I had not heard the new secretary of state for the British Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Elizabeth Truss, before. This year, she spoke at the Oxford Farming Conference. The British government has changed its senior ministers with bewildering frequency. Ms Truss succeeded the unfortunate Caroline Spellman and the blunt Owen Patterson – both resigned or were fired by prime minister Cameron with little ceremony.
Ms Truss will presumably see it out until the British election in May. She will be a safe pair of hands, in that her speech stuck rigorously to the official line, but the view (which I shared) was that she wilted badly under the questions posed by the well-informed audience that comes to the main British farming conference of the year every January in Oxford. As usual, the two-day range of topics was extremely wide. There were two Irish speakers: Paul Vernon, the head of Glanbia for Northern Ireland and Britain, and Edmond Harty of Dairymaster. Both acquitted themselves well, with Edmond Harty being acknowledged by the conference organisers as heading up a firm that is a world leader in dairy technology, as well as being the youngest member on three key global scientific dairy committees.
Dr Harty’s paper was primarily about the role of electronic sensors in monitoring livestock performance. With his new Moo Minder technology monitoring up to 210,000 separate pieces of data for each cow, each year and presenting this information in an easily understood and digestible format to herd managers, it was not surprising his audience had their eyes opened.
The second Irish speaker, Paul Vernon, as well as heading up Glanbia Cheese is steering the largest mozzarella company in Europe – the Glanbia joint venture with the US-based LePrino. The company accounts for 30% of all UK cheese exports. Mr Vernon said that while dairy demand would continue to grow so would volatility and that a recovery in prices would not occur until the second half of next year at the “earliest”.
While I had been more or less familiar with the world status of both Glanbia and Dairymaster, I was taken aback at two separate, but linked, presentations. The first was from BASF, the giant German chemicals company. It has been responsible for developing some of the key chemistry that has enabled cereal yields across the world to keep pace with world population and the increased consumption for animal feed. The company is now finding that this kind of necessary research is being stymied in Europe – BASF itself has moved its major agricultural research effort to the US and the results are plain to see: a continuous increase in maize and soya yields, while European wheat stagnates. What is equally serious, not only is Europe not encouraging research into new products, but it’s actually removing useful active ingredients on the basis of a totally new approach by Europe with relation to measuring and assessing risk.
We see that attitude already at work in relation to GMOs, but having large chunks of a research budget devoted to defending existing products is a waste. It is very clear that in this area, Europe is losing its competitive edge and its lacklustre economic performance gives weight to the argument.
BASF is proposing that a new approach be taken to innovation within Europe, including giving real power to the chief scientist in the European Commission.
While the slippage in Europe was being acknowledged, we were given an astonishing presentation on what biological control can do to control plant diseases.
Louise Labuschange has developed a thriving integrated pest management business in the serious Kenyan horticultural business. While we are all familiar with the ability of beetles to consume aphids and so curtail the need for spraying, I was not prepared for the possibilities of mites controlling some fungus diseases of cereals as well as fusarium in beans. The scope for this kind of development would seem enormous, but so far there has been very little take up in Europe.
While the area has to be carefully handled, it is clearly an area in which a joint research programme should be developed. We will undoubtedly hear more about it, the potential to control diseases biologically with tiny levels of residues is too valuable to ignore.
Differences between
Britain and Ireland
About one third of British farms have an income stream from some kind of renewable energy investment – the reason for much higher feed in tariffs in comparison with Ireland.The British pig industry has been as effective in insulating its market as it has been with beef. The difference between the Dutch and the British pig price is 22p/kg.Food self-sufficiency in Britain has dropped from 74% 20 years ago to just 60% today, even though there is a huge political commitment to buying local.The US speaker said that in the very fertile Iowa area, 50% of the topsoil has been lost in 150 years of farming. Therefore, some form of mintill or soil conservation husbandry is starting to be seen as essential.
