Rural Communities
Angela Eagle Excerpts(1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
I beg to move an amendment, to leave out from “House” to the end of the Question and add:
“welcomes the support that the Government is providing for rural people, communities and businesses; commends the continued support for farmers through investment in Environmental Land Management schemes which will boost nature and sustainable food production; recognises that the Government has listened on the subject of Agricultural Property Relief and made changes to support family farms; further welcomes the Bus Services Act 2025, which includes provision to support the protection of socially necessary bus services in rural areas; further recognises that the Government continues to invest in Project Gigabit with £2.4 billion available to ensure over one million premises have access to gigabit-capable broadband; and supports the joined-up approach with the weight of Government behind tackling rural crimes such as the theft of high value farm equipment and livestock.”
I welcome the chance to open the debate on behalf of the Government and to highlight what we are doing to support rural people, businesses and communities to realise their full potential. I apologise in advance to the House and to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, that I will not be able to stay for the whole debate. [Hon. Members: “Oh, no!”] I am sure hon. Members will miss me.
We are committed to improving the quality of life for all people across the country. To achieve that, we are putting the needs of people and businesses in rural areas at the heart of policymaking. I am baffled, quite frankly, that the Opposition think they have any right to speak on behalf of rural communities after the 14 years of chaos and corruption that they put this country through. I am astounded that they are now trying to present themselves as the solution to the problems that rural communities face, when they were the architects of many of those very same problems.
The very Members sat opposite me presided over the first Parliament in modern history where living standards were lower at the end than they were at the beginning, and rural communities were some of the hardest hit by their incompetence. The Conservatives are the party that oversaw the shambolic Brexit deal that hit farming communities hard. That was happening alongside the sleaze that countless people across the country will no doubt remember so well: £1.4 billion of wasted taxpayer money on dodgy covid contracts given to Tory mates over WhatsApp, and partying while the country was in lockdown.
Rural communities gave their damning verdict on those 14 years at the general election, sending Conservatives to the Opposition Benches and returning more rural Labour MPs than ever before. While Conservative Members continue to protest, we will get on with clearing up their mess.
Several hon. Members rose—
Dame Angela Eagle
No, I will not give way.
The rural economy already contributes £259 billion to gross value added in England alone, and we know that rural areas offer significant potential for further growth. The Government are committed to harnessing this potential to ensure that we can fully realise the opportunities that exist in the rural economy across the whole country. Small and medium-sized businesses are the engine room of the Government’s No. 1 mission, which is growth, and there are half a million registered SMEs in rural areas—the vast majority of them not having anything to do with agriculture or farming.
The SME plan, which was launched by the Prime Minister last summer, represents the most comprehensive package of support for small and medium-sized businesses in a generation. The plan will make a real difference to the day-to-day trading operations of small businesses. That includes a new business growth service and a massive £4 billion finance boost to increase access to finance for entrepreneurs and make Britain the best place to start and grow a business.
A prosperous rural economy requires effective transport as well as digital infrastructure, the availability of affordable housing and energy, and access to a healthy, skilled workforce. We are tackling those issues. We know that rural residents often have to travel further to access work, education, training, healthcare and other essential services. The Conservatives made that worse by slashing local bus routes in England by 50%, with more than 8,000 services slashed in their time in office.
Dame Angela Eagle
No, I am getting on with my speech. [Interruption.] There are many Opposition Members who wish to speak, and I do not want to take their time up.
Rural transport under the Conservatives became a postcode lottery—
Dame Angela Eagle
Perhaps the hon. Lady will let me make my point before she gets up to ask me a question.
Rural transport under the Tories became a postcode lottery, and the price that many communities paid was to have no reliable bus service at all. Under Labour, the Bus Services Act 2025 places passenger needs, reliable services and local accountability at the heart of the industry by putting power over local bus services back into the hands of local leaders across England. We are reconnecting our local communities by protecting socially necessary bus services and the most vulnerable. We are rebuilding connectivity and confidence in our countryside—
Several hon. Members rose—
Dame Angela Eagle
I will give way to the hon. Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew)
Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)
The Minister talks about rural transport. Does she not recognise that enhanced partnerships run by Conservative county councils in Norfolk and Essex have increased bus usage by more than anywhere else in the country because they are working with the private sector, not against it?
Dame Angela Eagle
We are not working against the private sector. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will recognise the Conservative record in this area. They presided over a 50% cut in the availability of bus services across the country, and that was often worse for rural areas as some lost their buses completely. We know that rural areas are benefiting from Labour’s changes—for example, York and North Yorkshire.
Several hon. Members rose—
Dame Angela Eagle
I will give way to the right hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard).
Mark Pritchard
It is humid in here. I am grateful to the Minister for giving way. She is talking about important subjects for all our communities, including infrastructure, SMEs and transport. We can differ on who is to be praised or not. On the Government’s legislative priorities—many of these things require legislation or have already had legislative time spent on them—why are the Government going to spend so much time on banning trail hunting? Is she aware that, if that goes through, in Shropshire alone we will likely see the death of at least 300 hounds? That will impact on many rural SMEs.
As the Minister has been in the House a very long time, she will know that I have had at least three animal welfare Bills in the House—[Interruption.] That was long before the hon. Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon) even set foot in the Chamber. My record on animal welfare is long and established. Today, I stand up for all the people in the hunts who do not want to destroy all those dogs as well as jobs.
Dame Angela Eagle
First, I pay tribute to the right hon. Gentleman’s record on animal welfare; I think everyone across the House respects it. Secondly, I was in the House when we voted to ban hunting in the first place. I was actually in the Chamber when it was invaded by hunt protesters, who did not show much attention to the law when they ran into this place—they were so surprised that they had arrived here that they did not quite know what to do. I therefore take no lessons on any of that.
The ban on trail hunting was in our manifesto, and we are consulting on how to put it into effect. I certainly hope that the right hon. Gentleman will take part in that consultation.
Dame Angela Eagle
The right hon. Gentleman may vote any way he likes, but I hope that he will take part in the consultation so that we can have a proper debate about these things.
Dave Doogan (Angus and Perthshire Glens) (SNP)
I am interested to know how keen the Minister is to adhere to that distinct element of the Labour party’s manifesto, because it seems clear to rural communities up and down Scotland and elsewhere on these islands that it is pick-and-mix as the Government introduce things that were never in the manifesto and fail to deliver that which was. When did the manifesto become such an important compass for the Minister?
Dame Angela Eagle
We are in only the 18th month of the five years of the Parliament, so the hon. Gentleman should be patient.
Tom Hayes
Bournemouth is a town of animal lovers, and it has received with great happiness the news that the Government are bringing forward animal welfare reforms. Could the Minister outline some of those reforms and how they will particularly benefit our rural communities?
Dame Angela Eagle
Certainly, the animal welfare strategy is very comprehensive. As hon. Members will know, it encompasses farm animals, wild animals and pets, as well as international trade and all those aspects. It also looks at what can be done to enforce the ban on hare coursing, which is particularly brutal. I was happy that the right hon. Member for Louth and Horncastle (Victoria Atkins) supported that element. [Interruption.] But it happens all the time—that is the point. I said, “enforce the ban”; I did not say “banning”. We can have the best laws in the world, but if none of them is enforced we might as well not bother.
Dame Angela Eagle
Perhaps the hon. Gentleman should be patient and let me finish my sentence. He should be well aware that the Conservative Government’s record on enforcement was dire, because a lot of enforcement activities were decimated by the cuts they enacted in the period of austerity.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
The Minister is being generous with her time. The previous Government’s cuts to the Environment Agency have had a huge impact on parts of my constituency and just beyond it. We have had fly-tipping on an industrial level that has leaked into the rivers and streams of my constituency and caused a huge amount of damage.
Dame Angela Eagle
That is exactly right. The cuts that were made to enforcement activities and enforcement muscle have caused many huge problems that we are attempting to clear up, such as the 20% rise in waste crime. Many of the benefits we expect and the requirements to keep our rivers free and our wildlife healthy were, in effect, not properly enforced during the austerity years. I am a fair person, so I will give way to the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans).
Dr Luke Evans
If the Minister’s argument is about enforcement, and given that is it already illegal to hunt with dogs, is she not arguing for more resources for our rural communities to enforce what is legal or illegal? Let us take the example of Leicestershire. We instituted our rural crime team in 2019 and have seen that type of crime drop by 23%. My worry is that if the Government have their way, that funding will disappear and therefore rural crime and enforcement will get worse. Will she square that circle for me? Also, is she speaking to the Home Office to make sure that rural communities get the policing they need and the funding for that?
Dame Angela Eagle
I know a few people at the Home Office; in fact, when I was there before the reshuffle we launched the rural crime taskforce, which is doing great work and will carry on doing so. I agree, and the hon. Gentleman is right, that enforcement needs to be properly funded and not slashed as it was under the Conservative party.
I was talking about improving local transport links and pointing out that we have a multi-year investment, working with local authorities to provide a much better service in our rural areas. We know that those areas are already benefiting from the changes in the Bus Services Act 2025. For example, in York and North Yorkshire, the Labour combined authority is developing a rural bus franchising model to improve connectivity for villages that currently see only one bus per week. That is one bus per week, Madam Deputy Speaker. That is the kind of legacy that we have from the Conservative party in the areas it purports to support.
We know that bus services in rural areas can be a lifeline for many, providing the only means of getting around. That is why, in our multi-year allocations for local authorities, we have revised the formula to include a rurality element for the first time, ensuring that the additional challenges of running services in rural areas are taken into account. The Conservatives slashed local bus routes; we are putting them back, protecting them and promoting them.
Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)
The local government finance settlement is a huge problem for rural local authorities. In Shropshire, we have had 16 years of Conservative mismanagement, we have a surging social care demand and our allocation has been cut in cash terms over the next three years. The black hole is unfillable and a section 114 notice looks very likely for us. Will the Minister speak to her colleagues in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government so that we can sort out that desperate problem for rural authorities?
Dame Angela Eagle
I am happy to pass on the hon. Lady’s comments to the appropriate Ministers.
