Foot and Mouth Disease
Daniel Zeichner Excerpts(6 days, 10 hours 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
Dr Neil Hudson (Epping Forest) (Con)
(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will make a statement on the Government’s emergency contingency response to the recent confirmation of foot and mouth disease in Germany?
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Daniel Zeichner)
The whole House will be aware of the concern across rural communities about the potential threat of foot and mouth disease. It is a severe, highly contagious viral disease of livestock that can have a significant economic impact, and a truly devastating effect on farming and rural communities when outbreaks occur, as we know from history.
I assure the House that the UK is currently free of foot and mouth disease, and has been since 2007. But following confirmation on 10 January, foot and mouth disease in the German state of Brandenburg, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has taken rapid action to protect the UK, including suspending the commercial import of susceptible animals from Germany and restricting personal imports of animal products from across the European Union.
I assure the House that the Government will do whatever it takes to protect our nation’s farmers from the risk posed by foot and mouth. We have increased risk levels in the UK to medium. Last night, the chief veterinary officer and I spoke directly with the German Federal Minister and his officials. The Government have taken decisive and immediate action. The import of cattle, pigs and sheep from Germany has been stopped to protect farmers and their livelihoods. We will not hesitate to add additional countries to the list if the disease spreads. I can inform the House that this morning the chief veterinary officer has confirmed that while Germany’s surveillance continues to be ongoing, it has not as yet detected any further cases.
Foot and mouth disease guidance is available on gov.uk and livestock farmers are urged to be extra-vigilant and report any suspect disease to the Animal and Plant Health Agency immediately. The UK chief veterinary officer is also urging livestock keepers to remain vigilant to the clinical signs of FMD. I reiterate that there are no cases in the UK currently. I also reassure the House that FMD poses no risk to human or food safety but it is a highly contagious viral disease in cattle, sheep, pigs and other cloven-hoofed animals. Livestock keepers should therefore be absolutely rigorous about their biosecurity.
The Government are absolutely focused on responding to the animal disease threats we face, protecting animal health and welfare. Upholding high biosecurity standards is paramount for protecting and promoting food production and food safety, both animal and human, and supporting our economy and trade. That is why we have invested a further £200 million in the UK’s main research laboratory testing facilities at Weybridge to bolster protection against animal disease.
While we stand ready to protect our livestock from the threat of foot and mouth and other exotic diseases, we also offer our support to our European neighbours as they face this threat to their livestock, farming and rural communities. I can assure the House that the Government will be decisive and take the necessary action to protect our farmers from foot and mouth disease.
Dr Hudson
Thank you for granting this urgent question, Mr Speaker. I declare a strong personal and professional interest. As a veterinary surgeon I supervised some of the animal culls in the 2001 outbreak, witnessing sights I never want to see again.
The confirmation on 10 January of foot and mouth disease in Germany, with subsequent slaughter and movement restrictions, is sending shockwaves around Europe and the UK. We have requested this urgent question as no statement was provided to the House on Monday or Tuesday. The shadow DEFRA Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Louth and Horncastle (Victoria Atkins), is unable to be with us today as she is at the LAMMA show in Birmingham speaking to agricultural manufacturers and farmers.
In 2001, the foot and mouth outbreak resulted in more than 6 million animals being culled and cost £12.8 billion in today’s prices. It devastated the farming community, and farmers want reassurance that action is been taken to protect our borders, their livestock and their livelihoods.
The mental health impacts of foot and mouth cannot be overstated. Can the Minister reassure us that the announced movement restrictions are fully in place for animals and products coming to the UK from the affected area? Will the Government think about extending the ban to personal imports of meat and milk products unless accompanied by veterinary documentation? Can the Minister update us on the work tracing possible movements of products from Germany? What advice is there about movements of people and vehicles from the area in terms of fomite transmission of the virus? And, heaven forbid, if foot and mouth ever enters the United Kingdom, what is the situation regarding vaccine supply and potential deployment?
Finally, I pay tribute to the chief vets and the veterinary and animal officers and scientists and officials at the Animal and Plant Health Agency, who do so much to keep our country biosecure. This foot and mouth disease wake-up call is yet more evidence that the Government must now commit to fully fund the redevelopment of the APHA HQ in Weybridge. I urge the Government from the bottom of my heart to fully fund that redevelopment, to make sure that the burning pyres of slaughtered animals, as well as the economic and mental health devastation of foot and mouth disease, remain resolutely confined to the history books.
Daniel Zeichner
I fully appreciate the expertise and passion the hon. Gentleman brings to this subject; he knows of what he speaks. I hope I made it clear in my initial reply just how seriously the Government take these issues. I spoke to him earlier this morning ahead of a Delegated Legislation Committee to make it clear that we would work on a cross-party basis to tackle this, should it come to our shores.
I will try to address the hon. Member’s questions, particularly those around vaccination, because that is always raised and is always of concern.
We are absolutely ready in case that is a control that we need to implement. According to the general advice with regard to control measures, if an outbreak were to occur in the UK, vaccination is a control option that would be considered by DEFRA and devolved Administrations at the outset, in addition to culling and immediate movement controls. I can assure the shadow Minister that the UK vaccine bank holds vaccines for a range of foot and mouth disease serotypes. I can also assure him that there is good, close working with the devolved Administrations on this matter and that we are working in harmony.
On the movement of personally carried goods, I remind the shadow Minister that this Government strengthened those controls at the borders. I am confident that we are doing everything possible at the moment to ensure that we are following the right procedures, given the risk assessments that have been carried out. Our sincere hope is obviously that this does not extend beyond the Brandenburg area, but we are absolutely ready to deal with those issues.
On the investment at Weybridge, as I have said, we have committed an initial £200 million. This is a debate we have been having for some time, and I am afraid that we are working with the resources we have now. However, I am confident that we have a very good set of procedures in place to tackle any potential incursion.
Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)
I thank the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson) for his concern and passion on this subject. Like him, I know only too well the devastation that was caused in 2001. Of course, he previously had the privilege of representing a large part of what is now the Carlisle constituency.
Cumbria was the worst affected part of the country in 2001, with 30% of the culled cattle being from Cumbrian farms. Will the Minister elaborate on the steps that are being taken to ensure that our farmers and their livestock are protected ahead—God forbid—of any potential outbreak?
Daniel Zeichner
I thank my hon. Friend for her question and for the concern she has rightly shown. As I said at the outset, we are well aware of the concern that people feel. However, they should be reassured that we have very good tracing facilities these days; the technologies have improved. What is particularly important is that we are in close contact with our German colleagues, who are sharing advice regularly. Everything that can be done is being done, but I absolutely recognise people’s concerns.
Mr Speaker
Order. This matter is very important. My area had the first case of foot and mouth detected in that year, so I know all about it. However, we must stick to the times that have been allocated.
Daniel Zeichner
I am always happy to speak to Lord Curry, who brings huge expertise and knowledge.
I will just say to the hon. Gentleman that there was no delay—essentially, as soon as we were informed, we put the appropriate processes in place, and staff at border control points were issued instructions to hold goods at the border. Everything was done as quickly as possible.
I hear the hon. Gentleman’s point about our relationship with the German Government. I know the German Minister personally, and I spoke to him yesterday. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we are getting every co-operation needed from the German Government.
