whna frmer submits a claim for Single Payment the paragraph above where he signs states very clearly that the farmer confirms he is a farmer under Article 2 and that he has read and understood the definition of farmer.
Single Payment Entitlement is not I repeat not selling ferociously. The supply is out stripping demand, and due to farm land going under a bulldozer always will do as there will be more entitlement than land. The market the Times describes does not exist, at many of the recent auctions Single Payment Entitlments has been left unsold.
The facts are that you cannot claim payments unless you are a farmer, and to suggest that city dwellers who do not farm can invest in this commodity is just not happening and would not be allowed within the regulations and would fire straight in the face of Article 29 of the Eu regulations which is titled artificiality.

Please could the Times make sure before they print any article that they are printing facts rather than fiction

George Paton, Wootton Bassett, England

I object to the statement that farmers were given the subsidies for free - they are in part based on our production over three reference years, 2000, 2001 and 2002. The subsides received then enabled food to be sold more cheaply in the shops, and the same applies now. As all European farmers receive Single Payment should British farmers be despised for trying to make ends meet? In the dairy industry market forces work against us, we are legally obliged to sell our milk to only one buyer at at time, therefore we can't pit one customer against another to drive up our income, the result is our "customer" pays us the least they can get away with. We have to give them a year's notice to switch milk buyer and we are unable to dictate to them how much money we want for our product. I do not believe the income from selling ones entitlement would generate enough to retire on - unless you were planning to retire anyway when it would help.

Susan, Swindon,

Instead of Subsidising farmers not to grow food. Why not spend the same money on subsidising them to grow bio fuels? Oil seeds for bio-diesel? Bio-Mass for power stations? I don't know how fuel efficient it would be but surely it would make more sense environmentally than just letting people buy up allowanaces

Derek Richards, East Yorkshire, UK

EU loophole allows city ‘farmers’ to reap millions in subsidy harvest
Does this tell you about the united EURO’s hastily drafted constitution.?

Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD, Dar-Es-Salaam, Tanzania

While I agree that current subsidy arrangements are completely bananas (this latest story comes on the heels of the announcement that the highest earning farmers win the greatest handouts) those who advocate an end to subsidies altogether should consider what would happen to this country if market forces were to decide the fate of the farming sector. The quaint rural communities where city-dwellers such as myself enjoy spending our holidays would more than likely disappear completely, with already over-crowded cities swelling still further with the influx of displaced inhabitants from those communities. And, even more crucially for me, our fabulously picturesque countryside would more than likely go to ruin. Think of subsidies not as a crutch for a failing industry, but rather as the cost of maintaining England as a tourist destination.

Johnny, London, UK

This article bares so many untruths that it is unbelievable and amazing that such a lack of knowledge of one industry can be displayed in such a sort article. Firstly and probably most importantly European single farm payments are made for maintaining land in good agricultural and environmental condition, onerous conditions which all Farmers, even those city farmers described have to meet! Profits made from these payments are certainly not enormous, the article has taken no account of managing
these cross compliance conditions and it has certainly taken no account of the financial charge for the land involved on which these entitlements can be used. Many other inaccuracies include the statement that payments are to cut agricultural production, demand is certainly not outstripping supply, you can not claim single farm payment on woodland, and many other untruths.
Please take care in future before attempting to destroy the reputation of such a vital industry

Andrew Blenkiron, Wolverhampton,

Well said, John Howe (above). I recall that, analagously, by the time the debate on responsibilty for the Asian bird 'flu outbreak at the Bernard Matthews plant had reached the floor of the House of Commons, we had EU law so conveniently (but incorrectly) blamed and Hungary as an icon of the victimised nation State praised by the Minister, Milliband. The Oppposition even joined in the populist blaming of the the EU and thus dropped their ball and opportunity.

Jonathan Stanley, London,

Has JH read the article? This is nothing to do with a question of should we subsidise farmers or not! The question is, should people who are not farmers, receive farmers subsidies. Come on JH and The Times, please spare us the agony of explaining articles further. Message is: if you do not agree with what I have said, please re-read the article above until you do.

