Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP) I beg to move, That this House
has considered energy support for farms. As a matter of openness
and transparency, I declare an interest: I come from a small,
family-run farm. Thank you for chairing the debate, Mr Robertson;
it is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship. I thank the
Minister for being here and for his prior engagement on the topic.
I thank hon. Members from across the House for giving their time to
attend this...Request free trial
(Upper Bann) (DUP)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered energy support for farms.
As a matter of openness and transparency, I declare an interest:
I come from a small, family-run farm. Thank you for chairing the
debate, Mr Robertson; it is a pleasure to serve under your
chairmanship. I thank the Minister for being here and for his
prior engagement on the topic. I thank hon. Members from across
the House for giving their time to attend this debate on this
important issue.
In the constituency that I represent, the agriculture sector is
vital to our economic wellbeing. In the wise words of my
grandfather, if the farmer is not doing well, no other industry
is or will; such is the importance of our agrifood industry.
Across the wider Armagh, Banbridge and Craigavon area, we have
3,431 farms. They contribute approximately £376 million in goods
value and farm support payments into the local economy. They
provide employment in the agriculture sector and in the 265 local
agrifood sector businesses that the industry supports. In
Northern Ireland, we have 26,000 farming families. The agrifood
sector is worth more than £5 billion to the economy, and we feed
more than 10 million people with our top-quality produce.
As has been the case for all households and businesses, energy
costs on these farms have spiralled since the outbreak of the war
in Ukraine. Many farms are unavoidably energy intensive. Take
dairy, for instance. Farmers who needed to renew their energy
contract last autumn experienced increases of more than 400%.
With an electricity price of 37p per kWh, the annual cost to an
average-size dairy farm is now approximately £105 per cow. For a
250 cow herd, that adds up to £46,000 a year, which is up by
£26,000.
(North East Fife)
(LD)
I congratulate the hon. Lady on securing this important debate. I
absolutely agree with her and want to give my own example. I
represent a local seed potato farmer whose costs have increased
from £10,000 to £30,000. He has a generator and thinks he may
have to come off the grid entirely. He faces an increase not only
in energy costs, but in standing charges. Does the hon. Lady
agree that farmers face a cliff edge at the end of this month and
are disappointed that the Government did not do more to support
them through the Budget?
I think the hon. Member has been reading my speech. A cliff edge
certainly is coming for this important industry, which is the
backbone of our economy.
Another example is poultry. There has been an increase of
approximately £87 a day, which equates to about £32,000 a year.
That is a phenomenal amount, and only so much of that can be
passed on.
Ahead of the Chancellor’s spring statement last week, our farming
unions, alongside Members from across the House, had been
lobbying to bring about a change in mindset from the Government
in relation to support for farmers with energy costs. The
Government must recognise the key role of the agriculture sector
in feeding the nation. The industry needs support in the face of
energy price pressures.
The current support from the energy bill relief scheme is due to
expire at the end of March. It will be replaced by the energy
bills discount scheme, which will run for 12 months. That scheme
offers far less protection and support to businesses, with the
removal of the price cap and its being replaced by a token
discount. A pre-defined selection of industries has been
identified for additional support under the energy and
trade-intensive industries scheme. However, farming sectors have
been left off this scheme, leaving them literally out in the cold
without support. In the face of that cliff edge, the ask of the
Government was straightforward. Our farming unions, on behalf of
their members, sought the extension of the energy and
trade-intensive industry scheme to include energy-intensive
sectors, such as horticulture, poultry and pig production. That
was a reasonable ask that the Government should have listened
to.
Poultry businesses are reliant on gas and electricity to rear
poultry and store fresh produce safely. Without sufficient
support, there is no doubt that those farmers will struggle to
absorb the huge hikes in energy prices that they will face. The
same can be said for pig producers.
Mr (East Londonderry)
(DUP)
I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing the debate. As I am
sure is the case across the UK, small farm holdings in Northern
Ireland have shown great adaptability and diversification over
recent years, as times and legislation have changed. Does she
agree that the campaign and the pressure she is applying to the
Government, to which I hope they will respond positively, needs
to get them over the hump of the next 12 months, after which we
hope things will improve regarding prices and the war in Ukraine,
so that a more normalised structure can return?
