Agriculture (Delinked Payments) (Reductions) (England) Regulations 2026
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts(4 days ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)
My Lords, I would like to pay a personal tribute to the noble Lord, Lord Curry of Kirkharle. Along with my sponsor, the late Lord Plumb, of Coleshill, he has long stood out as being so knowledgeable about farming and the countryside. He has given immense and dedicated service to this House over so many years, and he is a local lad who has done his county proud. We shall all miss him greatly, and we thank him for his great service.
I also pay tribute to the outgoing hereditary Peers and their knowledge, which passes through generations, as we have heard from the noble Earl, Lord Devon. I am probably the first and last member of my family who will enter Parliament or politics, so I am in awe of those who have served with such longevity. They have all made a massive contribution and will be greatly missed.
I echo the thoughts of the noble Lord, Lord Curry of Kirkharle, on the impact that the clean energy proposals will have on farming and the countryside, taking probably about 10% of land each year out of food production. As we heard from my noble friend Lord Redwood, farming is essential. We are only 60% self-sufficient in this country, and in certain fruit and vegetable cases we are only 55% self-sufficient, so it is a diminishing asset if we lose the land to clean energy proposals.
Last week the Minister responded to a Question from me on the SFI and whether farmers would benefit. I am not entirely convinced that she grasped the point—just made by the noble Lord, Lord Curry of Kirkharle—about recognising this as a public good and rewarding farmers for temporarily storing floodwater on farmland. We cannot expect them to do it; they are not operating as a charity. They are trying to make money in very difficult circumstances—we are potentially facing another drought this year, given the rainfall this month—so we need to have a defined understanding of how their contribution will be recognised through the SFI.
I have particular concerns about these regulations, and I am delighted that my noble friend Lord Roborough brought the amendment for debate. I am concerned about two aspects in particular. First, before 1 January 2025, approximately 83,000 farm holdings were receiving the basic payment scheme before the change to delinked payments in England came into effect. After 1 January 2025, there were 32,200 active SFI agreements, with a growing number of businesses having more than one agreement due to how the scheme is administered by the RPA. That immediately demonstrates that there are probably fewer farmers with SFI agreements than even that number suggests. My second concern is about the lack of clarity we can expect when SFI 2027 comes into effect. The Minister is very aware of rural issues, given her previous constituency representation. There will be real hardship, as my noble friend Lord Roborough indicated, and I will address that.
I represented quite a large upland area for the last five years I was in the other place, and I am currently patron of Upper Teesdale Agricultural Support Services. I make a plea to the Minister to be as absolutely clear as the Government can be as to how the schemes will apply for common land, to upland farmers and to tenant farmers. In north Yorkshire in particular, about 48% of the farms are tenanted and, when a solar panel scheme takes a big chunk of the tenanted farm out of production, that leaves them with very little area on which they can claim. I hope that the Minister, in summing up, will look carefully at the gap between the existing schemes remaining in force, and the fact that if you are in an existing scheme, you are probably unable to apply: you are locked out of an environmental scheme until early 2028 at the earliest.
The pace at which basic farm payments are declining and the rate at which the new schemes are coming into effect will pose very real issues of hardship for farmers. I hope that that is an aspect that the Minister will address when she sums up the debate on these regulations.
Lord Carrington (CB)
My Lords, I cannot compete with the noble Earl, Lord Devon. First of all, I declare my farming interests in Buckinghamshire and Lincolnshire, and my receipt of delinked payments.
The first Lord Carrington, the third Lord Carrington and the sixth Lord Carrington were all Ministers of agriculture. The most famous of them was the third Lord Carrington, a Liberal, who introduced a policy of smallholdings for farmers during the Boer War and the First World War. That policy seems to be the guiding light for what the Government are currently doing on the SFI payments—concentrating on the small farmers with 50 hectares or less, rather than the larger farmers, who will be capped, if they get money at all, at £100,000.
