Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
The UK’s post-Brexit farming subsidy scheme has failed to improve on the old EU system and large landowners are still benefiting disproportionately, according to the president of the National Farmers Union.
In an interview with the Financial Times, Minette Batters, who is due to stand down as president of the union in February, slammed post-Brexit agricultural policy, which has been overseen by seven different environment secretaries since the UK voted to leave the EU in 2016.
One of the biggest criticisms of the EU subsidy scheme run as part of the Common Agricultural Policy was that it unfairly benefited large landowners.
Brexit was seen as an opportunity for the payment system to be overhauled. But its replacement, the Environmental Land Management schemes (ELMs), has been slow to be implemented and criticised for placing too much emphasis on the environment at the expense of food production.
“The focus at the moment is on growing a crop for the environment and not producing food . . . I think that’s going to be really hard with the cost of living crisis,” said Batters, adding that consumers cared more than ever about food security.
She went on to criticise the government for failing to build a more equitable system: “Large landowners effectively living off the state is not going to wash going forward,” said Batters.
While the new scheme differs from the EU system in that funding is awarded in exchange for environmental actions — “public money for public goods” — the system is still area based. Access to land is a pre-requisite to access the scheme and the more land a farmer has the more funds they will be able to secure.
The phase out of the EU Basic Payment Scheme has left many farmers who were reliant on the subsidies with lower payments than they had previously. Meanwhile, take up of the flagship payment under ELMs — the Sustainable Farming Incentive — has been low, with only a fraction of the 82,000 farmers who are eligible having signed up.
“At the end of the day, farmers knew what they were getting with the Basic Payment Scheme,” said Minette Batters, who will step down as president in February after five years in the role, referring to the EU subsidies. “Whether you liked it or not, it was the only way for us to manage our risk.”
EU-style payments are currently being phased out, with farmers receiving smaller sums yearly from 2021 through to 2027. The replacement schemes, which only apply to farmers in England, are designed to reward farmers for restoring the natural environment and adopting sustainable farming practices such as soil management.
Speaking to the FT in a recent interview, shadow environment secretary Steve Reed said that Labour would not “rip it up and start again,” but that the system could work better.
“If we want to incentivise landowners and farmers to behave in certain ways, and they had compensation for that previously, then they need that compensation to continue,” he said.
The Country Land and Business Association, which represents landowners and rural businesses, has been more supportive of the scheme, but has said that “doom speak” was dissuading farmers from signing up.
“We have taken agriculture home for the first time in 40 years,” said CLA president Victoria Vyvyan referring to the UK’s exit from the EU Common Agricultural Policy. “It’s obviously going to be difficult and complicated . . . but the general direction is good and productive.”
The NFU has called on all parties ahead of the next general election to commit to domestic production targets to offer security to farmers who are struggling with high production costs and “the biggest shake up in agricultural policy since 1947”.
The group said the government should set and report on food production targets in the same way it sets environmental targets, and that food was a key priority for voters going into the next election.
A poll of 2,135 adults in England and Wales commissioned by the group found that 84 per cent of people surveyed think food production targets are either as or more important than environmental targets.
“Farmers will vote for whoever has a credible plan for food production,” said Batters.