Lizzi Collinge (Morecambe and Lunesdale) (Lab)
In 2001, I lived in north Cumbria and I will never, ever forget the sight of burning livestock in my friends’ fields. Can the Minister assure me that my farmers in Morecambe and Lunesdale, who by and large are livestock farmers, will never have to face that terrible scene again and that we will do everything we possibly can to ensure that foot and mouth does not spread to our country?
Daniel Zeichner
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her comments and for her account of the effect the disease had on her constituents. The purpose of my response to the question today is to give reassurance to people that we have very, very high quality officials working very, very hard to make sure we do everything we can to prevent such an outbreak happening again.
Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)
As well as noting my own entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests, I should tell the House that my wife is a practising veterinary surgeon who is occasionally contracted to provide local veterinary official services to the APHA.
I, too, remember the events of 2001 and I remember, having just been elected, the debates we had in this House. We said that we must always learn the lessons and never forget, but in truth, frankly, we have. The extent to which we are exposed today is something for which responsibility is shared across the parties. The state of the APHA headquarters in Weybridge is a disgrace and it is now an urgent disgrace. Hopefully, this is a bullet that we will dodge, but if we do, we know there is also the risk of African swine fever, bluetongue and avian influenza all coming. Is this the point where, across the House, we can all agree on the importance of biosecurity and the importance of funding it?
Daniel Zeichner
I thank the Chair of the Select Committee for his point. I think we all know how important biosecurity is, and that is why the Government committed a further £200 million for that very important facility in Weybridge.
Mr Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)
Will the Minister confirm what mitigation funding has been made available for farms that may be affected? Will he commit to look urgently at the provision of an abattoir on the Isle of Wight, because we do not currently have one?
Daniel Zeichner
I thank my hon. Friend for his question—good try. At the moment, we are talking about an outbreak in Germany. Should there be—obviously, we are doing everything we can to prevent it—an outbreak in the UK, we will come back with further proposals, but at the moment we are working hard to make sure that that does not happen.
Simon Hoare (North Dorset) (Con)
Could the Minister confirm, given the seriousness of the issues, that when in doubt the precautionary principle will come to the fore, there will be urgency and the proper decisions will be taken? He mentioned working with the devolved Administrations. Given the shared land border on the island of Ireland and the trade there, can he confirm what conversations he has had or may be planning to have with the Government in Dublin?
Daniel Zeichner
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. We will, of course, take every precaution and apply the precautionary principle. We treat Northern Ireland in the same way as the other devolved Administrations. The Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry East (Mary Creagh) will be having conversations later today.
Alison Hume (Scarborough and Whitby) (Lab)
I welcome the urgent question, as the news is a worry to farmers in my constituency. Is the Minister able to share with the House more details about the funding available from his Department to help prevent new animal diseases?
Daniel Zeichner
I thank my hon. Friend for her point and her concern. We have an extensive set of facilities and agencies who are tasked with protecting our country on these issues. I have every confidence in the chief veterinary officer and her officials in the APHA, subject to the issues that have been raised around long-term funding. We have good protections in place and people should have confidence in them.
Dr Ben Spencer (Runnymede and Weybridge) (Con)
Yet again, we rely on the fantastic people at the Animal and Plant Health Agency, which is based in New Haw in my constituency, despite its slightly confusing name. Will the Minister join me in thanking the people who work there, and does he agree that it urgently needs investment to improve the facilities? I do not think he has visited the APHA. Will he join me on a tour as soon as we can arrange it to see for himself the state it is in and what improvements are urgently needed?
Daniel Zeichner
I am always grateful for invitations from hon. Members and feel that I am permanently on tour, but the hon. Gentleman is right that I have not yet had the opportunity to visit, although the Secretary of State has. Last week, when I was at a conference in York, very senior officials from the APHA gave me a very detailed briefing on the work they do. I share in the thanks to those people who play a huge role in keeping our country safe.
Louise Jones (North East Derbyshire) (Lab)
As a child, I distinctly remember the creeping fear on my family’s farms as foot and mouth moved ever closer. I realised that even as a child, and I feel sick just thinking that we could ever go back there. Many farmers in my constituency have repeatedly raised their concerns over infectious diseases entering the UK. Please can the Minister assure me, and them, that we are doing everything to take this very seriously, and that we have contingency plans in place?
Daniel Zeichner
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for reflecting on the awful experiences of 20 years ago. I assure her that we have excellent people, to whom I have just referred, who are working extremely hard to minimise the risk of any further outbreak. We are doing everything we can to prevent that from happening.
Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)
Does the Minister not agree that it is preposterous that Northern Ireland has been excluded from the UK ban on imports from Germany because of the outbreak of foot and mouth? Does he agree that that is the tip of the iceberg in respect of the impact the Windsor framework and the protocol continue to have on our agrifood industry in Northern Ireland? Since he thinks—and rightly so—that it is essential to protect GB farms from potentially devastating impacts, why does he believe that Northern Ireland farms are not as important?
Daniel Zeichner
Northern Ireland farms are just as important. In Northern Ireland, the controls will apply to meat and live animals moving from a 3 km protection zone and a 10 km surveillance zone surrounding the affected premises in Germany. Those products cannot be moved to Northern Ireland.
Sally Jameson (Doncaster Central) (Lab/Co-op)
Will the Minister outline what measures are being taken to ensure that no animals infected in the outbreak in Germany end up in this country?
Daniel Zeichner
This is an unusual outbreak, in a sense. It is a very small herd of 20 water buffalo. What is unknown to the German authorities at the moment is how they got infected in the first place. Extensive work is going on in Germany to try to understand that. The difference from 20 years ago is that we now have much better science to be able to trace where it may have come from. Extensive work is going on across Europe, because it is a threat to the entire continent. I can assure my hon. Friend that every avenue is being explored to try to make sure that we understand how this has happened and that it goes no further.
Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)
As a farmer’s daughter, I fully remember the sickening impact of the last foot and mouth outbreaks across Somerset and Dorset, particularly on farmers’ mental health. The culling restrictions resulted in 73% of farmers experiencing depression and anxiety following the last outbreak. Now, almost one half of the farming community are already experiencing anxiety. What plans do the Government have to support farmers who may be impacted by this disease or any other biosecurity risk?
Daniel Zeichner
I thank the hon. Lady for her question. I know she takes these issues very seriously and we have discussed them before. Let me be clear: this is an outbreak in Germany at the moment. We are doing everything we can to ensure it does not extend into our country. Of course people are concerned and worried. Should it develop further, which we are absolutely determined to make sure does not happen, then we will look at further measures to help and support people, but we are not at that stage.
Claire Hughes (Bangor Aberconwy) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for his responses. It is very reassuring that the seriousness of the situation is felt across the House and across the country. He talked about working with the devolved Administrations. Will he say more about how he will work with the Welsh Government in particular to address this issue?
Daniel Zeichner
I can assure my hon. Friend that we have an extremely close relationship with the Welsh Government. The Rural Affairs Minister, Huw Irranca-Davies, and I speak frequently—indeed, we spoke to each other only a few days ago, at the Oxford farming conference—and we are in regular contact to discuss issues such as these. In anything that we do, we will be working together on an “entire United Kingdom” basis.
John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)
With some of the most productive grassland in the UK, Dumfries and Galloway is not worried but terrified by this outbreak. I am reassured to know that we are doing what we can, but it is a very difficult problem to solve. Can the Minister reassure me that the Republic of Ireland will not be the unlocked back door through which this dread disease returns to this country?
