Agricultural Sector: Import Standards

Angela Eagle Excerpts

Thursday 22nd January 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)]

This debate goes to the heart of something that this Government care deeply about: the future of British farming and the food on British tables. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North West Cambridgeshire (Sam Carling) for securing the debate, and I thank all Members for their contributions.

Let me be direct about what we are trying to balance in this area. British farmers produce most of our food: two thirds of it in 2024, which means that 65% of everything we eat is produced in this country. When it comes to what can actually be grown or reared in this country, that figure rises to over three quarters: 77%. In other words, we do not grow our own bananas or mangoes, and we cannot grow our own citrus fruits except in particularly hot weather, so we have to import them.

The hon. Member for Bridlington and The Wolds (Charlie Dewhirst) used the phrase “carcase balance”, which is important to think about when we talk about the balance between exports and imports. In the UK, we eat only particular bits of the animal, not all of it. It is useful to be able to export the bits that the British do not particularly want to eat, so the farmer who produces the animal gets more of a return than they would if those markets were not open.

The potential benefits for UK producers of open trading markets for such things are very great indeed. Although I will spend much of the rest of the debate talking about standards for imports, we have to remember that exports are also important to our home-grown industry. Exports are harder to gain if we are too closed about the imports we allow in our trade deals, because trade is a two-way street. I caution everyone to think about that balance, as well as thinking about what we would like to see in trade deals: it is real, it exists and we ought to take it seriously.

We have to remember that we are a trading nation. Trade gives families access to food that we cannot grow here; it keeps prices affordable; it means that we can get food out of season all year round; and it provides a safety net when supply chains are disrupted by disease, drought or conflict. Although being able to grow most of what we want to produce here is an important part of food security, so is having reasonable, predictable and acceptable access to other markets so that we can import when we have to, if there is a particular issue.

The question is not whether we trade, but how we trade and on whose terms. This Government have been clear that we will not sacrifice British standards on the altar of trade deals. All imports must meet UK food safety requirements, and that is not going to change. We have been clear that hormone-treated beef and chlorine-washed chicken, which hon. Members on both sides of the House have mentioned, are and will remain banned in the UK. As the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson) pointed out, that is because such treatments are designed to hide what has happened as a result of production methods. We are firm that we will not allow that. There are also potential issues with the human food chain, and we do not wish to put our consumers at risk.

We understand that there can be frustrations when farmers here are held to higher welfare standards than some competitors abroad. Sometimes there are good reasons for those differences. We have not heard about any of that in the debate today, but farmers across the world face different geographical environments, different climate conditions and different disease risks. Practices such as sow stalls and battery cages, however, are banned in this country for good reason. We will not pretend that every difference in global standards is acceptable just because it happens to be legal elsewhere; we spend our time trying to persuade other countries to see the sense in adopting our higher food production and livestock standards.

As we have said in the trade strategy, we will not lower food standards. We will continue to uphold high standards in animal welfare. We will always consider whether imports have an unfair advantage and what the potential impact of trade agreements on UK food production could be. That is why, in our trade deal with India, as my hon. Friend the Member for North West Cambridgeshire pointed out, we kept tariffs on pork, chicken and eggs: because we were concerned about the welfare standards. We used the powers we have, and we will do so again where our farmers and our values are at stake. In the India deal, we also secured commitments to co-operate on animal welfare—the first time that India has ever agreed to that in a trade deal. The independent Trade and Agriculture Commission recognised that achievement in pursuing our policy on animal welfare protections as a part of our trade deals.

We have a proud history of leading the way in ensuring the very best care for animals. In December, we published our animal welfare strategy, to which hon. Members on both sides of the House have referred. It will improve the lives of millions of animals in the UK. We recognise that animal welfare is a global issue, and we will continue to champion high animal welfare standards around the world, promoting robust standards nationally and internationally. Our recent trade deal with Korea includes comprehensive language on animal welfare that goes beyond anything that Korea has agreed to date. We will continue to strengthen co-operation and information exchange on this globally important issue.