I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. The point is well made
that there needs to be a short-term injection for those farmers,
so that they can continue to produce at the same levels. We will
see farming families and farms going out of business, which will
not help the overall industry or the nation’s requirement for
food produced locally.
Horticulture’s exposure is significantly greater not just for gas
for glasshouse heating but for electricity used for lighting,
chilling and storage. Without sufficient support, that sector
will be under huge strain to remain viable. Yet the
evidence-based appeal was ignored by the Chancellor. That
reasonable ask of the farming community to extend the ETII scheme
was ignored. There was no extension of ETII to support
energy-intensive farms. A range of other industries continue to
receive support. High-level energy relief continues to several
sectors, including food processing and manufacturing, but the
primary producer is forgotten. The Government once more ask the
farmer to do more with less, and that is simply not possible.
I thank the hon. Lady for giving way again. Wholesale energy
prices are already falling. The Government have not spent the
amount of money that they had expected to spend on their
energy-relief schemes. Does she agree that the Government have
the headroom to go over and above what they announced in the
Budget and to date? They could use those additional funds to
support our farmers.
I absolutely agree with the hon. Lady. There is the headroom and
available money. I encourage the Government to do the right thing
by the industry and to support those farmers at this time of
need. This decision will have consequences; the cliff edge will
be too much for some farmers. They will exit the industry and
others will reduce output, unable to absorb the cost of
maintaining their current output. Consequently, UK food
production will fall, processors and manufacturers in the supply
chain will be impacted, food inflation may well increase, and
consumers ultimately will end up paying more.
No one wins from this decision. I believe it is still in the
interests of the Treasury and the Government as whole, the
agrifood industry and consumers that this decision is revisited.
I ask the Minister to undertake to explore this comprehensive
case once more, and to step up with the support these farms need
to face the challenge and conditions they find themselves in. I
also invite him to visit my constituency in his ministerial
capacity to witness at first hand the value that these farms add
to our economy and the pressure that they are currently
feeling.
We need to back British farming. The Government demand the
highest standards of our farmers and must repay their endeavours
to produce world-class produce to the best animal welfare,
environmental and sustainability standards with sufficient levels
of support to enable them to do just that.
2.40pm
(Strangford) (DUP)
It is indeed a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr
Robertson, and an even greater pleasure to support my hon. Friend
the Member for Upper Bann (). She has outlined very
clearly the problems that her constituents in Upper Bann are
having, and I want to reflect on those problems as well.
It is also a pleasure to see the Minister in his place. He
reminded me at 11 o’clock that this debate was on— I was already
going to come, by the way. It is a real pleasure to be here. I
think that he has already told me that whatever I ask for, he
will respond in a positive fashion. I am not quite sure how that
will work out, but perhaps my hon. Friend the Member for Upper
Bann could give me a list of things to ask for. I say that in
jest, by the way, but I know that the Minister will reply in a
very positive fashion and I appreciate that.
My hon. Friend the Member for Upper Bann is truly an advocate, in
every sense of the word, for her constituents. She is also—I say
this respectfully—a credit to her constituency and to us as her
colleagues. We are very pleased to have her here alongside us
today and we are equally pleased to support her.
I declare an interest as a landowner and a farmer, and a member
of the Ulster Farmers’ Union. As my hon. Friend and I both hail
from rural constituencies, we are often of one mind and one
voice. Everyone else present is also of that one voice because
the issue raised by my hon. Friend affects many constituencies
across this whole United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland.
It is hard to know what more can be added to the comprehensive
case that my hon. Friend has made today, but I will certainly do
my best to contribute to this debate in a positive fashion.
Farmers and farm businesses are heading towards crisis, which
will not be a matter of a few “Closed” signs and a closed door;
instead, it is a matter of food security, which is of the utmost
importance to this House.
I chair the all-party parliamentary group on eggs, pigs and
poultry. There is no better APPG to chair, by the way; I love
telling people about it. Everybody says, “Well, you’ll have a
good breakfast every morning”, and I probably do. I always have
two eggs every morning; I do not always have bacon or sausages,
but I always have my eggs.