Daniel Zeichner
I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s appreciation of the complexities that we face, but it is in everyone’s interests to ensure that we stop this, and we are all co-operating closely. The veterinary officials have a very good network, and they are working closely together. No one wants this to extend further.
James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)
As the son of a farmer, I remember only too well waking up in the early morning and going downstairs to listen to Radio 4 in silence with my family as we heard about more and more animals being culled during the crisis in the early 2000s. What steps are being taken to engage the National Farmers Union and other trade bodies to prepare for any outbreak here in the UK?
Daniel Zeichner
I thank my hon. Friend for his concern and his recollections. Yesterday we held a roundtable to discuss the threat posed by bluetongue, and we are in constant dialogue with all those who have direct interests and expertise. We will be working in lockstep.
Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)
In his initial answer, the Minister talked about protecting the UK and spoke about our nation’s farmers. He also advised farmers to consult gov.uk, which gives advice to Scottish, English and Welsh farmers but not to Northern Ireland farmers. May I ask him why he has abandoned them, given that the last outbreak, in 2001, cost the Northern Ireland economy £24.2 million? One small region in Germany cannot export to Northern Ireland. Does the Minister not agree that there should be a complete ban on the import of German products to Northern Ireland as well as the rest of the United Kingdom?
Daniel Zeichner
We stand with farmers throughout the United Kingdom. The circumstances are slightly different, for reasons that the hon. Gentleman will understand, which is why we have to provide appropriate advice, but we are working in tandem and lockstep with colleagues across Europe to beat this horrible disease.
Mr Luke Charters (York Outer) (Lab)
It is the critical work of the Animal and Plant Health Agency in Weybridge, which I visited recently, that will prevent foot and mouth from reaching our shores. The £200 million for the agency that the Government have announced is welcome, but will my hon. Friend commit himself to reviewing its funding, particularly in the event of multiple concurrent diseases?
Daniel Zeichner
We constantly keep under review the resources that are available to enable us to tackle all these issues. On the basis of a number of questions today, I shall be happy to visit Weybridge at the earliest opportunity.
Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)
Unfortunately, as the Minister will know, foot and mouth disease looms large in the memories of many Shropshire farmers. Talking of visits—this is a genuine point—I wonder whether the Minister, and indeed the Secretary of State, would consider visiting Harper Adams University in my constituency, which, as he will also know, is the top agricultural university in Europe. I mention that because it has veterinary experts with specific expertise in this disease and others.
As we heard from the shadow Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson), more than 6 million pigs, cattle and sheep were lost in 2001 and 2007. The Minister mentioned biodiversity. Can he update the House on illegal meat imports and checks at the border, and the implementation of the border target operating model?
Daniel Zeichner
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his invitation; I shall add him to my list. The border checks involve a complicated set of issues, but one of the Brexit benefits, if you like, is the existence of those checks, and I am satisfied that they are providing a level of security that should give people confidence. As I said in an earlier answer, we have strengthened the controls on personal imports. It is always a challenge to protect any area, but we are in a better position than colleagues in mainland Europe.
Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)
It is good to see cross-party support for increased investment in Weybridge, which has long been needed, but my right hon. Friend the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) mentioned biosecurity, and we know that a great deal of illegally imported meat is coming through our ports. That is a huge biosecurity risk, and an even greater risk if there is foot and mouth on the continent. As well as investing in Weybridge and improving those facilities, can we look at how we can resource the port authorities properly to catch all this illegally imported meat?
Daniel Zeichner
That is an important point. We will try to do all that we can to ensure that illegal imports are intercepted and stopped. I am delighted to observe the outbreak of cross-party consensus on the need for more investment, and I hope there will also be an outbreak of consensus on how to fund it.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
My constituency was one of the most significantly impacted by the 2001 outbreak. Virtually every hoofed animal in Dumfriesshire was slaughtered, and the smoke from the pyre hung over the Annan valley in particular for days. A large part of the market in livestock in my constituency comes from Longtown market, in the constituency of the hon. Member for Carlisle (Ms Minns), which was a source of the previous outbreak. Will the Minister ensure that we work closely with the Scottish Government, given that there is a significant amount of cross-border movement of animals that needs to be properly identified and regulated?
Daniel Zeichner
The right hon. Gentleman speaks with passion and paints a vivid picture of that dismal period, which, sadly, I remember well. I can give him an absolute assurance that—as he will know from his time in government—the veterinary officers work very closely together, particularly on an official level. This is an entirely shared endeavour, and we will do everything we can to ensure that that there is the close co-operation that is needed.
Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin) (PC)
I am a dairy farmer, and the devastating outbreak of foot and mouth more than 20 years ago was on my doorstep. We were lucky, as a family farm, but sadly others within my farming community in Wales were not. The outbreak was also a food security issue, as it was understood to have derived from food waste fed to pigs. What lessons have the UK Government learnt from that outbreak to enable them to secure our food chains better and keep our livestock and food supplies safe?
Daniel Zeichner
I recognise the hurt that the hon. Lady recollects from that dreadful time. A great deal of work was done in the light of those events, and lessons have been learnt; for instance, technology has changed and improved. I will not go into all those lessons, which are probably worthy of a longer debate, but it is important for us to act on them, because we do not want a repeat of what happened in 2001.
John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)
Like many other Members, I clearly remember the events of 2001, not least because all the cattle and sheep on our family farm—my father’s farm in Berwickshire—were slaughtered. The emotional trauma will stay with farming communities for many years to come. I am reassured that this Government are engaging with the Scottish Government, but is the Minister also speaking to NFU Scotland and to local authorities, to ensure that they are able to support farming communities in the best way possible?
Daniel Zeichner
The hon. Gentleman has spoken with passion and conviction about that dreadful time, and I fully respect that. We were notified of the outbreak on Friday; today is Wednesday. Of course we are ready to move to the next stage should it be necessary, but at this point the key priority must be ensuring that we keep the disease out of our country, and that is where the attention is currently focused. In the dismal eventuality that we have to move to measures within our country, we will of course work very closely with everyone who needs to be involved.
Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)
I am sure that my farmers, like me, will be hugely grateful to know that the ban will operate with cross-party support; our farmers are more important than party politics. Back in 2001, I was the Liberal Democrat candidate for the Totnes constituency. The amount of communication with farmers before the outbreak was the only thing that made it easier for them to understand what was going on, because one could not go on a farm once it had started. May I encourage the Minister to communicate with farmers as much as he can during this very difficult time?
Daniel Zeichner
I am grateful to the hon. Lady for her recollections of that time. I reiterate that we are trying to ensure that foot and mouth disease does not arrive on our shores. Should that happen, we will move to another phase. We are not at that point yet, and it is important to reassure people that we have excellent measures and excellent people in place. They are working very hard to ensure that we do not get to that point.
Harriet Cross (Gordon and Buchan) (Con)
I welcome the Government’s efforts in bringing us up to speed today, but also in imposing the import ban. I recognise that the ban applies to products from Germany, but does it capture products that may originate there but for which the point of import is outside Germany? What steps are the Government taking to proactively increase spot testing or screening across the country, so that we can get ahead of any possible outbreak?
Daniel Zeichner
We are applying all the rules that we can to ensure that we exclude German products at the moment, but there is quite a complex set of supply chains within the European Union. The key priority is live animals. There is nothing fortuitous about bluetongue, but there have been restrictions on movements for some time, so we are probably better protected than we might have been. We cannot say for sure that nothing will move across the continent and come into the country, which is why it is very important that people are vigilant. Should foot and mouth disease cross the channel, speed will be of the essence to ensure that we shut it down. However, from talking to the chief vet and her officials and my conversations with German colleagues, I am confident that everything that can be done is being done. I hope that reassures the hon. Lady.
