« A dream is born | Main | Secrecy, not cuts, for some »

February 26, 2011

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

wholesale louis vuitton handbag

Wow, I love a good dig but I'm not sure I could have done that; the items would have been too close to their original context for me, I think, but then again I've never done an estate sale. When I thrift I like to imagine the histories behind pieces, but in the end, I think I like the distance. Interesting though; you've made me think about the nature of thrifting a bit more deeply!
pilipalagaga 0228

Paul Flynn

That's a fair point Patrick. Most Welsh farmers get relatively small subsidies. More evidence in today's blog on the point that I am making.

Patrick

PF

I feel it’s important to make a clear distinction here when talking about farming incomes.

The corporate owned massive arable farms are the beneficiaries of huge subsides.

Let’s not forget the other side of the coin. Family size farms are fighting for their lives.

Take British Dairy Farming,
‘ Each week, nine dairy farmers in Britain are forced to sell up. In the heyday of British dairy farming, there were 28,000 in England and Wales. Today there are just under 11,000. As recently as three years ago, Britain was self-sufficient in milk. Now we import 1.5 million litres a day, mostly from Holland and Denmark. Indeed, the situation has become so dire that the average dairy farmer today makes £20,000 a year while working a 60-hour week.’ Telegraph 26/2/2011

The CAP still insists on running a system created in 1945.

The beneficiaries are corporate controlled businesses and associated producers of artificial fertilizers and pesticides like ICI & Monsanto.

The end product of its intensive farming system is soil erosion, sub standard food, destruction of wildlife and the end of small family farms.

We need to overhaul the system in favor of the smaller size farms before we lose them all.

Any subsides should be given in relation to soil sustainability and food quality.

Subsides for organic farming would do this as well as restore biodiversity that has been devastated since WW2.

We need to overhaul a stupid system and bring it inline with our present needs.

Junican

Mr Flynn,

I find it difficult to believe that SUBSIDIES can be anything other than public, if these subsidies come from the public purse. What is there to hide? "The taxpayer provided X (ultra-millionaire) with assistance of £yyyyyyyy in order to increase his profits from his farm" Taxpayers' money is a matter of public record and therefore cannot be secret. This thought should be a constitutional matter, although certain matters of 'national security' could be exempted.

I have read that 'The Royal Family' (or 'The Royal Estates' (same thing I suppose)), is claiming ownership of vast tracts of the sea bed as regards wind turbines. ????????????

I don't know what to say. Where do you begin? Could I say that The Royal Family only 'own' the land under the sea as Head of State? That is, in a representative sense? That is, the ACTUAL owner of this land is 'The People'? If that is not legally so, then the law needs to be changed.

Gerald

If Labour in Ireland are able to gain enough seats and form a coalition with Fine Gael, I hope they are able to persuade Fine Gael to drop their proposal to re-introduce Stag Hunting. Apart from saving Stags in Ireland if such a proposal were introduced it would give encouragment to the Hunting Lobby in this country.

The comments to this entry are closed.