Access to digital services is crucial for rural areas. We are delivering high speed-capable broadband to UK premises that are not included in suppliers’ commercial plans. Our aim is to achieve 99% coverage of a reliable, superfast, high-speed broadband by 2032. Over 1 million further premises have been—
Dame Angela Eagle
Will the hon. Gentleman please let me develop my point? Over 1 million further premises have been included within contracts to provide access to superfast broadband, with funding of over £1.8 billion allocated in the latest spending review to support the project. That helps end social isolation, provides access to healthcare and turbocharges rural businesses. Our focus on rural hard-to-reach areas ensures that the benefits of superfast broadband reach every corner of the UK, breaking down barriers that the Conservative Government failed to address. I must say—
Stuart Anderson
I thank the Minister for giving way. Only 40% of my constituency has gigabit broadband and that has a major impact. Does the Minister understand how detrimental it is to move the 2030 target to 2032? I will have many constituents who will still not be able to connect to the internet.
Dame Angela Eagle
The problem is that we inherited a system in which all the hardest-to-reach bits had been left till last. We are trying now, by investing £1.8 billion, to get that sorted, but I understand the hon. Gentleman’s frustration.
Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)
Wessex Internet, which was founded by the late James Gibson Fleming, has done some great work in Dorset, Wiltshire, Hampshire and Somerset, but the vouchers that are given out to areas that are not included are not available in Dorset. We have challenged that many times with the Ministry. Would the Minister mind seeing whether vouchers can be rolled out in every area that needs them?
Dame Angela Eagle
If the hon. Lady gets me the information, I will pass it on to the relevant Minister. I will make sure that we cover the point that she makes.
I was astonished to see that the Conservatives had pledged to scrap the Climate Change Act 2008 in the face of opposition from one of their own former Prime Ministers, Baroness May, who called their plans a “catastrophic mistake”. This Government are committed to achieving clean power by 2030, while the Conservatives would leave us dangerously reliant on Putin’s oil. Labour’s ambitious clean power mission will create good jobs in rural areas, protect bill payers and ensure our energy security. Well-designed and well-managed solar farms have the potential to deliver a range of environmental benefits, with some solar farms delivering significantly more than the mandatory 10% increase in habitats required by biodiversity net gain.
Dame Angela Eagle
I have given way quite a lot, so I am going to carry on with my speech.
We know that the roll-out of solar generation does not pose a risk to food security. Planning guidance makes it clear that developers should utilise brownfield land wherever possible. Where agricultural land must be used, lower quality land should be preferred. We also encourage multifunctional land use and are encouraged to see plenty of farmers ignoring the hysteria of the Conservatives and combining sustainable energy generation with arable and livestock farmers—
Dame Angela Eagle
Perhaps if the hon. Lady had calmed down, I might have had time to do so. [Interruption.] No.
The total area of land currently used for solar is less than 0.1% of UK land. Communities are providing a service to the country when they host clean energy infrastructure, so there needs to be a benefit for them. Through Labour’s clean power action plan, we have made it clear that where communities host clean energy infrastructure, we will ensure that they benefit from it. There are already voluntary community benefit funds running across the country, including the offshore wind farm at Norfolk Boreas, which has a community fund worth over £15 million. In addition, the Government have already announced bill discounts for communities living nearest to new electricity transmission infrastructure and published guidance on community funds for electricity transmission infrastructure and onshore wind in England.
After a decade of Tory cuts to frontline policing, this Government are also committed to driving down rural crime—
Wendy Morton
I am grateful, because this is a really important point. Before the Minister elaborates on policing cuts, will she give us her take on the Labour police and crime commissioners’ funding gap, which will mean that areas such as the west midlands will have fewer police officers than in 2010?
Dame Angela Eagle
There are going to be 3,000 more police officers on the beat this year, which is far more than the right hon. Lady’s Government managed after slashing 20,000 at the beginning of their time in office.
This Government are determined to crack down on rural crime. Last year, we published the rural and wildlife crime strategy, collaborating with the National Police Chiefs’ Council. This strategy is a vital step in our mission to deliver safer streets everywhere—that includes rural areas—and comes as we give the police new powers to take on the organised criminal gangs targeting the agricultural sector. Only last year, rural policing teams recovered more than £12.7 million-worth of stolen farm machinery, leading to 155 arrests. Interestingly, some of it turned up abroad, so there is clearly an organised crime element that needs tackling properly.
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
I join the Minister in congratulating our rural crime teams on their work. I invite her to pay tribute to Special Constable Susan Holliday who has served almost 40 years as a special constable and was awarded the British empire medal in the new year’s honours. I am delighted to invite the Minister to my constituency to meet Susan Holliday.
Dame Angela Eagle
I add my congratulations to Susan Holliday. She sounds like a remarkable person, and it is good that she has been recognised for the work she has done in her local community.
It would be impossible to discuss rural communities without paying tribute to the vital work undertaken by this country’s farmers. Supporting British farmers and boosting the nation’s food security are key priorities for the Government. I understand that farmers do not just produce nutritious food; they also need to make a profit, and the margins of farm businesses are often tight, but we are taking action to help farms prosper. We commissioned Baroness Minette Batters to undertake an independent farming profitability review, and we published that last year. We have announced our new farming and food partnership board, which will bring together voices from farming, food, retail and finance to drive profitability, support home-grown British produce and remove barriers to investment.
While the Conservatives failed to spend £300 million of the farming budget, we are investing £11.5 billion over this Parliament into nature-friendly farming. While they sold out our farmers in trade deals with New Zealand and Australia, we are unlocking new markets for British produce in India, China and the United States. We are committing £200 million up to 2030 through farming innovation programme grants to improve productivity and to trial new technologies, and there is an exciting agenda of development out there in that area. We have appointed Alan Laidlaw as the first ever commissioner for tenant farming, giving tenant farmers a stronger voice than ever before.
We have continued to listen and engage with the farming community and family businesses about reforms to inheritance tax. Having carefully considered this feedback, we are going further to exempt more farms and businesses from the requirement to pay inheritance tax, while maintaining the core principle that more valuable agricultural and business assets should not receive unlimited relief. That is why we are increasing the inheritance tax threshold from £1 million to £2.5 million. Couples can now pass on up to £5 million without paying inheritance tax on their assets. That will halve the number of estates claiming agricultural property relief that will pay more in 2026-27, including those claiming business property relief. Of the remaining 185 estates affected in 2026-27, 145 of them will pay less than when the allowance was set at £1 million.
Let us be absolutely clear about what this Tory motion really is. It is not a plan for rural Britain, and it is not a serious attempt to fix the problems that our rural communities face; it is an exercise in political distraction. Every single regret listed in this motion is the direct result of decisions taken by the Tories over their 14 disastrous years in government. They regret raising taxes after crashing the economy and blowing a hole in the public finances. They regret business closures after years of stagnant growth, poor investment and broken rural infrastructure. They regret changes to funding for rural areas after hollowing out public services, cutting rural transport and stripping away neighbourhood policing in the very places where visibility and response times matter the most. They regret the changes to the rural way of life, but sold out our farmers in trade deals and broke their funding promises. Even their own former Environment Secretary admitted that they had failed to defend our agricultural interests. They regret uncertainty when it was their chopping and changing, their political chaos and their lack of long-term thinking that created it in the first place. Rural communities deserve honesty, not selective political amnesia, and from this Government, they will get it.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Future of Thames Water
Angela Eagle Excerpts(1 week, 1 day ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris. I do not know whether it is down to you, but it is now much warmer in this room than it was in the last Parliament when I was chairing such debates. I regularly left thinking that I had developed frostbite, so whoever has managed to make that change has done a good job. I thank the hon. Member for Oxford West and Abingdon (Layla Moran) for securing this debate, and thank all hon. Members on both sides of the Chamber for the manner in which they have, very eloquently, made their important points in this debate. It is a pleasure to respond to it on behalf of the water Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice (Emma Hardy), who sadly is unable to be here today.
This Government are committed to the transformation of the water sector. As the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson) has just said, the industry is spending £104 billion of private investment on upgrading our crumbling sewage pipes and cutting sewage pollution. Is it not a pity that some of that investment did not happen many years ago? That was promised as one of the advantages of a privatisation that, as many people have said in their various eloquent ways during today’s debate, has essentially not worked. Through the Water (Special Measures) Act, we have driven meaningful improvements in the performance and culture of the water industry, as a first step—only a first step—in enabling wider transformative change across the sector.
Following Sir Jon Cunliffe’s report, we have announced our intention to do three things: establish a new single regulator, create a water ombudsman, and stop water companies from marking their own homework when it comes to pollution. The water reform White Paper, which—I have to tantalise hon. Members—is due very shortly, will set out our vision for the sector. Members will not have to wait very long; that is all I am going to say. That White Paper will form the basis of new water legislation, which we will introduce as soon as we get a place in the parliamentary programme to do so. The reforms will secure better outcomes for customers, investors and the environment, and will make the water sector one of growth and opportunity.
Turning to Thames Water, this Government will always act in the national interest, and we will work to ensure that Thames Water acts in the best interests of customers and the environment. We are working closely with Ofwat, which is in conversation with the London & Valley Water consortium, a group of Thames Water’s creditors. Ofwat will only agree to a plan that will ensure the best possible outcomes for customers and the environment.
James Naish
I think it was more a turn of phrase than anything else, but it was suggested earlier that customers were being treated as cash cows for servicing the debt of Thames Water. Will the Minister confirm that that is not the case, either for Thames Water or for other companies, because investment is ringfenced under the new legislation, and therefore customer money is being put into the infrastructure that matters?
Dame Angela Eagle
I can confirm that, and it was one of the first things that this Labour Government, when we were incoming, put on to the statute book as a priority, in order to prevent that particular abuse. Thames Water is now under a cash lock-up arrangement; only Ofwat can approve any further dividend payments. That restriction will remain in place until credit ratings improve. Nothing that is happening at the moment will allow the kind of behaviour that we have seen in the past, from this company and others, to continue.