Caroline Voaden (South Devon) (LD)
I am sure that nobody in Devon will forget the horror of 2001, when half the farms in the county were affected by foot and mouth. Does the situation in Germany provide an impetus for the Minister to move forward with securing a veterinary deal with the European Union?
Daniel Zeichner
We do not need any extra impetus; the Government have committed to get a better deal. What I can say to the hon. Lady is that the relationship with our German colleagues is excellent at the moment, and they are giving us the full co-operation that we need.
Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)
The outbreak of foot and mouth disease in Germany is a timely reminder of the livestock diseases that threaten the UK every day. The Minister has said that he will take every precaution available to him, so will he use this opportunity to permanently ban all personal imports of meat, and to ensure that both the public health authorities and Border Force are resourced to tackle illegal meat importation?
Daniel Zeichner
The hon. Gentleman and I spoke frequently when he was in his previous role and I was in opposition, and he knows of what he speaks. We have strong measures in place. We strengthened them a few months ago, and I am confident that they are at the right level at the moment. Of course, there is always a case for further investment, and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will support any measures that we bring forward.
Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)
Does the Minister accept that the reason why he cannot provide national protection for Northern Ireland is that this House has surrendered the right to make such regulations? They cannot even be made in Stormont, because only a foreign Parliament is now entitled to make them. Therefore, we in Northern Ireland do not have the same protections for our farmers and their livelihoods that are afforded elsewhere. The ban is restricted to products coming from the affected areas in Germany. Given that context, will we see the absurdity that we have seen in response to bluetongue, whereby cattle and livestock from mainland Europe can transit through GB to Northern Ireland and, indeed, anywhere in the island of Ireland, despite the ban? Is that same loophole going to apply in this case?
Daniel Zeichner
I am grateful to the hon. and learned Gentleman for continuing our dialogue on this issue. I do not recognise that loophole, and I can assure him that Northern Ireland will be fully protected, because that is what we are determined to do.
David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)
Farmers in my constituency are very concerned by this news, as Powys was one of the hardest-hit regions in the 2001 outbreak and the trauma remains for the 2,000 livestock farmers affected. Can the Minister provide us with some further details on the conversations that he has had with the Welsh Government, and will he confirm that the Welsh Government will commit to working with local authorities?
Daniel Zeichner
I thank the hon. Gentleman not just for his question, but for the concern he expressed about his constituents, who suffered so grievously. The detailed conversations on these issues are conducted between the veterinary officers, who have a very close network. However, any political decisions that need to be made will be made by Ministers, and I have a very close relationship with Minister Irranca-Davies. If further action is needed, we will work together to stop any further incursions.
Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)
In Shropshire, dairy and other livestock farmers have been having a torrid time recently, and they will have read this news with a sense of dread. I am also an officer of the all-party parliamentary group on food security, and we recently heard some eye-watering evidence from the border authorities at Dover about illegal meat imports and the threat that they pose to UK biosecurity. Can the Minister explain to the House what assessment he has made of the problems with that process, and what he intends to do to ensure that diseases such as foot and mouth do not arrive in the UK?
Daniel Zeichner
I thank the hon. Lady for expressing her concern. I reiterate the point I made earlier about the border controls that we have in place. I am afraid this has been a long-running issue, but we have much stronger border controls in place than we would have done in previous times. We are working hard with the port health authorities to make sure that we crack down on illegal imports of meat.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I declare an interest as a member of the Ulster Farmers Union. Indeed, I live on a farm on the Ards peninsula, where dairy farming and sheepmen surround me, and the impact on them would be great. For that reason, I want to ask the Minister a question. I can well remember the piles of dead animals and the traumatised farmers, who were all concerned, as they always are, about their animals—that was over 20 years ago, in 2001. The lessons were hard and well learned. Three other Northern Ireland MPs have asked similar questions, and I am the fourth. We need to clarify for farmers, my neighbours in Northern Ireland and all those who farm that there will be zero tolerance of products from Germany. Will the Minister confirm that a full, UK-wide report, including on Northern Ireland, will come to this House before any ban is lifted?
Daniel Zeichner
The hon. Gentleman speaks with passion on these issues. I can absolutely assure him that the measures in place to protect farmers in Northern Ireland are strong and will be good enough to make sure that we can protect people properly. Clearly, there is a slightly different set of arrangements in Northern Ireland, as he will be well aware. We have to respect that, but we are getting absolute and total co-operation from our German colleagues. There will be no meat coming from affected parts of Germany to Northern Ireland.
Draft Free-Range Egg Marketing Standards (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2024
Daniel Zeichner Excerpts(6 days, 10 hours ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Daniel Zeichner)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Free-Range Egg Marketing Standards (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2024.
It is Wednesday morning, so we must be here again, Mrs Harris. It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair. The draft regulations were laid before the House on 21 November 2024, and will amend the existing legislation governing egg marketing standards to enable free-range eggs to be marketed as such for the duration of mandatory housing measures that restrict laying hens’ access to open-air runs.
Currently, when free-range hens are placed under mandatory housing measures due to disease outbreaks such as avian influenza, the existing egg marketing regulations allow their eggs to continue to be labelled as free-range for only 16 weeks. This is known as the 16-week derogation period. If the mandatory housing measure lasts for longer than 16 weeks, eggs from those hens have to be labelled and sold as barn eggs.
The requirement for egg producers and packers to re-label free-range eggs as barn eggs once the 16-week derogation period is exceeded is difficult to implement in modern automated pack houses, adding significant logistical and packing cost to the industry, so the statutory instrument will remove the 16-week derogation period so that free-range egg producers and packers can label and market the eggs as free-range for the duration of a mandatory housing measure, however long that might last.
Under mandatory housing measures, egg producers still have the higher operating costs of maintaining their free-range egg system, with the additional cost of having to ensure that hens are also temporarily housed indoors. The normal laying period of a productive free-range laying hen in the UK is around 90 weeks. The SI will remove the derogation that will affect only a small part of a laying hen’s productive life, with all the other free-range criteria, except access to open-air runs, still needing to be met.
In 2024, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Scottish Government held a joint consultation on the proposed changes, and 70% of respondents supported the removal of the 16-week derogation. The removal of the derogation has already come into force in Scotland. Following their own consultation exercise, the Welsh Government have announced that they will also introduce legislation to remove the derogation.
In 2023, the European Union amended its egg marketing standards regulations to remove the 16-week derogation period. Through the Windsor framework, this also applies to free-range eggs produced in Northern Ireland. Without the SI, the introduction of any mandatory housing measures that last longer than 16 weeks—for example, during an avian influenza outbreak—would be detrimental for English free-range egg producers and result in an increase in the importing of free-range eggs from the EU and Northern Ireland. This could have a significant negative long-term impact on the English free-range egg industry. The SI will restore alignment with the EU and Northern Ireland, and will also ensure that free-range egg producers and packers do not incur additional costs for adhering to Government-imposed housing requirements.
