(4 days, 10 hours ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, it is a pleasure to follow my noble friend Lord Caithness. I declare my farming and land management interests in Wales and that I am a member of the CLA and the Conservative Environment Network. I congratulate the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans on securing this important and timely debate.
Much has rightly been made, including by me, on the impact of October’s Budget on the rural economy and, in particular, family farms and rural businesses. However, today I will make my remarks on policies that I believe can grow the rural economy. A lack of housing and opportunities forces young people from rural communities and reduces demand for local services. This situation is only worsened by an urban-rural digital divide, which holds back rural businesses’ ability to grow. The Government were elected with a mandate to grow the economy, and this must include rural areas.
I know from my own experience in Defra that the rural economy is hindered by poor cross-departmental working. Ministers and officials from other departments assume that Defra has sole responsibility for the rural economy. In reality, Defra does not have the economic levers to unlock the countryside’s potential by itself. That power lies in other departments and, increasingly, local authorities, as we heard in the Statement earlier today. Much better cross-departmental working is necessary to ensure that economic policies are designed to generate growth in the rural economy. The Government have thus far failed to address this issue, which is most evident in the industrial strategy Green Paper’s lack of focus on rural issues.
The poor delivery of the rural England prosperity fund by local authorities illustrates the effect of a lack of understanding of the rural economy on devolution and localism in rural areas. There have been breakdowns in communication and misunderstandings of the rules and guidelines of the REPF, and some local authorities have failed to engage with external stakeholders. A future REPF needs to encompass better engagement between central government, local authorities and external stakeholders, and better promotion of such funds to small businesses that could benefit from them.
As we have heard from several noble Lords, the primary barrier to rural economic development is the planning system. In its current state, it does not appreciate the improvements that small-scale development can make to the viability of rural villages. In planning terms, these villages are often deemed “unsustainable”, creating a spiral of decline. In the plan and decision-making process, weight must be given to development that will improve the sustainability of a settlement, whether through the provision of new homes, services or facilities. The Government should follow the mantra of a small number of homes in a large number of villages.
To develop rural planning policy meaningfully, the Government must introduce permission in principle for rural economic development. This would encourage planning applications by reducing the risk of high financial input without the guarantee of consent. The Government should also enable the repurposing of redundant agricultural buildings and sites. Planning applications to repurpose these sites are often rejected, as they are not deemed to be “sustainable development”. In many cases, the development of these sites would lead to economic growth and, through diversification, provide a much-needed boost to a farm’s profitability.
As the right reverend Prelate, the noble Lord, Lord Wigley, and my noble friend Lord Caithness described, the lack of access to sufficient broadband connection is a massive barrier to rural productivity. Mobile connectivity in rural areas continues to be an issue, with the previous Government having allocated £500 million for the shared rural network to fix not-spots in mobile coverage. Will the Minister commit to publishing a road map to improve rural connectivity and provide transparency over how public funds have been allocated?
The proposed £100 million cut to the nature-friendly farming budget is estimated to reduce the amount of nature-friendly farmland by 240,000 hectares in England. This will present significant issues for farmers’ finances, food security and the UK’s ability to deliver its legally binding target to halt species decline by 2030. The Government must restore the nature-friendly farming budget to £2.8 billion in real terms and index it to increase with inflation over the Parliament. This would ensure that farmers have the confidence to adopt regenerative practices and help close some of the funding gaps to achieve our biodiversity goals.
The Government must change course, protect APR and BPR for all rural businesses, and extend them to farm businesses engaged in capital markets. This will ensure that farm businesses engaged in public and private agri-environment schemes can be passed between generations. It will also provide the necessary incentives to continue producing food while restoring farmland and naturally sequestering carbon.
I know how much the Minister cares for the rural economy and the countryside. I hope that she can champion it and stand up to other departments for what is right. I look forward to her reply.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I declare my farming and land management interests in Wales and congratulate my noble friend Lady McIntosh of Pickering on securing this important and timely debate. I also congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Elliott of Ballinamallard, on an outstanding maiden speech.