In my constituency of Strangford, the eggs, pigs and poultry
sectors have intensive businesses with high energy usage. They
have been encouraged to produce more food over the years, and to
invest to do so. They have done that. The old saying, “You need
to speculate to accumulate”, only really works if someone can
speculate in a way whereby they know they will get a return. The
problem is that with energy costs being so high, that speculation
is now looking rather doubtful for many farmers, which is why we
worry.
In my constituency of Strangford, we have the world-famous Comber
spud. There is no spud like it; there are no potatoes like it in
the whole world. By the way, Europe recognised that and I have to
say that I had a small role to play in getting the Comber spud
recognised by Europe. My colleague at that time was . He and I pursued that
objective and the Comber potato is now highly recognised and
valued, not only right across the whole of the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but as far away as
Europe.
The very famous Comber potato is produced by farmers in my area.
They are immensely proud of that product, as they rightly should
be. In my constituency of Strangford, we are blessed with
precisely the right climate to be able to produce three crops of
potatoes per year instead of the standard two. As I say, that is
due to the climate, but it is also down to the soil. I would say,
without fear of being contradicted, that there is no better soil
in Northern Ireland to do that. And what a joy it is to represent
that constituency, which has, as I say, the best soil there
is.
The difficulty for the businesses in my constituency is that the
cost of production has risen but the cost to the agrifood
industry of converting potatoes into mash pots—which is where
nearly all potatoes seem to go now—or whatever form they take,
means that they cannot provide as much food as they potentially
could. That is due to the rising energy costs.
(Orkney and Shetland)
(LD)
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving way and I remind
the House of my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial
Interests. He touches on the most important part of the debate.
The issue is not just that farmers face increased energy costs,
but that that is part of the overall package. They have labour
shortages and are under the cosh in just about every way
imaginable. Consequently, if they are not able to meet the
demand, other food sources will come through trade deals, and
once they fill that gap in the market, we will never get them
out.
The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. I will refer to
that shortly and give an example. There are many issues with
workforce and the supply of products as well. We have had
problems over the last year, before and after Christmas, and I
wish to refer to them as well.
Over the years, Government have encouraged farms to diversify and
modernise, providing grants for new equipment and technology.
However, Government have not taken into account the fact that
costs have quadrupled in the space of a year for many farmers,
and grants and subsidies certainly do not meet those rising
costs. When I speak to farmers in my constituency about the
possibilities for renewable energy—there are quite a few who are
trying to do it—I learn that, unfortunately, they have heard too
many stories of fields being used for solar energy with only £100
being saved on the electricity bill. They would be better off
renting out their field for a birthday party bouncy castle, which
would bring in more revenue than £100. The numbers do not seem to
add up for many and that is why we must now step in and sow
solutions into the problem. Hopefully, the Minister will give us
some ideas about what can be done to assist and help.
The lifeblood of this nation lies in self-sustainability. The
right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael)
referred to that. The UK does not produce enough fruit and
vegetables for its population to get the recommended five
portions a day. Even without taking waste into account, the
United Kingdom would need to produce or import 9% more fruit and
veg for everyone to be able to eat the recommended amount. That
is not possible while farmers do not have the ability to produce
and process in profit.
The recent debacle with the fruit and vegetable shortage
highlighted a pertinent point: the UK depends on Morocco and
Spain for vegetables during the winter. It does not have the
workforce to sustain and gather all the fruit and veg in the
summer. There are opportunities to do that better and to work
ahead. Because of heavy rains and floods, suppliers have been hit
by the problem of ferry cancellations, which has, in turn,
affected lorry transport. At one stage, the Secretary of State
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs had to reply in the House
as to why food was so scarce. To be fair, it was not the
Secretary of State’s fault, but ultimately the need to find a
solution fell at her feet.
Supermarkets have also had shortages of broccoli and citrus
fruits and we were left with rationing. I am not an avocado man,
but my wife mentioned that they were in short supply as well. We
never eat them, by the way, so I do not know why she told me
that. I could not figure it out because it did not really make
that much difference. However, farmers know they could fill the
breach with other seasonable vegetables if they had the capacity
to do so in a profit-making venture. If it comes to speculating,
to accumulate we need to encourage the farmers to do just
that.
