Bernicia Media

10/07/2025

UK SET FOR FURTHER FOOD INFLATION
(by Bruce Jobson Newsquest Hexham Courant)

Inflation continues to rise and consumers remain at the forefront in the rise in food prices. Sadly, it seems another dose of food inflation will continue to hit hard-pressed families that struggle on low incomes or, those families through no fault of their own, are literally living hand-to-mouth.

In his 1961 inauguration speech President Kennedy said: “If a free society cannot help the many who are poor – it cannot save the few who are rich.” Following the end of World War Two, Britain was a bankrupt country – that had been relying on US Lend Lease and food supply since 1940. Food rationing remained in Britain until June 1954, nine years after the cessation of hostilities.

The US also fed the four million allied troops in Europe and as the war progressed, supplied France and The Netherlands with US food aid, owing to Hi**er having ordered 50 per-cent domestic supplies to be shipped East to feed his armies. The population of both countries had survived on 1,250 calories per-person per-day, resulting in malnutrition and starvation. In the past 40-years, UK self-sufficiency has alarmingly declined from 80 per-cent to 55 per-cent. Some 20-years-ago, food banks were an anathema; today, an essential way of life for thousands of hard-pressed families.

We now have a form of food rationing owing to the ever-increasing price of the weekly grocery budget. In May, food inflation increased to 4.7 per-cent and seems likely to increase to 5 per-cent for June, when the figures are announced later this month. Consumers, or a section of the population, will continue to struggle on family budgets due to cost-of-living increases such as mortgages, rent, electricity and gas supply.

After the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, food inflation rocketed – on farm food inflation increased by up to 35 per-cent, owing to the cost of energy, gas and the 300 per-cent increase in artificial fertiliser. The resulting consumer 25 per-cent food increase has not been reduced – it’s more or less been absorbed into the supply-chain - just look at the never decreasing supermarket weekly food bill. The Office of National Statistics recently reported food inflation has increased 4.4 per-cent June year-on-year.

Recent reports in the UK and agricultural press have welcomed the recent easing in the farmer market price of UK produced beef. Few appear to understand the vagaries of food production and market fluctuations due to in this case, record temperatures achieving 35 degrees centigrade, when the consumer appetite for hot-roast beef declines.

Beef price increases over the past year are the result of inflationary cost as well as, the decreasing numbers of cattle in the UK and Ireland as a result of Net Zero policies; set to bankrupt the nation at a cost (October 2023) of £5.5trillion. Sirloin steak is 50 per-cent higher than in June 2024 at £10 per-kg; diced beef at double-digit percentage increases and poultry 13 per-cent higher than June 2024.

Farm profitability aligned to UK food production self-sufficiency were not considered part of Net Zero. The result will be a two-tier policy. One for the rich; political elite and famous - and one for the poor; downtrodden and impoverished. If a free society cannot help feed the many who are poor; by 2050, it may not be able to feed the rich.

Inflation continues to rise and consumers remain at the forefront in the rise in food prices. Sadly, it seems another dose of food inflation will…

03/07/2025

In farming – and politics - you reap what you sow. The Chancellor sowed the seeds of her own destruction.

A tearful Chancellor Rachel Reeves was clearly in distress yesterday at Prime Minister’s Question Time. It wasn’t pleasant viewing. However, let’s go back to the October 2024 Budget announcement when the Chancellor was “grandstanding” and playing “to the gallery” - that cheered and clapped her every intended Government policy announcement – some already introduced and implemented such as cutting the OAP heating allowance; VAT on private education, increases in NI contributions, increases in minimum wages – that have resulted in numerous people losing jobs and business redundancies – and sadly, perhaps cost the lives of pensioners unable to heat their homes over the winter.

The Chancellor was all full of bravado announcing Farm Business IH Tax – and the likely outcome, the tax would result in farm staff redundancies and financially cripple some farm businesses. But little or no sympathy was expressed by the Chancellor about “under-pressure” farmers – who were literally mentally-crushed and broken – and rather than see their businesses collapse or sold-off to avoid paying IH tax – took their own lives (some even refused treatment for cancer) Let’s call it out and say what it really is: farmer su***de or farmer government assisted su***de.

Unfortunately, in farming – you reap what you sow. The Chancellor sowed the seeds of her own destruction. Don’t cry for me. Cry for farmers and their families.

27/06/2025

Newsquest Group Hexham Courant
Farming figures up 26% but don't be fooled - Bruce Jobson

The latest Defra Total Farm Income (TFI) data for April 2024 - 2025 was released last week showing a 26 per-cent increase in profits with TFI increasing to £7.7billion for 2024 compared with £6.1 billion in 2023. Whilst this is welcome news, Benjamin Disraeli’s famous quote of there being three types of lies comes to mind: “Lies, damn lies and statistics.”