Charlie Maynard
We have interest costs of 9.75% being paid. We have massive advisory fees coming out of the company. All the class A creditors’ legal fees—£15 million a month, give or take—were being paid for by Thames Water. To say that this is not all hitting the customers is not true. Who else is paying for this, if it is not ultimately the customers?
Dame Angela Eagle
I was talking about the specific point that my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) made about ringfencing for investment, not about some of the costs of the current impasse at Thames Water. To go back to that, the Government will always act in the interests of customers and the environment, and ensure that Thames Water acts in those best interests too.
We are working closely with Ofwat, which is currently in conversation with the London & Valley Water consortium, which is the group of creditors that was referred to. Ofwat will only agree to a plan that will ensure the best possible outcomes for customers and the environment. We will continue to support engagement between Ofwat and the consortium, with a view to supporting a market-led solution for Thames Water’s difficulties, while ensuring that customers and the environment are protected.
Many hon. Members in this debate have talked about the potential for a special administration regime. Should Thames Water become insolvent, we would not hesitate to apply to the court to place the company into a special administration regime, but as the hon. Member for Epping Forest pointed out, that is not a cost-free option. This would ensure that there is no increased disruption to customers’ water or waste-water services. In line with our preparations for a range of scenarios across regulated industries, including water, officials from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs have selected a firm, FTI Consulting, as an adviser to help with special administration regime contingency planning. That planning is going ahead.
Dame Angela Eagle
No, I must make this point, which is quite important in the context of the debate. There is a high bar for the use of special administration regimes. The law states that special administration can be initiated only if the company becomes insolvent—while Thames Water is living fairly hand to mouth, it is not currently insolvent—or is in such a serious breach of its principle statutory duties or an enforcement order that it is inappropriate for the company to retain its licence. Those are the only two things than can lead to the application of a special administration regime.
Richard Tice
Thames Water is not able to meet its financial obligations. The debt is trading at 5p in the pound. It says it is going to invest £20 billion in the next five years; it does not have the money. It cannot meet its obligations. While all that is going on, it is not repairing or investing in the pipes. It is bust. It is not meeting its obligations. It does meet those criteria, Minister.
Dame Angela Eagle
There is a process going on between the creditors and the company that must be allowed to finish one way or another. I have just said that, should Thames Water become insolvent, we will not hesitate to apply to the court to place the company into a special administration regime. Hon. Members on both sides of this Chamber should be reassured by that. We will continue to work with Ofwat to help support a market-led solution to the company’s issues of financial resilience and operational delivery.
Charlie Maynard
I concur with those views from the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness (Richard Tice), but can the Minister confirm that those discussions with class A creditors will not involve forgiving the company for its fines?
Dame Angela Eagle
There is an ongoing process that I cannot and will not comment on from the sidelines. What I have said is that the Government will ensure that any resolution comes in the interests of the environment and customers, and that is the criteria that the Government will apply, but I will not commentate on rumours from outside of the process in this place. It is important that we allow the process to continue to its conclusion, whatever that may be. I hope that Members are reassured that the Government will be ready to act and use special administration if we have to, should we get to that circumstance—but we are not in that circumstance yet.
I conclude by reiterating that this Government will always act in the national interest. We are clear that Thames Water must always act in the best interests of customers and the environment. We expect it to do that, and we stand ready to act if it becomes clear that it cannot.
Oral Answers to Questions
Angela Eagle Excerpts(3 weeks, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Rachel Taylor (North Warwickshire and Bedworth) (Lab)
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
As I may not get another chance, may I take this opportunity to wish you, and all Members and House staff, a happy Christmas, Mr Speaker?
We are committed to promoting fairness across the food supply chain, including achieving a fair price for sugar beet that benefits both growers and processors. There is a well-established independent process in place to agree the sugar beet price. We continue to keep it and the regulatory framework under review.
Rachel Taylor
A merry Christmas to you and all your staff, Mr Speaker.
In the summer I visited Boultbees farm in Baxterley in my constituency, where I met Andrew and his team. Like all farmers who grow sugar beet, they are obliged to sell it to British Sugar, as the sole processor of British sugar beet in the UK. Common market organisation regulation exists to ensure fair negotiations on price, but British Sugar has sought to circumvent it. What are the Government doing to strengthen protections for farmers like Andrew to ensure that they get a fair deal in the combinable crops sector?
Dame Angela Eagle
I thank my hon. Friend for her question, which is an acute one. I agree that growers too often bear disproportionate risk, which is why the Government have launched a public consultation on fairness and transparency in the combinable crops supply chain. The consultation is open for eight weeks, and I encourage all interested parties to engage and share their views.
Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)
Matt Vickers (Stockton West) (Con)
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
While the Conservatives failed to spend £300 million of the farming budget, we are backing farmers with the largest nature-friendly budget in history, and 50,000 farm businesses and half of all farmed land are now managed under our schemes. We have today published our initial response to Baroness Batters’ recommendations on farm profitability, and we are developing our 25-year farming road map.
Matt Vickers
I have met many farmers from my part of the world who have shared with me the horrific consequences of the family farm tax on food prices, on food security and on families who have farmed for generations. This morning’s farming profitability review identifies that that is the single biggest issue affecting farm viability. I believe that if the Minister heard at first hand from farmers in my part of the world, she might think again. Will she meet them?
Dame Angela Eagle
I meet farmers all the time, and I intend to spend the early part of next year, and hopefully many years thereafter, continuing to do so.
Ben Goldsborough (South Norfolk) (Lab)
Merry Christmas to you and your team, Mr Speaker.
Christmas is coming and the goose is getting fat—or it would be if we had not had such a terrible year for avian influenza. The poultry sector is worth £1.5 billion gross value added to our UK economy. As much as I welcome the investment going into Harlow for the national biosecurity centre, will the Minister tell us what action we are taking to make sure that we have more veterinary surgeons located in the area where the problems are being found?
Dame Angela Eagle
I pay tribute to the farmers in my hon. Friend’s constituency in the awful situation they face. We are closely monitoring the outbreak and have taken action to eradicate disease by putting in place control zones, tracing movements and issuing a proactive housing order. I am more than happy to talk to him about what we can do to ensure that we have the appropriate level of veterinary response. Avian flu is now endemic in the wild bird population, and we will have to get increasingly sophisticated at dealing with it.
Dr Neil Hudson (Epping Forest) (Con)
Merry Christmas to you and your team, Mr Speaker.
The Government must enact policies that benefit farming communities. They have a chance to do that now with another critical issue that impacts our farming, food security, animal welfare and biosecurity. A recommendation was made this month by the council of the School of the Biological Sciences to close the University of Cambridge’s vet school. I declare my strong personal and professional interest as a graduate of that school and as a fellow of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons. We do not produce enough vets in the UK. We face threats to our food security and our biosecurity, both of which vets are pivotal to. The health and welfare of animals depends on vets, as indeed does public health. Will the Government act now to press the University of Cambridge to block this closure proposal and save Cambridge’s vet school, for the benefit of animals and people here in the UK and across the world?
Dame Angela Eagle
This is a matter for the University of Cambridge, but having visited the veterinary school at Harper Adams University, I am all too aware—as clearly the hon. Gentleman is—of the importance of having enough well-qualified vets in our country. We need to ensure that the supply and the opportunities to train are there, but this particular decision is one for the University of Cambridge. I am happy to talk to the university, but I am unsighted on the reasons. If the hon. Member wants to talk to me afterwards, I would be more than happy to hear what he has to say.
Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)
Katie Lam (Weald of Kent) (Con)
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
Modelling has shown that food prices are driven by the interaction of domestic and international considerations, including farm gate prices, import prices and exchange rates. Modelling from industry and Government expects food price inflation to fall gradually over the next two years.
Nick Timothy
Happy Christmas to you, Mr Speaker, and to all Members and staff of the House.
At the Liaison Committee this week, the Prime Minister admitted that some farmers will take their own lives because of the family farms tax, but he repeated the claim that three quarters of farms will not be affected. According to the National Farmers Union, the opposite is true: three quarters of commercial family farms will have to pay it. The big idea now is to drive up profitability, but as my right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest West (Sir Desmond Swayne) said, the family farms tax is killing investment. Does the Minister think that Baroness Batters was wrong when she said in her report, on page 4, that the closure of the sustainable farming initiative and the family farms tax have left farmers
“particularly in the arable sector… questioning viability, let alone profitability”?
Dame Angela Eagle
I do not think that the hon. Member’s characterisation of the Prime Minister’s remarks to the Liaison Committee is entirely accurate, but I am working on introducing and making available in the first half of next year a sustainable farming incentive scheme that will hopefully be more available to smaller farmers, easier to engage with, and much simpler than the mess delivered by the Government of which he was a part. Let us face it: 25% of the money in the SFI scheme goes to the top 4% of farmers. I want to see a different distribution.
Katie Lam
Merry Christmas, Mr Speaker.
The cost of food in this country increased by 4.2% year on year last month, yet farming profitability is on the floor and has been hit repeatedly by this Government, whether that is in national insurance contribution increases, the family farm tax or energy taxes. Will the Government consider easing their terrible tax burden on farmers to solve both the cost of living crisis for food and the farming profitability crisis at the same time?
Dame Angela Eagle
I am puzzled by the hon. Lady’s view that the issues she talks about are somehow having a bad effect on food prices, since yesterday’s figures demonstrate that there has been a 0.7% decline in food price inflation, and estimates assume that inflation will gradually come down over the next two years.
Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab)
Merry Christmas to you and your crew, Mr Speaker.
Food prices from farm to fork are particularly tough on coeliac sufferers. Their shops are 35% dearer, and a loaf of bread costs six times the standard price. Will my Front-Bench colleagues look into Italy’s allowance system, in order to replace our outmoded subscription model, which is bad value for the taxpayer?
Dame Angela Eagle
I am more than happy to look at how Italy does things, but that can be a bit of a double-edged sword. I sympathise and empathise with coeliacs, who have to deal with much higher prices. Some of that is to do with production and the need to ensure that there is no cross-contamination of foods. It may well be that it is more expensive to produce food that is safe for coeliacs. I absolutely accept my hon. Friend’s point, and I am happy to talk to her about it.
