(5 days, 17 hours ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I too congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Northover, on securing this debate. I declare my interests as president of the Rural Coalition and a vice-president of the LGA. I am a farmer’s son, and one of the great privileges of my job serving in a diocese that covers Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire is going into some of the most wonderful, forward-looking and innovative farms in this country, which are at the forefront of farming across Europe.
Even though there are many successful, go-ahead farmers, there is nevertheless a huge level of mental stress among them. That has been true for many years. Sadly, there is an extraordinarily high number of suicides among the farming community. As one elderly farmer put it, “Many of us are feeling so depressed because these announcements suggest that we are not wanted and are worth more dead than alive”. He pointed out that if he manages to die before April 2026, his assets will be passed on; if he does not, the farm will probably not survive.
This cost on the mental health of so many of our farmers should not be underestimated. They are performing a fundamental service to our nation. The responsibility of government is defence of the realm, of course, but also to guarantee that we can feed the realm. If we cannot feed it, we will not have anybody here to defend within a very short time indeed, and that is why I pay tribute to organisations such as the Farming Community Network for their marvellous support for our farmers.
We understand that the Government are facing challenges and the need to raise revenue. We also know that APR has been used by some as a means of tax avoidance and treated as a loophole. We have some extraordinarily complex tax arrangements in various areas of life; is it not possible to find some way of defining those who really use their land and produce food to make a living? Can we not define that in some way, to address the loophole of those who are causing huge hikes in the value of land and sometimes taking it out of production because they have bought it as an investment? Can the Minister give us any clues as to whether some work is being urgently done on this? Will she commit to responding to the modelling done by the CLA and the NFU, so that we can really try to understand this huge disparity between the Government’s analysis and what the people on the land believe is happening? It would help us as we try to find a way through this impasse.
(3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberClearly, I cannot comment on the detail of a meeting that I did not attend. However, the Government’s commitment to supporting farmers and rural communities is unwavering and we have demonstrated this by committing £5 billion in the agricultural budget over the next two years. That is the biggest ever budget for sustainable food production and nature’s recovery.
My Lords, can the Minister help us a little? The Treasury figures state that fewer than 25% of farm businesses will be affected by the changes to APR on inheritance tax. However, the NFU estimates that up to half of all working farms could be impacted by the new tax rules. Why is there such a large discrepancy? Can she help us to understand what is going on?
There are two things here. People are looking just at the first £1 million and not at the opportunity for individuals to pass further tax reliefs on, of up to £2 million for one individual and £3 million for a couple. Also, there has been confusion around the data given out by Defra and the Treasury. The Treasury data shows that around 500 estates a year across the UK would be impacted to some extent and about 25% of the total number of estates currently making use of APR. What the Defra data shows is the asset value of farms in England so, by looking at that data, people have assumed that more farms would be impacted. But you cannot draw a straight line between asset value and what it means for inheritance tax, because the number of claims—how many people would be impacted by the change—is affected by many things, such as who owns the business, the nature of the ownership, how many owners there are, how they plan their affairs, and so on; this is where you have some of the confusion.
(1 month, 1 week ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady McIntosh, for getting this debate and I congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Elliott, on his excellent speech. I declare my interest as president of the Rural Coalition.
Rural communities make up nearly 20% of the population. That is similar to the number of people living in London, yet our biggest metropolis, among others, often feels far more integral to our policy and governance than our rural communities do. Rural communities are not just the responsibility of Defra; they are a significant proportion of our population, businesses, services and economy, and they cut across every government department. The specific impacts and challenges of policy rollout in rural areas need to be baked into the decision-making process of every single government department—not an afterthought but integral to the development of policy from the very beginning. Rural concerns are so often given to Defra which, while it has the lead on rural affairs, has very few of the levers necessary to bring about change. The sustainability of our rural communities should be of critical concern to us all, regardless of where we live.