Unfortunately, outbreaks of avian influenza usually occur during the winter months, as was the case in 2021-22 and 2022-23, resulting in the introduction of housing measures for poultry that, in both those cases, lasted longer than the 16-week labelling derogation period. They lasted for an additional six weeks in 2021-22 and seven weeks in 2022-23. It is, then, imperative that the SI is in place for the rest of the winter period and beyond.
We continue to uphold the high standards expected by UK consumers and businesses. The change in the statutory instrument will safeguard our important British egg industry. I commend the draft regulations to the Committee.
Daniel Zeichner
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his support. We are very much carrying forward the work of the previous Government.
The hon. Gentleman asked about the additional measures to preserve biosecurity and raised the important issues in respect of bluetongue and of foot and mouth disease in Germany. I assure him that all the measures he would expect to be in place are in place. I spoke to the German Minister about foot and mouth last night, and we will update the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues if there are any further developments. We obviously hope that outbreak can be contained. On bluetongue, we held a roundtable yesterday on our approach for the future. I assure the hon. Gentleman that we are very aware of these threats. Anyone who holds the relevant offices is aware that they are of huge concern not just to the farming community but to the wider community.
The vaccination against avian influenza of poultry and captive birds, excluding those in licensed zoos, is not currently permitted, as I think the hon. Gentleman knows. Although authorised vaccines are available, they are unlikely to provide full protection for the strains of highly pathogenic avian influenza that are currently circulating in the UK and Europe. At present, while vaccination can help to reduce mortality, it is likely that some vaccinated birds would still be capable of transmitting avian influenza if they became infected. Vaccination is not, then, part of our current approach.
The hon. Gentleman asked about the situation in respect of Wales. As I said in my opening statement, the Welsh Government are pursuing similar lines on this matter.
With that, I hope we can move to a conclusion. I should add that I understand that there will be concerns that somehow consumers will not get quite what they what they seem to be getting. We are we mindful of that, so to reduce the risk of consumers feeling misled, we will encourage retailers to place signage near where eggs are displayed, to inform consumers of the imposition of mandatory housing measures and their impact on the marketing of free-range eggs—notably that, except for access to open-air runs, the rest of the free-range egg criteria continue to be met.
This statutory instrument is an important measure to support the British egg industry by making sure it has a level playing field with trading partners such as the European Union that have already adopted similar provisions. On that basis, I commend the draft regulations to the Committee.
Draft Official Controls (Amendment) Regulations 2024
Daniel Zeichner Excerpts(1 week, 6 days ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Daniel Zeichner)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Official Controls (Amendment) Regulations 2024.
It is always a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mrs Harris. I wish you and all Members and officials present a happy new year. The draft regulations were laid before the House on 19 November. As I am sure Members will have noticed, there is a lot of detail to them; the Committee will be relieved to hear that I do not intend to go through the statutory instrument line by line, but I shall try to cover the most significant elements.
Building on the work introduced by the previous Government, we are implementing a global risk-based import model for sanitary and phytosanitary goods known as the border target operating model. That aims to deliver a streamlined approach to imports that protects public plant and animal health, and minimises friction at the border. The draft instrument uses powers conferred by the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023, known as the REUL Act.
The changes implemented by the draft instrument fall into three main categories. The first category of measures provides a long-term legislative framework for sanitary and phytosanitary controls already introduced, but beyond the reliance on temporary powers, such as the transitional staging period—for example, by amending the definition of “official certificate” to include digital documents, facilitating fully electronic and digital import documentation, and by expanding the definition of “documentary check” to include remote examination or examination by automated means.
We are therefore making it possible to remove the requirement to carry out documentary checks on all imports, allowing the frequency of checks to be based on risk and providing the power to allow for inland border control posts for reasons other than geographical constraints, in addition to giving Government the power to determine whether to designate allowing greater control to align border control facilities and resources with biosecurity, trade and food security priorities.
The second category of measures allows for conditions governing the import of animals and animal products to be updated administratively in response to risk, to uphold our obligations to protect biosecurity and public health while facilitating trade. Competent authorities, devolved Governments, the Food Standards Authority and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs together will be able to amend and manage biosecurity controls in response to changing risks. Additionally, animals and animal products can be categorised based on risk, with the ability to exempt low-risk categories from unnecessary checks, aligning our animal control measures with those for plants and plant products.
The third category of measures allows policies that reduce burdens to be delivered in future, and allows extension of policies to non-EU goods. Those future policies would require further legislative change to implement, but we propose to have the powers in place now to provide for flexibility in the future and to ensure that the border can be adapted over time in response to risk.
Two policies, however, have impact from the date when the draft instrument comes into force. First, diagnostic testing of plants and plant products can be undertaken at a border control post, instead of such tests needing to take place at official laboratories. That is a positive development, which will significantly reduce the release time of certain perishable goods. The second policy is the use of enhanced enforcement powers to require and pursue full cost recovery of the common user charge for goods entering through Government-run border control posts. That is vital to ensure full cost recovery of the operating costs and to ensure that businesses pay charges for their import activity. The changes will have no impact on the Windsor framework and do not bring in additional checks on the west coast of Great Britain. The Scottish and Welsh Governments have consented to the amendments.
Upon laying the draft instrument, we received a submission from Friends of the Earth, which expressed concerns about checks being made away from border control points, the frequency of checks being based on risk, how misdeclaration would be handled and performance monitoring. It also queried whether we were acting within our powers under the REUL Act. We responded by explaining that the instrument allows provision to be made only for documentary, identity and physical controls to be undertaken at places other than border control posts or control points, and that we have robust, evidence-based risk-modelling measures to categorise SPS into categories based on the inherent risk that the product poses to animals, food, biosecurity and public health.
For animals and animal products, the default documentary rate remains at 100%, and while low-risk goods do not require certification or routine checks under the new approach, we are able to detain such goods for checks, based on intelligence. By next year we will have review cycles of risk categorisation in place and we have existing surveillance programmes to ensure that emerging risks are detected and dealt with in a timely manner. Finally, the REUL Act is being used, under its powers, to replace provisions under assimilated law inherited from the European Union to create new provisions that achieve the same or similar objectives.
The Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee asked about the use of administrative, rather than legislative, powers in other areas of import controls. We explained that while powers exist to control imports through statutory instruments, administrative powers are required to ensure that changes to import conditions can be made rapidly in response to emerging biosecurity and food safety risks in trading partners approved to export to Great Britain. That is a really important point.
The amendments reflect and build on changes already made since the United Kingdom left the European Union, to refine our listing procedures for imports of animals and animal products in ways that provide the flexibility and responsiveness needed to protect biosecurity, but also to facilitate trade. The Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee noted DEFRA’s explanation and was reassured about the use of administrative, rather than legislative, powers in that specific policy area.
The Government are committed to removing trade barriers, including through seeking to negotiate an SPS agreement with the EU, but that will take time. The draft instrument is a necessary step to implement the policy that the industry has been preparing for, and to ensure that biosecurity is maintained between now and any new agreement’s taking effect. The draft regulations will ensure that controls already in place endure, implement a responsive, risk-based approach to the border, and protect the United Kingdom from emerging pests and disease, while supporting businesses with processes that are as simple and effective as possible.
Daniel Zeichner
I am grateful for the contributions made by Members and for the support of the Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley, whose positive response I welcome. This is important work, and a sensible approach is being taken.
I also hear the points made by the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim. I reassure him that essentially what we propose in the draft regulations is absolutely consistent with all the commitments already set out in the Windsor framework, including continuing to guarantee that qualifying Northern Ireland goods will have unfettered access to the Great British market.