I am speaking very much as a working, hands-on farmer, and I must say that I have never seen anything quite like it in all the 50 or more years that I have been involved in farming. I want to just bring to the attention of the House some of the real horror stories that are going on, even as we speak. They are based on what we are doing on our farm. We have decided for the first time ever not to plant spring crops, because we cannot risk the weather remaining as dry as it is, and therefore the crops not germinating. We are having tremendous trouble not so much in getting fertiliser, as the noble Lord, Lord Redwood, mentioned, but in getting red diesel. The price of red diesel is the real crucifier of most farmers in this country at the moment. Then, of course, we have the prices for the commodities that we are producing, all of which make leaving the land fallow the best option for us.
In East Anglia, in Norfolk, I gather, crops of wheat are currently being irrigated. That is a very expensive exercise for a crop that is not going to produce a great deal of money. We grow potatoes, and we have reduced our potato acreage considerably due to prices. We had a very good harvest last year, but prices worldwide are terrible. Now we have the potential problem of the SPS agreement. Under the SPS agreement, certain chemicals are going to be banned. If you buy a packet of crisps, that crisp will actually have been taken from a potato three years ago, and the chemicals that will have been used will be banned under the new SPS agreement, unless the Government get a waiver. That means, of course, that those potatoes will go straight into an anaerobic digester, if they cannot be sold.
A similar problem exists for sugar beet. Sugar beet is very susceptible, as everyone knows, to virus yellows; it is estimated that 60% of all sugar beet grown in this country is affected by virus yellows. There are very few other profitable break crops, which means that the following year you will not be able to get the yields you want out of wheats, and so on and so forth. So it is a pretty drastic situation out there.
I am a very lucky farmer, as we are fortunate to live in the murder capital of England. We have filming for “Midsomer Murders” going on even as we speak, and that is much more profitable than a crop of wheat. I am also in a part of the country where we can grow houses. I am lucky, but others are not so fortunately placed in the farming world.
All this, of course, makes the Government’s byline, “Food security is national security”, almost worthless. I am therefore going to ask just one question of the Minister. It is driven by the fact that farmers need to plan, and what we are getting at the moment is not nearly sufficient to enable us to plan for the future. Can the Minister reassure the House on how Ministers and the department are supporting farmers to business plan now by providing forward plans of the SFI and countryside stewardship higher-tier schemes, as they are offered in both 2027 and 2028? Only with that information can we make sense of our farming.
Like everybody else, I thank noble Lords very much for all the support they have given us hereditaries. I will still be here, but sitting on the steps of the Throne rather than in the Chamber.
Sustainable Farming Incentive: Flood Prevention and Drought Resilience
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts(1 week, 1 day ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering
To ask His Majesty’s Government whether funding will be available under the Sustainable Farming Incentive to permit farmers to undertake environmental measures for the purposes of flood prevention and drought resilience.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Baroness Hayman of Ullock) (Lab)
The sustainable farming incentive will continue to support flood prevention and drought resilience. The streamlined SFI offer for 2026 includes actions that slow the movement of water during periods of heavy rainfall, keep soil covered and increase organic matter, which improves the soil’s ability to retain water. Applications will open in June this year for small farms and those without an existing environmental land management revenue agreement, and in September for all farms.
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)
My Lords, I welcome that Answer and the information. I also welcome the department’s recently published independent report on flourishing uplands, which highlights graphically the tensions between farmers and environmentalists. It makes no economic sense at all for productive farmland to be flooded when farmers are providing 62% of the UK’s food. In those circumstances, does the Minister agree that there is a positive role for farmers to play, particularly in the uplands, in flood prevention and drought resilience? Will she therefore make sure that not just the SFI but all forms of environmental payments will look to putting livestock back on the land and making farmland productive and, at the same time, contributing to flood resilience and drought resilience?
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
The noble Baroness is right: it is important that we recognise the role that farmers, land managers and landowners have in supporting the Government’s ambitions on flood and drought resilience, and that this should be delivered through any way that is practical and possible, while at the same time looking at continuing to support farm profitability.
