Agricultural Transition Plan 11.47am The Minister for Food, Farming
and Fisheries (Mark Spencer) With permission, Mr Deputy Speaker, in
addition to the written ministerial statement tabled today, I would
like to make a statement updating the House on the next steps that
we are taking to shake off the damaging legacy of the bureaucratic
EU common agricultural policy for good. We will learn from the
past, and help farmers to build and maintain profitable and
resilient...Request free trial
Agricultural Transition Plan
11.47am
The Minister for Food, Farming and Fisheries ()
With permission, Mr Deputy Speaker, in addition to the written
ministerial statement tabled today, I would like to make a
statement updating the House on the next steps that we are taking
to shake off the damaging legacy of the bureaucratic EU common
agricultural policy for good.
We will learn from the past, and help farmers to build and
maintain profitable and resilient businesses by spending public
money in a way that helps us to secure the public good, so that
they can continue to produce the food we need and help to improve
the state of nature. That is the right and smart thing to do with
public money, as we also develop the markets that will draw on
finance from all sources. Today we are publishing detailed
information about what we will pay for in our environmental land
management schemes, and how farmers can get involved this year
and beyond.
Having kicked off our sustainable farming incentive last summer
starting with soil health, today we are adding six more ways that
farmers can be paid to take action in 2023, from protecting and
enhancing the hedgerows that make up a vital network of habitats
across our farmed landscapes, to making sure that we tackle
pests, protect crops and support wildlife, so that more farms of
all shapes and sizes can make doing their bit for the environment
part of their business plan. Each year, we will add offers to the
SFI, with the full set in place by 2025, so that farmers can
choose more options for their businesses. That is vital for
producing food, tackling the causes and impacts of climate
change, and helping nature to recover.
We are making it straightforward and simple to get involved. We
know that farmers need to plan for the months and years ahead as
early as possible, so today we are publishing information on the
work we will be rewarding by 2025 through the sustainable farming
incentive and countryside stewardship, and sharing information on
the next round of landscape recovery projects. We remain as
ambitious as ever, as we move ahead through our transition and
work with farmers to design a much better way of doing
things.
All that will help us to build the resilience of our communities
and to meet our environmental targets on air, water and waste, as
well as nature, land and sea, guided by our commitments to reach
net zero by 2050 and halt the loss of species in our country by
2030. We are also tackling the polluters who stubbornly refuse to
help and threaten to undermine everyone else’s hard work. Our aim
is to back the frontrunners who can have the greatest impact and
inspire others, as well as helping everyone to bring up their
baseline and improve it year on year, harnessing the power of
innovation and technology to help our farmers give nature a
helping hand so that we focus on bringing their businesses into
the future.
All the evidence we have, as well as plain common sense, tells us
that making the shift towards a more sustainable, resilient food
system is critical to feeding our growing population and meeting
our commitments to halt the decline of nature by 2030 and reach
net zero. That will fundamentally improve the lives of people
across our country and around the world, and make sure that every
generation has a better future. The UK will continue to lead the
way. I am sure that the whole House will join me in recognising
the vital importance of the solutions our fantastic farmers bring
to the table. I commend this statement to the House.
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
I call the Opposition Front-Bench spokesman, .
11.51am
(Cambridge) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for advance sight of the statement. It
provides detail following announcements made not to this House,
Mr Deputy Speaker, but to the Oxford farming conference some
weeks ago. It will be scrutinised closely as farmers rightly try
to work out what it will mean for them. With intense cost
pressures on fertiliser, fuel and labour supply, many people are
hurting and worrying. At the same time, the reduction in basic
payments moves inexorably onwards. For people on the margins,
especially in the uplands, the withdrawal of that essential
support will make life harder and harder. Next year, half of it
will be gone and the value of the other half will be eroded
substantially by inflation.