Some industry commentators have extolled TFI increases however, the figures should be treated with caution. Drilling down into the detail suggests the industry is far from being in sound financial health. The increase of £1.6 billion does not reflect farming being on the threshold of an exciting and profitable era.

A quick comparison shows farmers’ costs declined by £1.2billion, mainly due to lower fertiliser costs. From September 2021 to January 2022, fertiliser costs increased from circa £300 per-tonne to £600 per tonne. Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, fertiliser costs increased to as much as £1200 per tonne – if you could get any supply.

In recent months, record prices for beef cattle have made headline news at Hexham Mart on a week-to-weekly-basis, on the back of a 9.3 per-cent increase for 2023-2024 and dairy at 5.5 per-cent, respectively. Prices for all ages of beef cattle have reached historic levels but this relates to a lack of supply, forcing upward prices as farmers and buyers compete for depleting livestock numbers.

Hard-pressed families may not be able to afford expensive beef products, but consumer resourcefulness may be the reason for the largest value increase in TFI for eggs rising by 35 per-cent to £353 million from 2023-2024. Farmgate egg prices increased by 8.7 per-cent compared to 2023 with eggs at 144p per-dozen.

This is welcome news for large-scale egg producers that were under severe pressure losing 2p per-egg in 2022 or 24p per-dozen. The 35 per-cent increase in the value of eggs has helped increase livestock output albeit this does not in my opinion, provide an accurate reflection of livestock sector profitability.

Three years ago, I expressed concern in the media that arable prices were extremely susceptible due to various influencing factors such as cost of fertiliser; seed, fuel, energy and sprays – and susceptible to inclement weather conditions. In our outlet, Bernicia Media, as far back as February 2022, I stated farmers would cut back vegetable production due to cost structures and lack of profitability.

By February 2024, wheat production was down 7 per-cent and barley 38 per-cent, vegetable crops down 44 per-cent; barley and wheat down £30-£50 per tonne and Oil Seed R**e (OSR) down 30 per-cent. Official Defra 2024 figures show wheat and barley dropped 27 per-cent and 14 per-cent with OSR value down 30 per-cent, respectively.

According to Defra, the decrease in OSR value was due to 32 per-cent decline in production due to a 25 per-cent decrease in the area planted and a 10 per-cent drop in yields. As predicted in this column in late April, impending drought conditions will have severe repercussions on farm incomes in 2025.

24/06/2025

“From 1650-1750, Britain’s agricultural production was the highest in the world. Today, the UK is the world’s third highest net-importer of food – behind China and Japan.” Bruce Jobson. Bernicia Media.

“If this is a trade deal – we no longer have trade negotiators – we have trade appeasers.” On 5th April 2022, on GB News, Bruce called-out the then Conservative Government’s UK trade agreements with Australia and New Zealand. The comments were purely based upon agricultural food imports entering the UK from both countries. The comments were not anti-Australian nor anti-New Zealand – but based upon the UK Conservative government’s incompetence in negotiating trade deals at the expense of UK farmers.

April 2025 imports of New Zealand chilled beef have increased by 36% from 307 tonnes in April 2024, to 417 tonnes in April 2025. This figure is eight-times (8x) the volume imported before the UK New Zealand trade agreement was ratified in April 2022. It’s not a massive tonnage but highlights the future global food importation trend. Australian beef imports were previously minimal but since 2023 have increased 180% to 5,500 tonnes.

What needs to be reconciled is OZ and NZ farmers will not be any wealthier. Any wealth from these trade agreements tend to go to the multi-nationals and export companies – not the farmer. The real winners in UK trade agreements are car, machinery and heavy plant exports and financial services. In the “Top 10” benefits listed by the UK Department for International Trade, there was not any mention of meat import products? Strange?

Not everyone will agree with sentiments expressed in 2022 by Bernicia Media. GB News presenter Tom Harwood enthusiastically described the agreement as “bold and liberalising.” There’s nothing “bold and liberalising” for UK farmers working seven days per-week; calving suckler cows at 2am or doing the lambing night-shift for two months – for little or no profit. According to Defra, 2023 and 2004 were the worst two years this century for Farm Business Income – down 46% mixed farming; cereals 76%, dairying 78%.