Victoria Atkins (Louth and Horncastle) (Con)
On Monday, the Prime Minister admitted that farmers are considering taking their own lives for fear of the family farm tax—a tax that he described as a “sensible reform”. The next day, I was given a letter for the Prime Minister from 90-year-old farmer and grandmother Mrs Denton. It contains one chilling question that I expect the farming Minister to be able to answer. Mrs Denton asks:
“My husband and I now need to know as soon as possible the date we need to die by to avoid the totally unfair inheritance tax that will be forcibly put on our offspring to have to sell or split up a food-producing farm—and do what?”
Dame Angela Eagle
This is a highly sensitive issue. The reasons for someone contemplating taking their own life are often very complex. My heart goes out to every family who is devastated by such events. I understand the pressures that farmers are under, but I have to say that the right hon. Lady’s way of making her point is very distasteful indeed.
Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
Dairy farmers are facing a difficult period of market adjustment. The new fair dealing regulations ensure fairness and greater transparency, creating a more resilient dairy supply chain that supports farmers and strengthens national food security.
Wendy Chamberlain
Happy Christmas to you and your staff, Mr Speaker, and to everyone here.
Despite the agricultural supply chain adjudicator having a remit over fair dealings for milk prices, it appears that contracts are essentially a one-way street, with milk processors dictating prices. A constituent of mine, a dairy farmer, has recently been notified of a 2p per litre cut, which equates to a loss of £11,000 and makes it unviable for him to continue. What steps is the Minister taking to urgently redress that imbalance? Farmers are scared to speak out because it will have an impact on their contract.
Dame Angela Eagle
I understand and empathise with the experience of the hon. Lady’s constituent. A global glut of milk is driving prices down; prices had gone up because there was an undersupply, so there are market corrections going on. The Fair Dealing Obligations (Milk) Regulations 2024 now apply to all dairy supply contracts. If her constituent feels that he is being unfairly dealt with, he can contact the agricultural supply chain adjudicator, who was appointed to carry out enforcement of the fair dealing obligation regulations. He can now do so because those regulations have been in place since July of this year.
Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)
Merry Christmas to you and your fantastic staff, Mr Speaker.
I note that the hon. Member for Clacton (Nigel Farage) obviously has better things to do than turn up and speak for farmers. I want to speak up for dairy tenant farmers. Tenant farmers manage a third of all farmland in England. As well as running her dairy farm, Rachel at Low Springs farm in Baildon also runs Baildon farmers market and is the director of the Great Yorkshire show. Will the Minister set out how this Labour Government are implementing the recommendations of Baroness Rock’s review to help tenant dairy farmers such as Rachel?
Dame Angela Eagle
My hon. Friend raises the important point that a third of all farmland in England is managed by tenant farmers, so a fair and sustainable tenant farming sector relies on positive landlord, tenant and adviser relationships. To help deliver that, we have appointed Alan Laidlaw as England’s first commissioner for the tenant farming sector. We will continue to look particularly at how tenant farming agreements are working, to see whether there is any need for reform in the future.
John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)
Merry Christmas to you, Mr Speaker, and to your tip-top team.
Dumfries and Galloway is the land of milk and slurry. We lack not for grass and dairy cattle, but we do lack for people. We are heavily reliant on immigrants to milk the cattle, so the loss of occupation code 5111 from the immigration salary list is causing huge concern. Can my farmers count on the Secretary of State to speak to the Home Office and head off what appears to be a looming crisis?
Dame Angela Eagle
We have a close relationship with the Home Office, and I have old contacts there too. I promise that we keep a close eye on these things and look at what we can do about emerging shortages. Given that we want to reduce the number of people who come into this country and that we want to create job opportunities for people here, it is important that the sector looks at how it can train people locally to do those jobs.
Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)
I had the opportunity to meet a dairy farmer in my constituency, who explained just how financially challenging things have been. They have diversified, they have a farm shop and they do raw milk vending, but it is simply not enough for them to make a profit on other activities to subsidise their milk production. Will the Minister outline how dairy farmers, who are critical to a vibrant food and drink sector, will be supported in the long term?
Dame Angela Eagle
The global glut of milk has led to instability in price, which is difficult as many of our food prices are reliant on global markets. We have put in place the Fair Dealing Obligations (Milk) Regulations 2024, and we will be keeping a close eye on the sector to see what else we can do to ensure that we continue to support it.
Adrian Ramsay (Waveney Valley) (Green)
Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)
Merry Christmas to you and your team, Mr Speaker.
Alongside many colleagues on the Government Benches who are passionate about farming, I will continue to argue for a rethink on inheritance tax, but I back this Government and their mission to improve the profitability of our farms. We are speeding up planning, tackling unfair supply chain practices, unlocking finance and boosting exports. Does the Minister agree that the findings of the Batters review mean that we can finally turn a page on dwindling farm incomes and unleash benefits for farmers, the rural economy and our nation’s food security?
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
That is absolutely true. Stepping forward with confidence into the future using new agritech techniques, diversifying farm income and seeing what we can do in partnership with the industry, as Baroness Batters’ report says this morning, is the way forward; talking down the industry and covering it in doom and gloom is not.
Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
Merry Christmas, Mr Speaker.
A recent outbreak of avian flu near Wetheral in my constituency affected 43,000 birds and required the culling of the entire flock. Although I welcome the turkey vaccination trial, I am concerned that it will not conclude in time for the vaccine to be rolled out for the next avian flu season. Will the Minister set out what steps she is taking to remove the regulatory barriers that might prevent a roll-out in time for the next avian flu season?
Dame Angela Eagle
We have to get the science right on vaccination trials. The turkey trial is being carried out because this is one of our most valuable stocks, so we cannot rush it. I would not want to get our turkey industry into a situation where the vaccination trial was rushed and we were not sure of the response, because if there is not international recognition of vaccinations, it destroys the trade.
Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)
Dame Angela Eagle
We have already brought forward some sectoral regulations to improve fairness, but there is a built-in difficulty when there are small suppliers and very large buyers. The fairness regulations that the hon. Gentleman talks about have been put in place to try to redress that difficulty.
Mr Alex Barros-Curtis (Cardiff West) (Lab)
Many constituents, including my own, were shocked to see that 24,000 homes and businesses in the south-east were without drinking water for two weeks. What steps are the Government taking to ensure that residents get the compensation that they deserve?
Animal Welfare Strategy
Angela Eagle Excerpts(3 weeks, 6 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Mr Mark Francois (Rayleigh and Wickford) (Con)
My wife, who is a radiographer, is on call on Christmas day, but luckily we are going to the in-laws, so hopefully that will cover it.
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
You won’t be in the kitchen, then?
Mr Francois
They’re not going to risk that!
Mr Speaker, we know you are an animal lover—the world knows that—but some may recall that our great friend, Sir David, was a passionate animal lover, too. One cause that was very close to his heart was pig farrowing crates. Another was banning the import of foreign hunting trophies, which is an awful trade. There was a private Member’s Bill in the last Session that sailed through the Commons but ran into trouble in the Lords. Can the Secretary of State confirm that the Government are committed to banning the import of hunting trophies? At the moment, they are not providing any private Member’s Bill Fridays for other reasons, so how will that ban be achieved?
Fishing Opportunities Agreement 2026
Angela Eagle Excerpts(1 month ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
The UK has reached agreement with the EU, Norway and other coastal states on catch opportunities for shared stocks for 2026. Across negotiations so far, the UK has secured agreement on over 80 total allowable catches—TACs—providing access to more than 520,000 tonnes of fishing opportunities for 2026, worth an estimated £830 million based on historic landing prices.
Additionally, the UK participated in multilateral consultations, reaching agreement on sustainable fishing opportunities and marine conservation management measures through the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission, ICCAT—the international commission for the conservation of Atlantic tunas—and the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organisation, and updating the United Nations General Assembly resolution on sustainable fisheries.
We have set annual catch limits that are informed by the best available scientific advice, predominantly that provided by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea—ICES. The scientific advice for 2026 creates a challenging sustainability picture, with many stocks receiving declining advice—compared with 2025—or advice for zero catches, particularly in demersal mixed fisheries. We have therefore agreed new technical, remedial and management measures through these negotiations to reduce fishing pressure and support long-term sustainability.
In these negotiations the UK Government worked closely with the Scottish Government, Welsh Government and Northern Ireland Executive to secure outcomes that deliver on our domestic and international obligations to improve the sustainable management of our fish stocks for the long-term in support of the whole of the UK fishing industry.
UK-EU bilateral negotiations
The UK has secured fishing opportunities of 150,000 tonnes, worth around £430 million based on historic landing prices, through agreement on over 70 TACs as well as agreement on arrangements for non-quota stocks. Compared with the same stocks in 2025, this is similar in volume and £20 million higher in value. The small increase is primarily due to higher catch limits for North sea nephrops and sole. Most catch limits are the same as in 2025 or have declined, largely driven by the scientific advice.
We have set TAC positions above ICES headline advice for 18 stocks as part of our final negotiated position this year. This includes bycatch-only TACs for severely depleted stocks in mixed fisheries. The Government will publish early in 2026 a full assessment of the number of TACs set consistent with ICES advice across all annual negotiations.
In recognition of the depleted status of stocks this year, we have reduced the tonnage for some bycatch TACs and agreed new technical measures to reduce bycatch of vulnerable cod, haddock, whiting, place and sole stocks in the Celtic sea, Irish sea and channel.
The UK and EU have agreed to balance increases for the pollack and seabass fisheries with a cautious approach that aims to support long-term sustainability. For example, we have agreed to introduce a new mandatory bag limit for the pollack recreational fishery. This complements the voluntary measures already in place and aims to further reduce mortality of this stock.