Richard Sarsfield, London,

Greedy people will always find a way to feed on greed!

Michael Levy, Fort Lauderdale, Florida/usa

II can't understand how farmers can say "[We] ensure the beauty of the landscape is preserved.”
Personally i would rather see untouched woodland or the like, rather than artificial, heavily weed-killed fields. I'm sure the countryside made do just as beautifully before farmers were around.
It's just an excuse to extract money from the tax-payer and preserve their way of life at the expense of our, and the developing worlds standard of living.

James Evans, Southampton, UK

Interesting, isn't it, that this doesn't seem to be a problem in the rest of Europe.
Could it be, I wonder that it is because only the UK Government that interprets EU directives in such a crass way?
It would be instructive, I think, to investigate *why* our government so often seems to make a mockery of EU directives that work well and sensibly everywhere else.

Tim Bartlett, Southampton,

Why Is this not being debated in "Paliament"? Mr. Blair??

Francis Wheeldon, Llantwit Major, Wales

Goldman,

We are enjoying the cheapest food this nation has ever seen as a percentage of average income. I would love to know where you intend this nation gets its food from if we find ourselves unable to import produce (as we have expirienced in the past).

If you want to be a self providing nation then we must keep our farmers. The choise is simple.

JH, London,

Fascinating: for once the French have done something we can benefit from!
This change from producer subsidies to fixed subsidies was made as the insistence of the French to "lock-in" their position as major beneficiaries of the CAP, ensuring they maintained it despite any (trivial) atempts to reform it!

Mike Bibby, St Albans, England -not EU

This is corrupt.

Farmers have been taking us for a ride for decades now. It is time to end subsidies in the EC and operate a free market. Food prices would rise to pay farmers at an economic rate but a free market system would be much more open and honest.

James, Newmarket, England

This article is so inaccurately reported that it can not go unchallenged. The Single Farm Payment (SFP) is, and never was, created to reduce production. The decoupling from production was designed to eliminate the overproduction of any agricultural product grown solely from a desire to chase the subsidy.
What neither Giles Lane or George Paton said, or at least you did not report, is that although anyone can indeed buy Entitlements, those entitlements can only be activated by having an equivalent number of hectares of registered land under your control for the requisite 10 months ( 1 entitlement requires 1 hectare to be activated). That “Control” is indeed a grey area as Section B11 of the Single Payment Scheme Handbook and Guidance for England 2005 states ”You will not be awarded any payments under the SPS if you artificially create the conditions required to obtain payment”.

John Howe, Wincanton, England

I think I am correct in saying that last year there was a food supply deficit of some 100million tonnes globally. Instead of this absurd situation, would it not be better to farm and give a subsidy to those supplying aid to poorer countries undergoing famine?

Alistair Kipling, Birmingham,

The trading of Single Farm Payments entitlements is the consequence of the way the UK DEFRA operate the system.
Back in 1993 set-aside was introduced because the government wanted to reduce the area of cereals, and farmers were paid a compensation for taking land out of production. That payment has now become the SFP. Throughout Europe the SFP is paid to those farmers who were in receipt of compensation, only in the socialist UK, under Mrs Becket ,was a dogmatic policy adopted which insisted on spreading this payment across all land, including large gardens and pony meadows, a policy which has uniquely led to this problem in the UK. What is more, DEFRA made it so so complicated that they, again uniquely, made such a mess of it that they have now been fined hundreds of millions of pounds for failing to make the payments on time - payments which apparantly many don't really need, so they sell them!
Don't blame the EU for thisone.

j.kelleway, bern, switzerland

farmers are lobbying for supermarkets to pay more for milk .this is another subsidy for unwanted production .they have the opportunity to sell entitlements and land at record prices and retire . if you cant make a profit out of any business activity stop doing it. Presumably this is the intention of the scheme. What other failed enterprise enjoys these conditions?

edward.goldman, cambridge,

Another example of the greedy self serving money hungry people that know how to take advantage of an absurd political situation. When will common sense prevail??

brian willmer, chiang mai,