The primary barrier to rural economic development is the planning system. Currently, it does not appreciate the improvements that small-scale development can make to rural villages’ viability. In the planning and decision-making process, weight must be given to development that will improve a settlement’s sustainability, whether through the provision of new homes, services or facilities.
Our best and most fertile agricultural land must be saved for food production, and lower-quality agricultural land or brownfield sites must be prioritised for new housing and infrastructure projects. This would allow us to safeguard food security while investing in communities and infrastructure.
To reform rural planning and develop the rural economy, the Government should introduce permission in principle for rural economic development. This would encourage planning applications by reducing the risk of high financial input without guaranteeing consent. It should enable the repurposing of redundant agricultural buildings and sites. Planning applications to repurpose these sites are often rejected as they are not deemed sustainable development, whereas, in many cases, developing these sites would lead to economic growth.
As my noble friend Lady McIntosh of Pickering said, the agricultural budget has remained static since 2014, despite significant shifts in the importance of domestic food security and recognition of the scale of environmental challenges. Modelling by the independent Andersons Centre showed that an annual agricultural budget of around £4 billion will be required to meet these aims and challenges. Respecting the nature of devolved governance, this would translate to a UK-wide budget of around £5.6 billion. In opposition, the Secretary of State for Defra and the Minister of State for Food Security and Rural Affairs understood this and consistently argued that any underspend in the agriculture budget should be rolled forward to future years.
Farmers also face increasing financial damage from flooding. According to the Environment Agency, approximately 12% of agricultural land in England is at flood risk from rivers, the sea or both. Defra-commissioned research finds that winter floods cost farmers an average of £480 per hectare. Following recent reports that the Government are reviewing the farming recovery fund, it is worrying that many of those announced as eligible for the fund on 24 May 2024 have not yet received payment. Could the Minister clarify the position for land users entitled to compensation but who have not yet received it?
Crime is another issue for rural communities and the Government must recognise that tackling crime and increasing police visibility are priorities. While there is increasing awareness of the growing problem, this is not felt by the communities that live and work in the countryside, nor is it reflected in current government policy.
Research from the House of Commons Library shows that rural crime has increased by 32% since 2011, compared with 24% in urban areas. This includes nearly 130,000 more reported offences and an additional 30,000 cases of criminal damage and arson. These figures highlight a significant disconnect between rural issues and government policing policies.
We have a rural population simply putting up with the crime they experience and making do as best they can. There is often no escape from the effects of rural crime, with the fear of crime doing just as much damage as the crimes that are committed.
Good rural policing concerns more than the number of police officers on the ground. If we genuinely want to tackle rural crime, we must form effective partnerships between the police, communities and other authorities to ensure that the needs of our communities are genuinely understood and that the availability of services matches those needs.
British farmers face an array of challenges, from uncertain economic conditions to misinformation spread by activists about meat and dairy. Meat production faces criticism, leading to mandates for plant-based catering at councils and universities and proposals for a meat tax, yet studies confirm that UK livestock farming operates among the world’s highest sustainability and animal welfare standards. Research from the Committee on Climate Change found that British beef production is about half as carbon intensive as the global average. Additionally, game meat, such as venison, is a non-farmed alternative that is nutrient-dense and sustainably harvested, and its consumption supports conservation efforts.
Ultimately, the simplest way to shop sustainably is to purchase food locally, reducing food miles between farm and fork. This, in turn, helps the British farming sector thrive and prevents reliance on lower quality imports produced to lower welfare and sustainability standards. The Government must do everything they can to protect and champion British farmers and must listen to, understand and respond to rural communities’ needs and challenges. I look forward to the Minister’s response.
(3 months, 1 week ago)
Grand CommitteeMy Lords, it is a great pleasure to take part in this debate and to follow my noble friend Lady Rock. I declare my farming and land management interests in Wales. I also declare that I am a member of the Conservative Environment Network.
I congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Parminter, on securing this debate and the committee on the report that it produced. Although I was not a member of that committee, I was a member of the Land Use in England Committee, whose report recommended the creation of a land use framework, and I have found that many of these reports’ key themes and recommendations complement each other.
The Environment Committee report’s recommendations clearly state that effective collaboration, partnership working and stakeholder co-ordination are crucial for achieving domestic and international biodiversity targets. According to monitoring done by Wildlife and Countryside Link, the condition of SSSIs declined between 2023 and 2024. Link categorised 34.67% of them in good condition and protected for nature in 2024, down from 36.82% a year previously. I therefore strongly urge the Government to focus on restoring nature and biodiversity in these already designated landscapes rather than getting caught up in designating new ones.
The International Union for the Conservation of Nature’s Green List regards good governance, sound design and planning and effective management as the baseline components supporting successful conservation outcomes, including interventions such as predation management. As the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust’s research has shown, there are many exemplars where private investment—not tied by prescriptive approaches—has achieved demonstrable success in reversing wildlife declines through evidence-led management, such as in the provision of habitat and interventions such as supplementary feeding and reducing predation pressure during the breeding season. Examples can be seen at the Allerton Project, Holkham, and the Peppering Biodiversity Project.
I am fortunate to have grown up, lived, and worked in Eryri. The national park’s landscape is breathtaking, and I know how hard the offices and volunteers work to preserve it. However, I was shocked to read in the committee’s report that protecting nature is not a statutory duty of protected landscapes, and that in many cases nature is not in a better condition within these areas than outside it.
As my noble friend Lord Caithness has said, we cannot rely solely on top-down directives to support nature recovery. As discussed, guidance exists, but nature has not recovered without proper management and support. The Government must therefore also nurture ground-up, farmer and land-manager-led projects on how they can contribute to the 30 by 30 target. Within that, there is enormous scope here for regenerative agriculture projects.
An example that I want to highlight is the work being done by farmer Teleri Fielden, otherwise known as the Snowdonia shepherdess, who is implementing a conservation grazing plan for her cattle. To enhance species diversity, she has a higher stocking rate in winter followed by a lower stocking rate in the spring and summer in order to allow grasses to grow longer and set seed, and other species to flower. This provides seeds and pollen to insects and birds and cover for small mammals and birds. The grazing land is a mosaic of scrub, trees and semi-natural pasture, and deadwood is not removed due to its habitat value.
The cattle need minimal supplementary feeding apart from hay, thus reducing any nutrient inputs to the land, as excessive nutrient inputs can lead to nutrient leaching and cause certain species to dominate. She undertakes routine faecal egg counting of the cattle and sheep to minimise the use of anthelmintics, and the Ivermectin class of anthelmintics is not used at all—which I hope will please the noble Baroness, Lady Jones of Moulsecoomb. This ensures that the livestock manure will only enhance and not reduce insect life on that specific land area. That is particularly prevalent during the winter grazing period for dung beetles and other insects that need food during the winter.
That is an example of what only one farmer can do on their land and shows that engagement and co-operation at scale, via environmental farmers’ groups and farmer clusters, must be built into the core of local nature recovery strategies so that there is understanding and involvement at all levels between the land user and the planning or government scheme with which they are interacting.
I conclude with my questions for the Minister. First, how will the Government commit to building on the creation of ELMS and the Environmental Improvement Plan 2023, which they promised to do in their manifesto, when they are reportedly cutting their nature-friendly farming budget by some £100 million? Secondly, how will the Government balance their stated housebuilding aims with the need to protect and restore natural habitat? It is my opinion that carbon credits and offsetting are just a myth; once a habitat is gone and concreted over, it is gone for ever. Finally, I know that the Minister supported calls to create and introduce a land use framework in England; I am hopeful of and look forward to the positive changes that this will bring. When can we expect this work to start? I look forward to the Minister’s response.