Generations of farmers are prepared to carry on with the family
farm and the back-breaking, morale-destroying and socially
isolating nature of their work. We may not give farmers enough
credit for all they do. They work away. I have always lived in
the countryside, so I am aware of that from friends I went to
school with and others I know quite well. Also, I live on a farm
and my neighbours are all intensive farmers. But they cannot do
this without support and the recent payment does not even make a
dent in what is needed.
I back my hon. Friend the Member for Upper Bann in her calls for
meaningful support. This is not only a matter of saving a job;
this is about saving the nation’s ability to survive alone, and
that is worth any investment in my eyes and hopefully in those of
the Minister.
2.49pm
(North Ayrshire and Arran)
(SNP)
I too congratulate and thank the hon. Member for Upper Bann
() for securing this debate,
in which I am pleased to be participating. It is important that
the challenges facing our farming sector are properly aired, and
it is a little disappointing that the debate has not attracted
more interest from across the House.
Farming that uses more energy—for example, the horticultural and
poultry sectors—is not included in the UK Government’s definition
of energy and trade intensive industries. There will therefore be
a reduction in the energy cost support for farms, which has
caused understandable and great disquiet.
The omission of horticulture is particularly frustrating. The
question posed by the National Farmers Union, to which we would
all like an answer, is: why are botanical gardens included in the
scheme, but not food grown in greenhouses? That is not to take
anything away from botanical gardens, but it seems quite out of
kilter and bewildering. European farmers have been supported with
a €500 million package to help with production costs, but farmers
in Scotland and across the UK feel that the support they have
been asking for has not been forthcoming.
As the Minister is aware, it was very much hoped that the
Chancellor, in his Budget last week, would extend the definition
of energy and trade intensive industries. It is extremely
frustrating that that did not happen. As production costs soar,
many farmers and food producers face a cliff edge of support.
“Cliff edge” is an expression that every speaker in the debate
has used. Many producers simply do not know how they will be able
to keep going. Where in the Government’s priorities does domestic
food production come? Unless the definition is extended, there
may well be a reduction in production, which will risk
longer-running food price inflation for consumers and could
negatively impact the thousands of supply chain companies
sustained by the farming sector.
Recent weeks have demonstrated how important domestic food
production is, but it is energy intensive. We only have to think
back to the recent tomato shortage as a prime example of what can
go wrong if the farming sector is not supported. The vast
majority of UK tomatoes are grown in greenhouses, which is
clearly energy intensive. That, alongside the soaring cost of
fertiliser, has given farmers cause to review what food they can
actually afford to grown. Indeed, many have opted not to grow
vegetables this winter, since there is a genuine lack of
confidence that they would be able to cover the costs associated
with energy-intensive crops. Cucumbers, which are also energy
intensive, are expected to be another casualty. More generally, a
shortage of domestic produce right across the board is now
expected next year. Farmers cannot be expected to grow produce
when they cannot even cover their costs. The reality is that it
is simply not viable to grow under glass unless farming is
recognised to be an energy-intensive business.
The only way to ensure that we have fresh domestic produce on our
shelves is for the UK Government to understand what everyone else
understands: that food production is energy intensive. It is
bewildering that that argument has to be made. If that is not
recognised, a shortage of fresh domestic produce on supermarkets
shelves will become a familiar sight. The disruption of
international supply chains means that we cannot even have
imported fresh produce, as we saw recently with tomatoes. It will
not be because of rain in Spain or Moroccan weather changes, as
we were told recently when tomatoes became like hens’ teeth; it
will be because of inaction from this Government.
There can be no doubt that Brexit has posed huge challenges for
domestic food production. Farmers were promised a Brexit bonanza,
but the reality is that they have been left paying the price for
the damage caused by the Brexit adventure. Some people may think,
“Well she would say that, wouldn’t she?” but the chair of Save
British Food has also observed:
“I keep hearing that Spain is being blamed for the food shortages
in Britain and this is absolute nonsense. The reason we have food
shortages in Britain—and they don’t have food shortages in Spain
or anywhere else in the EU—is because of Brexit and because of
this disastrous Conservative government that have no interest in
food production or farming or even food supply. That’s why we are
in this mess. The Conservatives with their Brexit have messed up
our trade and made that very difficult. This has also impacted
the labour supply as it ended freedom of movement. It has also
removed the cap and food subsidies, then add on top of that the
Ukraine war and Covid and all of the inflation. All of this was
predicted and predictable.”
