LAST year saw us full of optimism for a new year, decade, century and millennium. In reality, it could not have turned out much worse for British farmers and growers.

The ravages of the over-valuation of sterling and continuing unnecessary red tape have been compounded by the dreadful weather.

So what of 2001? In the face of the increasing globalisation and the opening up of world markets it is easy to feel like giving up, but there are glimmers of hope that at long last suggest we might have seen the worst.

Forecasts from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development predict prices will firm in most major commodities.

Good news, but to make sure we get the benefits we need to translate this into results for ourselves and not let it be absorbed in the middle of the chain. We must keep on returning power to producers through working together.

We need to turn round the continual fall in our sale price to deliver a fairer share of the final sale value.

Effective marketing of our products is essential and branding must be key. Here the British Farm Standard - the little red tractor logo for food - is crucial. It gives us hope for the future.

Another welcome sign is that the euro is beginning to strengthen against sterling. It always seemed to be out of line, and a more normal rate will help us enormously.

This is even more reason to ensure we create a critical mass in the market place. In the past we have failed to benefit from weakening currency - we cannot afford to let that happen again.

Added to this, the industry's fight for de-regulation is beginning to pay off. The recent better regulation task force report bore out all the NFU has said about the crippling effects of red tape.

In the run-up to the general election we need to ensure that the government lives up to its promises in this area and resists the pressure for more unnecessary rules which often come from single issue groups.

The nitrates directive is a key example of this.

I have yet to find a serious scientist who would confirm the need for the directive at its current level of 50 parts per million instead of the scientifically justified 100 parts per million.

The difference is costing our society hundreds of millions of pounds. And farmers end up bearing a lot of this cost.

If the EU and the government are intent on tearing down trade barriers, they must realise that they cannot burden us with impossible, unjustified and costly regulations.

Farmers must continue to find their sources of income in 2001 in order to weather the crisis. Diversification is vital and a key issue will be to explore in earnest the potential for non-food crops.

These can be used to tackle the climate change by absorbing carbon dioxide and also as a replacement for mineral oil.

But there must be a co-ordinated policy from the government and EU to help farmers exploit this potential additional source of income.

All of this will require a single-minded determination from everyone involved; from the scientists to give us the technology and from the government and the EU to give us the framework for change which tackles and removes unneeded bureaucracy and creates the ability for farming to prosper.

For our part we need to show that we can meet the challenge of change and turn it to our advantage.

Our role in society, the environment and the economy is vital. We must make sure that it is sustainable