Jim Allister
How can there be unfettered access from Northern Ireland to Great Britain, as is assured in the words of the Windsor framework, if, at the same time, regulation 14 provides for checks on goods coming into Great Britain, which must include goods coming from Northern Ireland? How can there be unfettered access if goods are subject to checks?
Daniel Zeichner
I am grateful for the points made by the hon. and learned Member. He will appreciate that we are trying to resolve a complicated set of circumstances and make them work. These measures are a genuine attempt to make the system work for everybody’s benefit. I appreciate the complex issues that he raises, but I do not believe that these measures make any substantial difference to them.
The draft regulations remove the reliance on temporary measures, implementing a responsive, risk-based imports approach to protect the United Kingdom from emerging pests and diseases while supporting businesses with processes that are as simple and effective as possible. I commend them to the Committee.
Question put and agreed to.
Oral Answers to Questions
Daniel Zeichner Excerpts(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Daniel Zeichner)
Mr Speaker, I wish you and all your staff a happy Christmas, and thank all those who work in our food system for ensuring that we are fed every day and that, particularly at this time of the year, so many of our constituents can enjoy a traditional, wonderful British celebration.
The autumn Budget on 30 October confirmed the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs budgets for 2024-25 and 2025-26, and funding allocations for individual programmes will be determined in the upcoming months through the Department’s business planning exercise. We will update the House on the rural England prosperity fund in due course.
Rebecca Smith
I thank the Minister for that answer. Farmers in my constituency of South West Devon have highlighted the role that the rural England prosperity fund could play in the economic growth of our community. Given the publication of the English devolution White Paper this week, what conversations has the Minister had with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government about how funding, such as the rural England prosperity fund, can ensure that devolution is a success for the countryside?
Daniel Zeichner
We are in constant dialogue with our MHCLG colleagues. I was delighted that areas with a significant rural population will on average receive about a 5% increase in their core spending power. That is a real-terms increase. I hope we can continue to work well to address the rural productivity gap of some 18%, which is a real challenge for all of us.
Sir John Whittingdale (Maldon) (Con)
Blake Stephenson (Mid Bedfordshire) (Con)
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Daniel Zeichner)
We all know that food security is national security, and most of us also recognise that the impacts of climate change and nature loss pose a significant risk to domestic production, so it is very important that we use our land carefully. Consequently, the Government will be introducing a land use framework to ensure that we protect our most productive agricultural land.
Blake Stephenson
High-grade agricultural land in Mid Bedfordshire has been farmed for generations, and it is critical for our food security and our freedom, but it is under extreme pressure. We have talked this morning about climate change and flooding, and also about the Government’s family farm tax. What has not been mentioned so much is urban sprawl, which is a major threat to high-grade agricultural land. We live in an uncertain world and we need our country to feed itself. Considering the threat, will the Minister guarantee that high-grade agricultural land will be protected by this Government?
Daniel Zeichner
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his points and refer him to my earlier comments: we see more and more pressure, and there are so many things we need to do on our land to house and feed people, so it is important that we have a proper structure in place. It is widely acknowledged that the current planning system does not necessarily do that. The previous Government promised a land use framework; we will actually deliver it.
Danny Beales (Uxbridge and South Ruislip) (Lab)
Mr Speaker
Order. We need to get our act together. This is the shortest set of topical questions and I will not be able to get many Members in. We have to remember what topicals are always about. I hope you have got the gist of the question, Minister.
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Daniel Zeichner)
The point that farmers need to get a better return from their business is well made, and that is exactly what this Government will be addressing.
Sarah Edwards (Tamworth) (Lab)
Merry Christmas to you, Mr Speaker, and to your team and to colleagues across the House. My constituents have long felt the impacts of flooding, and many residents have been isolated in rural areas after a storm. I have recently produced a flooding report. Will the Minister meet me to discuss it, so that I can support the work of the Department?
Daniel Zeichner
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. It was extraordinary, was it not, that the last Government managed not to spend £300 million of the farm budget. We are determined to ensure that we do better. I wish him and his farmers a very merry Christmas.
Bobby Dean (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)
Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)
Merry Christmas, Mr Speaker, and happy Hanukkah to those who are observing.
What action are this Government taking to promote the purchasing of British-grown and seasonal produce through their public procurement framework?
Daniel Zeichner
We are absolutely determined to ensure that we see more British produce bought across our public sector. We will come to the House with our plans in due course.
Mr Speaker
I call the Chair of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee.
John Glen (Salisbury) (Con)
Last year I visited the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust’s Allerton project in Loddington. May I commend the contribution that it can make to defining sustainable intensification of agricultural food production? Perhaps it would be a suitable place for a DEFRA ministerial away day early in the new year, to help with the use strategy.
Daniel Zeichner
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his suggestion. I am a great admirer of the Allerton project and have been meaning to visit it for a long time. My officials are working on a visit, and I am really looking forward to engaging with those people, because they do great work.
Tim Farron (Westmorland and Lonsdale) (LD)
On a point of order, Mr Speaker.
Fishing Opportunities: 2025
Daniel Zeichner Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Daniel Zeichner)
The UK has reached agreement with the EU and Norway on catch opportunities for 2025 through the UK-EU-Norway trilateral and UK-EU bilateral negotiations. Across these negotiations, the UK secured agreement on over 80 total allowable catches (TACs), providing access to £660 million of UK fishing opportunities. Alongside the coastal state negotiations on stocks including mackerel, this brings the total UK fishing opportunities secured for 2025 to 720,000 tonnes, worth an estimated £890 million based on provisional landing prices.
Further, since leaving the EU, the UK has a larger share of many of the total allowable catches set at these negotiations. It is estimated that the UK might have received around 600,000 tonnes of fishing opportunities if we were still an EU member state, in comparison to the 720,000 tonnes actually received. That is an estimated increase of 120,000 tonnes of fishing opportunities for the UK fleet in 2025.
In these negotiations the UK Government worked closely with the Scottish Government, Welsh Government and Northern Ireland Executive to secure outcomes that deliver on all our domestic and international obligations, improving the sustainable management of our fish stocks for the long term in support of the whole of the UK fishing industry.
UK-EU agreement
The UK has secured fishing opportunities of 150,000 tonnes, worth around £360 million based on historic landing prices, through agreement on around 70 TACs as well as agreement on arrangements for non-quota stocks. This is an increase of around 10,000 tonnes compared to 2024 largely driven by increasing scientific advice on sustainable catch levels for Northern Shelf anglerfish.
An initial estimate suggests that slightly fewer UK-EU TACs are set to align with scientific advice from the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) compared to last year, due to a challenging advice picture for a number of stocks. The Government will publish early in 2025 a full assessment of the number of TACs set consistent with ICES advice across all annual negotiations.
The UK and EU also made commitments to work together through the Specialised Committee on Fisheries to address the management challenges of certain fisheries. This includes reviewing the effectiveness of measures to protect spurdog and continuing to progress work on technical measures to support the recovery of depleted stocks in the Celtic and Irish seas. 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 pollack in ICES area 6 and 7 (which will be benchmarked by ICES in early 2025) and sole 7hjk.
For non-quota stocks (NQS), the UK and the EU agreed a roll-over of access arrangements for 2025 to ensure continued access to fish NQS in EU waters. UK fleet landings for these stocks are historically worth around £30 million a year. We also agreed to roll over existing joint management measures and increase within ICES advice some catch limits for sea bass, and 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 2025 for six jointly managed North sea stocks, giving the UK fishing fleet access to opportunities worth over £300 million, based on historic landing prices.