The UK and EU also made commitments to work together through the Specialised Committee on Fisheries in 2026 to address management challenges and promote long-term sustainability of shared stocks. This includes continuing to review management approaches for skates and rays, monitoring behaviour change in the seabass fishery, and exploring options for a minimum conservation reference size for spurdog. The UK and EU also agreed to continue to work together through the SCF to support ICES in improving the science base for a number of stocks, including Rockall cod—to improve the quality of the biomass assessment in area 6b—mixing horse mackerel stocks in area 7e, and sole in area 7hjk.
For non-quota stocks, the UK and the EU agreed a roll-over of access arrangements for 2026 to ensure continued access to fish NQS in EU waters, worth around £25 million in 2024.
The parties also agreed a roll-over of access arrangements for spurdog in the North sea and albacore tuna.
UK-EU-Norway trilateral negotiations
The UK has also reached agreement with Norway and the EU on catch limits for 2026 for six jointly managed North sea stocks, giving the UK fishing fleet access to opportunities worth over £380 million, based on historic landing prices.
TACs for haddock, saithe, whiting and plaice have been set in line with, or below, the headline advice from ICES.
For northern shelf cod, the parties agreed that a multi-year approach was required to reduce fishing pressure, increase biomass and recover the sub-stocks to MSY levels as soon as possible. For 2026 the UK, along with the EU and Norway, agreed to introduce additional seasonal closures and update real time closure regimes, as well as introduce new restrictions on targeting of cod in the southern North sea. This enables a 2026 TAC which is projected by ICES to lead to biomass increases and which secures fishing opportunities that recognise the social and economic importance of cod in the mixed fishery. In the longer-term, the UK has committed to further work through the trilateral forum, much of which is to be led by the northern shelf cod management working group which the UK currently chairs.
For North sea herring, after many years of discussions on changing the management model for the stock, the UK, EU and Norway have agreed a new approach which includes the implementation of a long-term management strategy. This issue has been a UK priority for many years, and this new management regime, in place from January 2026, is expected to deliver sustainability improvements for the stock.
The parties renewed their commitment to deliver LTMSs for their other shared stocks. The parties also agreed to discussions in 2026 on moving the management of northern shelf anglerfish—monkfish—and the northern hake stock to a joint basis, and they further committed to continuing to progress their joint work on the monitoring, control and surveillance of their shared stocks.
Coastal states negotiations
The UK has reached agreement with other coastal states on fishing opportunities for blue whiting and Norwegian spring-spawning—Atlanto-Scandian—herring in the north-east Atlantic in 2026. These opportunities are worth an estimated £20 million to the UK fleet, based on 2024 landing prices. TACs for these two stocks have been agreed in line with ICES advice. Discussions on the 2026 TAC for mackerel, and associated management measures, are ongoing among coastal states.
North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission
The UK worked with other parties to secure new monitoring, control and surveillance measures. This included taking steps to bring the NEAFC scheme into alignment with guidelines published by the food and agriculture organisation of the United Nations on at-sea transhipment.
ICCAT—the international commission for the conservation of Atlantic tunas
The UK secured an increase from 63 tonnes to 230.65 tonnes of bluefin tuna per year for 2026 to 2028. The quota will enable the further development of commercial and recreational bluefin tuna fisheries in the UK and Crown dependencies from 2026 to 2028. DEFRA will share plans regarding these fisheries with interested parties soon.
The UK also secured a range of objectives to promote more sustainable fishing of Atlantic tunas, support economic growth and protect the environment. We secured adoption of a UK proposal to prohibit retention of white shark and basking shark, affording greater protection to these iconic species. ICCAT also adopted strengthened port state measures, based on a UK proposal, to help in the fight against illegal fishing. Although a UK proposal to help reduce bycatch of endangered seabirds was not adopted, we will continue to fight for this at ICCAT in 2026-27.
Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organisation
The UK agreed a TAC for NAFO division 3M cod, in line with scientific advice. This provides the UK with a quota of 1431.6 tonnes for 2026, a 22% increase over last year. The Canadian-set TAC for NAFO 3L cod also increased for 2025-26, providing the UK with a quota of 40.4 tonnes. Together this provides the UK with around £5 million-worth of fishing opportunities, based on historic landing prices.
UN General Assembly resolution on sustainable fisheries
The UK contributed to updating and strengthening the content of the UN General Assembly resolution on sustainable fisheries. Seven of the UK’s proposals were progressed this year, consistent with our overarching aim of improving global fisheries governance and sustainability. These included securing references to the latest findings from the food and agriculture organisation regarding the status of global fish stocks, and new text to help reduce or eliminate seabird bycatch, and improve the management of fisheries catching sharks.
UK-Norway and UK-Faroe Islands bilateral negotiations
Bilateral negotiations between the UK and Norway and the UK and the Faroe Islands for 2026 are ongoing. Our aim is to conclude those before the end of the year. These negotiations are to agree access, exchanges of fishing quota, and broader fisheries management measures between the parties.
[HCWS1151]
Draft Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging and Packaging Waste) (Amendment) Regulations 2025
Angela Eagle Excerpts(1 month ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging and Packaging Waste) (Amendment) Regulations 2025.
It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Hobhouse. These draft regulations were laid before the House on 3 November, and they introduce amendments to extended producer responsibility for packaging—referred to as pEPR—in England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. The amendments mark a significant milestone in our journey towards a more circular, resource-resilient economy in which producers take greater responsibility for the packaging they place on the market, and in which waste is designed out from the beginning.
The Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging and Packaging Waste) Regulations 2024 established a new framework for managing household packaging waste. They shifted the financial burden of disposal from taxpayers and local authorities to the businesses that supply the packaging. As a direct result, producers are now obligated to cover the cost of managing the packaging waste they have produced, and to ensure that a proportion of the packaging they supply is recycled, with evidence provided to the regulator.
The amendments before us today are designed to improve the fairness, clarity and operational efficiency of the scheme. They respond directly to feedback from producers, local authorities and other stakeholders, and they reflect our commitment to international best practice. I will highlight three key areas of reform in the amendments.
First, we are enabling the appointment of a producer responsibility organisation from 2026, which is a significant development. The producer responsibility organisation will be an independent not-for-profit body established with the support of producers to take on core responsibilities for the operation of the pEPR scheme. This responds to a critical request from industry and aligns with successful models seen in countries with mature extended producer responsibility systems, ensuring that producers are not only accountable but actively involved in shaping the system. The PRO will operate under conditions agreed by the four Governments, and it will work in close partnership with the scheme administrator, PackUK. Sovereign functions related to sign-off and ownership of data, models and fee-setting cannot be delegated to the producer responsibility organisation, and will be retained by PackUK.
Secondly, we are introducing a targeted expansion of the scheme’s offsetting provisions. Large producers that operate closed-loop recycling systems for food-grade plastics—a system whereby they collect their own food-grade plastic waste directly from consumers and send it for reprocessing into new food-grade recyclate—will now be able to deduct these closed-loop package tonnages from their disposal cost obligations.
Eligible producers will be able to resubmit data for the 2024 reporting year and receive revised invoices for the 2025 assessment year. We are doing this because we want to increase the recycled content in food-grade plastics. Despite sorting techniques, it is currently difficult for local authorities to keep plastic that is intended for food contact separate from other types of plastics, and the result is that food-grade plastics often get downcycled, so we lose that valuable material. Closed-loop recycling systems help to keep food-grade plastics separate and decrease our reliance on virgin plastics. The approach we have chosen supports moving the UK towards a circular economy.
Thirdly, we are making a series of technical amendments to improve the scheme’s operability and ensure clarity for producers. Those include refining the definition of fibre-based composite materials by introducing a threshold—where plastic layers constitute no more than 5% of the packaging by mass, the item will be treated as paper and card. That provides greater clarity for reporting and fee calculation.
We are clarifying obligations across producer classes, including how responsibilities transfer when businesses merge or change ownership. We are also strengthening enforcement powers to tackle non-compliant “free riders”, which are businesses that meet the producer threshold but fail to register or report data. Such entities gain an unfair advantage over compliant competitors and undermine the integrity of the system. The scheme administrator, PackUK, will now have powers to charge free riders and recover costs. Updating regulator fees to reflect increased activity and inflationary pressures, as well as the introduction of new services such as recyclability assessment methodology and digital infrastructure, also form part of the change.
The amendments do not change the core policy of pEPR; rather, they enhance its delivery and ensure that the system is fair, transparent and effective. They have been developed through extensive consultation and co-design sessions with stakeholders, which brought together producers, local authorities and others from across the packaging value chain to shape the future of the scheme. The amendments before us today strengthen our commitment to a circular economy, support innovation, reward sustainability and ensure that our packaging system works for the environment, the industry and the public.
Dame Angela Eagle
I am happy to address some of the points that have been raised. I welcome that the official Opposition are broadly supportive of this system, and I will come to their questions in a minute. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton, sounded like she was in favour on principle but not quite in favour of this particular system. That is an interesting approach, but ripping up the whole thing and starting again would not help our recycling rates. I prefer to think that the best way forward is to keep refining what is happening, to see how it works and to see if there are obvious things that we need to change.
These draft regulations are part of that iteration, because they introduce, for example, a change on the closed loop for food-grade plastics, and they shift to a producer-run organisation so that we can integrate how packaging is produced and try to drive up recycling rates. These measures will be responsible for returning over £1 billion to local authorities through fees and structures that enable them to recycle waste collected at people’s doors.
The hon. Member for Epping Forest asked whether Ministers have met industry groups affected by dual use, and I hope to reassure him that the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh), has done so. We recognise the strength of feeling on the need for a system that can be effectively monitored and enforced, given the impact of pEPR on packaging that remains in scope of fees.
Through our workshops, we are looking at what we can do to refine the system further to deal with the issues of double charging, as the shadow Minister put it. He asked what would happen if the PRO collapsed. PackUK can take control in the event of a catastrophe while it seeks to establish a successor, so that there does not have to be any other system.
We recognise the issues with glass, raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Llanelli, and the issues with measuring by weight, on which we are in touch with producers. There is also Government support for energy costs in the industry, which will hopefully deal with some of the additional costs that traditional industries are having to shoulder. I hope my hon. Friend accepts that we will continue to keep all of this under review.
