Sustainable Food Supply and Cultured Meat 11.00am Dame Maria Miller
(in the Chair) I will call Sir Roger Gale to move the motion and I
will then call the Minister to respond. There will not be an
opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up, as that is the
convention for a 30-minute debate. Sir Roger Gale (North Thanet)
(Con) I beg to move, That this House has considered sustainable
food supply and cultured meat. Thank you, Dame Maria. I
apologise...Request free trial
Sustainable Food Supply
and Cultured Meat
11.00am
Dame (in the Chair)
I will call to move the motion and I will
then call the Minister to respond. There will not be an
opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up, as that is the
convention for a 30-minute debate.
(North Thanet) (Con)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered sustainable food supply and
cultured meat.
Thank you, Dame Maria. I apologise for subjecting you to myself
twice in one morning. I thank the Minister for Farming, Fisheries
and Food, my hon. Friend the Member for Banbury () for being here during an
incredibly busy week for her. I know how hard she has been
working, and I am deeply grateful for her presence. I would also
like to thank the Good Food Institute, the Nature Friendly
Farming Network, the Conservative Animal Welfare Foundation and
Ivy Farm Technologies for opening my eyes and stimulating this
debate.
It is a fact of parliamentary life that we go to a lot of
receptions. Outside this place, people think they are a waste of
time, but if we look and listen, we learn from them. The Ivy Farm
presentation stimulated my interest in a subject that, frankly, I
knew very little about until I was briefed. I am not starting
from a conclusion; I am hoping to open an ongoing debate.
I will first place on record some quotes from the Government’s
food strategy, which was published this week. The primary
objective is:
“A prosperous agri-food and seafood sector that ensures a secure
food supply in an unpredictable world and contributes to the
levelling-up agenda through good quality jobs around the
country.”
The second objective is:
“A sustainable nature positive, affordable food system that
provides choice and access to high quality products that support
healthier and home-grown diets for all.”
The next point follows on from what we were talking about this
morning and relates to Ukraine.
“The conflict in Ukraine has shown us that domestic food
production is a vital contributor to national resilience and food
security. Domestic food production can reduce the offshoring of
food production to countries that do not meet our high
environmental and animal welfare standards.”
In the foreword to the document, the Secretary of State
writes:
“Technological solutions are developing at pace. Our future
farming policy will support innovative solutions to the
environmental challenges we face.”
The final quote leads directly into what I want to briefly
discuss this morning.
“Innovation will be a key component to sustainably boost
production and profitability across the supply chain. We have
committed to spend over £270 million through our Farming
Innovation Programme and are supporting £120 million investment
in research across the food system in partnership with UK
Research and Innovation, in addition to other funding
packages.”
That is the key and why I am standing here this morning. The
potential, as I understand it, for cultivated meat is huge.
Cultivated meat, scientifically, is meat processed and produced
from tissue. It is not, and never will be, a replacement for
fillet steak, a pork chop or a leg of lamb. What it can do is
augment and supplement meat production in a way that reduces
carbon dioxide emissions and the number of animals required for
slaughter, which is an objective that most of us would like to
see followed through.
I was astonished to learn that 18% of CO2 emissions—more than all
CO2 emissions from transport globally—are caused by animals. As I
understand it, the cultivation of meat can obviate a significant
portion of those CO2 emissions, and I believe that to be a
desirable objective.
I wish to comment on one by-product of this issue. Earlier this
week, the Prime Minister launched a “grow for Britain” plan in
Cornwall; I simply say to the Minister, and through her to
Downing Street, that it is an admirable objective, but if we are
to grow for Britain, we need the farmland to grow crops on, which
means not sacrificing our prime agricultural land to development
in the way that “Builder Boris” is seeking to do at the moment.
It has got to stop.
Let me come back to the issue of cultivated meat, on which I can
be brief. Ivy Farm briefed me to indicate that, frankly, research
in this whole area is lamentably underfunded in the United
Kingdom and is therefore slow. Singapore approved the consumption
of cultivated meat in 2020. In 2021, the United States approved a
major research programme into the development of cultivated meat.