Some of the “bold and liberalising” UK food benefits include a saving of 20p on a bottle of Marlborough Sauvignon Blanc. And a saving of 50p on a £30 jar of Manuka honey. One can only imagine British beef; sheep and hill farmers racing down to the supermarket to stock-up on these high-quality imported food products. If Bernicia Media readers see tractors parked outside supermarkets; farmers are not protesting about farmgate prices – farmers are purchasing bargains. Honest.

The former Conservative Government’s International Trade Minister Anne-Marie Trevelyan stated: “British farmers should not be worried.” Presumably the Minister meant, tractors would not be towed-away from supermarket car-parks as “the lads and lasses” stock-piled vast supplies of Sauvignon Blanc and Manuka honey. In a stock-piling import food-Bonanza, Hoss Cartright wouldn’t get a look in.

The Labour Party, in Opposition, offered welcomed and strong support to British farmers via the formidable Emily Thornberry MP, stating the trade agreement could hurt UK farmers and lower food standards. Since forming the Labour Government in July 2024, UK farmers have incurred increases in National Insurance contributions; minimum wage increases, withdrawal of subsidy payments (Sustainable Farming Incentive) a reset of Brexit legislation – and last but not least – the threat of Farm Business Inheritance Tax in April 2026.

Since July 2024, the UK has announced further trade agreements with Japan, India, the USA (USA 13,000 tonnes of beef) and potentially, by back-door default owing to Brexit reset, the potential to have beef; sheep and poultry imports from the EU - Mercusor trade agreement (Argentina; Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay and potentially Bolivia - Bernicia Media 4th December 2024) The 11-country Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) agreement – will bring further pressure to the UK table by way of food imports that “could hurt UK farmers and lower food standards.”

In the 1980s, the UK was 80% self-sufficient in food production and according to some estimates, is now 50%-55% self-sufficient - with 84% of fruit imported. UK food production self-sufficiency has therefore declined in 40-years by 25% to 30% - while the population has increased by 10million in the past 20-years.

Bernicia Media’s position is not about protectionism. It’s about preservation. Preservation of UK food self-sufficiency; preservation of food production, preservation of farming, preservation of the UK rural economy and rural way of life. For over 40-years, successive UK governments have overseen farming’s decay and decline. The decline did not happen overnight.

12/06/2025

The Irish Question Part IV

“It’s not Bernicia Media’s role to report what has happened – it’s our role to report what is going to happen.” Nutrient Action Plan: Northern Ireland – “the weakest executive in the world” - Is taking a 180-year-old backward step.

(Including lessons not learned from Sri Lanka Farmageddon XII Feb 2024)

Since October 2022, Bruce Jobson has addressed “The Irish Question” - a conundrum wrapped-up in an enigma. Parts I, II and III – examined Ireland’s perilous farming industry facing existential threats to its existence and rural way of life that has lasted generations.

That threat has now manifested, as predicted in The Irish Question Part III (August 2024) Northern Ireland is already under the EU directive and this has food supply relevance to mainland Britain.

Furthermore, Prime Minister Starmer has already agreed a Brexit reset that now threatens to draw the remainder of the United Kingdom into further EU alignment.

The Irish Question Part III (August 2024)
“Ireland Today: Britain Tomorrow.”

“Ireland and its farming system is being systematically destroyed. The rural economy is faltering and neither the government nor the EU through its directives offer solutions. What is happening today in Ireland – will inevitably happen in Britain.”

Northern Ireland’s Nutrient Action Plan (NAP)

The introduction of Northern Ireland Nutrient Action Plan is set to destroy farming and the rural economy - driven by political dogma by “the weakest executive in the world.” Oblivious to economic reality, NI Agriculture Minister Mr Muir, is set to devastate the farming and rural economy of the province.

With a population of only two million people and heavily dependent on agriculture, the province is the only part of the UK that exports its surplus food – producing up to 22 per-cent of the UK’s home-produce.

In October 2022, Bernicia Media raised concerns on the future of Ireland's dairy industry. “Irish farmers face an existential threat like no other, now that the ‘emissions genie’ has been let out of the EU milk bottle - and Ireland’s farmers face unparalleled constraints on all sides from EU legislation as well as, political and economic fragmentation.

“Sir Isaac Newton stated: ‘Every action – has a reaction.’ The EU’s ‘green policy’ actions are a dichotomy (a difference between two completely opposite ideas) in relevance to Ireland’s historic farming practices.”

NUTRIENT ACTION PLAN (NAP)

The same environmental and “greening” constraints – including alleged water pollution claims - have manifested across the Northern Ireland border – where the Executive – without consultation with farmers and industry bodies seek to implement fertiliser restrictions that will limit farm and food productivity. In very simple terms, for those not familiar with the vagaries of farming – this will result in keeping one cow on two acres of land – rather than the present one cow per-acre. The same applies to other livestock and crops. The maths doesn’t add-up.