To conclude, the amendments made by these draft regulations are necessary to maintain the circular economy for packaging in the UK, to ensure that the key industry request that producers are involved in running the scheme is taken forward, and ultimately to ensure that materials and products are kept in use longer. I trust that hon. Members on both sides of the Committee understand and accept the need for these draft regulations, and accept that the changes will benefit the scheme.
Dr Hudson
As I mentioned, the Budget document talked about a consultation on this going into 2026. I raised with the Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the hon. Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh), in the Westminster Hall debate that such consultation needs to be urgent, rather than kicking the can down the track. Can the Minister reassure us that she and her DEFRA colleagues will urgently review the system and act to mitigate any adverse consequences? A consultation is good on paper, but unless it is urgent, stakeholders on the frontline are going to suffer.
Dame Angela Eagle
We are trying to take the scheme forward in a positive, iterative way. The consultation is not kicking the can down the road; it is recycling the can to see what we can do to ensure that the system is changed and iterated to fit more effectively, to drive up recycling rates in our economy and to move towards a circular economy. I hope the hon. Member feels reassured by that response.
Sarah Dyke
The Liberal Democrats have urged the Government to consider exempting pubs from the EPR, and to review the scheme’s scope and timeline to stop further damage to the hospitality sector, which we all know is already struggling. Will she commit to monitoring that progress as the scheme is rolled out so that pubs and the hospitality sector are not hit further?
Dame Angela Eagle
I know that the responsible Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry East, has met the industry, and that workshops have been held over recent weeks to urgently and carefully identify options that address the issues that the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton raises. We all need to find positive ways forward to address those issues. I hope she is reassured that my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry East is on to that one and already taking action. I hope that, with those explanations, this measure has the support of the Committee.
Question put and agreed to.
Land Use Change: Food Security
Angela Eagle Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
It is a great pleasure to respond to this debate with you in the Chair, Dr Murrison—I hope you are warmer than I am, having sat in what is quite a cold room for the entire debate. It has been a good debate, so I would like to congratulate the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) on her success in securing it. We have had a good and serious debate across all parties about a serious, if somewhat complex and multifaceted, issue.
Food security is about land use, but it is also wider than that, so I will begin my response by explaining how the Government are approaching this issue in the round. I do not think anyone would argue that food security is not an important part of our national security. If they were going to argue that before covid-19 and the war in Ukraine, I do not see how they could possibly argue it after living through those occurrences and seeing the effects and implications that those unanticipated events had on our ability to be resilient in future unforeseen circumstances. Being open-minded to learn the lessons, and doing our best to anticipate what the challenges of the future might be, is an important part of how we develop a more resilient stance than we would have if our post-war complacency—if I could put it that way—had carried on without what has happened in the last few years.
Anticipating the challenges of the future requires a close working relationship with the food sector. I chair F4, which brings together the National Farmers’ Union, the Food and Drink Federation, the British Retail Consortium and UKHospitality. That group represents the food system from farm to fork, and ensures that we are prepared for disruption to food supply chains and that we can respond quickly to threats as they emerge. We have heard about some of the threats from right hon. and hon. Members today, ranging from cyber-security threats to threats from Ukraine. Nobody has mentioned pests or diseases, but that is another potential threat that farmers know only too well. We have sadly experienced that in this country while I have been a Member of Parliament.
Robust analysis and transparency are critical. That is why we will publish an annual food security digest report, in addition to the UK food security report, which is published every three years. The most recent was published last December. Those reports highlight how diverse international trade routes and resilient domestic production systems ensure that any disruption from risks, such as adverse weather or disease, does not affect the UK’s overall security of supply.
Figures have been bandied around by different people about the percentage of our food we grow ourselves. UK agriculture currently provides 65% of the food we eat—77% of what we can actually grow here. We may not be brilliant at growing bananas, even though people love to eat them. The figure rises from 65% to 77% if we take account of what we can grow in our climate. Those figures have been more or less stable over 20 years.
Recent geopolitical challenges have highlighted increasing risks to food security, but have also demonstrated the resilience of our food system. As we develop implementation plans for the food strategy, we are applying lessons learned from covid-19 and the Russian invasion of Ukraine about how to prepare for, respond to and recover from shocks.
For example, one of the lessons from covid-19 was the key role that local communities and food systems played in maintaining access to food, particularly for the most vulnerable. I know from my experience during that strange time that working with the local authority and local kitchens was a far better way of ensuring that those who had to shield had access to useable, nutritious food. That is why the food strategy will focus on strengthening local food systems.
I am working closely with the Department for Work and Pensions to end mass dependence on food parcels, which is a moral scar on our society. I raise that point because food security is also about the ability of every citizen to access the nutrition they need. The new crisis and resilience fund will enable local authorities to provide preventive support for communities and assistance to individuals facing a financial shock, improving citizens’ financial resilience and reducing the need for future crisis support.
We also face challenges to the resilience of domestic food production systems from soil degradation, disease and climate change. Those are critical long-term risks, but we should be clear that the impacts are here today. We need only speak to a farmer whose fields were underwater last winter and then parched and drought-ridden this summer. They would say that that is not a theoretical risk, but a threat to food production today. That is a threat we can manage because we need to take climate change seriously and do something about it, as we do with more conventional threats.
Wendy Morton
I am genuinely interested in what the Minister is saying about food and food systems, but how does she see the connection between that and our farmers? We do not want anybody to be reliant on a food parcel, but what is her Department doing to ensure that the food in a kitchen, in a parcel or on our shelves is produced by British farmers? That is at the heart of this debate: British food security.
Dame Angela Eagle
I was coming to that. I am happy to get across my view of what this should be. The food strategy that we published in July makes clear that we will act to ensure that our food system can thrive and grow sustainably and continue to provide a resilient and secure supply of healthy, safe and affordable food. It sets out that that should include investment, innovation and productivity, and a fairer, more transparent supply chain, which is why we are dealing with the supply chain adjudicators and introducing regulation on how to ensure fairness. Dairy and pigs are already in a process, but other work is being done for other sectors to ensure that a fair price is paid for the food that is produced, which is important.
Boosting the resilience of our food system will prepare it better for supply chain shocks and disruption. Some of what we have to do is ensure resilience to climate change, which will make us more resilient in the way in which we produce food. Environmental changes therefore go hand in hand with protecting food production. If we do not make our landscapes more resilient and more sustainable environmentally, it is likely that the productivity of our land will decline and it will be harder as the climate changes for us to guarantee reasonable food production. Some of those things bolster each other and should not be set against one another, as the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills said in her opening remarks. They can produce a more effective and more resilient result if we do them effectively and properly.
We already manage the resilience of domestic production through updated environmental land management schemes. The good news is that actions taken today to manage these immediate risks can also reduce the risk from climate change. There is a £7 billion farming budget focused on improving the resilience of our food systems. That maintains the Government’s commitment to farming, food security and nature’s recovery. It includes £5.9 billion for environmental farming schemes, £816 million for tree planting and £385 million for peatland restoration, all of which is vital for sustainability.
The farming budget will pay for land management actions that reduce flood and drought risk for arable systems and manage heat risk for livestock. The Government will also provide £15 million in funding to stop millions of tonnes of good, fresh farm food going to waste by redirecting that surplus into the hands of those who need it.
The new energy infrastructure and new homes are not a risk to food security. Today, ground-mounted solar covers 13,000 hectares of land, which is 0.1% of England and 0.15% of English agricultural land. Half the agricultural land generating solar power is still producing food because it is dual-use—there are sheep grazing, and so on, on it. By 2035, the plan is for the percentage to rise to 0.4% of England as we increase our solar power generation capacity from 18 GW to 75 GW.
To put that into perspective, golf courses take up 0.7% of UK land and grouse moors take up 4%. At the moment, solar is at 0.1%, with plans to go up to 0.4%. People may not like solar panels appearing in and around the areas they live in, but they are not a threat to food security.
Wendy Morton
I beg your pardon—the hon. Lady. Maybe one day! It is one thing to see a few sheep grazing under a solar panel, but my point is about agricultural arable land that grows crops. I have yet to see a solar panel in an arable field because I do not think that is possible.
Dame Angela Eagle
I was not trying to make out that arable crops could graze around solar panels—
Dame Angela Eagle
The right hon. Lady is correct, but I am trying to get this into perspective in terms of overall land use.
There have been many calls for the land use framework to be published. I hope I can reassure hon. and right hon. Member that we will publish it early next year. Having looked at some of it, I am totally fascinated by it; when we publish it, I think we will have very many interesting debates about what it demonstrates. As I see it, the food strategy goes together with the land use framework, which goes together with the farming road map—all of which are in parallel production even as we speak.
Robbie Moore
Cash flow challenges are hitting many of our farming businesses right now. Baroness Batters, of the other place, has produced a profitability review, which seems to be hidden in the depths of the Department at the moment. Will the Minister guarantee that the profitability review will be published this week, before the Budget, so that all our farmers, the stakeholders and us, as Members of Parliament, can scrutinise it and lobby the Chancellor to make the right decisions before the Budget next week?
Dame Angela Eagle
I do not think that the lack of appearance of Baroness Batters’s report has stopped anyone lobbying the Chancellor; lobbying is happening outside even as we speak.
Dame Angela Eagle
Of course it will be published, and it will be published this year. I cannot think of any Government who produce large reports on matters of interest in the week before the Budget. The hon. Gentleman can expect to see it this year, as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State told the EFRA Committee in evidence, I think last week.
I could understand why the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills would be worried if solar farms were planned to take up more than 0.4% of land in England in the next period, up to 2035, but they are not. Also, the 1.5 million homes that this Government have said they will deliver in this Parliament are likely to take up approximately 26,000 hectares, which is 0.2% of English land. That is quite a small land take to transform the lives of the many hundreds of thousands of people who are currently in need of homes. The Government are quite right to pursue a target of 1.5 million homes, and clearly one needs to build those homes on land. As I said, 26,000 hectares, which is 0.2% of English land, is the approximate amount of land that will be needed to ensure that we can house many people who currently do not have the prospect of having a home of their own.
Bradley Thomas
I want to give the Minister an opportunity to answer a question that I have asked several Ministers in the main Chamber. My constituents and I do not dispute the need for more housing in the country, nor do we dispute that it needs to be located in areas where people want to live, but what would she say to my constituents living across Bromsgrove and the villages—an area that is 89% green belt and 79% rural—when I tell her that, as a result of choices made by this Government, our housing target has increased by 85% while the housing target in adjacent Birmingham has decreased by more than 30%? Every area has to take its fair share, but does she agree that that is a grossly unfair imbalance?
Dame Angela Eagle
In the small amount of time left to me before the end of the debate, it is hard for me to answer the hon. Gentleman. It is not up to me to take decisions about local planning issues of that kind. That is what local plans are for.
I thank the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills for securing the debate. I know that she wants to say a few words, so I will sit down.
Oral Answers to Questions
Angela Eagle Excerpts(2 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Adrian Ramsay (Waveney Valley) (Green)
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
We remain firmly committed to maintaining and improving animal welfare, and will work closely with the farming sector to deliver high standards. The use of cages and other close confinement systems for farmed animals is an issue we are currently considering and, as was announced by the Prime Minister, we plan to publish the animal welfare strategy by the end of this year.
Adrian Ramsay
I thank the Minister for her answer. Animal Equality estimates that around 200,000 sows in the UK spend nearly a quarter of their adult life confined in farrowing crates, which are metal barred cages that severely restrict their movement—they cannot even turn around. Some 75% of vets are concerned and research suggests that two thirds of the public oppose their use. When it comes to the animal welfare strategy, will the Minister commit to phasing out the use of all farrowing crates and the equally cruel cages for birds, and what practical steps will be put in place to support farmers with the transition?
Dame Angela Eagle
It is important to remember that 50% of the national sow breeding herd live freely and are not kept in these kinds of cage systems at all, which I think shows the way forward. It is very important that we work with the industry to see how we can move away from the use of farrowing crates and create more flexible alternatives that are available to be introduced in a practical and pragmatic way.
Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk) (Lab)
So often, farmers are the best conservationists. Many want to do even more to support the environment and animal welfare, but profitability and sustainability are key. Will the Minister confirm whether the Department will consider financial support for farmers to move towards more sustainable and strong animal welfare standards?
Dame Angela Eagle
We are always ready to consider how we can bring about the policies that will be set out in the animal welfare strategy when we publish it. We are pragmatic about how we can shift from outdated systems and modernise, and we are proud that we have some of the highest standards of animal welfare in the world.
Catherine Atkinson (Derby North) (Lab)
James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
Only 0.1% of land is used for solar, and half of the agricultural land used for generating solar power is still producing food. Solar farms are not a risk to food security. Instead, they play an important role in diversifying farm income and decarbonising our economy.
James Wild
I think the Minister’s answer was a bit tone-deaf. North West Norfolk’s farms and farmers play a vital role in our food security. My constituents are concerned about the Droves and High Grove solar farms, which will cover 7,000 acres. Why are the Government, and the Net Zero Secretary in particular, obsessed with putting solar farms on Norfolk’s agricultural land rather than on brownfield land and rooftops?
Dame Angela Eagle
A very small area of land is used by solar farms—as I said before, it is 0.1% of the UK’s total land area. The clean power commitment 2030 will take that up to 0.4%. Our land use framework, which will deal with ensuring that solar farms do not go on prime agricultural land, is due to be published in the early part of next year.
Dr Neil Hudson (Epping Forest) (Con)
Food security is national security, and we are in the middle of a food and farming emergency created by this Labour Government’s policies. From their heartless family farm tax to the closure of vital support schemes, they are damaging farming’s ability to thrive and harming rural mental health. That is only being made worse nationwide, including in my constituency of Epping Forest, by plans for excessive solar development that risk prime food-producing land being taken away. When will the Government stop this senseless assault on our green belt and countryside, and start putting solar in the right places, such as on brownfield sites and rooftops? When will they start to reverse these damaging policies so that our fantastic farming sector has a fighting chance of being preserved for future generations?
Dame Angela Eagle
It sounds as though the shadow Minister thinks that the entirety of agricultural land will be covered in solar. I have already said that it will be 0.4% by 2030, and it provides farmers with extra income. We have a national planning policy framework that prioritises using lower-quality land for such things. He says that he wants solar power on rooftops—well, we are doing that too.
Liam Conlon (Beckenham and Penge) (Lab)
Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)
I, too, welcome the Secretary of State, and the Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs, the hon. Member for Wallasey (Dame Angela Eagle), to their roles. I look forward to working with them both.
Research from the University of Cumbria shows that, by this time next year, the average hill farmer will earn barely half the national minimum wage, yet the Government’s family farm tax means an annual tax bill of £20,000 a year for the typical hill farm. Those farmers will have to stop farming and sell up. To whom? To wealthy landowners and big city corporations. Is this policy not deeply socially unjust, robbing from the poor and giving to the rich, while betraying the people who care for our landscape and provide food for us?
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
We will publish the farming road map and the Batters review, and then talk about a strategy for making farming more productive, profitable and sustainable for the next generation. Upland farmers will play an important part in that review, and we will see what we can do to support them.
Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)
Dame Angela Eagle
Again, we understand the pressures that farmers are under. We want to work on creating a productive, profitable and sustainable farming sector, and we will do so.
Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)
Shaun Davies (Telford) (Lab)
Given the Government’s focus on strengthening skills in the agritech food sector, will the Secretary of State join me in visiting Harper Adams University’s new Telford facility at the Quad to see how the industry and higher and further education facilities, including Telford College, are working together to develop and diversify the skills pipeline in the sector?
Dame Angela Eagle
We are fully supportive of collaboration between industry and higher and further education to strengthen skills in the agrifood sector. I will be visiting Harper Adams; that visit is already in the diary, and if my hon. Friend wants to join me, he is more than welcome.
Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)
Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)
Dame Angela Eagle
No, it is not the family farm tax. The right hon. Gentleman should be patient and wait to see our plan for the future of farming.
Fresh and Nutritious Food: Inequality of Access
Angela Eagle Excerpts(2 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
It is a great pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Mundell. I start by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South (Gordon McKee) on securing this debate, and I thank all those who have made relevant, if somewhat fast, contributions. It demonstrates how important these issues are, and how much more awareness has recently been raised about them.
We know that many households are struggling to afford food, particularly fresh and nutritious food, with some disproportionately affected, including low-income families and those with disabilities. We also know that our food environment is dominated by products high in saturated fat, sugar and salt, which are highly addictive, heavily promoted and readily available, as well as cheap, making it harder for people to make healthy choices.
My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South gave us a vivid example from his area of Castlemilk that shows how, even if people wish to make those choices, they cannot practically do it. The idea of having to make a six-mile round trip to buy a banana says it all, when other ways of getting to the nearest supermarket are so impossible for those on low incomes.
David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)
Will the Minister give way?
Dame Angela Eagle
Of course, but I have very little time to answer some of these points.
David Chadwick
Apples and pears provide essential nutrients, such as vitamin C and folate, and they count as one of our five a day, as recognised by the NHS Eatwell guide. Does the Minister agree that any attempt to include fruit juice in the HFSS category risks sending the wrong messages to families at a time when fruit and vegetable consumption is already falling, especially among children and those on lower incomes, as she mentioned?
Dame Angela Eagle
Today’s debate is about those who do not have practical access to any such choice, because there simply is nowhere for them to go and buy it. The national child measurement programme’s annual report demonstrated the consequences of the inequality of diet. For reception and year 6 children, obesity prevalence was more than double in the most deprived areas, compared with the least. These trends have been allowed to increase over the last 14 years, and there is now a positive correlation between obesity and poverty, which we must break. That is why it is so important that my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South has brought forward this small but perfectly formed debate on a really serious issue.
How can we bring to bear really creative solutions to these problems, such as the food deserts that my hon. Friend talked about? The Government have done some things. We have a food strategy that talks about how we can improve food price affordability and access to highly nutritious food. We are committed to making the healthy choice the easier choice, which is certainly not the case in Castlemilk in his area.
We know that the cost of a nutritious diet is currently too high, and we know, for example, that we can do some work on that through the Healthy Start scheme, which supports people to buy fresh or frozen fruit, vegetables, pulses, milk and infant formula, if they have children under four. Healthy Start makes a valuable difference to families’ ability to purchase healthy foods for their young children. The nursery milk scheme provides reimbursement to childcare providers for giving a daily portion of milk to children and babies.
We are taking action in schools, including by trying to improve the nutritional aspects of free school meals. We are reviewing the school food standards to ensure that schools provide healthy food and drink options and restrict foods high in saturated fat, salt or sugar, to reflect the most recent Government dietary recommendations. We have extended free school meals to all children from households on universal credit, lifting 100,000 children out of poverty and putting £500 back into families’ pockets ahead of the child poverty strategy later this year. Some 90,000 disadvantaged students in further education now receive a free meal on the basis of low income and an additional 1.3 million infants enjoy a free lunch-time meal. Our new free breakfast clubs will help around 180,000 children in the first 750 schools, around 80,000 of whom are in deprived areas. A free, nutritious meal every school day helps our children and young people to access healthy food and supports their education and chances to succeed in work and life. That is soon to be extended to 2,000 schools, with 500,000 more pupils being involved.
On the questions about food redistribution, we are looking at that in the circular economy strategy to see how we can make the best use of surplus food. On the point about KitKat’s marketing budget, you learn something every day—it is a bit worrying to contemplate that. There is new mandatory healthy food sales reporting for large food businesses. That will start to encourage the recalibration of food and its contents, which I hope will begin to make a difference.
