Jump to content

You'll never see a poor farmer


Flubbergump
 Share

Recommended Posts

Not to mention the subsidies trousered for holiday cottages.

 

Everything will be alright for Howard Quayle, don't worry

 

 

You want to look his Planning Application for a new Mansion, and I mean mansion, including swimming pool etc, the application is still under consideration. He states in the Application that it will provide employment for 10 people on a full time basis, challenge, lets try and make up a list of 10 positions required to run a Mansion?

 

The Planning App number is PA 14/01336/B and can be viewed on line at the Planning part of Govt's Website.

 

It must now be a perk of being an MHK for Middle to be granted planning permission for a new house, as the previous member got planning permission as well.

 

In relation to Howards Application as the proposed Mansion directly abuts a public highway and in particular you can submit your comments for consideration by the Planning Committee.

 

I reckon there is competition between Howard and Robertshaw as they are both neighbours, to see who can have the biggest built complex, Chris's answer to the very recent huge extension of residential floor space, is that it was a conversion.....................................thumbsup.gif

 

The other answer he will give, is it for his son, neither of them work on the farm, but how many other very genuine farmers who have a son or daughter and want to build a house, can never get a planning approval even though they both work on the farm.

 

So the only answer I can come up with, is if your an MHK or you are an MHK elsewhere and live in Middle, you will be guaranteed planning approval for what are and will be Mansions, as the perk of the job for representing so many more electorate than other areas, any other suggestions warmly welcomed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a small farmer I can't help but agree with many of the comments on this thread, id be quite delighted to farm without any government support (and the inspections that go with them) id just like one condition please? I would need the import of any food from any country that a,has a single farm payment(or government financial support for farmers) and b, welfare and environmental protection legislation of a lower standard than that of the Isle of man to be banned. Shelves in Tesco would be pretty empty.

Point is the rest of Europe have a countryside care/farming payments of some form, and in "the rest of the world" where in most places they are not subsidised ,in many of these places farming activities are not regulated either. I understand that the Government and thus the Manx public's finances are being squeezed in a way that has not been seen in a generation or more , and so I can see how the agricultural budget is a candidate for review, but to expect to remove all government money from the equation when farmers throughout Europe are subsidised would seem slightly unfair. To remove subsidy throughout the EU would be another matter in my opinion.

 

This doesn't explain why these subsidies are necessary. It has been explained that the subsidies aren't actually linked to food production. You aren't being paid to produce food. What are you being paid oodles of public money to do? Thanks.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't even see why, just because other countries' taxpayers are being ripped off to keep landowners rich, our taxpayers should be subject to the same treatment.

 

If market conditions are such that agricultural businesses on the Isle of Man cannot survive, then we need to just accept that, and allow them to fail.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Not to mention the subsidies trousered for holiday cottages.

 

Everything will be alright for Howard Quayle, don't worry

 

 

You want to look his Planning Application for a new Mansion, and I mean mansion, including swimming pool etc, the application is still under consideration. He states in the Application that it will provide employment for 10 people on a full time basis, challenge, lets try and make up a list of 10 positions required to run a Mansion?

 

The Planning App number is PA 14/01336/B and can be viewed on line at the Planning part of Govt's Website.

 

It must now be a perk of being an MHK for Middle to be granted planning permission for a new house, as the previous member got planning permission as well.

 

In relation to Howards Application as the proposed Mansion directly abuts a public highway and in particular you can submit your comments for consideration by the Planning Committee.

 

I reckon there is competition between Howard and Robertshaw as they are both neighbours, to see who can have the biggest built complex, Chris's answer to the very recent huge extension of residential floor space, is that it was a conversion.....................................thumbsup.gif

 

The other answer he will give, is it for his son, neither of them work on the farm, but how many other very genuine farmers who have a son or daughter and want to build a house, can never get a planning approval even though they both work on the farm.

 

So the only answer I can come up with, is if your an MHK or you are an MHK elsewhere and live in Middle, you will be guaranteed planning approval for what are and will be Mansions, as the perk of the job for representing so many more electorate than other areas, any other suggestions warmly welcomed.

 

I can't argue with that post. smile.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The application is here: 12/01336/B

 

In a nutshell, the footprint of the building is 925 square metres

garaging 86square metres

 

Includes:

lots and lots of bedrooms

library

study

meeting room

balcony

lift

spiral staircase

Swimming pool

Sauna/jacuzzi

Another meeting room, termed a snake pit, with circular seating surrounding a fire

a manmade lake stocked with fish

20 parking spaces

 

The farm itself is let on a long term lease.

 

Howard Quayle is obviously a very wealthy man. Good on him. It just seems that much of this fortune has come from generations of subsidies from the Isle of Man Government.

 

 

This man was advocating the toilet tax on Manx Radio, he is mooting the possibility of charging for GP visits. etc.

 

He may well be a nice bloke, but I don't want him making financial decisions that effect my life so much.

Edited by Wann
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can look at this two ways; either you think yes I do want someone running the country with some commercial nous or you think that Mr Quayle is too wealthy to understand the challenges of life facing ordinary folk. Having said that, you also have to ask how he made his money and I understand that it was through family land sold for development so I think there is a large "silver spoon" element in his wealth plus of course the attraction of farming subsidies which he has clearly maximized. I don't think that Mr Quayle is as bright as he thinks he is nor is he Alan Sugar. I wouldn't like to see him as CM but a future Treasury Minister maybe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Howard Quayle was in the "B" form at King Bill's, wasn't he (that is the lowest of the three forms in the year). Anybody know how many O levels he got? We want some subsidy-grabber to be in charge of Treasury. He will literally spend the entire Manx budget on farming and holiday cottage subsidies

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can look at this two ways; either you think yes I do want someone running the country with some commercial nous or you think that Mr Quayle is too wealthy to understand the challenges of life facing ordinary folk. Having said that, you also have to ask how he made his money and I understand that it was through family land sold for development so I think there is a large "silver spoon" element in his wealth plus of course the attraction of farming subsidies which he has clearly maximized. I don't think that Mr Quayle is as bright as he thinks he is nor is he Alan Sugar. I wouldn't like to see him as CM but a future Treasury Minister maybe.

