Simon Jupp (East Devon) (Con) I beg to move, That this House has
considered support for British farming. It is a pleasure to serve
under your chairmanship, Sir Gary. I am delighted to have secured
this timely debate, which is an opportunity for colleagues from
across the House to voice their support for British farming. We
have a lot to celebrate, alongside some concerns. As the Member of
Parliament for East Devon, I am proud to represent a corner of the
UK with...Request free trial
(East Devon) (Con)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered support for British farming.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Gary. I am
delighted to have secured this timely debate, which is an
opportunity for colleagues from across the House to voice their
support for British farming. We have a lot to celebrate,
alongside some concerns.
As the Member of Parliament for East Devon, I am proud to
represent a corner of the UK with an extremely rich farming
heritage. Devon’s farmers play a key role in the life of our
county. Around 100,000 people get a snippet of that every year at
the Devon County Show at Westpoint arena, which is held almost
every July.
We know that the freshest, most sustainable and best produce is
both local and seasonal. Local produce from across the south-west
is found on shelves across the UK and around the globe. With that
in mind, trade deals are of benefit to our region. We must take
advantage of our Brexit freedoms, but we must also work harder to
take the farming community with us. Leaving the EU allows the UK
to leave behind a bureaucratic and inefficient farming policy.
The Government rightly want to use our new-found powers to reward
farmers for doing more to help improve the environment while also
producing high-quality food.
However, the farming industry needs more certainty to both
survive and thrive. I regularly hold roundtable events with the
farming community in East Devon, and I hear that message about
clarity loud and clear. Last month, I invited local farmers to a
roundtable event with senior officials from the Department for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Rural Payments
Agency. Farmers, agents and others are eager to see how various
elements of the new farming funding system will underpin their
sustainable and resilient businesses. Support schemes will need
to be accessible and simple, and they will also need to reward
farmers fairly for taking part in them.
So my first plea in this debate is that DEFRA looks to accelerate
the development and roll-out of the sustainable farming
incentive. Incentivising farmers to take part in rewilding
schemes or to plant trees on prime agricultural land may seem a
worthy policy in Whitehall, but it will not put food on the table
in the west country. Farmers have said to me, “You cannot eat
trees.” Needless to say, a balance is required. Food production
and environmental sustainability are not necessarily in
competition, and nor are they mutually exclusive, but support
schemes should always encourage farmers to produce food. That is
the only way to deliver on the ambition of the UK food strategy
to maintain or increase our food self-sufficiency, which is all
the more important given the ongoing war in Ukraine.
(Newton Abbot) (Con)
Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the challenges resulting
from the war in Ukraine has been the increasing cost of energy
and that one challenge for farmers is the cost of energy? In his
autumn statement, the Chancellor said that he would provide
additional targeted relief for businesses. Does my hon. Friend
agree that those businesses must include farmers?
My hon. Friend makes a good point. It is incredibly important
that the agricultural industry is recognised, because energy
bills have shot up. Also, quite a few of our agricultural
businesses in Devon and beyond rely on heating oil. We know that
additional support is on the way, but we will have to wait and
see whether that is enough for people to weather the storm.
However, I and other MPs in the south-west of all party political
colours will be listening to our farmers and representing their
views back to Government.
Putting domestic food production first should also apply to trade
negotiations. Britain is now free independently to strike new
trade deals across the world, and colleagues should have enough
time and opportunity to scrutinise such arrangements in the
House. Giving Parliament more say in the process, in terms of
both the negotiating mandate and the scrutiny of these trade
deals, will strengthen the consent for them from the farming
industry and the public. That is very clear.
I sympathise with the comments made by my right hon. Friend
Member for Camborne and Redruth (), who recently criticised
the path undertaken by the Government in signing the trade deal
with Australia. The deal undoubtedly brings benefits, but as a
Government we can and must do better in the future. In the summer
of 2020, I supported an amendment on food standards tabled by the
former Member for Tiverton and Honiton to the Agriculture Bill.
The Government listened and acted, setting out that our high
standards for domestic and imported products will remain.
I particularly welcomed the setting up of the independent Trade
and Agriculture Commission, which must ensure that the voices of
everyone involved in food production are properly heard. I would
really like to see more engagement between commission officials
and MPs, with the commission bringing back some of the regional
evidence sessions that it held back in 2020. Those were
invaluable in feeding back concerns from farming communities in
Devon, the wider south-west and across the country.
There are many other topical issues I would like to touch on
before I conclude my remarks, and which I am sure are high in the
new Minister’s in-tray—not least rising input costs for things
such as fertiliser, slurry rules and avian influenza. Those
issues are playing on the minds of local farmers, alongside
significant concerns about abattoir capacity in the south-west
and across the country.
I will finish my remarks by talking about workforce shortages.
Those are an acute issue across the agricultural industry,
especially in the south-west, and DEFRA must keep working closely
with the Home Office on a long-term strategy for the food and
farming workforce. Farming is a skilled career, and it is a
labour of love for many. Excellent colleges, such as Bicton in my
constituency, keep the flame alive in the younger generation, but
is it enough and are we doing enough to encourage young people
into these careers? There are ample career opportunities for UK
workers in the food and farming sectors, but are we selling that
dream to people who are thinking of joining the industry or who
have an interest in working on our land?
The farming industry needs sufficient access to labour in the
meantime, with the industry calling for the seasonal worker
scheme to be increased to a minimum five-year rolling programme
to help give farms certainty to invest. The Prime Minister
committed to look at expanding seasonal worker schemes in his
leadership campaign during the summer, and he was absolutely
right to do so. I hope that that is something that DEFRA
Ministers and the Home Office can take forward, particularly for
the poultry and pig industries, which have faced real problems in
the last 12 to 18 months.
(North East Fife)
(LD)
The hon. Gentleman is making a proud defence of British farming.
One of the challenges is around the seasonal agricultural workers
scheme—that is certainly true in my constituency, where we will
end up with food rotting in the fields, because there are not
sufficient people to harvest it. The hon. Gentleman talked about
training people from the UK and bringing them into the industry,
but does he acknowledge that the changes to the scheme mean that
those people from overseas who worked in the sector for a long
time are now prevented from coming here and cannot pass on their
skills to the next generation?
That is an interesting point and it needs exploring, which is why
I am asking for more flexibility in the schemes the Government
provide. We know that this is an acute issue in the area that my
hon. Friend represents, but also in the area that I represent.
The industry is very clear on this issue, which is why I am
mentioning its views today.
Unprecedented events are placing a lot of pressure on our
farmers, so today’s debate is a timely opportunity for the House
to demonstrate its support for the industry, and I am glad to see
so many people here who want to do so. Farmers are the custodians
of our countryside. They create new habitats, protect wildlife,
produce the raw ingredients that feed our nation, and export food
around the globe. It is a seven-day-a-week profession and a
labour of love across many generations. I look forward to hearing
colleagues’ contributions and to hearing from the Minister, who
is experienced and knowledgeable, about his support for British
farming.
Several hon. Members rose—
(in the Chair)
Colleagues can see that the debate is well attended. There are
nine colleagues wishing to catch my eye, and they will have about
five and a half minutes each until the winding-up speeches
begin.
2.39pm
(Barnsley Central) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Gary, and to
follow the hon. Member for East Devon (); he made an excellent speech,
and I warmly congratulate him on securing this important
debate.
I should say at the outset that I have a long-standing love of
the countryside and have spent a lot of my life on farms over the
years. For the purposes of transparency, I want to declare that
my son is at agricultural college in Yorkshire, my parents-in-law
are farmers, and I am the grandson of a farm worker. I should
also say that a sizeable portion of the borough of Barnsley is in
a national park, and I am proud that there are a number of farms
in my constituency.
Let me say something about the challenges farmers face and what I
think we should be doing to support them. The UK benefits from
better food security if British farmers produce more food. The
war in Ukraine has brought that into sharp focus, as it has
caused an abrupt decline in global food production, but the UK
has experienced a longer decline. According to the National
Farmers Union, we now produce 60% of our domestic food
consumption, down from 80% in the 1980s. The Government have an
important role to play in reversing that trend, but we can all
play our part by buying local produce.