PFAS
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
My noble friend raises a really important issue. When deciding what action they will take to address any PFAS risks, the Government will have due regard to the environmental principles policy statement from the Environment Act 2021, which includes the precautionary principle. We know that many PFAS have useful properties and are widely used and that some critical uses of PFAS which benefit society do not currently have suitable and sustainable alternatives available. While we see their use continuing in the near future, we absolutely have to manage any risks effectively. The PFAS plan contains action to support this transition to alternatives.
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)
My Lords, will the Minister look carefully to the forthcoming water Bill and the conclusions and recommendations of the Cunliffe report as to how we can remove these very dangerous products from our water courses, our rivers and the sea?
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
The water White Paper and the Bill that will follow it are a central part of the Government’s programme and a priority for Defra. We are looking at the Cunliffe report extremely carefully; it is an important piece of work.
Forest-Risk Commodities
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts(1 month, 4 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
As I mentioned, we remain steadfast in working with partners to deliver our shared commitment to halt and reverse deforestation and forest degradation. Clearly, examples such as that which the noble Lord has just given are part of that. We need to ensure that any regulatory frameworks we bring in are robust and proportionate but also effective in addressing any deforestation in UK supply chains. Any decision-making will also have to consider the implications of the EU deforestation regulation on UK businesses that trade with the EU, and that is part of the bigger picture in order to address exactly the issues that the noble Lord is talking about.
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)
My Lords, some might say that the Government’s proposals for nature loss are very ambitious; some might say they are overambitious. Does the noble Baroness agree that taking 10% of farmland out of food production to go towards clean energy projects is not in the interests of the country? Surely, taking farmland out of production in this way must count against nature loss and biodiversity gain.
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
I am sure the noble Baroness is aware that the Government are working alongside farmers and environmental organisations on our farming road map, “Farming 2050, Growing England’s Future”, in order to set the course of farming over 25 years. We need a long-term vision for farming and food security, and this road map will be designed to get there, because ultimately, we need to deliver our food security alongside our environmental objectives.
Global Biodiversity Loss and National Security
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts(2 months, 1 week ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
It is important to note that this is a strategic tool and not a prediction of future possibilities. The idea behind it is to help government plan for future shocks that are credible enough to warrant preparation. The way it has been managed reflects standard national security planning for preparedness. On policies, we are taking comprehensive action to strengthen resilience to environmental risks, both at home and aboard, through various ways. Tree planting in England is at its highest rate, and we are restoring peatlands, improving water quality and protecting pollinators. We have introduced landmark legislation to protect our oceans. We are supporting food security with new technology and farming schemes that reward sustainable production, and we are also committed to providing international climate finance—I could go on. Maybe the noble Earl and I can pick this up in more detail after the Question.
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)
Does the Minister agree that farmers are probably best placed to regard the future of nature and to safeguard our biosecurity and ecosystem? Will she carefully consider the damage that could be done, particularly to livestock farmers, from some of the proposals in the animal welfare strategy, which I would be very happy to raise with her separately?
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
The proposals on farmed animals in the animal welfare strategy are designed not to harm farmers but to bring long-term improvements to animal welfare in relation to how our food is produced. Our intention is to work very closely with farmers and other relevant stakeholders so that the policies we introduce do not cause harm but support animal welfare.
Changing Weather Patterns and Floods
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts(2 months, 2 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
It is important that we invest through the water companies in improved infrastructure. One problem in this area is that so much of our infrastructure is old and has not been updated, which is why we have so many issues with our sewerage system and run-off into our watercourses. The Government are committed to improving investment in that infrastructure in order to tackle some of the issues that the noble and gallant Lord rightly raises.
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)
My Lords, the Minister will be aware that there is an issue with storing water on farmland as it breaches the de minimis rule of the Reservoirs Act 1975. When does she plan to revisit that Act? Will she learn from Pickering’s Slowing the Flow and the work in Hull to use sustainable drains to store the water at source and save it for use in times of drought?
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
The noble Baroness raises some important issues. I am sure that, in referring to Hull, she is aware that the Minister for Water is a Hull MP and so is very aware of these issues. We are currently looking at our reservoir policy, because we need to consider how best to make use of the water that we have, future water storage needs and so on.