 

I believe that is the case, from memory the family had land Kirk Michael way which they sold to a developer. It should be remembered that he has not always been a farmer, he was for a period a civil servant.

 

As for subsidies etc we all slag people off for getting, and I know he has received with regard to converting farm buildings to holiday cottages, but if they are there then I would expect anybody who views themselves as being half decent with money or in business to get their hands hands on them. In fact I would be fairly dubious amount the capacity of an individual if they did not get their hands on grants etc if they are available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point, is that the subsidies and grants are available at all.

 

Local fat cats basking in their opulence, while hardworking people are trying to make ends meet is one thing, but when those fat cats are sat in the government, it's a different matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hold no brief for the agriculture industry, but as I dared to say on the wireless recently I've met a few farmers over the years and all, without exception, seem to be hard working and proud people. It seems a bit crabby for them to be vilified for accepting a subsidy/grant for doing what IOMG wants them to do with their land, ostensibly on our behalf. There are far more members of Tynwald who AREN'T farmers, so to suggest they decide to help themselves to the funding is a bit of a stretch. I've not studied this particularly, but the figures I've seen quoted suggest that they get little more than a bit of help to run an expensive machine over their land a couple of times a year and maybe stick some fertiliser in it to keep it 'ready for production' if necessary.

 

So are these ranty threads more about some people being smarter and/or richer than the majority of us? It irks me that Bill Gates will make more money scratching his nuts once than I'll make in an entire lifetime and that one good rap song can set you up for a life of bling, but farmers/landowners being paid to do what 'we' want isn't a major irritation.

 

ETA: And if thinking this makes me a 'clown', squeeze this and see if it honks.

Edited by Stu Peters
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the point, is that the subsidies and grants are available at all.

 

Local fat cats basking in their opulence, while hardworking people are trying to make ends meet is one thing, but when those fat cats are sat in the government, it's a different matter.

 

Did those "fat cats" obtain the grants. subsidies etc before they were in Govt or whilst in Govt and where they grants subsidies that they put in place whilst in Govt. Depending on which it is I have a very different view and I would expect anybody with a bit of nouce to obtain if they could. It would worry me if you want to hold yourself up as having any sort of ability that you missed something like this when it was available.

 

As for fat cats, it is the problem with our current political structure that only those on lowish incomes, the retired or those of independent means generally stand for election. At least "fat cats" have presumably shown that they have had the accumen to become or remain a fat cat. There a fair few or have had the money and blown it.

 

Finally with regard to the OP question. Yes I have seen plenty of poor hard working farmers. Not all drive range rovers etc. Like most things in life there is a whole range out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So are these ranty threads more about some people being smarter and/or richer than the majority of us? It irks me that Bill Gates will make more money scratching his nuts once than I'll make in an entire lifetime and that one good rap song can set you up for a life of bling, but farmers/landowners being paid to do what 'we' want isn't a major irritation.

 

 

 

I don't think anyone is knocking farmers as such. Just the landowners who are given sums of money by the government for - owning land.

 

Good on them for being smarter. Good on them for being richer. Any chance you can do it without taking big pots in Government grant.

 

And come on! No one is mentioning Bill Gates or rapers here. A total red herring Mr Peters and you know it!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a small farmer I can't help but agree with many of the comments on this thread, id be quite delighted to farm without any government support (and the inspections that go with them) id just like one condition please? I would need the import of any food from any country that a,has a single farm payment(or government financial support for farmers) and b, welfare and environmental protection legislation of a lower standard than that of the Isle of man to be banned. Shelves in Tesco would be pretty empty.

Point is the rest of Europe have a countryside care/farming payments of some form, and in "the rest of the world" where in most places they are not subsidised ,in many of these places farming activities are not regulated either. I understand that the Government and thus the Manx public's finances are being squeezed in a way that has not been seen in a generation or more , and so I can see how the agricultural budget is a candidate for review, but to expect to remove all government money from the equation when farmers throughout Europe are subsidised would seem slightly unfair. To remove subsidy throughout the EU would be another matter in my opinion.

 

Well put - if there were a comprehensive review of agriculture, are there areas the industry would see worthy of investment & others that are in general decline?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't even see why, just because other countries' taxpayers are being ripped off to keep landowners rich, our taxpayers should be subject to the same treatment.

 

If market conditions are such that agricultural businesses on the Isle of Man cannot survive, then we need to just accept that, and allow them to fail.

 

This view also has merit in that we should be looking for ideas for development of our countryside that are worthy of investment, rather than just throwing money at it

Edited by Donald Trumps
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vulgarian asked above what are these subsidies for? I can only reply that in my own I use this money to pay part of my rent. The same as farmers all over Europe get subsidy to help their buisness, it provides a level playing field. The subsidy I got last year was less than I would have got on the dole. Not all farmers are large landowners. In return for these subsidies I have to basically keep my land neat and tidy, and keep good records regarding any medicines or sprays used as well as animal movements ,ear tags etc Im also bound by environmental protection measures as to when and where I can clean ditches out, trim hedges etc...The regulations involved in the countryside care scheme fill a ring binder. As I see it the government provides suitable buisness conditions for quite a few industries here, tourism grants, the first time buyers scheme helps developers indirectly,all these large gold plated govt construction jobs keep builders in work, industry grants help manufacturing too.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...