So what is on offer today? Not nearly enough, I am afraid. There
are more than 100 pages of complexity. There are lots of schemes,
which are worthy in themselves, but in far too many cases, I fear
they will be insufficiently attractive. There is a risk that
take-up will be very low, as we have seen with the SFI so far,
with just 224 paid out last year, compared with the over 80,000
receiving basic payments. I hope take-up improves—we want these
schemes to work—but we have real doubts. Will the Minister tell
us how much of the £1 billion already cut from farmers will go
back to them this year through environmental land management
schemes? How many people does he expect to take up the SFI in
this calendar year? I welcome the reference to tenant farmers,
but can he guarantee access to those schemes, because he will be
aware of the issues highlighted in the Rock review?
There are also real questions about the environmental benefit. In
the absence of a whole-farm approach, there is real risk,
particularly on countryside stewardship, that the Government will
pour money out to people to do pretty much what they already do
and then intensify alongside that. Will the Minister tell us
today what measures of environmental improvement are in place to
ensure that public goods are really being secured in return for
public money? Crucially, what impact does this all have on our
food security? Will he tell us today whether we produce more or
less food in this country this year as a consequence of these
changes?
It is fully three years since we discussed the Agriculture Bill
in Committee. I asked many of the same questions then and got
vague answers. We will soon be halfway through the so-called
transition. The Government have been good at cutting the funding
to hard-pressed farmers, but frankly woeful at guaranteeing our
food production here in the UK and enabling the switch to the
more sustainable nature-friendly food production system we all
want to see.
I honestly entered the Chamber with optimism. I thought today was
the day we would get a positive Opposition able to join the
people up and down the country who are being positive about this.
I am sure the hon. Gentleman is disappointed we have had positive
comments from non-governmental organisations and farming
organisations, which seem to be welcoming the plans.
Let us get to the points the hon. Gentleman made. He said we made
announcements at Oxford, but what we announced at Oxford was the
lifted payments for countryside stewardship. Today we are
announcing the SFI, which is the other scheme. That is on the
website now. There are six extra schemes in there, some of
which—the low-input grassland and improved grassland schemes, for
instance—are designed to help and support exactly those upland
farmers he mentioned. There is also support through countryside
stewardship to assist with the maintenance of stone walls, so
there are lots of things for farmers to embrace.
The hon. Gentleman asks: can we do both? Can we keep the nation
fed and improve the environment? We have full confidence that we
can. Looking at the data and at history, this country gets about
1% more efficient year on year in the way we produce food. That
means that in 10 years’ time we can produce the same amount of
food on 10% less land. I think we can do better than that. With
investment in new technology, we can be more productive on the
most productive land, and on the margins around those fields we
can add true biodiversity and environmental output.
Let me give a practical example. If we convince farmers not to
cut their hedgerows in August or September, as was traditional,
but encourage them to cut them in February, that would provide a
huge pantry of berries for small birds to feed on throughout the
winter. Combining that with support for wildflower strips next to
the hedgerows would encourage the development of lacewings and
ladybirds, which eat aphids, which are the pests farmers use
pesticides on to stop the damage to their crops. That would be a
win-win by working with, not against, nature. That is what we
want to encourage farmers to do, and that is how we will deliver
food security, environmental benefits and better
biodiversity.
(Camborne and Redruth)
(Con)
I warmly welcome the inclusion of a new hedgerow standard under
the sustainable farming incentive, and particularly the inclusion
and recognition of Cornish stone hedges within it. Hedges are
probably the single most important ecological building block in
our farmed environment, and it is right that that is
recognised.
However, to get the movement we need toward our 2030 species
abundance target, we need widespread participation in the
schemes, as the document published today outlines. It is very
welcome that the Government have increased the payment rates
already, but can he confirm that if we need to increase them
further in the years ahead to get the participation rates we
need, he will not be banned by antiquated EU laws around income
forgone—those are still sitting in retained EU law—and that we
will pay whatever it takes in the market to get the participation
we need?
First, I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend, who was the
forerunner of many of these thoughts and schemes. The work he did
in the Department has led us to this point, and I pay tribute to
it. He is right to identify hedgerows as the corridors of
wildlife. They are a huge source of biodiversity and a place
where wildlife can thrive. We will, of course, do all we can to
not only support individual farmers, but build that network of
hedgerows and those corridors for wildlife.
