of Lords. Blair’s and Brown’s chickens are assuredly coming home to roost, albeit they no longer have the responsibility for dealing with them. I detect a whiff of the ‘poll tax’ about the tax credit problem. There was a huge resentment of the injustices of the old rates system and the poll tax was a good idea. However, it was introduced at too punitive a rate, and thereby became unpopular and ultimately indefensible. Mr Osborne needs to make some concessions to ease the abolition of tax credits.
P. John O'Neill , Rayong, Thailand
Having a Field day
In Britain is a force for good in the EU, Mark Field claims that if Britain followed the Norway option post-Brexit and rejoined EFTA and thus stayed in the European Economic Area (EEA), we would have “all of the rules and none of the influence”. This argument is often used, lately by the Prime Minister, but it is grossly misleading.
The EEA is based on EU rules as they were in 1992, when EFTA gained access to the single market, plus the changes accepted by EFTA since then. EFTA countries have accepted most new EU regulations (three-quarters so far), but are not bound to accept all of them. The EFTA Secretariat has identified over 1,200 EU acts designated by the EU as “EEA relevant” (ie which the EU intended EFTA to adopt) but which EFTA decided not to adopt. Moreover, EFTA polices its own rules for the single market. The European Court has no jurisdiction over them; it cannot impose its mission for ever-closer union upon EFTA.
EFTA has considerable input into drafting EU legislation, through the international bodies (such as the WTO) that draft international regulations which the EU has to follow. EFTA represent themselves on these bodies. They don’t have to adopt a compromise EU position. We do, because we are represented by the EU. EFTA countries also participate in EU committees drafting EU regulations. They don’t have a vote, but they don’t have to implement the regulations under discussion. Which is the stronger negotiating position – to have a vote in a losing decision, or to refuse to carry out the decision unless your interests are protected?
Mr Field also suggests that the EU would somehow punish us for leaving. In EFTA, we would have the same EEA deal as the other EFTA countries. The EU would not be able to impose special punitive conditions retrospectively on Britain. Besides, we are their biggest customer. EU businesses would not want to risk this valuable market, and EU governments are desperate for growth.
Ken Worthy, Surrey, UK
Thank you for the article How the EU starves Africa into submission.
Many European countries have just announced they are not interested in science, they’d rather focus on maintaining their “clean, green” marketing image by prohibiting GMOs (except for feeding their animals). I never could understand how a continent like Africa could be a net importer of food and yet worry about their very small exports of food to Europe. Africans should stop abiding by this “food imperialism” imposed by the EU and concentrate on feeding their own people. Europe is rapidly becoming a “farm museum” protected against competition by high tariffs and there is no reason for Africa to look to them for a break.
The population of Africa will grow to 25% of the world population by 2050 while the European population will shrink from 11% today to 7% in 2050. The population of Nigeria alone will surpass that of the United States of America by then. Why is Africa still behaving like a colony of Europe? It is time to concentrate on feeding your own population. They want to eat chocolate and drink coffee too.
GM biotechnology can be the revolutionary breakthrough which will help Africa leapfrog over Europe and become a leader in the 21st century.
Stuart Massion, Kushiro, Japan
Poles apart
Mr. Hannan wrongly calls Law and Justice (PiS) that won elections in Poland eurosceptic in his article – 26th October. Its candidate for the Foreign Affairs Office said recently: ‘PiS supports creating of the European Army and common defense’. The only Polish groups that are consistently against Brussels bureucracy are Korwin, Braun and Ruch Narodowy which in last elections together gained over 6% of the votes.
Leszek Templewicz, Warsaw, Poland