The parties agreed TACs for six stocks. Four of the six stocks were set in line with, or below, independent scientific advice from ICES. For North Sea herring, parties aimed to set TACs in line with advice. However, the current management structure, to which the UK has long objected, means we cannot consider outcomes to be in line with headline advice. Finally, for Northern Shelf cod, the parties acknowledged the current advice structure means the sub-stock located in the southern North sea and eastern channel in quarter one brings down the advised catch limits for sub-stocks further north and therefore brings significant challenges for the whitefish sector in the North sea. The parties therefore agreed an approach to set the TAC using part of the headline advice in combination with an alternative catch scenario provided by ICES. This approach is forecasted to lead to biomass increases across all three of the stock’s sub-stocks and secures fishing opportunities that recognise the economic importance of cod in the mixed fishery.
The parties renewed their commitment to deliver long-term management plans (LTMP) for their shared stocks and agreed a request to ICES to advise on an LTMP for saithe. The parties also noted their commitment to start discussions on a new management model for herring in 2025, a significant priority for the UK. That model should also incorporate the newly-developed LTMP. The parties also agreed to start discussions in 2025 about moving the management of Northern Shelf anglerfish (monkfish) to a joint basis, and they further committed to continue to progress their joint work on the monitoring, control and surveillance of their shared stocks.
Multilateral coastal states negotiations
The UK has agreed TACs at the level advised by ICES on the three widely-distributed stocks we share with other coastal states in the north-east Atlantic: mackerel, blue whiting and Norwegian spring-spawning/Atlanto-Scandian herring. The opportunities will be worth an estimated £240 million to the UK fleet in 2025, based on historical prices. The UK will also have additional mackerel quota in 2025 as part of the multi-year deals with Norway and Faroes agreed last year.
Regional fisheries management organisations
The UK has continued to support the sustainable management of widely distributed and highly migratory stocks via regional fisheries management organisations (RFMOs) of which it is a member. RFMO negotiations this year have resulted in the agreement of a wide range of stock-related measures, conservation measures and measures to combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing (IUU) activities. These negotiations have also delivered around 2,000 tonnes of fishing opportunities for the UK, as well as a new sharing arrangement for the reopened Canadian Northern cod fishery.
UK-Norway and UK-Faroe Islands bilateral negotiations
Bilateral negotiations between the UK and Norway and the UK and the Faroe Islands on access arrangements and exchanges of fishing opportunities are ongoing.
[HCWS296]
UK Food Security
Daniel Zeichner Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Daniel Zeichner)
Later today we intend to lay the next edition of the UK food security report in Parliament, as required by the Agriculture Act 2020. The UKFSR sets out an analysis of statistics relating to food security, serving as an evidence base to inform future Government policy and public understanding. This 2024 report will reflect improvements in the evidence base following consultation with a range of experts and stakeholders from across the food system.
Food security is national security. Food security is also complex and exposed to many different variables globally and domestically such as the weather, markets and trade. It is therefore vital that the Government monitor food security trends, and even more so in a world facing increasing challenges from geopolitics and climate change.
The Government have confirmed to businesses and industry groups from across the food sector that work is under way to develop an ambitious new food strategy. The Government will be considering the UKFSR’s findings to inform this work.
[HCWS297]
Farming Schemes
Daniel Zeichner Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Daniel Zeichner)
I have today confirmed this Government have injected more than £343 million into the rural economy in the first week of December, benefiting more than 31,000 farmers.
This includes payments worth £223 million to countryside stewardship revenue customers and £74 million to environmental stewardship customers, administered by the Rural Payments Agency (RPA).
This Government are providing over £5 billion to the farming budget—the largest ever increase in investment in sustainable food production in our country’s history. To further support farmers, we have today announced new details on how farmers will benefit from improved and optimised farming schemes.
A new and improved countryside stewardship higher tier (CSHT) scheme will open in 2025, providing new quarterly payments designed to improve farmers’ cashflow and a rolling application window so customers can apply throughout the year.
It also includes new actions to improve flood resilience and species abundance and important funding to secure enhanced environmental benefits and deliver for nature recovery, including sensitive areas such as sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs).
Our commitment to farmers is steadfast. That is why I am working hard to get money into farmers’ bank accounts as well as announcing today how farmers can benefit from the new CSHT scheme, with more flexible actions, improved payments to help cashflow and a rolling application window.
It is part of our £5 billion farming budget over two years—the largest ever directed at sustainable food production in our country’s history.
As we set out our plan for change, we are focused on supporting our farmers, supporting rural economic growth and boosting Britain’s food security.
Our farmers are the heartbeat of the nation’s rural economy, and I remain focused on supporting them by getting payments into bank accounts as quickly as possible.
I am very pleased that this December we have been able to inject more funding than ever from environmental schemes into the rural economy.
This comes at the same time as providing more certainty over the details in the CSHT offer to enable farmers to see for themselves how it can benefit them.
CSHT will open through an initial controlled roll-out to ensure everyone gets the necessary support. Initially, applications will be by invitation—on a rolling monthly basis.
We are also publishing an additional 14 sustainable farming incentive (SFI) endorsed actions, further improving the offer. These will be available from summer 2025 to enable farmers and land managers to contribute further benefits to grassland, heritage and coastal sites, among others.
Further payments made in December include £39 million under SFI, as part of the quarterly payments system designed to improve farmers’ cashflow, and a further £7.4 million has been paid to customers who have completed capital grants works.
As part of this Government’s new deal for farmers, we will set up a new British Infrastructure Council to steer private investment in rural areas including broadband roll-out in our rural communities.
We are also developing a 25-year farming road map, focusing on how to make the sector more profitable in the decades to come.
Farmers and land managers are stewards of the environment, and we will continue to invest in them to make their businesses, food production and our country more sustainable and resilient through environmental land management.
[HCWS298]
Avian Influenza Outbreak Response
Daniel Zeichner Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Daniel Zeichner)
My noble Friend, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Baroness Hayman of Ullock), has made the following written statement today.
Avian influenza (“bird flu”) is once again threatening both wild and kept birds across Great Britain with two strains of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) (H5N1 and H5N5) now circulating in our wild bird population.
DEFRA recognises the unprecedented outbreaks of avian influenza in recent years have been an incredibly difficult time for bird keepers who are on the frontline of this terrible disease and in particular that the poultry and egg sectors have been under serious pressure. Practising good biosecurity at all times remains vital to protect flocks across the country from avian influenza and all bird keepers are being urged to remain vigilant and take action to protect their birds.
In response to the cases of HPAI this winter DEFRA and the Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) have stood up their well-established outbreak structures to control and eradicate disease, restore normal trade, and assist local communities’ recovery. DEFRA and APHA’s approach to avian influenza considers the latest scientific and ornithological evidence and veterinary advice, and is set out in the notifiable avian disease control strategy for Great Britain supported by the mitigation strategy for avian influenza in wild birds in England and Wales. Current policy reflects our experience of responding to past outbreaks of exotic animal disease and is in line with international standards of best practice for disease control.
Government action on animal disease control is led by APHA, who carry out routine surveillance of disease risks in the UK and globally, to help the Government anticipate future threats to animal health. To support this work, in Great Britain members of the public are encouraged to report findings of dead wild birds using the online reporting service or by calling the DEFRA helpline: 03459 335577.