A recent report by the CPRE showed that, pound for pound,
spending in smaller, independent, local food outlets supports
three times as many jobs as spending at supermarkets, and buying
direct can be even better for some farmers. In my area, the Hill
family, who run a local dairy farm, have shown entrepreneurial
spirit by setting up a very sophisticated vending machine so that
people can buy their dairy products directly. They call it “Milk
From The Hills”—local milk from local cows helping local
farmers.
Members who speak to their local farmers know that farming has
rarely, if ever, been easy. So we must support farmers during
difficult times, and the latest outbreak of avian influenza is a
timely reminder of that. I acknowledge the need for the
Government’s national housing order for poultry, along with steps
to improve the compensation scheme, although there is some way to
go to get that right. Ultimately, strong biosecurity will help
prevent and mitigate many threats, but the Public Accounts
Committee reported last week that the Government are not
prioritising the significant threat to UK health, trade, farming
and rural communities posed by animal diseases. That has led to
the Animal and Plant Health Agency site in Weybridge having more
than 1,000 single points of failure. The completion of the
redevelopment programme, due in 2036, will be cold comfort to
farmers, especially given that avian influenza is not the only
threat.
(Orkney and Shetland)
(LD)
The hon. Gentleman is right about the contribution of biosecurity
to tackling avian influenza, but does he agree that, because of
the interaction between the wild bird population and domestic
birds, biosecurity will never be the whole answer to the problem?
To be honest, I do not know what the answer is, but to put all
our metaphorical and political eggs in the biosecurity basket
risks leaving us with no solution in the long term.
The right hon. Gentleman makes a very important point. I
understand that there will be a debate on that subject in the
House next Wednesday. That is a really important opportunity for
Members to put points to the Minister, who takes these things
very seriously. I hope that that debate will be well supported. I
am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his intervention.
On biosecurity, African swine fever is a real danger, but the
Government have not yet shown that they appreciate the need for
strong border checks. I would be grateful if the Minister could
say something about the need to keep it out of this country. It
is in Germany, and many hon. Members are concerned about the
potential for it to come here.
Farmers do diligent work to keep their livestock healthy, and we
all respect the fact that farming can be physically demanding.
Despite recent advances in technology, it can, as we heard from
the hon. Member for East Devon, still require a significant
workforce, crucially at harvest time. The seasonal workers scheme
must secure the labour needed to ensure that we can produce the
food we need.
In response to a written question that I put to the Minister back
in October, he said:
“40,000 seasonal worker visas were available in 2022”.
However, the NFU says that farmers need between 60,000 and 70,000
seasonal workers. It is important to note that those workers are
not the same as other economic migrants: they return home after
performing critical work and filling labour shortages. I would be
grateful if the Minister could say something about what his
Department is doing to ensure that supply meets demand.
Despite the large workforces sometimes required, we appreciate
that farming can be a solitary experience, so we need to ensure
that our young people see farming as an attractive option for
their future. The Farm Safety Foundation reported in February
that 92% of farmers under 40 rank poor mental health as the
biggest hidden problem facing farmers. That is a concerning
figure. I know that the Minister will understand this issue and
take it seriously, so will he say something about the
Government’s plans to target outreach to young farmers to make
sure they get the support they need?
(in the Chair)
Dan—10 seconds.
To conclude, it is very important that we nurture those who feed
us and that we support the stewards of our countryside so that
they can fill our national larder and protect our green and
pleasant land.
2.45pm
(Witham) (Con)
It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Gary.
I am particularly grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for East
Devon () for luring me back into
Westminster Hall for such an important debate. He spoke
eloquently about the importance of rural communities, which we
all fundamentally believe in. I represent a part of Essex that is
known for its rurality and for its coastal constituency values as
well. Farming needs to be recognised as a strong, dynamic and
entrepreneurial part of our economy, as well as for the
agricultural quality that it brings. My hon. Friend also spoke
about the fact many of our rural communities maintain our
beautiful countryside and about some of the challenges that come
with that.
The hon. Member for Barnsley Central () spoke about buying local produce, so I will advertise
local produce from the Witham constituency, which can be
purchased here in Westminster as well. There are the famous jams
from Tiptree’s Wilkin & Sons, which holds a royal warrant.
With Christmas fast approaching, I urge everyone to make sure
they stock up on Christmas puddings from Tiptree.
Importantly, there are many other farms that supply produce, and
my hon. Friend touched on the issue of trade—our ability to
export around the world. Importantly, we also have the ability to
feed our domestic population. In Essex, we have the fantastic
Wicks Manor farm, which produces amazing pork products—sausages
and bacon—much of which goes across the world. It is also the
birthplace of the famous milkshake known as Shaken Udder. We also
have Humphreys at Blixes farm; Daymens Hill farm, which has an
amazing orchard with nearly 4,000 varieties of apples and pears;
and Blackwells farm shop. In addition, this House has the
privilege of selling Linden Lady chocolates, which are very
famous, in its gift shop—I recommend them.
That is just a small taster of what my constituency’s farmers and
producers have to offer. They want more trade and fewer barriers
to trade. They want to ensure that they can grow their businesses
and see much more progress. Of course, two years of covid have
left many challenges. There is the pain of inflation and what
that means not only for wages but rising global food prices.
Higher petrol and diesel costs also have an impact on farmers’
ability to operate.
Farmers are also being squeezed by the supermarkets. Everyone
will be aware of the margins that supermarkets chase. The
Government must hold the supermarkets to account.
(West Dorset) (Con)
Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Groceries Code
Adjudicator—the regulator for supermarkets, farmers and price
controls—needs to be given more teeth and to have greater control
so that our farmers are not suppressed?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. I know the Minister has heard
those comments, and he is familiar with the issue too.
Avian flu has been mentioned. I appreciate that the Minister has
been involved in many debates, and there have been many meetings
across the House as well, and I want to express my thanks for
that support. But farmers face numerous pressures in terms of the
regulations and some of the enforcement. I would welcome further
details from the Minister on the measures that are being looked
at to support farms.
In Essex and across the country, avian flu is very severe. One
farm in my constituency has been left devastated by an outbreak.
Despite the farm taking all the measures around biosecurity—I am
pleased to hear that there will be a debate on that next week—the
strain was still detected. As we know, it is causing disruption
to the poultry supply chain, which will impact on the costs of
poultry. I hope that we can continue to have constructive
discussions and support our farmers around the implications of
avian flu.
I would like to touch on investment in farming. I have picked up
already the comments that have been made about the labour market,
labour market reform, and the infamous seasonal agricultural
workers scheme, which has more than 40,000 available places. We
should not always depend on overseas labour, not just in farming,
but for our country and wider economy. There are active
discussions, which I hope the House will welcome, around the
development of the labour market strategy. That is something that
I, with the former Chancellor—now the Prime Minister—had been
pursuing in Government, and I know that the current Chancellor is
also looking at that.
It is important that we support our entrepreneurs—our farmers are
entrepreneurs; we have heard about the hard work and the graft
that goes into farming—but we must be able to give farmers
long-term security around investment in technology. When it comes
to picking fruit or produce, capital allowances can help
enormously, alongside a solid labour market strategy that
attracts and develops the workforce.
I am grateful for the opportunity to speak today. Farming and
agriculture are the backbone of our country; they need to be
nurtured and invested in. I very much look forward to hearing the
Minister’s remarks.
2.51pm
(Orkney and Shetland)
(LD)
It is a pleasure to follow the right hon. Member for Witham
(), and to be able to say—unlike,
perhaps, on some occasions when she was in the Home Office and I
shadowed her—that there was a great deal in her speech with which
I agree. I congratulate the hon. Member for East Devon () on getting this debate, and I
am pleased at the measure of consensus, because consensus is very
important for agricultural policy. In politics, we tend to work
on a four or maybe five-year cycle. In agriculture and farming,
that is but the blinking of an eye. I should, parenthetically,
remind the House of my entry in the Register of Members’
Financial Interests; I am a farmer’s son and now a landowner
myself.
The real support for agriculture that we need from Government is
more certainty. That, of course, will come from the future of
farm payments; they have hit difficulties south of the border.
North of the border, we must still wait and see. We welcome the
consultation that is outstanding. I share some of the
frustrations of the National Farmers Union of Scotland, which
came forward with proposals four years ago that would have put
active agriculture at the heart of environmental policy; it feels
there has been a missed opportunity. However, if we get what we
need from that consultation, it would behove us all to welcome
it.
In particular, in my community, I am keen to see a flexibility
that shows an understanding of the local social and economic
benefits from agriculture. We have two dairy farms left in
Shetland; they have been whittled down—salami-sliced away—over
the years. Last week, we had four days without ferries, so our
supermarkets, Tesco and the Co-op,
which would normally import much of the milk, were not able to do
so. For those four days, we were reliant on those two dairy farms
for milk for our communities. If there is not an opportunity
there for public money for a public good, then I do not know
where there is one.
Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the supermarkets’
dominance of our national food supply chains is now just too
much? It is defeating the objective that he mentions, which I
have long advocated for: local food, getting through local supply
chains to local people, is the way forward.
Mr Carmichael
The hon. Gentleman risks triggering me—if my children were here,
I think that is what they would say—because that is a theme on
which I have spoken many times. He is absolutely right. I was
part of the Government who introduced the Groceries Code
Adjudicator. I am disappointed that it has not worked; it needs
to be revisited.
There are other powers in the Agriculture Act 2020, and with the
Competition and Markets Authority, that could be brought into
force, and I think that the consensus in rural and agricultural
communities across the country is that that should be done. There
is an imbalance between the purchasing power of the
supermarkets—which are maybe 10 behemoth commercial
organisations, at most—and that of the thousands, if not tens of
thousands, of farmers across the country. The supermarkets have
been allowed to take advantage of their market dominance for too
long, and that absolutely must end.
There are a couple of other areas where the lack of certainty is
becoming difficult for the agricultural sector. The progress of
the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill is one. I know
the Minister understands that, because I was with him when he
heard from the National Farmers Union of Scotland about its
concerns. There is a real concern that, because of the way the
Bill is framed, we risk losing some of the most important
legislation, almost by omission. There must be a more pragmatic
and practical way to deal with the concerns that that Bill seeks
to address that does not risk unintended consequences.
There are other areas in which agriculture, certainly in my
community, could benefit from support, but that requires
Governments in Edinburgh and Westminster to be prepared to
listen. I see some of the debate about the transportation of live
animals by sea and it scares me. The people who talk about that
issue seem to have no interest in the fact that those of us in
the Northern Isles, having years ago designed the
state-of-the-art, blue-chip system for transporting animals by
sea, risk being caught in legislation that frankly does not take
account of our needs and circumstances.
I know the Minister is good at this, and he has a background that
will allow him to do it: he must take his heft into Government
and deliver. He must be prepared to listen to the people who know
most about agriculture: the farmers. If he does that, the benefit
is not just to farmers and farm workers, but to the rural
communities across the countryside. Good agricultural policy
makes for sustainable rural communities; it is as simple as
that.
2.57pm
(South Dorset) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Gary, and
to follow the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr
Carmichael), and all hon. Members, in particular my hon. Friend
the Member for East Devon (), whom I thank for securing the
debate. It is also a pleasure to see the Minister in his place. I
have been promoting him since I got here in 2010; I have been
asking, “Why don’t the Government put him in the Department for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs?” He, a farmer, is now here;
I cannot believe it. Someone who understands what we are talking
about, and what we want, is a Minister with the power to help us.
I refer to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial
Interests: I am a landowner and farmer, so I speak with a lot of
passion and experience in this field.
When I was selected as a candidate in 2006, one of my first tasks
was to set up a farming group. It meets every quarter. That group
started with two members, and now at least 50 or 60 appear. The
Minister has often come along to it, either virtually or in real
life. We hope this Minister will come long in real life soon, so
that our farmers can talk to him and put across their
concerns.
(Congleton) (Con)
My hon. Friend is highlighting the same point as many colleagues:
the importance of listening to local farmers on local issues.
Farmers in my constituency have asked the Government to extend
the policy of culling on a discreet basis for a further three
years, when it ends at the end of this year, as part of the
co-ordinated approach in Cheshire to tackling bovine TB. Does he
agree that it is vital that we consider farmer-led approaches to
such challenges?
My hon. Friend has taken the words out of my mouth. In the dying
moments of my speech, I will talk briefly about badgers and
beavers, since I am slightly concerned about their presence in
small Dorset rivers.
What we all want, and the public demand, is cheap food. If we as
farmers are to produce cheap food, we need help—not to grow trees
and all the other green things, although I totally accept that
there is a place for that, but to grow food. We frequently hear
Ministers refer to the public good; production of food should be
at the top of the list of public goods.
As hon. Members have said, we have had a war, a pandemic, world
food shortages and climate change, and there are terrifying
predictions of food shortages around the world. We will have to
become more and more self-sufficient, and farmers will have to
farm more efficiently. Farming is an expensive game. Buying or
leasing agricultural equipment—combine harvesters, tractors and
all the rest of it—costs hundreds of thousands of pounds. Many
farmers simply cannot afford it, not least tenant farmers. We
would all like to see some form of grant, through which farmers
could apply for money for those sorts of things.
As I said, the public need—and want—cheap food. We have left the
EU. I was a Brexiteer; I was one of those crying to leave, and I
am delighted that we have left. However, we face a danger if we
do not help our farmers. Certainty is desperately needed, as the
right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland said, because as the
basic payment scheme slides away and alternatives come in, there
is a big hole there; and as a result, many famers, not least
those in remoter parts of our country, will struggle. That hole
needs to be filled. We need certainty, and they need reassurance.
The alternative, which none of us wants, is cheap imports. That
is not the way forward. That will not increase self-reliability,
or counter all the threats that this country and the rest of the
world face.
I will touch briefly on the badger cull. I understand that this
is a contentious issue; the badger is a protected animal. I do
not agree with that personally. I like to see badgers. We love to
see deer, foxes, and every other wild animal, but these animals
no longer have predators. If we do not maintain them, look after
them and ensure that they are healthy by securing the right
numbers, then —as we know—the badger population grows
exponentially and disease spreads.
The culling practices have worked. The statistics are pretty
impressive; we cannot refute them. They show that culling badgers
reduces the impact of bovine tuberculosis, which, as my hon.
Friend the Member for Congleton () said, has devastated the beef
and dairy industries. I urge the Minister to go back to this
issue. I believe that badger culling will end, but I urge him to
stop saying that we will end it. We must continue the cull, just
as we cull deer and foxes, but in a balanced way, so that we have
the right balance of wildlife in our countryside.
Finally, my hon. Friend the Member for East Devon mentioned that
rewilding must not come at the expense of growing food. There is
a place for green trees and rewilding. However, Scotland
experimented with it, and once beavers had bred, they did not
keep to the allocated space. They went all over the place. They
are not appropriate for small rivers in Dorset.
3.02pm
(Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the hon. Member for East Devon () for setting the scene so well.
Farming and agriculture are at the heart of both our areas. I
declare an interest as a farmer. I am also a member of the Ulster
Farmers Union, and have been for many years; we are in regular
contact. My main reason for joining, if I am quite truthful, is
that the insurance premiums were excellent. I have been a
customer for over 30 years as a result.
I am in full support of the farming industry; it is crucial for
the UK and an integral part of our economy. It is great to be
here to exchange ideas, and also to hear the hon. Member for
South Dorset () speaking. I happen to
disagree with him on one point: I think that all foxes—every one
of them—should be controlled, but that is just my opinion. I will
put that on the record. All foxes should be controlled. There
should not be any foxes, but that is by the by. It is great to
listen to other Members, and to see the Minister in his place; he
has landed in the right job, and we are all very pleased to him
there.
Agriculture plays a pivotal role in Northern Ireland; it brings
an estimated income of £501 million as of 2021 —an increase of
some 8.3% from 2020. Agriculture thrives in my constituency of
Strangford; we have numerous companies that are bywords in the
constituency. Willowbrook Foods, Lakeland Dairies, Mash Direct
and Rich Sauces have a combined workforce of probably just over
3,000. I have mentioned before that Lakeland Dairies has four
factories in Northern Ireland and five in the Republic; that
highlights the importance of smooth and frictionless trade. There
are countless dairy farmers across Northern Ireland who deal with
Lakeland Dairies, and that has proven to be an incredible success
in the dairy farming trade.
Employment is a major factor in the agrifood sector, hence the
importance of securing funding and support from elected
representatives. It does not matter if someone does not come from
a constituency that is rich in farming; the supplies from farmers
to other local businesses are equally important.
Furthermore, the sector employs some 70,000 people in Northern
Ireland, so we cannot take away from the importance of those jobs
for us in Northern Ireland. We export some 80% of our goods, so
we depend on exports to survive. The Department for the Economy
has concluded through economic modelling that there could be up
to 10,000 fewer jobs, depending on the nature of the
relationships established with the EU. I have to put this on the
record, and the Minister knows it is coming: the Northern Ireland
protocol disadvantages us in Northern Ireland. I know the
Minister accepts that issue, but it is important for us that the
Northern Ireland Protocol Bill be agreed to. When it left the
House of Commons for the House of Lords, it was where we wanted
it. We hope it will return in a similar fashion.
(Upper Bann) (DUP)
My hon. Friend makes a powerful point on the protocol. We have
heard today of the challenges facing famers. Would he agree that
in Northern Ireland there are additional challenges because of
the protocol? Look at the seed potato issue. We cannot get seed
potato from Scotland to Northern Ireland. Some 50% of veterinary
medicines will not be available to Northern Ireland in January
after the grace period. Does he agree that the protocol needs to
go? Great Britain’s farmers would not accept it, so Northern
Ireland farmers should not have to, either.
I totally agree. My hon. Friend is our party’s agriculture
spokesperson, so I am pleased to have that contribution made.
Land use in Northern Ireland is now dominated by improved
grassland management for dairy, beef and sheep production; there
are also small pockets of cereals, mostly in County Down. I am
privileged to have a farm that is agriculturally sound, and the
land is very productive, as it is for many farmers across Mid
Down and Northern Ireland. I have highlighted the importance of
community farming numerous times, and nominated a constituent of
mine, Emily McGowan, for the National Farmers Union community
hero award. She is a young girl with a deep interest in farming,
and I hope she does well.
Community and local farming are the backbone of business in
Northern Ireland and the UK. Mash Direct supplies good, healthy,
hearty food to numerous large retailers across the United Kingdom
at an affordable price. ASDA and local Spars in Northern Ireland
are some of their major retailers. That business started out of a
kitchen 15 or 20 years ago. Mash Direct has been looking at
becoming more sustainable and protecting the environment by
installing solar panels at its family farm. It looks forward and
has a vision for the future. This is another milestone in how
farming can become carbon neutral. The farming industry is
crucial to the UK economy, and we must support it. As stated,
farming plays a major role in our achieving our environmental
targets. It provides tens of thousands of jobs across the United
Kingdom, and supports businesses with fresh and decent food for
our constituents.
Finally, farmers face increasing stock prices on items such as
fertiliser, due to inflation and Putin’s invasion of Russia, yet
they still work hard and do their absolute best to provide for
us. We should be incredibly proud of our farmers. I fully support
them, especially those in my constituency, who I know work
tirelessly to support their local community. If they can support
us, we must do the same back.
3.08pm
(St Ives) (Con)
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for East Devon () on securing this debate. We
cannot speak enough about the need to support our farmers, who
produce the food we need in a way that is good for the country
and our health. We talk regularly about the need to support our
farmers and landowners in producing more food. We also talk a lot
about the need to protect and enhance our natural environment and
countryside, which many of us are privileged to live in or
represent; there does not need to be conflict between the two.
Food production and biodiversity can complement each other; our
mistake has been to give farmers the impression that they bear
responsibility for our countryside and natural environment
declining, and their job to fix it. I disagree, but there is no
denying that consumers, driven by supermarkets and Government
policy on inflation, hunger for ever cheaper food; they often
want to pay less than the cost of producing it—a point made by my
hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset ().
Farmers face unparalleled challenges and are fighting fires,
barely surviving each challenge as it rolls over them. They have
little time to think, plan and change the way they produce the
food we need. As a result, small farmers in Cornwall are handing
over their land to large contractors to farm. I see a significant
number of farmers reducing the amount of food they plan to
produce this year and next, and lots of farmers are leaving dairy
altogether. The production of potatoes and dairy, which are
essential to our daily diet, has reduced enormously in
Cornwall.
(South Holland and The Deepings)
(Con)
My hon. Friend makes the point that we need to build more
national food resilience. It is preposterous that in the 1980s we
were producing 78% of what we consumed, but now the figure has
fallen to 60%. The grant funding discussed earlier would help
farmers, particularly in respect of automation, and allow them,
once they have become more productive and efficient, to challenge
the power of the supermarkets, which have distorted the food
chain. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need to rebalance the
food chain in favour of primary producers?
I do agree, and that was the subject of one of the first debates
I ever secured in this place, back in 2015. Given how farmers’
plans have shifted in the last 18 months, I suspect that less
than 60% of the food we consume is grown in the UK.
Urgent action is needed. I am glad to see the Minister in his
place; I met him first thing this morning to discuss a similar
issue. One thing that was said this morning, and with which I
completely agree, is that food security should and must be
adopted as a public good, so that we can focus Government funding
and support for farmers in order to deliver food security across
our nation.
As has been mentioned, we also need a determined effort to
maximise high-quality food production—not just to feed our nation
but to do so in a healthy way. We know that our NHS is not
properly coping with the demands we place on it, and it will not
get any better until we really look at our diet, the food we
produce and our gut health. It is a massive issue, and the
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, of which I am a
member, will be looking at soil quality and how it affects gut
health.
We need to attract talent, especially in opening up the
opportunity to embrace science and innovation, and to harvest the
food we need. I go into schools all the time, and so much work
needs to be done across the Department for Education, schools,
the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy and
other Government Departments to make farming and food production
a key conversation in primary schools, secondary schools,
colleges and our homes. Parents also have a real opportunity to
talk to their children about jobs in the food and farming
sector.
Finally, we need to restore the relationship between the state,
Government agencies and non-governmental organisations, so that
farmers know they are vital and that we recognise they are vital
to our national security and health. They should be supported to
transition to modern, sustainable and productive farming and food
production. We will not be forgiven by those living in the
countryside if we fail to support them and to enable them to play
the role they want to play, and are keen to play, in feeding the
nation and making the countryside a place that is both secure at
home and generous to the world around us.
3.13pm
(West Dorset) (Con)
It is a pleasure to speak in this debate. I pay tribute to my
hon. Friend the Member for East Devon (), who is almost my constituency
neighbour, and congratulate him on securing this important
debate. I declare my interest as a tenant beef farmer’s son in my
home constituency.
Although I could talk a lot about farming across the board,
particularly beef and sheep farming, I want to focus my remarks
on egg production and the effects we are starting to see. Some
people say the situation has been caused by avian flu, but I
would like to share some other aspects of the debate that may
help to inform the discussion. The egg industry has been going
through a period of turbulence for some time. In my opinion, it
is because the supermarkets control the supply chain, totally
dominate the market and force producers to accept a price at
which they cannot afford to produce. I am afraid it highlights
the fact that the Groceries Code Adjudicator, which I spoke so
strongly in favour of in my maiden speech in February 2020, is
proving to be totally ineffective.
Most of my local farmers in West Dorset tell me they do not want
to receive Government subsidies, but they have to. Why do they
have to? More often than not, they are forced into that position
because the Groceries Code Adjudicator is not doing its job and
is allowing supermarkets to dominate the field in such a way that
farmers cannot continue to provide the goods that we all need to
consume. In effect, in my opinion the Government are ultimately
subsidising supermarket profits. That has to stop.
We all know that egg production costs have risen. Rising energy
costs, the war in Ukraine and inflation have clearly all had an
effect on that. But we cannot continue in a situation where large
supermarkets’ strong yield-management policies are forcing this
to occur. It is not new. Only a few days ago, the British Retail
Consortium confirmed that
“some UK supermarkets are putting limits on egg purchases due to
shortages largely linked”
to the avian influenza pandemic. Well, I do not agree with that.
It is wrong. I think supermarkets are hiding behind that
explanation a total failure in their yield-management strategies
of probably many months, if not longer.
In West Dorset, a number of egg producers have told me that it is
now so difficult for them to make money. Let me to put that into
context: supermarkets broadly have raised the price of a dozen
eggs by 50p over the past six months. The British Free Range Egg
Producers Association says that farmers and producers are
receiving just 18p of that, in the light of all the additional
production costs they are having to bear. They cannot therefore
do things like invest in pullets—new young stock—to ensure the
future. This has basically resulted in a gradual 13% reduction in
egg production over the past year alone. That is not solely
because of avian influenza.
I have a number of egg producers in my constituency as well. If
they sell their eggs locally to smaller shops, they can get a
good price—for instance, £1 has been increased to £1.89. That is
an increase that smaller shops have made, but the larger
supermarkets are hellbent on screwing the producers to such an
extent that they will no longer be in business. It is the big
boys that need to be taken on.
I totally agree with the hon. Gentleman’s remarks, which concur
with my thoughts. I am afraid this is the beginning of a ticking
time bomb. If ever there was a time that this House had to urge
the Government to give the Groceries Code Adjudicator the teeth
it needs to sort this mess out, it is now. If we think there is
difficulty in the market today, I can assure this Chamber that in
less than 12 months’ time we will not be in a situation where we
have a reduction in eggs available for sale to consumers—we will
be lucky if we have any eggs on the shelves at all.
Before my hon. Friend concludes what is, as ever, a brilliant
speech, I want to say that this does not just apply to eggs. The
Groceries Code Adjudicator needs to intervene in respect of
horticulture, cereals, livestock and a whole range of things in
respect of which supermarkets are, as I said earlier, distorting
the food chain. Will my hon. Friend ask this brilliant Minister
—there is no one better in the House to do this—to use the powers
that the Government already have to act in favour of farmers and
growers?
Yes, I will. The Minister has heard that request.
Finally, the NFU has called for a DEFRA investigation into the
egg supply chain. The NFU is a bit late with that call, but I
think it is right. I hope the Minister will take that on board.
My right hon. Friend the Member for South Holland and The
Deepings ( ) makes a very fair point: this
is not just about eggs. Milk was 49p a pint maybe 18 months ago;
it has gone up now to more than £1 a pint in most shops. Ask our
dairy farmers if they have received that difference—no, they have
not.
(in the Chair)
I call . He and the final Back-Bench
speaker have five minutes each.
3.19pm
Mr (South West Hertfordshire)
(Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Gary. I
applaud my hon. Friend the Member for East Devon () for securing this important
debate.
It was not that long ago that throughout the House we were
celebrating the Back British Farming campaign. I am conscious
that I am probably one of the few people present who does not
have a farming background or a link to farming, but as Members
know the industry employs more than 4 million people and is worth
around £120 billion to the national economy. In South West
Hertfordshire, about 65% of our land use is for agriculture.
As someone who does not have many years of farming
experience—definitely not as many as my right hon. Friend the
Minister—I have proactively spent several months learning a lot
more about the industry. Back in June, I held a roundtable in
conjunction with the NFU, and I think that a lot of the issues
raised then are common throughout the country. They included
rising costs, especially for fertiliser; the VAT threshold for
those who decide to have farm shops; and rural crime, especially
the theft of tools and caravans and the police response. I am
lucky that in Hertfordshire we have as our police and crime
commissioner , who is very proactive on
that.
In a follow-up meeting with farmers in August, I went to the P.
E. Mead farm, where they farm more than 800 acres. Although it
does not feel warm today, a key issue then was heatwaves and how
the changing weather patterns will influence farming in the
future. I am conscious that although the Minister is an excellent
farmer in his own right, he may not necessarily have the answers,
but I wish to put on his radar such important issues from across
the industry. Where appropriate, we need to think about how the
Government can best support farmers to deal with them.
One of the other things that I did during the recess was work
experience: I spent a day with farmers at the PE Mead farm so
that I could fully appreciate the trials and tribulations of
farmers. As mentioned earlier, mental health is a really massive
issue. The Office for National Statistics figures from back in
2015 suggested that suicide rates for male farmers were three
times higher than the national average. That cannot be right. We
need to think about what more we can do to support this vital
industry. Unfortunately, we have seen with the war in Ukraine
that food security will continue to be a massive issue. Although
there is pressure for the development or change of land usage, my
worry is that we are losing a skillset that is really important.
Once it is lost, it is lost forever.
I have a personal plea to the Minister on education. One of the
few pieces of casework that I have been really successful on is
in respect of school catchment areas. I had the case of a young
child whose parents were famers and had to live on the farm, but
because of the farm’s location they were outside the catchment
area for the school that the child wanted to go to. To me, that
feels like penalising a family and their children for doing the
right thing and ensuring that we have continued food security. I
would be grateful if the Minister could take that point away and
speak to his colleagues in the Department for Education about how
we can ensure that when someone is involved in critical
infrastructure related to things such as food production, they
have the ability to make appeals about education catchment areas
and have their situation considered.
I shall finish there because I am sure that my learned colleague,
my hon. Friend the Member for Penrith and The Border (Dr Hudson),
has more to say.
(in the Chair)
Last but definitely not least, I call .
3.23pm
(Penrith and The Border)
(Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Gary. I
congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for East Devon () on securing this important
debate.
I am proud to represent a large rural constituency, as a
constituency MP and as a Member of the Environment, Food and
Rural Affairs Committee. My constituency has a huge farming
footprint. Our farmers in Cumbria and across the UK produce food
to the highest standards with the highest animal welfare
standards, and we should be very proud of that fact. I pay
tribute to all farmers in Penrith and The Border and across the
UK for all that they do. We must remember that during the
pandemic farmers were classified as key workers, and they should
be classified as key workers in the future.
The cost of living, which we have heard a lot about today, is
really affecting the input costs for farmers. They are not immune
to such costs, which include fertiliser, animal feed, fuel and
energy. The Government support in recent months—such as the
energy schemes, the bringing forward of the basic payment scheme
payments, the new slurry grants and the fertiliser rule
changes—has been very welcome and much needed, but I stress to
the Minister that the Government need to continue to provide the
support that farmers need during this crisis.
We have been supporting farmers through these challenging times,
and as the funding systems change it is so important that we help
farmers through those changes. I have seen at first hand in
Cumbria how the new environmental land management schemes can
work really well for local communities, and the farming in
protected landscapes scheme is very welcome in Cumbria. This
issue has been a big focus of the EFRA Committee. The current
situation makes it even more crucial that the payments under such
schemes are set at a fair and sufficient level and are a proper
reward for producing the public goods that communities rely on.
It is important—our Committee has been pushing the Government
hard on this—that we support all types of farmers, including
tenant farmers, commoners and upland farmers.
From talking to farmers in my constituency and across Cumbria, I
know that there has been a lot of anxiety during this time. I
have hosted regular roadshows with them, and I visit livestock
markets regularly. I have triggered an EFRA Committee inquiry on
the ELMS transition period. Sadly, I think some of that anxiety
and negativity is being fuelled by people briefing against the
payment system and misleading people on the levels of uptake.
I was pleased to question the Minister and Janet Hughes, the
senior DEFRA official involved, at the EFRA Committee meeting
last week. There is a 30% uptake of the environmental schemes,
both existing and new. The uptake on the new sustainable farming
incentive is not as high as that because it started only this
summer. I would welcome the Minister reaffirming the point that
we want to encourage people to enrol in those schemes and then
inform them so the schemes can be improved. It would be welcome
if the Minister said we were looking into levels of payment to
help farmers through this period.
We have heard a lot about food security in this debate. The issue
came into sharp relief in the pandemic and has been highlighted
again by the war in Ukraine. Bolstering our food security is a
prime priority for the Government. The EFRA Committee has been
looking at this—we are in the middle of a food security
inquiry—and has heard about supplies of fertiliser to the United
Kingdom. We have two plants in the UK: the one in Ince has been
mothballed and the other in Billingham has ceased ammonia
production. That is critical infrastructure for our country, and
I urge the Government to keep watching that. We must also
remember that a by-product of fertiliser production is CO2, which
is much needed by the food and beverage industry. It is also
needed in the slaughter process for poultry and pigs, so there is
an animal health and welfare implication. We need to secure that
supply as well.
On animal health and welfare, I declare an interest as a
veterinary surgeon. To support British farming, we need to have
healthy animals. I welcome the Government’s progress in that
area. The new animal health and welfare pathway scheme, as part
of the new ELMS, is very welcome, formalising the partnership
between vets and farmers. But more can be done, such as
responding to the calls for investing in animal health
infrastructure—we heard the hon. Member for Barnsley Central
() make that point.
