If the CAP fits. . .
From Elizabeth Burton Sir: While I appreciate that Ross Clark had his tongue well tucked into his cheek (`Country slickers', 16 August), there are one or two small errors which could prove to be the worm in the golden apple for his rusticated City bankers; a worm, I must add, which is also a source of discomfort to existing country landowners.
You see, the money from the decoupled CAP does not necessarily go to the landowner per se, which is tough. It will be claimed by the chap who has done all the work in the past, and was doing it in the crucial (reference) period 2000-02, i.e., the farmer. This 'entitlement' grant will be based on those little brown envelopes containing subsidy cheques that he was paid on stock and cropping during those relevant years. This may well be a landowner, but it could often be the tenant.
So your new landed gentleman farmer will not be able to 'maximise the taxpayer's input' quite so effortlessly as Ross Clark suggested; not unless he is able to buy 'entitlements' (which may not be saleable), or unless his new estate has the requisite environmental/species-rich habitat which would qualify for a Countryside Stewardship Scheme.
Even the Inheritance Tax Exemption aspect has a catch in it: to qualify, 50 per cent of his income must come from farming. I wonder how many ex-City bankers would tolerate that level of deprivation, because one thing that is certain is that the 'new' CAP will be even more successful than its predecessor in destroying what is left of British agriculture
Elizabeth Burton
South Molton, Devon
Previous page