All these schemes remain under review. One of the reasons we are
here today and were not able to do this last year is because we
were running pilot schemes with farmers and listening to the
feedback they were giving us. The scheme we have today is in a
much stronger place than it would have been if we had acted
earlier. We will continue to have dialogue with NGOs and farmers
to ensure we get the outputs we require.
(North Shropshire) (LD)
We obviously welcome the aims and objectives of today’s
statement, but it has been a tough year for farmers, with cuts to
their basic payment alongside the increasing cost of doing
business. My farmers tell me that the SFI schemes are too complex
and cost too much up front to engage with. That is why we have
seen such poor take-up rates so far. Will the Minister consider
halting the cut to the basic payment scheme until our farmers
have had time to get to grips with the complexities of this new
scheme and participation rates have increased to an acceptable
level?
We should be clear that we set out our plan to reduce basic
payments over a seven-year period and we are trying to ensure
that, as those basic payments come down, we increase the
environmental payments at the same rate, so that we maintain the
same budget. The hon. Lady is fair in her criticism that some of
the schemes appeared to be too complex. We have listened to that,
and the schemes we are announcing today are much more simplistic
in their approach and much more flexible in their delivery. I
encourage farmers in her constituency in Shropshire to take a new
look. This is a new approach, which builds in flexibility,
particularly for tenant farmers, to step in and out of the SFI,
and I sincerely hope that her farmers will be able to benefit
from the new schemes announced today.
Mr Deputy Speaker ( )
I call the Chair of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Committee.
Sir (Scarborough and Whitby)
(Con)
As a farmer myself, I thank the Minister, following the taster
that we had at the Oxford farming conference, for his further
clarification of the way that agricultural transition will be
delivered. We are now able to capitalise fully on the freedoms we
have outside the European Union to tailor our agricultural policy
not only to the needs and objectives of farmers, but to the
objectives of taxpayers.
English agriculture is very diverse in land type, topography,
altitude and size, with many smaller farms relying on the support
they get from the taxpayer. Can the Minister reassure me that
this support system will not only help those farmers who need to
change the way they farm to make it more sustainable and
ecologically diverse, but support those upland farmers in places
such as the North Yorkshire moors who have been delivering for
generations exactly the public good that we want them to
deliver?
I join my right hon. Friend in declaring my interest, and I pay
tribute to him for his work as Chair of the Select Committee and
the scrutiny that he brings to this area of government. He is
right to highlight the uplands. In these schemes, we have
something for everyone. Whether someone is a small livestock
farmer in the uplands or a huge arable farmer in the lowlands,
there is something that they can engage with to improve their
business and improve the biodiversity and environmental output of
their farm. Of course, some of the SFI criteria we have put in
place—particularly those regarding improved grassland and
low-input grassland—are aimed specifically at sheep farmers to
ensure that there is something they can participate in. I do not
underestimate the economic value of the food they produce, or the
impact they have on the tourism industry and on the mental health
of people visiting that part of Yorkshire to unwind and enjoy the
great landscapes that those farmers have created.
(North Durham) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for his statement and welcome the intentions
of this policy. He said that the scheme would be open to all
farms of all shapes and sizes. In County Durham we have a lot of
tenanted smaller farms. As the hon. Member for North Shropshire
() just said, a lot of them are
struggling at the moment with diesel and fertiliser costs, and
other things. Some of these decisions will need investment up
front. Will there be any incentives or help for smaller farmers
to make that investment? They will also need guidance; big
agriculture businesses will have that already, but smaller
farmers will need specific help.
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his question. We have taken
a number of things into account. Under the SFI, we have
introduced a management payment of an extra £20 per hectare on
the first 50 hectares, which will help smaller farmers who do not
have the capacity in their business to employ a land agent, so
that they have time to go into the agreement and are rewarded for
doing so. That is very important.
The flexibility in the SFI scheme also helps tenant farmers. If
they enter a scheme and, for some reason, they lose control of
their land—if they are removed by their landlord or want to give
it up, for example—they will not be penalised for leaving the
scheme; they will have the flexibility to come in and out. I hope
that helps tenants. We have engaged extensively with the Tenant
Farmers Association, and the right hon. Gentleman may be familiar
with the review, which looked
specifically at the needs and desires of tenants. We have taken
on board lots of those recommendations and built them into the
scheme.