LESSONS FROM SRI LANKA

Farmageddon XII 13TH Feb 2024

One of the world’s most beautiful countries with a population of 22 million people, was forced to go organic in the spring of 2021. The government banned fertiliser and pesticides resulting in financial disaster despite warnings from farmers; scientists and agricultural experts. Two million farmers saw their crops reduced by 30 per-cent resulting in severe food shortages; food riots, job losses, bankruptcies, international investors refused finance and inflation increased to 54.6 per-cent.

Tea production, the country’s largest export fell by 18 per-cent. It’s doubtful if Mr Muir and the Northern Ireland Executive understand the consequences of NAP implications nor, even know about Sri Lanka’s food disaster or where Sri Lanka is on the global map.

The Irish Question Part I Oct 2022

“Ireland is “trapped” in an EU conundrum - not of its own making - resulting in a return of the “Irish Question.”

“Some 180-years ago, future British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli defined what he called the “Irish Question.” Paraphrased: “A dense population, in extreme distress, on an island where there is an established church… and in addition, the weakest executive in the world.”

Northern Ireland - the weakest executive in the world - is taking a 180-year-old backward-step.

The Trusted Source of Agri-business Journalism – Bernicia Media – Ahead of The Curve.

06/06/2025

Thanks to Northern Farmer and Scottish Farmer for publishing this article on Simon and Claire Bainbridge - the couple also featured on GB News on 26th March 2025 as part of the coverage on the UK Govt's Spring Budget announcement.

Simon and Claire Bainbridge have a clear vision for the future of their multi-facetted organic farming business. Bruce Jobson visited the award-winning Northumberland enterprise.

The Bainbridge family have deep farming roots having taken the tenancy of 360-acre Donkin Rigg Farm near Morpeth from the National Trust in 1991. Simon’s parents, Ivan and Elisabeth, started the business in 1968 with two cows and 12 sheep. Since then, the business has expanded to 1,650 farmed-acres in total.

In 2000, Simon, aged 27, took over the tenancy of Donkin Rigg and Rothley West Shield. Garden House was purchased in 1994 and Rothley East Shield in 2009. The business entered the organic conversion scheme in 2009 and strives to produce high-quality, home-grown forage protein in order to produce a high-quality grass-fed premium end-product.

Simon and Claire make a formidable partnership by combining their talents to develop a business that now consists of 200 suckler cows; 1,000 breeding ewes with Claire undertaking business administration roles as well as, running the 24,000 flock of free-range organic hens.

Simon studied for an HND in agriculture with Claire having an Honours degree in Rural Enterprise and Land Management both undertaken when at Harper Adams University, respectively. Claire is also a qualified Chartered Surveyor, a Member of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors and Fellow of the Central Association of Agricultural Valuers.

“Donkin Rigg was the EBLEX Monitor Farm for Northumberland from 2010-2013,” says Simon. “The opportunity brought together various renowned experts and local farmers and was extremely beneficial to everyone involved. Opening-up our business enabled Bainbridge Farms to monitor; self-assess, bench-mark and look at future ways to develop and progress.”

BEEF ENTERPRISE
Bainbridge Farms operates a spring-calving suckler herd with emphasis on a close-calving time frame. The business purchases pedigree Aberdeen Angus and Hereford bulls to run with the herd and by using cross-breeding methodology producing a “Black Baldy.” The bulls remain with the cows for nine weeks and heifers for six weeks, to ensures a close calving time frame states Simon.

“The calves are all the same age and this results in numerous benefits including feeding; weaning, vaccinations and general wellbeing and animal welfare. We run a comprehensive vaccination programme to best protect herd health, with antibiotics not used unless directed by a vet for a medical condition.

“Premium home-bred heifers are retained and sold as replacement animals with the remainder being sold for meat. All of our finished cattle go to Dovecote Park to be sold via Waitrose through the Duchy Organic range.

“We have Angus and Hereford, traditional native breeds, that graze and mature to full-weight on our own organic grasslands and forage crops. We also incorporate a herd of Galloways as well as a Luing herd. The farm rises from 600 - 900 feet above sea-level and it’s important to have the right breeds of cattle to suit the local environmental conditions.”

SHEEP ENTERPRISE

The same basic principles apply to the 1,000-ewe breeding flock with the Bainbridge’s rearing their own replacement ewes. The couple operate a closed, stratified flock with Swaledale ewes breeding North of England Mules. These then go to Suffolk tups bred on the farm.

Simon says his ‘Holy Grail’ is to breed a healthy ewe that produces healthy twin lambs; can live in the hill grassland environment, have good fertility and produce excellent quality meat. Finished lambs are sold to Waitrose. Ewes lamb outside from the middle of April on a grass-based system.

HEN ENTERPRISE
The hen flock consists of 24,000 organic hens kept in two poultry houses each with four flocks of 3,000 birds. Each organic free-range flock has its own 1.5-hectare grass range with over 500 trees planted in each range comments Claire.

“Our hens receive organic feed and have access to water and the grass ranges throughout the day albeit, except when the hens are under Avian Influenza restrictions. The facilities are regularly inspected in order to sell our eggs through the ‘Lion code’, RSPCA inspected schemes and organic status.

“The welfare of our birds is paramount as happy hens lay lovely nutritious eggs. The flock produces eggs for Lintz Hall Farm and are sold locally through organic box schemes as well as, local outlets such as Tully’s of Rothbury; Bays Leap Farm at Heddon-on-the-Wall and the Spar Supermarket at Thropton.”
THE GRANARY

Simon and Claire continue to develop their business portfolio that now includes a new state-of-the-art Granary holiday-home conversion. The couple also own nearby Rothley Low Lake, designed by world famous landscape designer Capability Brown. Bainbridge Farms have partnered with “Wild-With-Consent” to enable camper vans and 4x4 vehicles with roof-tents to park near the lake for that off-the-beaten-track exclusive night-away experience under the stars.

05/06/2025

Bernicia Media – Ahead of The Curve (2011)

BALANCING FOOD PRODUCTION AND THE ENVIRONMENT

Bruce Jobson’s national award-winning article (Newcastle Journal June 2011) laid-out the future dilemma facing UK farmers. When primary food-producing farmers started to accept - and became reliant upon environmental payments to the detriment of food production, inevitably, farming would be at the mercy of political dogma; environmental lobbyists – and those that sought the destruction of farming and rural life. Take-home messages from 2011 (followed by an abbreviated version of the original article)

* “Without generous subsidy support, farming would not be profitable.”

* “Sadly, UK food production appears to have taken a back-seat.”

* "The amount of food eaten; grown in Britain, has declined to 58.9%. The last time this occurred was back in 1968.” (Source: DEFRA 2010)

* “UK producers have continued to raise concern over the merits of reliant imported food policies and as well as food security.”

* “Farmers will continue to dance to whoever pays the subsidy tune.”

BALANCING FOOD PRODUCTION AND THE ENVIRONMENT
By Bruce Jobson Newcastle Journal June 2011

Today’s rural economies provide a complex matrix requiring a balance of food production, protection of the environment as well as, provision for tourism. The halcyon days of single emphasis food production has certainly disappeared from the countryside and modern farming exists in a new world order.

Whilst some may lament the passing of the post-World War Two policies of producing as much food as possible; and damn the consequences as the EU will foot-the-bill, the political world and an awakening emphasis has changed how farmers produce food as well as how agriculture interacts with the environment. It’s not all good – and it’s not all bad.

"The key emphasis, however, should be achieving a “balance.”

At grass root level farming, the first signs of quiet discontent are beginning to rumble. It’s more ideological rumblings but the discontent exists. Unfortunately, farmers are “programmed” in a certain manner; it’s probably a genetic disorder passed down through the farming generations. The result being, farmers prefer to produce more food. More food; theoretically, equating to more profit. It’s therefore more than likely, a mathematical gene.

Every country faces its own unique set of challenges but a successful strategic global policy requires decisive action in order to avoid the next generation encountering immense social and economic problems. Feeding the world is not someone else’s problem; it’s a global problem requiring global responsibility. But first, let’s consider how the UK has to feed itself.

A recent report (2010) estimates UK population increases over the next 50 years will account for 17 million of the EU’s estimated increase of 24 million. The UK’s current population is set to increase from 62 million to 79 million - an increase of 27 per-cent owing to rising birth rates and immigration.

One of the major issues facing UK farmers, politicians and lobby groups is to achieve the correct balance between food production and maintaining the environment. Many British farmers now consider the pendulum may have swung too far in favour of maintaining the environment rather than focus on food supply. This concern should not be detrimental to the environment at large; farmers have a vested interest in maintaining the land for future generations.

There are some farmers, happy to take advantage of the incentive programmes, now beginning to question the viability of organic food production. Food sales overall, are estimated down 3%. However, UK farmers may well continue to benefit for preserving wildlife and landscapes rather than for producing food. Total income (2010) from farming is estimated at £4.07 billion, a decline of 7% from the previous year. The dilemma for agriculture is easy to perceive. Farmers received £3.6 billion in subsidies in 2009, an increase of 11% on 2008 levels.

“Without generous subsidy support, farming would not be profitable.”

Agriculture’s fortunes play a small part of the UK economy generating approximately 0.5 – 0.6% of Gross Domestic Product. It now appears tourism holds greater sway with rural economies. According to consultancy firm Oxford Economics, UK rural tourism (2010) is estimated to be worth £70 billion per-annum. The figures suggest continued growth and by maintaining the environment and countryside, would provide further increasing returns. UK tourism alone generates an estimated £115 billion per-annum and the agricultural, farming and environmental contribution cannot be ignored.

“Sadly, UK food production appears to have taken a back-seat.”

UK producers have continued to raise concern over the merits of reliant imported food policies and as well as food security. The recent e-coli outbreak( 2011) in a modern EU country such as Germany has refocused the food security debate.

During the 1980s EU subsidies ensured 78% of all food consumed was UK produced. Since then, the country has witnessed a 20% drop in self-sufficiency (DEFRA 2010) and the amount of food eaten; grown in Britain, has declined to 58.9%. The last time this occurred was back in 1968. The more cynical farmers now consider their role as being agricultural environmentalists or paid “park keepers” rather than primary food producers.

“Without generous subsidy support, UK farm businesses would not survive.”

It’s a balancing act requiring consensus, common-sense and political will. Meanwhile, farmers will continue to dance to whoever pays the subsidy tune. -ends-

The Trusted Source of Agri-business Journalism - Bernicia Media - Ahead of The Curve

31/05/2025

Dunkirk: May – June 1940: 85th Anniversary Operation Dynamo

Only 10% of the German Army is mechanised. Click Rare film footage.

Bruce Jobson made this post five years ago and dispels some of the myths about Dunkirk and the Battle of France. A story of incompetence - lack of planning - out thought and out flanked.
Invading German forces given Pervitin - a crystal-meth drug to produce feeling of "invincibility" - the crystal-meth drug kept troops awake day and night.

Pervitin-fuelled German army advances 12 straight days without rest covering 22 miles per-day under-fire - previously thought impossible.

• Blitzkrieg: Hi**er occupies France; Belgium, Luxembourg and
Netherlands

• 400,000 British; French and Belgian troops encircled at Dunkirk
Allies have 45% more artillery guns.

1.9 million soldiers captured in Battle of France

• 90% of the German Army is horse-drawn

• Only 10% of the German Army is mechanised

45% of German army average age is 40 years old

The Battle of France and Battle of Dunkirk: Bruce Jobson reports.

Click the video link at the end: horse-drawn German Divisions and captured French and Colonial troops.

On 10th May 1940, Hi**er launched a military offensive to occupy the Low Countries and France. Within 11 days, the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) Belgian Army and three French Field Armies (1st; 7th & 9th) were encircled and pushed back to the sea. Hi**er had achieved in 11 days, what could not be achieved in four years of the First World War (1914 – 1918) On 14th June, Paris was declared an “open city” to German forces and within six weeks, France had capitulated (46 days)

We’ve all seen the movies. The German military might with Panzer Divisions smashing across Europe but the truth about the Battle of France and resulting Battle of Dunkirk is somewhat different. We’ve all been brought-up on the familiar events described by Winston Churchill as “The Miracle of Dunkirk.” It’s what happened before Dunkirk that has been ignored – and no doubt for good reason. The history of war is written by the victors and Dunkirk and the Battle of France is the classic case of turning a “monumental defeat” into a victory.

However, these written events may make some people feel uncomfortable. Including those who lost family; any survivors and even those raised in a post WW Two era. But to view military history, requires ignoring the abhorrence of the political N**i regime - undoubtedly the most “evil” regime the world has ever known and focus on events on the battlefield. But we should learn from history.

In a very dangerous 21st century, some may consider the extended Europe suffering similar consequences and several European countries should now not ignore potential threats. But back to 1940 …and let’s look at a few “myths.”

Myth One: The all-conquering German Army is unstoppable. Huge Panzers force back the allies. Mechanised German infantry divisions are also mobilised along the autobahn and sweep their way to victory. If only.

In 1940, 90% of the German Army relied on horse-drawn wagons to move its artillery; infantry, supplies and stores. Only 10% of the German Army was mechanised. The Panzer divisions consisted of Panzer 1s and Panzer 2s, which were light armoured tanks in many cases used for reconnaissance purposes. Versions of the more capable Panzer 3s, only became available at the start of 1940 and a limited few hundred were used in 10th May offensive. The French Army had more tanks, and “better” tanks with some 3,254 compared to 2,439 German tanks. The BEF also left behind 445 tanks at Dunkirk. The BEF left behind 2,477 guns.

The BEF was the most mechanised in Europe – possibly in the world - at that time. Britain starting mechanisation in 1928 and France had a dual policy of mechanised and horse-drawn forces. The German Army use of horses was the largest amount ever used in the history of military conflict – the most horses the world has ever known (But we don’t see that in the WW 2 movies)

N**i propaganda films rarely showed horse-drawn units and preferred to film mechanised transport and Panzer units to portray the perception of invincibility. Studying rare old film footage demonstrates German dead horses following the Normandy landings (allied footage) and French Resistance footage shows German horse-drawn wagons vacating Paris in August 1944.

In 1939, the German Army had 514,000 horses and the average amount rose to 1.1 million horses during the war, using 2.75 million horses in total. Throughout WW Two the ratio of horse-drawn to mechanised divisions (Panzer and mechanised) remained the same being between 15% - 20% maximum. In 1943, the ratio was 322 divisions of which only 52 were mechanised and in late 1944, 264 divisions with only 42 mechanised. The German Army alone lost 179,000 horses in December 1940 and January 1941, part of Operation Barbarossa, Hi**er’s failed attack on Russia.

The German Infantry divisions effectively marched on foot supported by horse-drawn wagons carrying weapons and supplies. A rifle company’s transport consisted of three horse-drawn wagons loaded-up with their packs. This involved thousands of horses and thousands of men looking after the horses; feeding, grooming, shoeing and refitting the horse teams. A six-horse field gun team required six men spending at least one hour per-day in attendance duties. The cost of feeding the working horses was expensive requiring 12 pounds of grain per-day that had to be transported on the wagons.

The horse-drawn wagons travelling distance was slow, complex and arduous at approximately 20 miles per day (30 kilometres) Horse welfare deteriorated after 10 days of modest work (200 miles) that required refits and recuperation could take months; replacement horses also needed to settle into the system and work with new handlers.

Front-line horse refits took up to 8 –10 days and all this hard work slowed down military operations. Hi**er’s problem was he did not have oil and gasoline to support his military objectives and even produced synthetic oil by expensively turning six tonnes of coal to produce one tonne of oil.

Myth Two: Hi**er’s outrageously brilliant Blitzkrieg plan. If only.

First, it wasn’t Hi**er’s plan – but the N**i leader was never short of claiming great military accomplishments. After the Fall of France; Hi**er declared himself “the greatest military leader” the world had ever known.

Following the Declaration of War by Britain and France in September 1939, the German military planners started work in October, during the “phoney war” period. General Erich Von Manstein was the architect of the plan and over weeks and months, was amended and had further input from General von Rundstedt and Colonel-General Halder.

However, the plan is known as the “Manstein plan” and finally, after months of wrangling, Hi**er approved the plan in February 1940 and later declared Manstein was the “only person who understood him” and thereby aiming to take all the credit. But German military strategists were not all in favour of the Manstein plan stating Hi**er had a “weak” understanding of the German Army position and the army being poorly prepared to invade the Low Countries and France. This being the case after invading Poland.

In fact, 50% of German Divisions were not combat ready and were inferior equipped than the British and French armies. The allies had 45% more artillery guns than the German Army. Rather than being an army of young fit “supermen” as portrayed in movies and news reels; in 1940, 45% of the German Army was over 40-years-old. And Pervitin-fuelled.

Myth Three: No one thought Hi**er would attack France through the Ardennes in 1940. If only.

During French military “war games” in 1937 and 1938, French military strategists advocated Germany could invade through the Ardennes. French Commander-in-Chief Maurice Gamelin dismissed the warnings despite strategists stating it was “idiocy” to think the German Army could not pe*****te the Ardennes and occupy the Low Countries and France.

On 30th April 1940, French military attaches warned a German attack was due to occur and would probably happen between 8th – 10th May. Hi**er attacked on 10th May.

In the winter of 1939 – 1940, Belgian sources in Cologne anticipated German forces would attack through the Ardennes and would thrust forward and encircled the Belgian, British and French field armies in Belgium and north-east France. Swiss intelligence detected six Panzer Divisions on the German-border with Belgium and Luxembourg and informed French Intelligence Commanders.

Further intelligence by French sources as well as, of all places, sources at The Vatican, informed Gamelin and the French Command that a German military column had taken up position on the Luxembourg border stretching back 62 miles (100 kilometres) into Germany.

Gamelin and the French High Command were still living and preparing for a war based upon World War One tactics and strategy. The huge Maginot line – stretching from the Swiss border - was a wall of concrete bunkers and gun emplacements extending along the border with Germany and was supposed to prevent an attack, and thereby not resulting in another war on French territory, avoiding a similar situation to WW One.

The Ardennes warnings were ignored by Gamelin and resulted in thousands of brave French soldiers being killed or captured and the resulting occupation of France. Worst of all, Gamelin and the French Command did not have field telephones and had no idea of what was occurring in the fast-moving blitzkrieg attack. Gamelin remained locked-up in his Chateau HQ without communications and refused or take any military counter decisions. One out of three French troops suffer “shell-shock” as a result of devastating bombardments.

The German offensive swept through France and the Low Countries within a matter of days. On 17th May, Churchill was alarmed to discover that Gamelin had committed all his forces forward and had not any Reserve Divisions in place to counter the Ardennes offensive. Gamelin was replaced on 17th May by Maxime Weygand. The French therefore had no forces between the German Armies and the sea.

The BEF, French and Belgian armies to the north-east were pushed back and encircled at Dunkirk. Churchill described the events as a “colossal military disaster” whilst Hi**er described the Fall of France as the “greatest military achievement of all-time” – possibly with justification.

Myth Four: Hi**er hesitates for three days. If only.

History informs that Hi**er “hesitated” and stopped the Panzer advance on 23rd May for three days. The halt was the suggestion of General Field Marshall von Kluge and since then history and historians have repeated the “hesitated” claim. General von Rundstedt had ordered the Panzers to halt due to logistical concerns. The problem with this Blitzkrieg attack was the mechanised divisions had swept through the Netherlands and Belgium and were so far in advance of the supporting artillery; infantry and supplies.

As previously stated, 90% of the German Army was equipped with horse-drawn wagons and was way behind the mechanised Blitzkrieg advance. The German Army was also vulnerable on its flanks and did not have supply to its forward troops. German tank losses, such as the lightweight Panzer 1 and Panzer 2s in some units was up to 50% and the soft marshy ground was not suitable for tank advancement.

It’s easy to state post war, the “halt order” was a massive mistake by Hi**er. But there were sound reasons for the three-day halt to allow resupply – and some units did not mobilise for another 16 hours. Furthermore, Hi**er’s foot- troops were physically exhausted from the day and night advancement due to Pervitin and at the point of physical and mental collapse.

In the Desert War, Rommel encountered the same problem with his Blitzkrieg attacks and his advanced units being so far ahead of the artillery, infantry and supplies. On numerous occasions, the British counter attacked and cut-off Rommel’s supply lines. Likewise, the same happened to the British 8th Army (Desert Rats) and this was one of the negative effects of a lightning Blitzkrieg attack. Air Marshall Goering stated the Luftwaffe, with its air superiority, that had effectively wrecked carnage on the allied forces, would finish-off the British, French and Belgian armies in the retreat to Dunkirk.

Myth Five: Operation Dynamo saved the BEF and French armies. If only.

By a miracle and some incredible bravery by the RAF, Royal Navy and 933 ships, many of the boats described as “the little ships” and manned by civilians, resulted in 338,000 weary allied troops being evacuated from the beaches of Dunkirk. Dunkirk was also fortuitous for the allied evacuation being the longest sand beach in Europe.

Of the 933 ships – 697 returned to English ports. The BEF lost nearly all its equipment of 2,477 guns; 68,000 vehicles, 455 tanks, 20,000 motor-cycles, 76,000 tons of ammunition and 416,000 tons of stores. Many of these machines were recycled by the German Army.

The RAF flew 3,500 sorties (derived from the French word “sortie” meaning “exit”) in order to keep the Luftwaffe as far away as possible from Dunkirk albeit, not always successful. The RAF lost 145 planes including 42 Spitfires and the Luftwaffe lost 156 planes.

The BEF lost 68,000 troops, wounded, missing or captured (3,500 killed and 13,000 wounded) As for the Battle of France itself, this resulted in allied losses of 360,000 dead or wounded and 1,900,000 captured. Operation Dynamo ensured Britain had the remnants of an army and founded the “Dunkirk spirit” that brought out the best of the nation in times of adversity.

This “backs -to-the-wall” spirit remains in the national consciousness today.
It’s not possible to include every detail in a short piece on Dunkirk and the Battle of France. Hopefully, this version will inform more fully on the events of May and June 1940.

Click the link:

CriticalPast is an archive of historic footage. The vintage footage in this video has been uploaded for research purposes, and is presented in unedited form....