China has put cultivated meat on its development road map this
year. Canada and Israel are investing heavily indeed in this
area.
My plea to the Minister is quite simple. As I said, I do not
start from a conclusion, and I do not know what contribution
cultivated meat can make in totality to our demand, consumption
and sustainability, but I believe the potential is very
significant indeed. If that is so, it seems to me that if we in
the United Kingdom are to get ahead of the game—sadly, we too
often remain behind the curve—we have to examine carefully our
investment in research and development, and make sure that our
regulation does not get in the way of the introduction into the
market of cultivated meat.
(Central Suffolk and North Ipswich) (Con)
I congratulate my right hon. Friend on securing this debate. I
sense that he may be drawing his remarks to a conclusion and
waiting for the Minister to respond. Before he does so, could he
perhaps also comment on the importance of a proper public sector
food procurement strategy that backs British-produced food, be
that cultivated meat or meat and other agricultural products that
are farmed in this country? That is something we have not seen to
date, and there is every opportunity, now that we left the EU,
for the Government to take this issue forward.
That is slightly wider than the scope of this debate, but my hon.
Friend is absolutely right to suggest that we need a co-ordinated
initiative to ensure we deliver sustainable foods across the
board. I know that the Minister will tell us we are largely
sustainable and self-reliant with regard to meats and grains, and
that there is a shortage in vegetables and fruit. I think we can
go further. I know, because I happened to discuss this issue with
the Minister only last night—I am sure she will answer my hon.
Friend—that the Government have an initiative that may not be
entirely Conservative but is certainly valid. It does not try to
direct farmers on what they should grow but seeks to ensure
properly that the right needs are met in the right places and at
the right time.
(Strangford) (DUP)
I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on securing this debate.
Ivy Farm had a reception here that I visited with some
apprehension, to be fair, but I understood the issues and I
understand what the right hon. Gentleman suggests and the
necessity of it. He referred to the Nature Friendly Farming
Network, which is going to have a reception today. One of my
constituents, Stephen Alexander, will be there. He is involved
with Dexter cattle, and he is showing great initiative to bring
about a better product for use across the whole of Northern
Ireland. As well as the Ivy Farm example that the right hon.
Gentleman referred to, we should encourage the Nature Friendly
Farming Network that Stephen Alexander is part of.
I believe nature-friendly farming is completely compatible with
the other objectives—a point that was made to me by the network.
They are not mutually exclusive. The Conservative Animal Welfare
Foundation, to which I also referred, is not vegan or vegetarian
but it is about animal welfare. The more we can do to utilise
science and technology to improve animal welfare standards and
minimise the number of animals we actually use, while maintaining
our self-sufficiency, the better.
What I want from the Minister is simple. It is a commitment to
endeavour to invest in research and development. As I said, I am
not committed to this idea, but I do not believe we are talking
about frankenfoods or putting livestock farmers out of business.
I think the development of cultivated meat is completely
compatible with the maintenance of a live animal sector. They
should be complimentary to each other. I am not seeking to foist
yet another job on the Minister, but if it is not too big an ask,
it does seem to me that what we really need in this field is a
designated champion to take this project forward and to put us in
the vanguard of development, rather than the tail end of the
train.
11.11am
The Minister for Farming, Fisheries and Food ()
It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dame
Maria. I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Member for North
Thanet ( ) on securing a debate on such an
interesting issue. In the Government’s food strategy, which we
published on Monday, we acknowledged the opportunities for growth
in the alternative protein sector. The sector covers a wide range
of products and technologies—from cultured meat to the use of
insect-derived protein in animal feed—that, as my right hon.
Friend said, could be complementary to traditional animal
systems.
Dr Poulter
On that point, protein from different sources has different
qualities. Humans need protein that is as close as possible to
the protein in our own bodies. That is why the points that my
right hon. Friend the Member for North Thanet ( ) made about cultivated meat are
particularly relevant if we are looking at developing the sector.
