What industry could resist an invitation for a "summit" at Ten Downing Street?

That agriculture, and specifically the NFU, has received two such invites in four months suggests that it is at least a politically pleasing process for those involved.

Agriculture need not have any conscience accepting such invitations. The government's own farm income statistics provide a depressingly clear picture of the challenges faced by the industry.

But economics alone are not usually enough to win such preferred treatment. The politics have to be right too. And here the guests appeared less deserving. The government has a large majority and few truly rural constituents. It is, therefore, far from beholden to farmers.

Common to both the beef breakfast in early December and the recent get together to discuss the long-term strategy for agriculture, however, was an unprecedented level of affirmation action by farmers. And the recent meeting followed a commitment made by the Prime Minister in January at the NFU annual meeting which was also subject to uncharacteristic dissension in the ranks.

Beyond indicating desperate circumstances, this threatened the NFU pole position in UK farm politics. And, hence, the future of the somewhat cosy but mutually beneficial relationship it has had with governments of the day for over 50 years was at risk.

Evidence of its continued ability to deliver as the dominant farm lobby is particularly critical to the NFU at this time. Loss for the government of the simplicity of dealing with a single farm lobby was also threatened. Beyond cementing this relationship, these events at Number Ten Downing Street also provided a valued platform for the governments long term strategy for agriculture..

No fewer than nine related news releases were issued by the Minister of Agriculture on the day of the summit. Common to all was a focus on long term adjustment, but there was still a spread of short term money.

Beneficiaries included pig, dairy, beef and hill farmers, who possibly coincidently appear to have been the most active demonstrators of late. Arable farmers were quick to draw attention to their exclusion from the largesse. Even though they have suffered equally from the impact of the strength of sterling against the Euro on cereal prices, they did not benefit from CAP provisions for compensatory payments.

The governments objective was undoubtedly to cool and quieten things down for long enough for the industry to focus on the longer term. Few would doubt the need for this. But with so much attention focused on short term survival, it may be an unrealistic expectation.

The more cynical message was that it was the squeaky wheel that got the grease. A squeaky wheel and the need for grease typically means a worn wheel baring. With the industry carrying such a heavy load few will be considering jacking the load off the ground to replace barings.

April 7, 2000