Welfare for the Super rich: mind boggling EXTENT of CAP subsidies
tony at cultureshop.org.uk
Fri Jul 6 12:32:08 BST 2012
Talking of labouring a point in semantics, the
leaflet we were doing on CAP has veered off into
a ditch. This after nigh on 12/13 different
drafts. James wrote the original, which he will
still be circulating at the Tolpuddle Martyrs
festival next weekend, written in his name only.
Our last draft actually omitted the main stats on
the EXTENT of subsidies - (which was actually the
original point of the leaflet).
In the UK, huge annual C.A.P. payments and other financial aid went out to -
- the Duke of Buccleuch £549,000, the Duke of
Westminster £532,144, Lord Carrington £149,000,
to MP's, for example Richard Drax MP got £417,846
in financial year 2010-11, to dukes, earls
to Prince Charles £581,000
H.M.Queen was paid £1,183,508 C.A.P. over 2 years
(08 & 09) for privately-owning Sandringham.
Tate and Lyle received Euros 829,975,239 in
payments between 1999 and 2011 (source: farmsubsidies.org)
In 2010, 709 UK recipients got more than
£250,000, 133 were given at least £500,000 and 47
received more than a million pounds.
--- In TheLandIsOurs at yahoogroups.com, Tony Gosling <tony at ...> wrote:
> Yes and unknowingly means not knowing how much of
> their money goes on subsidies.
> Almost everyone knows that agriculture is
> subsidised but very few know by how much, so I'm
> suprised you feel it necessary to labour a point
> of semantics in what was a useful contribution from James.
> James is constantly banging on rightly about the
> big recipients of subsidy such as the crown
and long may he continue to do so.
> At 13:25 04/07/2012, you wrote:
> >No, he's saying that people don't know. i.e.,
> >"UK taxpayers ninety per cent of whom live in
> >towns and who, mostly unknowingly, fund these CAP payments".
> >James' has said this kind of thing before and
> >it's misleading. There are plenty of good
> >arguments to be made about how CAP payments are
> >distributed, and about the broader effects of
> >how the CAP is implimented, but James always
> >seems (as far as anyone can tell,) to be
> >attacking agricultural subsidies in
> >principal. If subsidies were removed from small
> >farmers, the consolidation of land ownership
> >would be even worse. What is needed is for
> >subsidies to be re-directed wholly to to smaller
> >scale farmers. James never seems to make this
> >argument but restricts himself to ranting about
> >the NFU and big landed interests. I'm not quite sure why.
> >From: Tony Gosling <tony at ...>
> >To: TheLandIsOurs at yahoogroups.com
> >Sent: Tuesday, 3 July 2012, 21:59
> >Subject: Re: [TheLandIsOurs] NFU PR Alert
> >The point James is making here is valid - ie.
> >that the public don't know the EXTENT of subsidies.
> >At 21:52 03/07/2012, you wrote:
> >>It simply is not true to say that most people
> >>don't know that farmers get public subsides.
> >>From: james armstrong <james36armstrong at ...>
> >>To: TLIO list <thelandisours at yahoogroups.com>
> >>Sent: Sunday, 1 July 2012, 9:08
> >>Subject: [TheLandIsOurs] NFU PR Alert
> >>Following the Prime MinisterÃ¢s statement
> >>concerniongong a referendum on UKÃ¢s EU
> >>membership, NFU will mount an even fiercer
> >>Public Relations campaign aimed at BBC and
> >>Farming Today and On Your Farm, defending
> >>their 50k membersÃ¢ one thousansand million
> >>pound annual payments received ,uncut, under
> >>the EUÃ¢s Commommon Agricultural Policy .
> >>With a supposed commitment to fairness, and to
> >>reveal the truth and to serve the public, BBC
> >>never once has a critic of the massive CAP
> >>burden- one of the 20 million UK
> >>taxpayers ninety per cent of whom live in
> >>towns and who, mostly unknowingly, fund
> >>these CAP payments to reveal the truth on air?
> >>Recently two senior BBC Farming Today senior
> >>producers defected to NFU (which is the subject
> >>of some embarassment to BBC) and supoorts a
> >>complaint to the BBC Trust that Farming Today
> >>are 'in bed' with the National Farmers Union.
More information about the Diggers350