Animal Welfare Strategy: Rural Communities
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts(2 months, 2 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
We are obviously very aware of any potential impact of a ban on rural communities, including rural businesses. I can confirm that Defra will be starting a consultation which will look for views on how to deliver a ban—the ban is our manifesto commitment. That will enable people to give their opinion on any impacts, including on rural communities and businesses. We welcome all points of view, and we will consider them very carefully. Stakeholder engagement will, of course, be an important element of the consultation process and will ensure that everyone can give their view and present their evidence.
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)
My Lords, has the Minister considered the future of foxhounds if trail hunting is to be banned? This a very real concern of those who live in the countryside.
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
I am aware of the concerns around foxhounds. To reiterate, the consultation will look at all views and concerns. I urge people who have concerns around the future of foxhounds to take part in the consultation, so that point can be properly considered and discussed as we move forward on the manifesto commitment.
Construction Industry: Timber
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts(2 months, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
As I mentioned earlier, we do not think the amount of imported timber is the way forward, and we have to change that. The noble Lord said that 10% is homegrown; our figures are that 80% is imported. It is important that we look at how best to turn that around. Importing huge amounts of end-product is not good for our national security, so it is important that we look at how we increase homegrown timber.
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)
My Lords, the Minister will be aware of the work of Fera Science Ltd, in Sand Hutton near York, which examines the wood used in furniture and other products that brings unwelcome visitors to this country, in the form of little insects and beasties. Will she congratulate Fera Science on the work that it does, and would she have occasion to visit in the not too distant future?
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
I am very happy to congratulate Fera. It does excellent work. When I went to Forest Research, I saw some of the wood that had, shall we say, unpleasant visitors in it, so I know that both Fera and Forest Research do important work and help biosecurity in this country. I know the noble Baroness is keen for me to visit Fera and I will of course consider that.
Water Companies: Fines
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts(3 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
It is important that the water companies pay the fines in such a way that it does not impact on consumers and consumer bills, and the Government are certainly keen to enforce that.
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)
Can the noble Baroness explain what proportion of the fines paid to date have been used to improve the environment? Will she ensure that these fines can be used to help farmers prevent pollution from agricultural diffusion? At the moment, the sustainable farming incentive is paused, and in any event it does not yet cover agricultural pollution.
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
We have announced that we are reopening the sustainable farming incentive, and we hope for a good response to it. The important thing to note about the fines is that currently, if they are from Ofwat, they go to Ofwat and then to the Treasury, and if they are EA fines they go straight into the Treasury. It is important that we have an agreement where we hypothecate the fines so that Defra can decide the projects where the fine money will make the biggest difference, and then HMT provides us with the money to do that. That is the important focus.
Yorkshire: Sustainable Water Management Solutions
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Excerpts(3 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms and Chief Whip (Lord Kennedy of Southwark) (Lab Co-op)
We have plenty of time. We will have the Lib Dems first, then the Conservatives.
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
When we brought in the recent water Act, we expected water companies to respect what Parliament had passed, and to behave in the right way regarding paying themselves bonuses when they were continuing to pollute. We will do what we can to crack down on that and to change behaviour, but I am also pleased that we are looking to prioritise a further water Bill to continue to improve the situation.
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)
I pay tribute to the Slowing the Flow Pickering scheme, which has prevented the flooding of Pickering. I bring to the Minister’s attention the case of Gladman Developments v Lancaster City Council. It has set aside the sequential test and overruled what MHCLG was hoping for: that optional standards will be respected. Going forward, this will contribute to greater flooding until we have mandatory SUDS standards. Is this not causing the Government concern? There is an amendment to the English devolution Bill that I hope MHCLG might support.
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
Obviously, I cannot comment on the specific issue to which the noble Baroness refers, but we are absolutely committed to improving the implementation of sustainable drainage systems. The noble Baroness is aware that we have updated the national planning policy framework to do so, and we introduced new national standards in June last year. They made it clear that SUDS should be designed to cope with changing climate conditions and to deliver wider benefits. We want this to work, and we recognise that SUDS are an important part of combating future flooding.