Those are not my words; they are the words of the chair of Save
British Food, who I suspect knows a thing or two about British
food. She is now part of a growing chorus of people who have
concluded that the only way to fix the problem is to
“get back into the single market and customs union”.
The woes are not hard to find; they are piling up for farmers at
an alarming rate. The Public Accounts Committee criticised the
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for its “blind
optimism” over the implementation of the UK Government’s
alternative to the EU’s common agricultural policy funds, with a
lack of detail as to how alternative funding will provide the
help needed.
(in the Chair)
Order. I gently remind the hon. Member that the debate is on
energy support for farms. It is quite a narrow title.
Mr Robertson, you intervened at the right moment. I was setting
out the general context for farmers. I have talked about energy
support, but I am putting it in the context of the bigger
challenges our farming sector faces. I take your point about the
title of the debate.
We can barely imagine the sense of betrayal and abandonment that
farmers feel when they look at their EU counterparts, who have a
£500 million support package to help with production costs. That
is a lump sum to farmers and agrifood businesses affected by the
significant increase in input costs, such as energy, fertiliser
and animal feed. All that UK farmers are asking for is similar
support. Energy costs are the obstacle that is going to hit
domestic food production across the UK—there is no debate about
that. On top of energy costs, farmers have to deal with chronic
labour shortages, with £22 million of fruit having rotted in the
fields because of the labour shortage caused by the end of
freedom of movement.
The Scottish Government are doing what they can with their
limited powers to support farmers. The Minister does not need me
to tell him that energy support is reserved to the UK Government.
It is to the UK Government that our farmers are looking and
hoping; they are asking and lobbying them to take note of the
devastating impact that we will see on the farming sector and
domestic food production if farming is not rightly recognised as
an energy-intensive business—that should be no surprise to
anybody.
When we get down to it, this debate is really about whether
domestic food production matters. If it does not matter, then the
Government can tell us about that position. I believe, as do many
others, that it does matter, and that it requires the support
that has been called for today. I hope the Minister will listen,
and then go back to his colleagues to make the strong, robust
case to include horticulture and poultry in the energy and trade
intensive industries scheme. Otherwise, the damage to our farming
sector and to domestic food production will be nothing short of
catastrophic.
2.59pm
(Southampton, Test)
(Lab)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Upper Bann () on securing the debate. It
is on an important and usually forgotten part of our current
energy debates. We talk generally about domestic customers and
industry and commerce and what they get in the various energy
bill support schemes and discount schemes and so on, but we very
rarely talk about farming or agriculture.
We tend to think that there is not much energy going into these
rural buildings. We completely overlook just how much energy is
used by farms, particularly in intensive industries such as
poultry farming and horticulture where an enormous amount of
energy is used in many parts of the process. It is rather hidden
behind the seemingly low-cost, low-energy appearance of the rural
environment.
It is important to concentrate on the farming sector’s problems
with energy costs and what they mean for the ability of such
businesses to sustain themselves. We must also think about what
that means for the on-costs for everybody else, such as effects
on the cost of food production. Many farms are pushed between the
prices they are going to get for their end products from further
up the chain and their own costs coming in. We must consider how
they are going to make a living between those two points.
The hon. Member for Upper Bann gave examples of just how much
energy costs have gone up for relatively small farms in her area.
Those costs are, of course, replicated across the United Kingdom.
She made a strong case for the question of energy support for
farms to be looked at with a far wider lens that encompasses not
just the small contributions that have been made to farms through
the energy bill support scheme and others—though I know Northern
Ireland has a slightly different scheme from the rest of the UK,
where the payments are lumped together. There has been a
considerable debate in Northern Ireland about the extent to which
farms that are both domestic properties and farms get the full
amount of payment through the scheme. Indeed, I have discussed
with Ministers in Delegated Legislation Committee proceedings the
rather complicated nature of that process.