(Harwich and North Essex)
(Con)
I thank my right hon. Friend for his statement—what a blessing it
is to have someone who knows so much about farming at the
Dispatch Box—and in particular for his emphasis on food security,
which, as we can now see, has been too neglected for too long. It
is clear from the current food price inflation and shortages in
the shops that we need better food security. Perhaps he would
like to visit the area of outstanding natural beauty around
Dedham Vale, where we see good landowner co-operation and work by
combined forces. Perhaps he would also like to contact Mr John
Geldard, who is leading a highly innovative co-operative scheme
in Cumbria. Agri-environmental schemes can work at scale across
many estates, and can be far more effective and far better value
for the taxpayer than other schemes.
I would be delighted to visit both locations—I have known John
Geldard and his son Richard for a number of years. My hon. Friend
has drawn attention to co-operation between farmers. The third
scheme that we are announcing is landscape recovery, which will
involve huge projects over many hectares, with farmers and
landowners coming together to contribute a positive environmental
output. For example, if we want to reduce phosphate levels in the
river Wye—this is an existing scheme—landowners can co-operate to
reduce the input of nutrients. We will extend that to a further
25 schemes, subject to the quality of the bids. I am quite
excited about it, and I think that non-governmental
organisations, landowners and farmers will want to get together
and deliver on the landscape recovery scheme.
(Huddersfield)
(Lab/Co-op)
I do not know what is going on in Sherwood and Sherwood Forest
these days, but my local farmers in Huddersfield and I have been
involved with the nature recovery network, and I am also a
trustee involved in a scheme relating to John Clare’s house in
Lincolnshire. We know what it means to deliver public good: it
means participation, involving the local community, parish and
other councils, and charities. Is not the current problem the
fact that no one really knows whether there will be serious money
and resources for this plan, or whether people will still be
required to co-operate to achieve it?
That is what today is about. It is about the announcement of that
money and those schemes that can allow the farmers in the hon.
Gentleman’s constituency to gain the reward for the public good
that they deliver. This is not only good for the environment, but
good for farming businesses. The soil standards, for example,
help the farming operation and ensure that we have good-quality
soils not only for this generation, but for generations to
come.
(North Devon) (Con)
Farmers in my constituency are passionate about supporting their
environment and raising their livestock in a sustainable way, and
will welcome the clarity of today’s announcement. Many of them
took part in pilots for these schemes. However, they report being
unable to apply for the slurry infrastructure grant. Given the
importance of water quality in North Devon’s rivers and on its
beaches, will my right hon. Friend please ensure that this vital
support is accessible to all its farmers?
My hon. Friend has already lobbied me on this in private, and I
pay tribute to her. It is important for us to help farmers on the
journey towards improving their environmental impact, and that
will include grants for new slurry systems and other
infrastructure. There will be several rounds so that farmers can
apply on several occasions. Today we are announcing a number of
future grant schemes in order to give farmers time to think about
them and plan for their businesses into the medium future.
(Strangford) (DUP)
I welcome the Minister’s statement, and I think that all of us in
the farming sector can take some encouragement from it. I should
also declare an interest, as a farmer and a member of the Ulster
Farmers’ Union.
The farming industry plays a key role throughout the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, notably in my
constituency, where, as a landowner and a farmer, I understand
the importance of retention. In England farmers will receive
sustainable farming resources to maintain incentives for a
production agriculture sector, but in Northern Ireland, through
the Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs,
agriculture is devolved, at a time when there is no working
Assembly. Can the Minister assure us that the devolved nations
will not be left behind when it comes to farming incentives,
given that their contribution in Northern Ireland is every bit as
important as the contribution in the rest of the United
Kingdom?
As the hon. Gentleman identifies, these are devolved matters. I
am sorry that the scheme does not apply to his constituents, but
we have a lot of engagement with the devolved Administrations,
some of which are going in a slightly different direction. In
those conversations we all recognise that we have to go in a
direction that improves our biodiversity and environment. We will
continue that dialogue to help support our friends and colleagues
in the devolved Administrations and their constituents.