As a member of the EFRA Committee, I guested on the Public
Accounts Committee for the inquiry on the situation at the Animal
and Plant Health Agency headquarters in Weybridge. It needs a
radical and drastic refurbishment, and I urge the Government to
make that a key priority. I have seen this at first hand: I came
into politics on the back of my experiences in the foot and mouth
crisis, and I witnessed things that I never want to see again in
my lifetime. The APHA needs to be funded. The Weybridge site is
pivotal in our attack and defence against infectious disease. We
see that critically now with the avian influenza crisis. I pay
tribute to the vets, officials and farmers on the frontline in
that horrendous crisis. Funding that infrastructure is so
important; this is about animals and people. We have to remember
that diseases can transfer from animals to people. That work
looks at public health and antimicrobial resistance.
We have heard a lot about rural mental health; the impact of
infectious diseases and outbreaks have a massive impact on our
rural communities. I urge the Government to look at that.
In conclusion, I pay tribute to our farmers. It is possible to
produce food and look after the environment at the same time. We
produce food to the highest animal welfare standards. As a
Government, we must keep our arms around our farmers and ensure
we support them moving forward.
(in the Chair)
Thank you, colleagues for your co-operation; we have come in on
time and on budget. We now turn to the Front Benches.
3.29pm
(Perth and North Perthshire)
(SNP)
Thank you, Sir Gary; I will ensure that trend is kept to. I
congratulate the hon. Member for East Devon () on securing a thoughtful and
fascinating debate. The conclusion of all this is that British
farmers still need support, and what they have received thus far
is not sufficient to ensure that we have good farming
practice.
I feel like a veteran at some of these debates. I have only been
doing this job for the past few weeks, but the same themes seem
to come up. Quite rightly, there is a tension between food
production and biodiversity, and there are issues about the costs
of supermarkets and concerns about food security and poor mental
health among the farming community.
There were a couple of things that did not come up. One that I
want to mention, which only the hon. Member for Penrith and The
Border (Dr Hudson) brought up, is the concerns about ELMS
payments. I thought that would be a focus of much of today’s
debate, but until the hon. Member rose, there was no mention of
it all. I am sure the Minister is more than aware of the some of
the concerns and anxieties about ELMS. Farmers are saying clearly
that they need to know what will happen, so that they can plan
their businesses and know whether they will have a viable future,
so I was quite surprised that that was not brought up.
I am absolutely not surprised at all that the other huge issue
that did not come up—the one that probably has the most impact on
agriculture and farming across the whole of Britain and UK—was
Brexit. I am not surprised that Conservative Members do not bring
it up, because they would have to acknowledge that the past few
years have not been their greatest. Brexit has had such a
negative impact on everything to do with agriculture, food
security, the wellbeing of rural communities and exports—with
everything to do with food and drink. We know that things are
bad. We only need to listen to the former Secretary of State, the
right hon. Member for Camborne and Redruth (), when he lamented the poor
deal that was struck with Australia and said—this was testament
to his powers of understatement—that it was “not…very good”.
That deal was more than not very good; it was a disaster for
sheep and cattle producers, and for beef and lamb exports. The
one-sided nature of the deal struck with Australia has allowed
cheap imports to come flooding into this country and given
nothing in return for the hard work of British farmers up and
down the countryside. I am not surprised that Conservative
Members do not mention Brexit, because if I was them, I would
stay well away from it too, because it has been a singular
disaster for our friends.
We heard a lot about animals, which quite surprised me. I always
like a debate about animals. My constituency in Perthshire was
one of the first to secure the introduction of beavers. I know
that there is some despondency and negativity around this—I hear
a lot of that from farmers, who are impacted quite severely—but
there are also benefits to attractions. I represent the biggest
river tributary system in the whole of the UK, in the Tay river
and its tributaries, and some of the positive environmental
outcomes of beavers are there to be seen. There is almost a small
tourist industry set up around them, so that people can walk
round and see some of the work of the beavers, so while there are
issues and management is of course necessary, it is not all doom
and gloom.
I heard the profound words of the hon. Member for East Devon
—“You can’t eat trees”—but tell that to the beavers, the bears,
the giraffes and the many insects that feast upon our woodlands
on a daily basis, if not every minute of the day. Let us not be
so negative and despondent about some of the reintroductions of
wildlife, because this will be ongoing. There are proposals and
plans for further introductions. The sea eagle in Scotland has
been a great reintroduction. I know that there are issues—it all
comes down to the tension between the introduction of wildlife
and the management of land—but we have seen positive impacts,
particularly through tourism and people coming to watch this
magnificent bird flying the skies once again over Scotland, so
let us not have all this doom and gloom when it comes to
reintroductions.
I listened to the message from the hon. Member for West Dorset
() about eggs, and he is right.
The crisis in egg production did not start with avian flu; it has
been ongoing for years, although it is most definitely
exacerbated by avian flu. I know that we will have a debate next
week, when we will probably all be back together again, including
the Minister—I always enjoy our little get-togethers—and
discussing this more at length, but avian flu has had a massive
impact, and not just on the turkey and farmed poultry sector, but
on eggs. I think it is the NFU that is now calling—and it is
right to do so—for an urgent investigation into making an
exceptional market conditions declaration under the Agriculture
Act 2020, given the severe disruption to egg production that UK
consumers are experiencing. I hope that is listened to very
carefully.
But I will say one thing: we are different in Scotland. We are
not run by DEFRA—for which we can give perhaps something of a
sigh of a relief when it comes to these things. We are
responsible for all the rural decisions that we make. We are
responsible for Scottish agriculture, and it us who will make
those decisions, which will be the right ones for the farmers and
agriculture communities that we represent. Scotland has taken a
different approach. We have not taken the three-pronged ELMS
approach, which has been a feature of the Agriculture Act.
As the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael)
said, we are currently consulting on our new piece of
agricultural legislation. One thing, among a couple of others, to
come out of that consultation so far is a decision to continue
with a single payment that will match EU funding up to at least
2025. We have looked at the three prongs of the Agriculture Act
and we feel that it is not the way to go. Indeed, we find that
there are difficulties associated with much of that. We will do
that differently. We will have food production at the core of how
we take this forward. NFU Scotland came to the Scottish
Parliament last week to tell us very clearly that this is what it
wants to see when we design the new legislation. We listened very
carefully, and I hope we will be able to satisfy NFU Scotland
that a commitment to food production will be at the very heart of
the legislation that we bring forward.
We have our own system of grants and support that we are putting
forward in Scotland, and we are able to do that. I hope that will
be recognised as we go forward.
Dr Hudson
Will the hon. Member give way?
I do not have time, I am sorry.
The last theme I want to mention comes up very often in these
debates and that is the shortage of labour. I am sorry to
Conservative colleagues, but this is another consequence of their
Brexit. I think they know that. They are not prepared to accept
it and say that this is a difficult issue because of it, but
ending freedom of movement with Brexit has probably been the
biggest single disaster that we have visited on rural
communities.
I represent a huge rural constituency. I have got strath,
fantastic agriculture farming, hill farming and many hospitality
businesses. Every single one of them has told me that they cannot
get the labour they require because we have ended freedom of
movement. What has happened is that people they had who were
stalwarts of their sector and businesses have left, and there is
nothing there to replace it. In the Scottish Parliament, we want
to establish a new rural immigration pilot.
One of the discussions we have had today is about the
independence of Scotland. We cannot do this pilot, and we are so
frustrated we cannot do this because we are bound by decisions
taken in the Home Office, which we have very little influence
over. We need to do something. The seasonal agricultural workers
scheme has helped, but it is insufficient. We need more people to
come across here. It is not just the seasonal staff, it is the
permanent staff we have in the agriculture business, such as vets
and people who work in abattoirs. All of them are suffering
because they cannot get the appropriate labour. I am pleased that
we are only partly impacted by decisions that are taken by DEFRA,
but we are heavily impacted by decisions taken by the Home Office
and some of the arrangements that were put forward around
Brexit.
We will continue to work on our agriculture Bill, and maybe when
we come back to discuss these issues in the future we will be
able to detail more about how we are approaching this, the
difference we are hoping to make and how we are hoping to serve
Scottish farmers.
3.37pm
(Cambridge) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir Gary. I
congratulate the hon. Member for East Devon () for securing this debate. We
had many positive contributions from across the floor. They echo
many of the points that have been made from Labour Benches over
the last few years, whether that be on labour supply, trade deals
or the importance of food production. I particularly congratulate
my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley Central () on echoing Labour’s cry to make, buy and sell more in
Britain, and milk from the Hills will certainly be part of that.