The hon. Member for Upper Bann put forward the case that,
notwithstanding Northern Ireland’s scheme, farms ought to be
treated as part of an energy-intensive industry. I am sure hon.
Members will be interested to know what actually is classed as an
energy-intensive industry. The starting point for being treated
as an energy- intensive sector is to fall in the 80th percentile
for energy intensity—meaning it must fall in the top 20% for
energy intensity across the UK—and the 60th percentile for trade
intensity. So there is a formula as to what gets on the list of
energy-intensive industries and can then receive additional
support from the EBRS and be substantially exempted from
environmental levies on the whole industry. The exemption has
been 85% for quite a while, and there are discussions about
whether it should be increased to 100% in the not-too-distant
future. Categorisation as an energy-intensive industry is
important, in a number of ways, to getting support with
energy.
It is curious that poultry processing, for example, is on the
list of energy-intensive sectors, but poultry production is not,
and that things relating to ornamental plants are on the list,
but horticulture is not. I suspect that may be because of the
NACE—nomenclature of economic activities—classes, which define
sectors. It may be that what look to us like sectors—poultry and
horticulture, for example—are lost in the wider definition of a
class such as agriculture and farming.
The Government should review fairly urgently how sectors are
defined for energy intensity purposes. Seventy-one sectors come
under the definition of energy-intensive industries. Is farming
simply losing out because, as the sector is defined, its
relatively lower-carbon elements dilute the elements with greater
energy intensity? Such a review is well overdue. If the sectors
were drawn a bit more closely, I think farming—or at least
substantial elements of it, in the way that the hon. Member for
Upper Bann described—would come under the definition.
Curiously, coalmining is defined as an energy-intensive industry
and therefore 85% exempt from environmental levies, when we might
think that that activity has something to do with the raising of
those levies in the first place. There may be a wider case for
redefining what counts as an energy-intensive industry.
This is a very important issue, and the Government could do
something about it, not simply by providing a larger cash amount
to farms, but by defining much more clearly what it is to run a
farm and how energy use affects such definitions. The Government
can look again at those definitions, and I hope that the Minister
will commit to doing just that.
3.09pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Energy Security
and Net Zero ()
It is an absolute pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr
Robertson. I thank all hon. Members for joining us in Westminster
Hall for this debate. All of us—especially those of us who
represent rural constituencies—are aware of the challenges that
farmers are facing at the minute. I wish to express my gratitude
to the hon. Member for Upper Bann () for bringing forward this
debate and for her dedicated campaign to back British
farming.
The Government have implemented several comprehensive support
schemes across the UK to assist farmers in coping with energy
costs. In particular, I wish to address the support being
provided in Northern Ireland, given the vital contribution of
farming and agriculture to the economy there.
I understand how fundamental agriculture and the wider agrifood
industry is to Northern Ireland, employing more than 50,000
people across 26,000 farms. Northern Ireland is renowned at home
for the quality of its produce. Farms are at the heart of the
agrifood industry, which contributes £4.5 billion in turnover
every year, helping to deliver a stronger, more secure economy in
Northern Ireland. Before I go any further, let me say that I
would be delighted to take the hon. Lady up on her invitation to
visit Upper Bann and see farms operating in her constituency.
Given the industry’s importance, it is right that the
Government’s energy schemes have offered much-needed support to
farmers over the winter in the face of high and rising energy
costs. On 1 October, we introduced the energy bill relief scheme,
which will continue to run until the end of this month. It
provides a discount on the wholesale component of gas and
electricity bills and has provided protection to farmers from
excessively high energy costs over the winter period. Support
offered by this package is worth £7.3 billion and it is available
across the entire United Kingdom.
Although energy prices are coming down, and it is right that we
balance continued support with energy costs with our duty to the
taxpayer, we also recognise that prices remain far above
historical levels. For that reason, although the energy bill
relief scheme is coming to an end, we have pledged to provide
further support to non-domestic customers, including our farming
industry, from April onwards through the energy bills discount
scheme. The EBDS will continue to provide support to eligible
non-domestic customers with their energy bills from April this
year until the end of March 2024.
