This week marks six years since the Brexit referendum.
More than 2,000 days after that momentous event, the first tier of England’s Environmental Land Management scheme will soon open fully for applications from landowners (many have already been partaking in a large pilot phase).
At the time of going to press, Defra secretary George Eustice was set to announce at the Groundswell event that the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) would welcome applicants from 30 June.
See also: FW Opinion: Defra’s food strategy reveals Johnson’s weakness
For what it’s worth, the Empire State Building took just 410 days to complete.
Groundswell, the Glastonbury of regenerative farming, will be a favourable event for the environment secretary to continue to preach the virtue of farming sympathetically with the environment.
The SFI will compensate farmers for a broadening range of actions aligned with this, with the focus this year on soil health and next year on integrated pest management.
This scheme, modest in outlook in order to attract as large a number of applicants as possible, seems to fall between two stools.
It is criticised by some regenerative farming enthusiasts (and the environmental lobby) for only rewarding them for doing what they regard as basic actions and not going far enough.
On the other side, it is criticised by the sort of farmers whose behaviour it is attempting to change by not offering enough compensation to make the hassle of adaptation and bureaucracy worthwhile.
Growers asking for a pay rise, however, are likely to meet the same response as striking train staffers – a short, sharp no following the uplift to some payment rates last year.
We can’t increase your pay, ministers have been fond of saying this week, because it will make the inflation problem worse in the long term.
How long until we hear that used in response to a question on SFI payment rates?
The natural business of government is to balance the demands of the moment with what is in the long-term interest of the country.
In farming, this means balancing the need for all-out short-term production to do our bit to alleviate predicted global food shortages against a pivot towards practices that may cost in the short term, but help maintain production in the long term.
In pleasing neither camp, Defra is currently heading towards what it fears most – apathy.
It is surprising that there is so far no prominent advocate calling for government to scrap pernickety schemes with teeny carrots and instead enforce high environmental standards with the help of a big stick and a few capital grants
Yet even if it can’t persuade close to 70% of the farmers it wants to take meagre dollops of taxpayer money, it should take heart that farmers are becoming more environmentally friendly on their own.
Witness the popularity of debut regenerative farming event Down To Earth recently, the buzz around Carbon Calling in Cumbria and a continual stream of on-farm discussions about producing more with less.
I’m sure there will be some chat on these topics between the show ring and the beer tent at the excellent Highland Show this week as well.
And that’s before the host of private sector companies gearing up to incentivise regenerative practices, such as Honest Burger and Arla, make their mark.
For too long, too much of our national conversation has pivoted around what the government is doing to help farming’s fortunes and – let me be clear – they still have a role to play.
But it is surprising that there is so far no prominent advocate calling for government to scrap pernickety schemes with teeny carrots and instead enforce high environmental standards with the help of a big stick and a few capital grants.
If the SFI does end up flopping, it would not be wholly surprising to see Defra or devolved governments tempted down this path instead for simplicity’s sake.