I had not heard the new secretary of state for the British Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Elizabeth Truss, before. This year, she spoke at the Oxford Farming Conference. The British government has changed its senior ministers with bewildering frequency. Ms Truss succeeded the unfortunate Caroline Spellman and the blunt Owen Patterson – both resigned or were fired by prime minister Cameron with little ceremony.
Ms Truss will presumably see it out until the British election in May. She will be a safe pair of hands, in that her speech stuck rigorously to the official line, but the view (which I shared) was that she wilted badly under the questions posed by the well-informed audience that comes to the main British farming conference of the year every January in Oxford. As usual, the two-day range of topics was extremely wide. There were two Irish speakers: Paul Vernon, the head of Glanbia for Northern Ireland and Britain, and Edmond Harty of Dairymaster. Both acquitted themselves well, with Edmond Harty being acknowledged by the conference organisers as heading up a firm that is a world leader in dairy technology, as well as being the youngest member on three key global scientific dairy committees.
Dr Harty’s paper was primarily about the role of electronic sensors in monitoring livestock performance. With his new Moo Minder technology monitoring up to 210,000 separate pieces of data for each cow, each year and presenting this information in an easily understood and digestible format to herd managers, it was not surprising his audience had their eyes opened.
The second Irish speaker, Paul Vernon, as well as heading up Glanbia Cheese is steering the largest mozzarella company in Europe – the Glanbia joint venture with the US-based LePrino. The company accounts for 30% of all UK cheese exports. Mr Vernon said that while dairy demand would continue to grow so would volatility and that a recovery in prices would not occur until the second half of next year at the “earliest”.
While I had been more or less familiar with the world status of both Glanbia and Dairymaster, I was taken aback at two separate, but linked, presentations. The first was from BASF, the giant German chemicals company. It has been responsible for developing some of the key chemistry that has enabled cereal yields across the world to keep pace with world population and the increased consumption for animal feed. The company is now finding that this kind of necessary research is being stymied in Europe – BASF itself has moved its major agricultural research effort to the US and the results are plain to see: a continuous increase in maize and soya yields, while European wheat stagnates. What is equally serious, not only is Europe not encouraging research into new products, but it’s actually removing useful active ingredients on the basis of a totally new approach by Europe with relation to measuring and assessing risk.
We see that attitude already at work in relation to GMOs, but having large chunks of a research budget devoted to defending existing products is a waste. It is very clear that in this area, Europe is losing its competitive edge and its lacklustre economic performance gives weight to the argument.
BASF is proposing that a new approach be taken to innovation within Europe, including giving real power to the chief scientist in the European Commission.
While the slippage in Europe was being acknowledged, we were given an astonishing presentation on what biological control can do to control plant diseases.
Louise Labuschange has developed a thriving integrated pest management business in the serious Kenyan horticultural business. While we are all familiar with the ability of beetles to consume aphids and so curtail the need for spraying, I was not prepared for the possibilities of mites controlling some fungus diseases of cereals as well as fusarium in beans. The scope for this kind of development would seem enormous, but so far there has been very little take up in Europe.
While the area has to be carefully handled, it is clearly an area in which a joint research programme should be developed. We will undoubtedly hear more about it, the potential to control diseases biologically with tiny levels of residues is too valuable to ignore.
Differences between
Britain and Ireland
About one third of British farms have an income stream from some kind of renewable energy investment – the reason for much higher feed in tariffs in comparison with Ireland.The British pig industry has been as effective in insulating its market as it has been with beef. The difference between the Dutch and the British pig price is 22p/kg.Food self-sufficiency in Britain has dropped from 74% 20 years ago to just 60% today, even though there is a huge political commitment to buying local.The US speaker said that in the very fertile Iowa area, 50% of the topsoil has been lost in 150 years of farming. Therefore, some form of mintill or soil conservation husbandry is starting to be seen as essential. 
This is a subscriber-only article
SHARING OPTIONS: