Andrew Arbuckle: Taking on the challenge of remaining uncontentious

This decision to go the gentler route has been brought on by getting it in the neck for being a bit too opinionated. For example, I am walking into a meeting somewhere and I am accosted for my views on breed societies.

Next, I am opening up my e-mails and I see a strongly worded letter on my thoughts on farmers importing disease through not taking sufficient precautions. Again I am chastised. So I reckon I will ease off and be a little more mellow with life…

Excuse me, that was my phone ringing and I had to stop to take the call. The caller wanted to make his views known to me. In particular, he was exercised about the latest awards from the Scottish Rural Development Programme. Did I say he was exercised? Can I change that to boiling over with bile? I had to hold the phone some distance from my ear.

He wanted to tell me that it was totally ridiculous for some very well-off farmers to get chunks of public money. He mentioned names but I passed no comment, thinking the flow of anger would subside.

I do not think he wanted to hear my comments that it was a competitive grant scheme and these applications must have drifted to the top of the pile on their merits.

That was what Richard Lochhead told me when the awards were announced. The Cabinet Secretary had on his sad Labrador eyes that he wears when someone questions him on possible failings within the government.

Sorry for that interruption. As I was saying, the intention is to write this article without raising either my blood pressure or that of any reader. So I will think of some relaxing topic.

However, before I do so, I will just check my e-mails – this constant checking is a 21st century twitch which seems to have no cure.

Oh, I see I have one from a couple I know who run a very successful farm shop. I will read it before getting on with my comment piece.

Oh dear, they want to express their extreme displeasure at the granting of public money to farmers starting up farm shops. They point out that when they started, they scraped together the cash to convert an old stable on the farm and then when some money came in they expanded a little and so it went on.

To cut a long e-mail short, they felt the giving of grant money to some and not to all was unfair. They did not put it as politely as that, but that was the gist of it.

Back to the blank screen on which I wish to write my more tranquil thoughts, avoiding matters where anger and rage may occur.

I am just about to tap out a few ideas when I recall going into my local shop. It is not grand enough to call itself a supermarket but when I am there I see that eggs are on special offer with very low price tags.

I remember the views expressed earlier last week, by some of the egg producers angry at cash going to new producers looking to start free-range systems. The SRDP Rural Priorities cash was upsetting their market, they claimed.

So what will I write about that will keep me mellow and possibly even serene? I think I will write about the need to change the SRDP programme to one which combines much more fairness and which does not tilt the balance between those who have and those who have not.

Possibly I could suggest that by trying to cover every aspect of Scottish rural life, it does not actually satisfy any one part, the public cash jam being spread too thinly over the rural "piece".

I just realised that even suggesting something as innocuous as that has hit a snag: I could not write that for fear the politicians might object. They seem to quite like the three or four occasions a year where they can enjoy the limelight of handing out public cash and making the big announcements on SRDP grant money.

Normal grumpy service will be resumed next week…