We are restricting volume price promotions on unhealthy food—buy one, get one free promotions—which encourage less nutritious food to be even more available. We expect that to make a difference. We have given local authorities stronger powers to block fast food outlets near schools, and I want such powers to be used proactively. We are also consulting on a ban on the sale of high-caffeine energy drinks to children under 16, which tend to be bought by children who live in more deprived, low-income households and make it very difficult for them to concentrate. This is not just about policy generally but what we can do across the system to reduce food inequality and improve access to healthy, affordable food.
My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South talked about the really difficult choices that his constituents face. I am more than happy to meet him to talk about what might happen there. Many hon. Members have talked about the Alexandra Rose charity. There is an interesting thing going on across the river in Merseyside, in Liverpool, where a mobile greengrocer called the Queen of Greens takes food to places where there is no supermarket. It may be that in the interim, before he and his community in Castlemilk get the chance to have a new supermarket built, there are some creative solutions for taking nutritious choices to the community. That is why I agree so much with some of the points made about how local communities, community action and perhaps even co-ops might be able to make a difference in areas such as that. The more creative we can be in having faster solutions, the more we can ensure that the current generation get the nutritional support that they deserve, rather than having to wait perhaps years for a supermarket to be built.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South for raising this really important issue.
Dame Angela Eagle
There is no time.
I am sure that together we can come up with some really creative solutions to assist in ensuring that we have a better future for those now suffering from a lack of access to free and nutritious food, and that we can finally start to address the terrible link between poverty and obesity, which has become such a feature of our society in recent years.
Question put and agreed to.
Draft Environmental Protection (Wet Wipes Containing Plastic) (England) Regulations 2025
Angela Eagle Excerpts(2 months, 1 week ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. The regulations were laid before the House on 16 September. I welcome the chance today to set out the action that this Government and the devolved Governments are taking to ban the supply and sale of wet wipes containing plastic across the UK. I am clearly not my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice, the Minister who has had the most to do with taking this legislation through Parliament. She cannot be with us today, and I have stepped into her position to introduce the statutory instrument that she has done so much work to bring about.
The Government are committed to root and branch reform of the water system to secure better outcomes for customers, investors and the environment, and to restore trust and accountability. A key part of that is enabling pre-pipe drainage and wastewater solutions, including better management of our rainwater and preventing pollutants from entering the sewer network and our waterways. Banning wet wipes containing plastic is integral to that ambition.
Wet wipes containing plastic are a growing source of plastic pollution amd are often found in our natural environment, including in waterways and on beaches. They break down into smaller pieces when in the water environment, contributing to microplastic pollution, which may be harmful to human and animal health. Banning them will reduce plastic and microplastic pollution, as well as reduce the volume of microplastics entering wastewater treatment sites when wrongly flushed.
This action is part of a wider commitment to encourage more sustainable behaviours around the consumption of single-use plastic. Ultimately, we want to encourage a shift towards reusable and/or plastic-free alternatives. In a 2023 public consultation, 95% of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the proposed ban on wet wipes containing plastic. The ban is part of the Government’s all-round approach to moving towards a circular economy for plastics—a future where we keep our resources in use for longer, waste is reduced to accelerate the path to net zero, and we see investment in critical infrastructure and green jobs, which will help our economy to prosper and nature to thrive. We intend to publish the first ever circular economic strategy for England in the coming months.
The UK is leading the way by banning the supply and sale of wet wipes containing plastic, which is a huge step in the right direction. We encourage other nations to consider banning these products, but there may be legitimate reasons why some countries continue to allow the supply and sale of the products. We have been working closely across the UK to agree a joined-up approach to the proposed ban and a UK-wide Government response. We want to deliver a ban that is sensible and effective, while minimising the negative impacts it might have on business and individuals reliant on these products.
The statutory instrument provides for an 18-month transition period before coming into force. The ban will therefore come into force in spring 2027, which is intended to mitigate the economic impacts of the ban, including potential job losses, and to mitigate the risk of excess stocks of wet wipes containing plastic being sent to landfill or being incinerated. We acknowledge that, for some uses, plastic-free alternatives are neither suitable nor available. On that basis, we will provide a medical and a business-to-business exemption to the ban. Our policy on exemptions ensures that individuals and businesses with a genuine need for wet wipes containing plastic can access them until there is a viable alternative. We will periodically review the scope of the exemptions.
Trading standards or equivalent enforcement officers in local authorities will enforce the ban using a reactive intelligence-led model. The Government will soon publish guidance to make clear the scope and details of the regulations. That will assist businesses and regulators in understanding the changes brought in by this legislation to help ensure compliance.
I emphasise that a ban on the supply and sale of wet wipes containing plastic is necessary to reduce plastic and microplastic pollution, particularly in our waters. I commend this statutory instrument to the Committee.
Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)
I rise as Chair of the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee. I am pleased to report that this statutory instrument passed our scrutiny. We checked the legal drafting and whether the instrument is intra vires and going through the proper legislative procedure. We deal with 1,200 or 1,500 instruments a year, but this one passed with flying colours.
Measures from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs do not always pass with flying colours. We produced a report last month showing DEFRA had produced 69 such regulations; 9% required further explanation, and three of them—4%—required us to request changes in drafting, which shows that this very obscure and unsung Committee does very important work to make sure that regulations such as these are properly elucidated.
I support the hon. Member for Putney and her injunction that people should stop flushing wet wipes down toilets. Unfortunately, this statutory instrument does not address that. I think the Minister could have taken the opportunity to impress upon the public that they must stop flushing wet wipes down into the sewage system. They cause incredible blockages, which cost millions of pounds to clear, put our water bills up, and pollute the environment. Even if there are no plastics in them, they will continue to cause that nuisance. We must not let it get into the consumer’s mind, “Oh, these are plastic-free, so I can flush them down the loo.” I put it to the Minister that that is a great danger.
Dame Angela Eagle
The hon. Gentleman has anticipated some of what I was going to say in my winding-up remarks—but he is right.
Sir Bernard Jenkin
I am most grateful to the hon. Lady. They say that in Parliament you should never ask a question to which you do not know the answer, but I am going to ask one. I notice that the EU is also moving towards this kind of ban, although I do not know whether it is the same. In Wales, the Welsh Labour Government have already introduced a ban. Would we have been allowed to do this without the EU’s permission? Would it have been regarded as a restriction on the free movement of wet wipes if we had introduced it while we were still in the EU? I hope that moving forward with this measure, for which I commend this Government and the previous Government, in this country will encourage the rest of the EU to follow suit. I do not suppose that this falls under the definition of “reset” or “alignment” or anything complicated like that, but could the Minister explain whether we could have done this if we were still in the EU?
Dame Angela Eagle
We have had a small but perfectly formed debate on a measure that has gathered cross-party agreement, partly because of the power of the argument about the damage that microplastics do. I particularly compliment my hon. Friend the Member for Putney on her long-standing and very powerful advocacy in this area: she should be very proud of the effect that her campaigning has had.
The hon. Member for Richmond Park has sold the beauty of her constituency in a way that I have never quite managed. I look forward to a time when she can talk about the unalloyed pleasures of the nature and beauty of her constituency without having to get us all involved in contemplating 180 tonnes of fatberg caused by 5 million wet wipes, but I also observe that 11 million wet wipes, or possibly more, are used a year. That is two fatbergs a year, created by the kind of waste that we are talking about banning.
I acknowledge that, as the hon. Member for Harwich and North Essex pointed out, banning wet wipes that contain plastic will not stop the formation of fatbergs in our sewer system, because any wet wipe can contribute to that, as indeed can pouring oil down the sewer system. We therefore have much more work to do, not least on labelling and the “Do not flush” approach to the wet wipes that will remain even after the ban is brought into force. I compliment the hon. Gentleman for pointing out to me some of the issues with the Department, which I joined not so long ago; I will take those back so that future statutory instruments can get through his Committee unscathed. I note the points that he made about those that have not quite reached the standard of technical excellence of this one.
The hon. Gentleman asked whether we would have been able to introduce this statutory instrument if we had been in the EU. My information is that we would. The EU is not actually banning wet wipes at the moment; it is doing plastic versus non-plastic labelling. Perhaps the EU is beginning to go down the path that we have pioneered.
Sir Bernard Jenkin
She always gets excited when I mention the European Union.
Dame Angela Eagle
Of course, and that is why I will give way to my hon. Friend. I think that the EU is perhaps beginning some tentative steps along the same pathway that, thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for Putney, we are pioneering.
Ms Creasy
I know that the Minister, like me, will want to reassure the hon. Member for Harwich and North Essex, who has previously expressed grave concern that somehow working with our European counterparts would not help us to abolish taxes on tampons, for example. Let me reassure him that the single-use plastics directive, which was made in 2019—after we voted to leave the European Union, admittedly, but before we left—would facilitate this work. Indeed, the Netherlands and Spain are already progressing their own bans. The European Union is—as it always was—simply a springboard to making decisions at a local level. We are ahead of the curve here in the United Kingdom, but working with the European Union would not prevent us from doing this work. I am sure that that will entirely reassure the hon. Member.
Dame Angela Eagle
I am in awe of my hon. Friend’s detailed knowledge of EU directives that were passed after we left. I am sure that she remains in dynamic alignment with what is going on in Europe.
I want to spend a little time answering the questions of the hon. Member for Epping Forest. Enforcement will be proportionate. The 18-month transition period is pretty generous, as far as transition periods go. We are certainly hoping that with the signals that have been given and with the ban coming in, the industry will be able to adjust. We also encourage it to innovate so that we can get plastic out of the remaining wet wipes that, for the time being, the exemptions in the statutory instrument allow. It is a pragmatic statutory instrument, as the hon. Gentleman says.
The hon. Gentleman asked how enforcement would work. It will be on sellers and suppliers, not on individuals. There will certainly be no one knocking on doors and checking people’s pantries to see whether they have an old supply of wet wipes with plastic in. At least, that is not the Government’s intention; if anyone were on the receiving end of that treatment, it would certainly be an overreach not allowed under this statutory instrument. With all those qualifications, I hope that the Committee will agree to the draft regulations.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That the Committee has considered the draft Environmental Protection (Wet Wipes Containing Plastic) (England) Regulations 2025.