It is true that the EBDS baseline support is significantly
reduced compared with that of the current energy bill relief
scheme. That is to reflect the welcome reduction in wholesale
energy prices. The Government make no apology for ensuring that
the taxpayer is protected; we need to focus our support where it
is most needed. Under the support package, energy and
trade-intensive industries will receive a higher level of support
than the baseline element. That is essential if those industries
are to maintain their competitive edge against their
international counterparts as they are less able to pass on
increased costs to their consumers.
Before I move on, I wish to address the specific points that were
raised. It is a great pleasure to see the hon. Member for
Strangford () back in the Chamber for the second time today. I am
delighted to address his points, although I take issue with his
assertion that the Comber spud is the greatest potato in the
world. I think a tattie howked from the Howe o’ the Mearns is the
far superior potato when it comes to international comparisons.
None the less, I do take on board all of what he said. I know
that, as a diligent Member of Parliament for an incredibly rural
constituency, like me, he speaks from his heart when he talks
about representing his farming constituents. I associate myself
entirely with his comments on the socially isolated nature of
farming in the 21st century. We must do all that we can to
support farmers in the incredibly important work that they do to
support this country and, indeed, to export great British produce
around the world.
The shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Southampton, Test (Dr
Whitehead), raised eminently sensible and pertinent points. I
commit to looking at the definition of an energy-intensive
industry, and specifically at his point about how the less
carbon-intensive elements of farming may reduce the overall
burden of carbon intensity.
Let me turn to the hon. Member for North Ayrshire and Arran
(), the spokesperson for the
Scottish National party. I will not take any lectures from the
SNP on supporting Scottish farmers. It is not the Conservative
Government, but the SNP Government who have been accused by the
National Farmers Union Scotland of leaving farmers to operate in
an information void, given the lack of progress on the Scottish
post-Brexit farming Bill.
If the hon. Lady really is as passionate as she says she is about
supporting domestic food production in Scotland, perhaps she will
make the case within the SNP Government that they should get on
board and extend the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Bill
to Scotland, just as the NFUS has asked them to. That could be a
great fillip and a great boost for Scottish farming, given that
so much of the technology in that field is being developed in
Scotland. Other than that, the hon. Lady did make some important
points regarding supporting Scottish farmers, which, of course, I
take on board.
I thank the hon. Member for Upper Bann for raising the issue of
farms not being eligible for the additional targeted support of
the energy and trade-intensive industries scheme. I am aware that
the National Farmers Union and the Ulster Farmers Union have
raised similar concerns. I want to stress that the energy and
trade-intensive industries eligible sectors list is targeted and
comprehensive. It was developed to support sectors in the top
20th percentile for energy intensity and the top 40th percentile
for trade intensity in the UK, notwithstanding what I said in
reply to the hon. Member for Southampton, Test about the carbon
intensity of some elements of farming.
Sadly, the farming sector does not meet the ETII eligibility
criteria at the minute and is therefore not eligible to receive
the targeted support. Although I recognise that the hon. Member
for Upper Bann would wish us to go further, I hope she will
understand that we have sought to be fair in applying the
criteria rigorously and objectively. We do not have plans to
extend the scope of eligible sectors to include farms, as
confirmed by the Chancellor at the Budget. However, the
non-domestic alternative fuel payment offers one-time support of
£150 to approximately 76,000 customers in Northern Ireland and
315,000 non-domestic customers without access to mains gas,
including some farms, throughout Great Britain. High users of
heating oil can apply for a top-up payment based on their usage
over the past year.
It is essential that we look at energy bills support for farms
and farmers in the round. Although farms will benefit from the
EBDS at its base support level, rather than at the enhanced level
for energy and trade-intensive industries, they will also benefit
from funding available to domestic customers. That includes the
energy price guarantee, the alternative fuel payment and the
energy bills support scheme. The energy price guarantee reduces
electricity and gas costs for domestic customers, aiming to lower
annual bills, combat fuel poverty and maintain supplier market
stability. The scheme covers approximately 29 million
households.
