
Till this time there have been a lot of ideas for active farmers. Remember maybe the consultations of the current National Strategic Plan, the discussions, and even their absence, on the active farmer? At the time there was no political courage, to define this definition, to implement in life. With each concussion it was simplified. Finally after the approval of the current National Strategic Plan there are grievances, that the times have changed, a we still don’t have a sensible definition of a active farmer, that fictional farmers, as were so and remain, that they will continue to receive subsidies only for owning the land, that there is no use of ecoschemes, of eventual assistance or compensation, because the lease agreement is plainly worded. I how are there farms to continue to develop?
Let’s not sleep debate over the active farmer
I feel, that we are going back to the point of departure, in a moment the conversation over the next WPR. There may be one that further will premise farmers for the agricultural-environmental effort taken. There is no thing to enchant, from protecting the climate and environment we no longer will escape. Farmers should be rewarded for this solidly, but how they have to feel, since the money probably will not come, and additionally will go to all. This quilt will become short. wants to have there, internally regulated issues of active farmers and leases of land. In finally we have this subjectivity and flexibility, to self order the spending of money from the Common Agricultural Policy.
What was proposed during the January meeting with farmer organizations? Initially, the active farmers would be considered those who have registered herds of animals in IRZ, those who receive direct payments in plant production, who implement ecoschemicals. This is in short, for the whole rest and this remark, because today, there are 660 thousands. persons would verify agricultural activity on the basis of
minimum costs incurred for agricultural activity or revenue from agricultural activity – that for time the
ministry proposes.
Read more
Definition of active farmer. We know the content proposed by the ministry!
Risky game before elections
In reality these, a size 660 tys. person, this politically quite risky game, before the presidential election. It is worth reminding, that in 2020 year. Rafal Trzaskowski lost with Andrzej Duda by less than half million votes. Also the ruling coalition may pass the threads after their pleasers, when they start verifying the voting election. Check, what the committee likes, and what doesn’t. But there is no sympathy involved, a of your nature of agricultural reform. with significant consequences on the future.
How to show the active farmer?
It looks like that 660 thousand people will have to prove that they are farming, for example. by presenting an invoice for any means of production or insurance, or also by presenting rent .
And this is starting, because there is no way to catch all the active farmers, if quiet leases will flow in the best. In finally the subsidies should be directed to those people, who actually cultivate this land and maintain in good agricultural culture, going further and even are producers of food. This is why the ministry presents the necessity of regulating the active farmer common with neighborhood leases. Proposing the necessity of an contract, which includes the time period, the rights and obligations of both parties, the method of payment, or the method of resolution. This is quite general assumptions, but probably also quite understandable in today’s world. In addition these are open proposals for discussion with unions, organizations and the farmers themselves.
Dialogue, as to boredom
no one needs to be convinced, that Minister Siekierski is open to dialogue, that is his motto. What like what, but it cannot be told that he would not meet with farmers, talk to them or not talk. As this was said by young people: in discussions that on him.
Therefore, let this definition come today in conversations and discussions. The Minister complains that he does not want anything to impose on farmers, so he is going to that.just a moment to talk about concretes and needs. A meeting to conversation is not missing. Therefore, it is not
time, to close to conversation. Some already have been covered with passwords, that is an attack on small farms, the end, we will talk. I’ll say
just that, that now you have yes no anymore talk. Blocking this work only for principle, imaging you, speaking not, because not –
medoesn’tconvince.
Discussionremainsopen.I encouragetocomment.
.