In his opening speech, my hon. Friend the Member for North West Cambridgeshire mentioned eggs from Ukraine. We are 90% self-sufficient in eggs in this country. The Ukrainian trade in eggs is about 1% of our supply. That is done partially as support for Ukraine’s industry and economy in the global situation in which it finds itself, at war with Russia. Despite that, I have met both Ukrainian Agriculture Ministers and they are working hard to ensure they can come into compliance with EU regulations in egg production as soon as possible. We are helping them to try to do so. The debates that we are having on animal welfare with respect to egg imports are real, and they are happening. I have raised them personally with both Ukrainian Agriculture Ministers.

Protecting standards is not enough on its own, however. We are backing British farmers to create a productive, profitable and sustainable future for farming. We believe that support is essential for our country’s economic growth and food security. Through new technology, streamlined regulation and nature-friendly farming schemes, we are helping farmers to produce food for the nation. A stronger and more productive domestic farming sector is in our national interest and will keep high-quality British food on the shelves for consumers.

The heart of our approach is working in partnership with the sector, which is why the Secretary of State and I are grateful to Baroness Batters for her recent review of farming profitability. We are taking forward a series of measures from the review to deliver practical support and long-term certainty for farmers. We recently announced a new farming and food partnership board as part of our actions. This brings farmers, processors and retailers together, because food security is not just about what happens on the farm; it is about the whole food chain, all the way from the farm to the fork. Farmers will have a seat at the table when policy is developed, and their voice will shape what the Government do.

Different parts of our food system face different challenges—the hon. Member for Caerfyrddin (Ann Davies) talked about what is happening in the dairy sector at the moment—but they also face different opportunities. Together, we intend to develop sector plans that target growth in sectors such as horticulture and poultry first, sectors in which there is significant untapped potential to increase home-grown production. This will be followed by other sectors in which there is real scope to grow more of our own food, because when British farming thrives, consumers benefit, with affordable, high-quality food on their tables.

As well as supporting producers at home, we are working to extend the international reach of British food and drink. We will continue to focus on new markets for the sector. We have 16 agrifood attachés around the world opening doors for British producers. Last year alone, their work removed barriers, creating £127 million of export value for our home-grown food producers. That includes opening British pork access to Mexico and removing costly barriers for British dairy exports to Egypt. This year, the Secretary of State and I will be leading dedicated trade missions to showcase British food and drink overseas and boost our exports. Our high standards are something we should be proud of; the reputation of our top-quality produce helps us to unlock new markets, and many of those we deal with see UK food as at the top of the quality mark and want to have access to it.

Closer to home, the majority of our agrifood trade is with the EU, including around 70% of our agrifood imports. That is why the SPS agreement with the EU to slash red tape for the businesses that trade most with our nearest neighbours is so important, as it will make agrifood trade in our biggest market cheaper and easier to engage with. The agreement will bring down costs for UK producers and remove most of the regulatory trade barriers. We have been clear about the importance of high animal welfare standards, and the EU has accepted that the UK will need to retain its own rules in some areas. As in all trade deals secured by this Government, we will maintain red lines in our negotiations.

We are a nation that has always led on animal welfare. In 1999, the Labour Government banned sow stalls before most of the rest of the world had heard of them. I understand the issues that the hon. Member for Bridlington and The Wolds (Charlie Dewhirst) raised and I want to reassure him that we are working closely with the industry on transition in some of the areas mentioned in the current animal welfare strategy, such as banning farrowing crates and moving away from enriched cages for hens. We do not want the law of unintended consequences, but we do want increases in animal welfare. This Government will not allow that legacy to be undermined through the back door by trade policy. We will protect our farmers, uphold our standards and back British food at home and abroad. That is what food security means, and that is what this Government will deliver.