In Northern Ireland, all households are receiving a combined
payment of £400 from the energy bills support scheme and a £200
alternative fuel payment, regardless of whether they use
alternative fuels or mains gas to heat their homes. That payment
has been provided by electricity suppliers to all households with
a domestic meter and a contract. That will include farmhouses
with a domestic meter. Farms in Northern Ireland with a combined
meter are covered by the alternative funding, to which I will
turn shortly. Suppliers began making payments on 16 January and
have confirmed that all first attempts to reach all customers
have been made. Efforts are now ongoing to reach those who
encountered challenges in the first pass, such as vouchers
addressed to the wrong individual or failed bank transfers. Those
who have not yet received their vouchers or a payment into their
bank account should immediately contact their electricity
supplier.
In Great Britain, the energy bills support scheme is being
delivered as a discount on energy bills and provided by suppliers
in monthly instalments from October 2022 to March 2023. As we are
now approaching the end of the scheme’s final month, I urge all
hon. Members to join the Government in highlighting to their
constituents who use traditional prepayment meters the importance
of acting now to redeem their energy bills support scheme
vouchers.
Over the weekend, it was indicated in a newspaper that 20,000
households in Northern Ireland have not received their benefit.
Is there any way that the Minister can ascertain who those 20,000
households are? Are some of them farmers? We suspect that they
are. There was certainly an issue early on, with some farmhouses
not receiving the benefit. Would the Minister be so generous as
to find out the answer to that question?
Across the entire United Kingdom, 1.9 million vouchers remain
unused, which is why I ask all hon. Members to encourage people
who have not received their vouchers, or who are not receiving
the discount that they should be, to contact their electricity
supplier, either directly or through their Member of Parliament.
I will find out the fuller answer to the hon. Gentleman’s
specific question on where those people are.
For those without a domestic energy supply, who were not eligible
for automatic support, we have introduced the energy bills
support scheme alternative funding in Great Britain and its
Northern Ireland counterpart, the energy bills support scheme
alternative funding for Northern Ireland. They offer one-off,
non-repayable payments of £400 and £600 respectively. In Northern
Ireland, applications are processed by our contracted delivery
partner, with Government support. The £600 payment in Northern
Ireland comprises £400 for energy bills, as in Great Britain, and
£200 for alternative fuels, mirroring the payments under the main
energy bills support scheme in Northern Ireland.
The Government are committed to providing assistance to farmers,
households and businesses affected by high energy costs. The
comprehensive schemes that I have outlined have been designed to
offer support when it is most needed and alleviate the burden on
our citizens and businesses during these challenging times.
I congratulate the hon. Member for Upper Bann on securing this
debate on a subject of great importance to many farms, businesses
and households. I commit to taking away all that she and others
have raised about the high intensity of those businesses. I would
be delighted not just to visit her constituency but to work
further with her if my Department can provide further assistance
to ensure that support reaches all those who need it as swiftly
as possible.
3.20pm
I thank everyone who participated in the debate. Farming is
clearly the backbone of our economy, and it was important to
highlight this issue. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for
Strangford () for raising food security. His constituency always
gets a mention. No one is in any doubt about the importance of
Comber spuds.
I thank the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr
Carmichael) for highlighting not just the energy issue, but
labour shortages and the effect of the increase in production on
feed and so on. That was an important point.
I thank the hon. Member for North Ayrshire and Arran () for highlighting the lack
of support and raising the need to prioritise domestic food
production. She digressed slightly with some of her views on
Brexit, but her overall point about energy and the need for more
support for our farming families was well made.
I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Southampton,
Test (Dr Whitehead), for his contribution. He made the important
point that the Government need to look at the definition, and the
Minister said he would do just that. The shadow Minister asked
whether the definition is being diluted; we need to look at that
important point.
I thank the Minister for his comments in this important debate.
He highlighted that lots of support has been given out, but it
really is a drop in the open. He will understand why I say that I
do not believe it goes far enough. I encourage him to look again
at the definition and include farming in the intensive industries
list. It is intensive, and it needs more support or farming
families will be diminished across the United Kingdom. We do not
want to see that; we want more food to be produced in this United
Kingdom. We want to serve our communities and produce high-class,
quality produce for all to feed on.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered energy support for farms.
|