(Keighley) (Con)
I declare my interest, as my parents are farmers and I previously
worked as a rural practice surveyor. I welcome the statement and
congratulate DEFRA on listening and making changes. It is worth
noting that Janet Hughes, who is working behind the scenes, has
been getting huge credit for her work to interact with farmers.
Landscape recovery projects are a great mechanism for fostering
collaboration between different landowners in creating that
public good that we need to see. Will the Minister expand on
today’s announcement on the landscape recovery schemes, which
will enable farmers to work together as bigger units to drive and
deliver the public good that we all want to see?
My hon. Friend is right to highlight the landscape recovery
scheme, which will deliver huge benefits to various parts of the
country. It is a competitive process, and 25 schemes are
available to be awarded. It will enable landowners, farmers and
non-governmental organisations to come together to increase the
amount of land in one package and to deliver a public good by
building networks of improvement, with a single person having an
overarching view of a whole landscape to make sure that we have,
say, buffer zones next to rivers. That is a new concept, and the
pilots prove that it works. I look forward to many more schemes
coming forward.
(Newcastle upon Tyne Central) (Lab)
Local, affordable and sustainable food production delivers real
health and food security benefits to my constituents in
Newcastle. We also benefit from the glorious north-east
countryside and landscape, which is shaped by small-scale
farmers. We have had six years of confusion and downright chaos
on grants, subsidies, imports, food standards, etc. Will the
Minister answer two simple questions? Will the small-scale
farmers of the north-east benefit and be better off as a
consequence of these changes, and will our landscape be more
biodiverse?
I am tempted just to say yes, but it is clear that this
opportunity requires farmers to engage in the schemes and to put
forward their own plans, so it is subject to farmers looking at
the website and working out deliverable plans. I suppose it
depends on how the hon. Lady defines “better off.” If she defines
it as attracting more Government subsidy, that is entirely
possible under the scheme if farmers bid for and deliver the
right environmental outcomes. Farmers have a choice whether to
engage with the programme. We think it is very attractive and
will help farmers not only to produce great food but to deliver
great environmental outcomes.
(Barnsley Central) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for his statement, and I welcome its
intention. My right hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Mr
Jones) made an important point about the specific needs of
smaller, tenanted farms, which are the lifeblood of our rural
communities. I am reassured that the Minister understands the
need for flexibility, but will he make sure that small tenant
farmers are not unduly disadvantaged as a consequence of these
proposals?
It is very much our intention to try to help and support farmers,
whether they are owner-occupiers or tenants. There is something
in the scheme for farms of all shapes and sizes, but we have an
eye on the farmers that the hon. Gentleman describes. As he will
be aware, the TFA is a powerful lobby group. The review is specifically looking
at the plight of those farmers, and it is having an influence on
Government policy.
(Rutherglen and Hamilton
West) (Ind)
As environmental and climate change goals become ever more
urgent, how will updates to the plan specifically increase the
use of peatland for carbon capture and storage?
The hon. Lady raises an important point, because our peatlands
are under huge pressure, particularly in the lowlands, where they
are disappearing. We need to try to embrace and support the
farmers who are farming that land, because they are very
productive in growing vegetables, particularly in the
Lincolnshire wolds. We must make sure that we continue to
sequester carbon in the peatlands in her constituency, as they
are a huge carbon sequestration asset. That is a huge priority
that this Government will continue to monitor and support.
(Bristol East) (Lab)
I share the Minister’s excitement about the potential of the
landscape recovery schemes, but we also need to leverage private
sector finance if we are to reach net zero and halt biodiversity
loss. What conversations has he had with colleagues in the
Treasury, the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial
Strategy, and across Government about ensuring that nature-based
carbon credits actually have credibility? At the moment, it is
difficult to quantify their value and to get people to be
confident in investing in them.
As ever, the hon. Lady is very informed. This is a challenge that
we have to get right, and we are putting a lot of work into
making sure that we can measure these things in a right and fair
way—this has to be applied in a global sense—and into engaging
with the private sector to make sure it can help to support
farmers and landowners to do the right thing to add to our
environmental benefit, and so it is not just the taxpayer picking
up the tab.
|