The Rural Coalition of which I am president—a coalition of 12 national rural organisations—has commissioned and recently published a report, Reigniting Rural Futures. It highlights the impact that years of underinvestment have had on the rural economy and the massive potential there is if we simply have the will and imagination to grasp it. I am not sure whether the Minister has read this report, but I would be very happy to leave her a copy at the end of this debate. It shows that, in the rural economy, productivity stands at just 82% of its non-rural counterpart and will decrease to 79% by 2040 if this trend continues. Those of us who champion rural communities have long been calling for fairer funding for rural, but I want to make the case as to why this is not just yet one more demand on already-tight government purse strings but an opportunity for growth.
The noble Lord, Lord Cameron of Dillington, helpfully referred to research that shows that, with the right policy framework, the rural economy could increase productivity significantly, leading to an additional income of something like £9 billion to £19 billion annually in tax revenues. The Treasury stands to gain from an invigorated rural economy; it is an opportunity that should not be ignored.
Historical underfunding in rural areas has resulted in fewer and poorer services, along with underinvestment in essential infrastructure and connectivity. There is a lack of access to suitable educational and job opportunities, along with a desperate lack of affordable housing, which often drives the part of the population that is economically active out of rural areas, making the problem ever worse.
I will make a few short points about rural affordable housing, as I know that His Majesty’s Government have made affordable housing for all a priority, on which I congratulate them. It is part of the plan to boost economic prosperity, but I hope that this mission will take account of the particular pressures around rural affordable housing. How will the Government ensure that the benefits of these policies reach rural areas?
In 2022 the most affordable homes were 8.8 times more expensive than average lower-quartile earnings in rural areas, compared with 7.7 times more expensive in urban areas excluding London. Housing waiting lists in rural areas grew by 20% between 2020 and 2023, compared with a growth of just 14% in urban areas. Rural homelessness has increased by 25% since 2021-22. It is clear that the lack of affordable housing in rural communities is a significant barrier to rural prosperity.
There is much more we could discuss around the premiums of rural service delivery caused by challenges, including sparsity, facing rural business. Remember that 23% of our businesses in this country are in rural areas. There is the problem of digital connectivity, and there are mental health and well-being challenges, with a higher suicide rate in rural areas. I hope that other noble colleagues will pick up these issues.
Finally, I emphasise once more the desperate need for a cross-governmental strategic approach to rural affairs. The consideration of rural communities must be addressed at the very beginning of the development of policies and right through the delivery process. With the proper investment, our rural communities can not only continue to be a vital economic asset to this nation but contribute significantly to its growth.
(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberTo ask His Majesty’s Government what plans they have to ensure farmers are supported and recompensed for their role in flood prevention.
My Lords, I am grateful to all Members of your Lordships’ House who have signed up for this topical debate, giving us a few minutes to explore the extraordinary challenges that flooding is causing for our farming community.
We had an extremely wet September, with dozens of flood warnings issued by the Environment Agency. Indeed, in my diocese in Bedfordshire, large areas flooded—fortunately not for long periods. In fact, England had 95% more rainfall than its September average, and 10 counties in England experienced their wettest September on record.
Floods and heavy rainfall can affect everyone, but the devastation they can cause to farmers is unique. When farmland is flooded and the ground saturated, it can be impossible to plant crops; harvests are poor and may be lost completely. So many of our farmers have not yet recovered from the intense flooding they faced last winter. Defra-commissioned research finds that winter floods cost farmers an average of £480 per hectare. That is a staggering loss.
The Government need urgently to roll out the expanded offer of the farming recovery fund, as businesses and livelihoods are under threat. The time pressures here are critical. The fund is designed to support farmers to restore their land to the condition it was in prior to flooding in order to secure food supply, which this Government have repeatedly assured us is a key priority. I note that the Defra Secretary of State, Steve Reed, has said that no confirmation on the rollout of the farming recovery fund can be given until the spending review is complete. I regret that it should be delayed for so long and stress that every week it is delayed, farmers and their businesses are suffering. Can the Minister confirm that the expanded offer will be launched as soon as possible following completion of the spending review?
The devastating impacts of flooding on farmers are clear, but what about the public goods they provide through their role in flood prevention, and the costs they bear to protect us from flooding? Rural landowners and farmers provide a critical service in the form of natural flood management when their lands flood, and they do this by storing water. Farmers need to be properly compensated for providing this public service—not just for the cost of restoring this land to use for food production but for the cost of lost income.
This is complicated, as illustrated by a specific example brought to my attention by a hill farmer in the Naddle valley just outside Keswick, an area that suffers from flooding. A flood management pilot, part funded by government and called the Resilient Glenderamackin project, is aimed at trying to tackle the risks to Keswick of increased flooding through natural flood management. This farmer is facing the challenge of trying to work out whether to join that flood management scheme. If he enters his bottom valley fields into the flood management scheme, he will no longer have suitable grazing or haymaking land. Fodder would need to be brought in, which raises concerns about availability, price and quality. It can be extremely challenging to put a price on this for a year, let alone longer term, which is a challenge both for the West Cumbria Rivers Trust, as it tries to set payment rates for farmers, and for the farmers themselves when it comes to making these decisions. I raise this example just to highlight the complexities of the issues. This is what people are actually facing: the day-by-day reality of how they are going to make their farms viable.
We need a long-term, mutually agreed strategy to allow farmers to plan and prepare for flood storage. We need to ensure that our farming businesses are able to thrive and that we can guarantee our food security. As many of us have noted, in recent global conflicts it has become even clearer just how urgent it is that we are able to produce the majority of the food that we need here in this country.
I welcome His Majesty’s Government’s new Floods Resilience Taskforce and Secretary of State Steve Reed’s pledge to speed up the construction of flood defences, drainage systems and natural flood schemes. However, I hope too that the department recognises the importance of maintaining existing assets and systems. Data from the Environment Agency shows that maintaining existing assets in good repair is more than twice as cost effective as building new defences to protect property from flooding. Yet in some places, existing flood defences are falling into disrepair as the Environment Agency’s revenue budget, which is used for asset maintenance, has not been increased in real terms for nearly 20 years and has suffered cuts of nearly a third since 2020. As is true in so many cases, the lack of a multiyear financial settlement is preventing long-term planning and investment.
We on these Benches appreciate the work of Ministers and civil servants in Defra on these issues. I know that Farming Minister Daniel Zeichner recently reassured the farming community that he is “fighting tooth and nail” on their behalf when it comes to the upcoming Budget. Secretary of State Steve Reed said this week that he is
“making the strongest case for that funding”—[Official Report, Commons, 8/10/24; col. 240.]
for the agricultural budget and various other schemes. We want to put our weight behind them, and I hope the Minister will pass this on and note our appreciation for all that Defra is working on.
I also want to highlight, as we so often do when we say that something is going well, that some measures in the SFI and Countryside Stewardship schemes work well for both flood management and farmers, although these need time to mature. Hedgerows along the contours of fells, for example, give farmers clear field boundaries and slow down water. They are good for wildlife and for carbon sequestration. We need to work together to try to find win-win solutions that work for all the parties involved in this significant area.
Farmers play a vital role in the flourishing of our country, producing the food we need, sustaining and protecting our environment and wildlife, and preventing flooding. They are an essential part of the solution to many of the challenges that we face. I ask that we keep that in mind in a world where there are lots of issues. I am acutely aware that the Treasury is always being asked for more money for everything we do, and that special pleas and special cases are being made.
We need to remember where the food on our tables comes from. Who is on the ground doing so much of the work to restore our natural habitats and move towards net zero and, of course, playing a central role in protecting our homes from flooding as extreme weather events become more common in the face of climate change? We need to give strong, practical long-term support to our farmers in the face of flooding. They are the bedrock of our nation.