Editorial: harvest under way while EU-UK collision look inevitable

The 2021 harvest got under way in earnest in the same week that Teagasc produced its family farm income (FFI) estimates for 2020. Those figures indicated a 1% reduction in average FFI for tillage farms in a year where yields were hit by a range of weather-related factors, despite somewhat higher prices and lower costs.

With the 2021 harvest now under way in gloriously long sunny days, it would seem that there is more scope for optimism on the output side. Early reports indicate average to very good yields, with some farmers reporting record highs.

But the spread remains very variable with yields reported from 3.1 to 4.5t/ac and it seems that averages are higher as you move up the country. But grain moisture levels are low and many have dipped well below 15% this week.

Grain quality appears to mirror yield and is said to be very high moving up the country. We must now wait to see how the current hot spell will affect winter wheat and spring barley yields, but history indicates that both crops respond well to heat providing there is adequate moisture in the ground.

International grain prices have been quite variable over the past three months and harvest pressure seemed inevitable but the surge in the market this week, driven by weather-related factors, seems likely to be positive for harvest prices. But while hot sunny days are ideal for harvesting, they also present additional risks – particularly for fire.

Already there have been a number of incidences and farmers need to be particularly sensitive to this risk.

Daily cleaning of all straw-working machinery is not just good to help prevent weed seed spread, it can also help prevent fires and might help show signs of a developing problem.

UK minister David Frost’s announcement on Wednesday to the UK parliament puts the EU and UK firmly on a collision course over the Northern Ireland protocol.

For farmers on the island of Ireland, there is little point deliberating on who is right and wrong in the debate. As John Bruton outlines, the constitutional/democratic legitimacy problems arising from the outworking of the protocol should be recognised. The reality is that an arrangement is required that is mutually acceptable to the EU and UK. It will only be built on trust from both sides. As it is, much of the protocol is working fine for NI business. As Trevor Lockhart comments, the view within business circles is that with modification and not using old rules for new problems, then it can work.

While policy-making requires a broad range of considerations, the direction of travel should be shaped by independent, transparent and unbiased scientific advice. It is essential that policymakers and politicians ensure these core values are protected when establishing appropriate scientific reference points to guide policy.

Protecting these values are of particular importance in what has become an increasingly politicised debate on human nutrition. In this regard it is deeply concerning that, as we report on page 27, requests for The Lancet to publish and disclose the methodology relating to a recent study it published by the Global Burden of Disease into the health effects of red meat appear to have been declined. As a leading scientific journal frequently used as a reference point in the development of policy by the EU and UN, the apparent failure to provide evidence to support published material should not go unnoticed among policymakers and politicians.