I congratulate the hon. Member for South Dorset () on convening his farmers
groups. I wish him luck with the Minister. Should he be unlucky,
I am very happy to oblige whenever he requires.
I will come to the future later, but let us start with the
present. What are we seeing, and where is the support for British
farming? Frankly, farming is hurting at the moment. There may be
good prices for some, but there is still no respite, particularly
for those in the pig sector. It is a very grim time for poultry
farmers. Avian flu is horrible, and we know the APHA is
struggling. As mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for
Barnsley Central and the hon. Member for Penrith and The Border
(Dr Hudson), I am afraid that last week the Secretary of State
ducked my question of what happens if we get another disease
outbreak. Crossing fingers and hoping it does not happen does not
constitute a plan.
We should not allow avian flu to be a cover for the longer term
problems egg producers have been highlighting for many months.
Back in the spring, egg producers warned retailers that costs
were running ahead of prices. At the egg and poultry fair,
retailers failed to show up. They were replaced with cardboard
cut-outs. It is a failure in the food system. What have the
Government done? Nothing. The Agriculture Act was supposed to
produce action on supply chain fairness, but all we have had is
consultations and no outcomes.
I ask the Minister once again: where is the dairy code? Where is
the pork supply chain code? Can he confirm that the daft proposal
to move the Grocery Code Adjudicator into the Competition and
Markets Authority is dead? Or is that yet another thing that the
“Department for Running Away From Any Problem”—DEFRA as it was
formerly known—does not know the answer to? At first I thought
the points the hon. Member for West Dorset () made about the GCA were
slightly unfair, but he pointed out that it does not have the
powers it needs, exactly as we argued during the passage of the
Agriculture Act.
On trade, we know about the lack of support for British farming,
because the former Secretary of State, the right hon. Member for
Camborne and Redruth (), did not mince his words
last week. He said that
“overall, the truth of the matter is that the UK gave away far
too much for far too little in return…We did not need to give
Australia or New Zealand full liberalisation in beef and sheep—it
was not in our economic interest to do so, and neither Australia
nor New Zealand had anything to offer”—[Official Report, 14
November 2022; Vol. 722, c. 424.]
I admire his candour. I just wish he had listened to the many
organisations, including the Opposition, that made exactly the
same points at the time, not many months after the Conservatives
sold out British farming. No wonder so many are so furious; they
are right to be.
There are more made in Britain—or rather made in Marsham
Street—gaffes that are undermining British farming. Look at the
meat export sector. I was at Lancaster auction mart last week to
see the sheep auctions and to hear from farmers at first hand
about the problems they face. There are not just high input
costs, fertiliser costs and labour shortages, as if they were not
enough. The latest is the gold-plating of rules for export into
Europe. If that is not resolved by 13 December, it will kill the
export trade. Will the Minister tell us what he is doing to
resolve the situation?
How do the growers feel about the support they are getting? The
NFU published a report this week showing that many are walking
away from contracts and cutting production by as much as 20%.
They cite a whole range of extra costs, including fertiliser,
wages, packaging and transport, but the killer is energy. Farmers
in competitor countries have support from their Governments, but
here there is no certainty beyond a few months. The Minister
knows full well that farming is a long-term businesses in which
decisions about whether to plant are made many months ahead.
Without certainty, the only sensible decision for too many will
be not to plant. The end result is that this country will be less
secure and will depend more on imports, almost certainly produced
to lower standards, just as we warned during the passage of the
Agriculture Act.
I could give many more examples, but let me conclude by looking
briefly at future prospects. To replace basic payments under the
common agriculture policy, a new system was introduced under the
Agriculture Act. The intellectual case for moving away from
direct support was couched in terms of public money for public
goods, and we agreed with the broad principle, but we argued
then—we believe we have been vindicated by subsequent events—that
food security is a public good. I was delighted to hear the hon.
Member for St Ives () endorse that point.
Frankly, it was never clear whether the Government believed that
a volatile and vital sector such as food production requires
direct Government support or just indirect support through
environmental schemes. The problem now is that they seem to be
achieving neither. The ELMS saga has played out in public view
over recent months. The headlines in last week’s Farmers Guardian
screamed out: “ELM uproar” and “New Ministers tear up scheme
plans”. Perhaps the Minister can tell us what is going on.
Perhaps the Minister can also tell us why Parliament is always
the last place to be told. Is it true that there will be an
announcement on 1 December? If so, are we invited?
Informed sources—I include the hon. Member for Penrith and The
Border in that—tell me that the changes may not be as dramatic as
the headlines suggest, but perhaps the Minister can clarify that.
Is tier 2 ELMS being replaced by countryside stewardship? If so,
is that the genuine nature recovery network system promised in
the Environment Act 2021? If not, how is it supposed to work?
What is happening with tier 3—the landscape recovery part of
ELMS? Has it been postponed, scrapped or scaled down? Perhaps the
Minister can tell us.
Replacing more than 80,000 schemes under basic payments with just
a couple of thousand so far under the sustainable farming
incentive leaves a whopping almost £1 billion hole in the rural
economy. To some extent, I echo what the hon. Member for South
Dorset said. Frankly, is that what the Conservatives mean by
supporting British farming? I wonder.
What assessment has been made of the impact of all this? Does the
Minister know? I have asked him before and I ask him again: what
assessment has his Department made of the economic impact so far
on the rural economy? What assessment has been made of the
environmental impact? I do not think we will get an answer
because I know the answer: none and none.
Under this Government, support for farmers and the rural economy
is haemorrhaging. The failures of this Government make them a
threat to our farmers, undermine our food security and, despite
the heroic efforts of the staff in the agencies, are leaving us
dangerously exposed in the event of further animal disease
outbreaks. Our farmers deserve support. They are not getting it
at the moment, but they will with a Labour Government.
3.44pm
The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs ()
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Gary. I
draw Members’ attention to my entry in the Register of Members’
Financial Interests, and pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member
for East Devon () for securing the debate. I was
going to start by saying that we have seen the Chamber at its
best today: we have seen a huge amount of celebration of and
positivity about UK agriculture. I am sorry that the speech made
by the hon. Member for Cambridge () soured that mood, to be
honest.
It is the truth.
The truth is that if the hon. Gentleman looks around him, he will
see how many members of the Labour party are here to provide
support, and how many members of the Conservative party are here.
Seeing how many Conservative Back Benchers have come to take part
in this very important debate demonstrates how important rural
communities are to the Conservative party and to this
Government.
I will respond to the hon. Gentleman later; I will start by
commenting on the speech made by my hon. Friend the Member for
East Devon. He talked about how the new schemes are going to
change the way in which we farm. This will be an exciting moment
in UK agriculture: we will move in a direction where we can
balance growing food—food security is a very important part of
our agricultural production and our supply chains, and it will
continue to be so going forward—with improving our environment
and our biodiversity.
The good news is that UK farmers are very much up for that fight.
They want to get involved in it, and are very proud of the
landscapes they have created. I think it was my hon. Friend the
Member for St Ives () who made reference to people
criticising farmers and saying that they are the problem. He hit
the nail on the head: farmers are part of the solution. The
beautiful rolling landscapes that we see in Cumbria and in Devon
are not there by accident, but because farmers have created those
landscapes through the way in which they have produced food for
generation after generation. The beautiful stone walls in North
Yorkshire are not there for decoration, but to keep sheep in. We
need to recognise that and celebrate it, and help and support our
farmers through this process, because they are up for the
fight.
My hon. Friend the Member for East Devon went on to talk about
trade Bills. I would put a much more positive spin on this than
the hon. Member for Cambridge.
Or the former Secretary of State.
The former Secretary of State, my right hon. Friend the Member
for Camborne and Redruth (), was a very good Secretary
of State. He fought tooth and nail on behalf of UK farmers during
those debates, and secured a number of concessions from the
Government on that journey. What we have been left with is a
trade deal with Australia and New Zealand that has brought those
countries closer to us and allowed us to co-operate and work with
them, which will give us huge opportunities in future. There are
massive markets around the world in Asia and North America where
we can sell top-quality UK beef and lamb, working with Australia
and New Zealand—which have the opposite seasonal activity to
us—to supply those markets. Bringing them closer through those
trade deals is the first step on that journey, and I am very
proud of what UK farmers produce. We should celebrate that and
make the most of it in trying to exploit those markets moving
forward.
Turning to the hon. Member for Barnsley Central (), I am delighted that his son is going to agricultural
college—did he say Askham Bryan? I think he just said that it was
a college in North Yorkshire, but I hope it is Askham Bryan,
which I know is a very good college. If there was ever a moment
when we needed bright young people to come into our sector—the
next generation to take us forward—this is it, and I celebrate
the fact that the hon. Gentleman has family getting involved in
the sector. We should do all we can to encourage that. One of the
first meetings I had when I took over as Minister was with the
National Federation of Young Farmers’ Clubs, looking at some of
the work it is doing to encourage young people into the sector.
It is also very in tune with some of the mental health challenges
that young people and farmers in rural communities are facing.
Anything I can do in this job to help it on that journey, I will
do.
The hon. Member for Barnsley Central also talked about
biosecurity, which is very important when it comes to dealing
with avian influenza: anything we can do to increase the
biosecurity of some of our professional poultry units is to be
welcomed. He went on to talk about African swine fever, which is
a challenge that is spreading across Europe. That is why on 1
August this year, we changed the rules: we did a spot check on
items coming into the UK to see how much illegal or unregistered
pork meat was coming in, and have now changed the rules so that
no one can import more than 2 kg at a time. Border Force
employees are on their toes, looking for any violations of those
rules to make sure we keep the UK safe from African swine
fever—it would be a disaster if we ended up with it.
There has been a lot of talk about seasonal workers; clearly, I
am not in a position to announce those figures, but we are in
close discussions with our friends in the Home Office and hope to
give clarity on that issue as soon as possible. That neatly takes
me to the former Home Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member
for Witham (). She started with a series of
massive plugs for her constituency and the great food producers
of Essex, including Tiptree, which I do recognise as one of the
premium jam producers in the world, not just the country. She
went on to talk about avian influenza. It is fair to say that
Essex, Suffolk and Norfolk have been at the epicentre of that
disaster. My heart goes out to those poor farmers who have found
themselves victims of that terrible virus. The good news, from a
national point of view, is that we have robust supply chains in
place. There will be turkeys for Christmas. There are some
challenges in the goose market, but the chicken market is also
fine.
The right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael),
who always attends these debates, is a great advocate for his
farmers and fishermen. He was the first to raise the Grocery Code
Adjudicator, along with my hon. Friend the Member for West Dorset
(), who mentioned the
adjudicator a number of times. It is important to understand what
the Grocery Code Adjudicator can and cannot do. Their role is to
ensure that contracts that are entered into are adhered to
appropriately and not violated.
If an egg producer has signed a contract at X per dozen eggs, the
supermarket has the right to expect the producer to stand by that
price. The producer could procure and secure the feed supply for
the same period as the life expectancy of a laying hen, which is
about 14 months. The producer could sign the contract for X
amount per dozen, secure the price per tonne of feed and
therefore protect the margin. The price of feed has gone up
exponentially and farmers have reached the point where they must
make a decision on whether to enter into a new contract for a new
price or at the same price. About a year ago, many of them voted
with their feet and said that they were not willing to sign up to
that level of contract. The retailers made a mistake when they
did not to see the huge challenge coming in the egg-supply
market, and we are now seeing that.
What is the role of the Government? It is to encourage
conversations between retailers, primary producers and
wholesalers on a regular, monthly basis. The Secretary of State
and I meet the farming unions, the hospitality sector, retailers
and the processing sector to ensure that those conversations take
place. I hope that that will continue to bear fruit, but I
acknowledge there are challenges in the sector that are not
linked to avian influenza.
My hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset () has been a great advocate for
farming for a long time. He was one of those who celebrated my
elevation to this position. So many people celebrated my arrival
at the Dispatch Box, I felt like Ronaldo must have felt when he
joined Man U and all the fans celebrated. I reflect on how that
worked out in the end—let’s see how that goes.
My hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset talked about grant
funding, and he will have seen today that we have announced some
grant funding to help farmers improve slurry systems. We are very
much committed to supporting farmers with capital expenditure to
allow them to invest in new tech, especially if that will benefit
animal welfare and the involvement of modern practices and
technology in food production.
My hon. Friend went on to talk about bovine TB, of course. There
is probably not enough time for me to get into that subject
today, but what I will say is that we must use every tool in the
box to fight bovine TB. That includes vaccinating badgers, it
includes ensuring that we have improved biosecurity and it
includes culling badgers where that is essential. We should be
guided by the science and not by anything else—not by the
calendar and not by political lobbying, but by the science. That
is what the Government will do.
I think that, for the first time, the hon. Member for Strangford
() managed to get to the right of my hon. Friend the
Member for South Dorset when he committed to shooting every fox
in Northern Ireland. I wish him well in his
pursuit—[Interruption.] I know it was tongue in cheek. He is a
huge advocate for the farmers of Northern Ireland, and they are
great food producers. He also mentioned the price of fertiliser
and the challenges with fertiliser, as did my hon. Friend the
Member for Penrith and The Border (Dr Hudson), who talked about
CF Fertilisers. Yesterday I met my right hon. Friend the
Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
to see what we can do to co-operate and work together to assist
CF in ensuring that we continue to supply the nation with
ammonium nitrate, nitric acid and carbon dioxide, which of course
is very important.
I know that I am running out of time, but I want to make a couple
of comments about my hon. Friend the Member for St Ives, who
talked about potato and dairy farmers leaving the sector and the
importance of education. Education of our consumers is one area
where we could criticise the agricultural sector. I do not think
that we have done a very good job as farmers—I put my hand up as
one of those farmers—of ensuring that our consumers understand
how and where our food is produced. We have to do better to
ensure that the next generation fully understands where and how
our food is produced. Education was also mentioned by my hon.
Friend the Member for South West Hertfordshire ().
My hon. Friend the Member for Penrith and The Border talked about
grant schemes, which I hope I have mentioned. He also mentioned
the work of the Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs, which is under the chairmanship of my right hon. Friend
the Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Sir ). It continues to be a
great critical friend of the Department, and I would encourage it
to continue its great work.
My hon. Friend for Penrith and The Border also talked about the
reward for—that is, payments for—hedgerows and so on. I hope that
when we announce the new schemes, which I hope will be very soon,
he will see the fruits of those discussions. I am very keen to
ensure that farmers want to take part in the schemes and feel
part of the solution. But money is not the only barrier. I think
that we can help, assist with, and tweak some farming practices.
Hedgerows are a good example. It is not just about money; it is
about being able to get on to the land and cut the hedges at the
right time. If we can fund and assist with wildlife strips by the
side of the hedgerows, it is possible to cut a hedgerow in
January and February without running on to the commercial crop.
That has the added benefit of creating a wildlife corridor and
leaving berries and so on the hedgerows for wild birds to feed on
during that time.
I think I have run out of time—apart from for mentioning the hon.
Member for Perth and North Perthshire (), who gave us his rant about
Brexit once again. We will have to come back to that on another
occasion, but I enjoy the same loop of conversation we have with
him every time.
(in the Chair)
Thank you, Minister. We now turn to , who will have the final
word.
3.58pm
Thank you, Sir Gary. I thank everyone who took part in the debate
to demonstrate our support for the British farming industry. If I
may, I will highlight a couple of people who made remarkable
remarks. The hon. Member for Barnsley Central () mentioned mental health. That is an increasingly big
problem in the farming sector. My right hon. Friend the Member
for Witham () mentioned supermarkets’
pricing structures. They have had their jam; it is time that
farmers had some, too.
My hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset () mentioned uncertainties over
subsidies and also made a plea to continue the badger cull—a
message well heard in the west country. The hon. Member for
Strangford (), who is not a fan of foxes, made a number of good
points about agriculture in Northern Ireland. My hon. Friend the
Member for West Dorset () made excellent points about
the Groceries Code Adjudicator, on which I have been informed
this afternoon. My hon. Friend the Member for South West
Hertfordshire () told us about his experience of working on a farm—I
am sure it was udderly brilliant. My hon. Friend the Member for
Penrith and The Border (Dr Hudson) talked about food security,
and rightly so. I highlighted that issue in my speech. And
finally, the hon. Member for Perth and North Perthshire () seems to disagree with the
referendum result—’twas ever thus, Sir Gary.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered support for British farming.
|