Quorn and other forms of protein do not necessarily have all the
amino acids that humans need. Will my hon. Friend the Minister
take that point back to the Department after the debate?
My hon. Friend makes an important point. I politely refer him to
the Government’s food strategy, published on Monday, which
carefully makes the case for a healthy, sustainable and, above
all, balanced diet that takes into account all the nutrients we
need as the complex beings we are. Our food system is broad and
complex, and the way we regulate it affects many different
Government Departments. The way we talk about food is incredibly
personal to the individual making food choices on a daily
basis.
It is important that we as a Government do not stand here telling
people what to eat but enable them to make healthy and
sustainable choices. That is why it is important that we are
having this debate today and looking at new forms of alternative
protein that have not previously been available to us. The
strategy identifies new opportunities to make the food system
healthier, more sustainable, more resilient and more accessible
to everybody throughout England.
I would like to give my right hon. Friend the Member for North
Thanet the commitments about investment and regulation that he
has asked for. On investment, the UK has been at the forefront of
innovative protein development, and we will continue to
financially support research and innovation in that area. Indeed,
we are already doing so through our partnership with UK Research
and Innovation, investing more than £130 million in research
across the food system. We will continue to work with UKRI,
industry and consumer groups to develop joint priority areas for
funding, which will doubtless include alternative proteins.
On regulation, the Food Standards Agency is using the freedoms
offered by Brexit to review our novel foods regulatory framework.
Whenever anyone wants to put a new food on the market, they have
to do so under the aegis of those regulations.
The food strategy commits the Government to developing dedicated
guidance materials for those seeking approval for new protein
products. A great deal of cross-Government work on alternative
proteins is already taking place, with officials from the
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs collaborating
with the Food Standards Agency. The Cabinet Office is taking a
very close interest in this issue, and cross-Government meetings
are taking place with the Department for International Trade and
the Department of Health and Social Care. A group is starting to
form that will take forward the regulatory basis for alternative
protein development, if that becomes sensible.
It all sounds very exciting, although it is fair to say, as my
right hon. Friend did, that not everyone agrees on the extent of
the predicted benefits of the development of alternative
proteins. However, it is clear that cultured meat presents a
number of fascinating and promising opportunities for the future,
and that this innovative technology may well present real
economic growth potential. Though some market predictions are
perhaps over-optimistic, there is clearly a willingness among
private investors to invest in this exciting new industry.
There are significant challenges, specifically around scaling up
the new technologies to make them commercially viable and taking
steps to address any concerns about consumer acceptance.
Government officials from across Whitehall will continue to work
together on this matter. I am not going to tell people what to
eat, but I want our consumers to be presented with a wide range
of clearly labelled options. Not starting from a conclusion is a
very good attitude to take towards new forms of alternative
protein.
I refer all Members to the Government’s food strategy, which we
published on Monday. It sets out exciting new policy ideas and a
determination to support our farmers and producers to help us
with our food security. It sets a goal of national production,
and it also includes the new and quite brave idea of a land use
strategy, which I think will address some of my right hon.
Friend’s concerns about where we build, where we grow, and where
we let nature thrive without growing. The most important takeaway
from the strategy is that the Government are committed to
supporting farmers to produce the food we need for our national
food security—an issue that has rightly gone to the very top of
the political agenda.
There are also exciting points in the strategy about public
procurement, including the fact that we now have a 50% goal for
sourcing locally, and exciting announcements about innovation and
technology, which will help to address the matters that were
covered in the debate. It makes important points about
sustainable farming—regenerative farming, which we will hear
about in the nature-friendly farmers meeting that many of us will
be attending—and makes it clear that farming, the environment and
nature are not exclusive, but can and must go hand in hand. In
helping our farmers to produce the food we all need, we have to
make sure they do so in an environmentally sensitive way.
Question put and agreed to.
|