The latest cases of HPAI have followed recent detections through APHA wild bird surveillance programme of HPAI H5N1 and HPAI H5N5 in wild birds in the area surrounding the infected premises. Reporting dead wild birds helps DEFRA and APHA understand the risk of avian influenza and other diseases to different species groups of wild birds, the risk posed to poultry and other captive birds, and the risk of overspill into mammals. The risk of incursion of HPAI H5 in wild birds in Great Britain is currently assessed as high—event occurs very often. The risk of poultry exposure has also increased and is now assessed as low—event is rare but does occur—where good biosecurity is consistently applied at all times, but medium—event occurs regularly—where there is suboptimal or poor biosecurity.
Upholding high biosecurity standards is paramount to food production and food safety, for human and animal health, protecting biodiversity and to support our economy and trade. The UK has robust disease control measures in place to prevent disease outbreaks spreading, and a strong track record of controlling and eliminating outbreaks. Animal disease outbreaks cause animals to suffer, damage businesses and cost the UK taxpayer significant sums of money. Together the Government and animal keepers must do everything we can to keep disease out and protect animal health and welfare.
Supporting bird keepers, the public and conservation bodies to prepare and respond to the threat of avian influenza continues to be one of DEFRA’s priorities. Government are clear that all farmers, producers and animal keepers should implement strong biosecurity measures and report suspected disease immediately. DEFRA and APHA will continue to work closely with industry to ensure good flock management and husbandry practices are implemented on all farms regardless of size or scale. While also working closely with the UK Health Security Agency and the Health and Safety Executive with regard to the protection of human health from this zoonotic pathogen.
While there have been no cases of HPAI confirmed in Wales or Scotland during this outbreak, following the case in poultry in England, in line with WOAH rules, Great Britain is no longer free from HPAI. There have been no cases of avian influenza in Northern Ireland, and Northern Ireland retains its self-declared zonal freedom from HPAI. However, there are some restrictions on exports of affected commodities to third countries from the UK. To facilitate trade, it remains DEFRA’s objective to achieve WOAH HPAI freedom across the UK at the earliest opportunity.
In addition, while vaccination of poultry and other captive birds against avian influenza, excluding those in licensed zoos in England, is not currently permitted and will not be a viable option for the 2024-25 season, DEFRA continues to invest in avian influenza research and the UK is committed to exploring opportunities for preventive vaccination for poultry and other captive birds.
With regard to vaccination to protect public health, while avian influenza is primarily a disease of birds, the UK Government have agreed a contract for more than five million doses of human H5 influenza vaccine to boost the country’s resilience in the event of a possible H5 influenza pandemic. This purchase has been made as part of long-established plans to boost the UK’s access to vaccines for a wider range of pathogens of pandemic potential. However, it is only if an avian influenza virus were to start spreading among humans, of which there is no evidence at this stage, that the human H5 influenza vaccine would be used. This procurement will strengthen the UK’s preparedness for a H5 influenza-originated pandemic by ensuring that vaccines are immediately available, while a pandemic specific vaccine is made ready. The UK Government already have an advance purchase agreement for pandemic vaccines if or when they are needed, that would be tailored to combat the specific pandemic influenza strain identified at the time.
Avian influenza risk levels are regularly reviewed and our response adapted accordingly. We publish our risk assessments online and share the evolving picture directly with our expert stakeholder groups. It is too early to predict the outlook for future seasons and risk levels may increase further this winter, associated with the migratory pattern of waterfowl and environmental conditions becoming more favourable for virus survival. Practising good biosecurity at all times protects the health and welfare of kept birds and for commercial keepers will help protect their business from HPAI and other diseases. The need for avian influenza prevention zones (AIPZ) mandating enhanced biosecurity will be kept under review.
All bird keepers must register their poultry and other captive birds, even if only kept as pets—with the exception of certain psittacines and passerines. Registered keepers will receive regular updates and guidance to help protect their birds from avian influenza. Having a good register also saves taxpayer resources when infection is found, because we already know where birds are kept. In addition, anyone can subscribe to APHA’s free animal disease alerts service for the latest information on updated risk levels, guidance and new cases in Great Britain regardless of whether they keep birds. Further information on the latest situation and what can be done prevent avian influenza and stop it spreading and how to spot and report suspicion in kept or wild birds or mammals can be found in DEFRA’s guidance at www.gov.uk/birdflu
[HCWS289]
Biosecurity
Daniel Zeichner Excerpts(1 month, 2 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 (Daniel Zeichner)
It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Dame Siobhain. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk (Ben Goldsborough), not just for securing this important debate—and for winning South Norfolk, which is very precious to me—but for his continued commitment to championing our agriculture sector. East Anglia is a crucial part of the UK’s livestock and, in particular, arable sectors and provides quality produce that underpins our nation’s food security and is in demand across Europe and beyond.
We have had a thoughtful and sensible discussion this morning. Let me start by reiterating the Government’s total commitment to all those who work in the agriculture and horticulture sectors, and all those beyond. They are on the frontline, not only producing our food but protecting our national biosecurity. I was struck by the passionate interventions by all speakers this morning. I listened closely to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) talking about the impact that bovine TB has on people. I was struck by the account that my hon. Friend the Member for South West Norfolk (Terry Jermy) gave of walking through Thetford and seeing the dead birds after the avian influenza outbreak. Of course, I could not help but be struck by the way my hon. Friend the Member for York Outer (Mr Charters) summed up biosecurity as being like a Yorkshire wall—solid, well-built and designed to keep out things we do not want here. I paraphrase, but he gave a very good account of what we are trying to achieve.
I also listened closely to the hon. Member for Epping Forest (Dr Hudson). I do not think anyone could have failed to be moved by his powerful personal account of the foot and mouth outbreak, and I echo his warm words for those in our Government Departments, such as the chief vet, Christine Middlemiss, for the work they do. I think there is actually a lot of agreement in the Chamber this morning about the importance of the issue and our support for those working on it.
Biosecurity is vital. It underpins safe food, protects animal and plant health, and supports a prosperous economy and trade. It is a joint endeavour: Government, animal keepers, horticulturists and the public must do everything we can collectively to keep disease out. As we have heard from Members this morning, the costs are significant. Plant diseases alone are estimated to cost the global economy over $220 billion annually, and up to 40% of global crop production is lost to pests each year. Those are huge numbers, and are sadly unlikely to reduce as climate change drives the geographic expansion and the host range of pests and diseases. Healthy plants and animals are not just an important tool in the fight against climate change and biodiversity loss, but contribute directly to many of the UN’s sustainable development goals—in particular, ending hunger, achieving food security, improving nutrition, and promoting sustainable agriculture.
Pests and diseases know no borders. New and emerging threats are often the result of trade and globalisation, and are then further exacerbated by climate change. Safe trade is essential to food security in a thriving economy. We want healthy trade to support food security and the economy, but at the same time we need to protect ourselves from risks. That is why DEFRA is a key delivery Department of the UK biological security strategy, which takes a UK-wide approach that strengthens deterrence and resilience, projects global leadership and exploits opportunities for UK prosperity. In parallel, the environmental improvement plan sets out how we will improve our environment at home and abroad, including through enhancing biosecurity. I can assure the House that we have in place robust measures to maintain and improve our ability to understand, detect, prevent, respond and recover from outbreaks that affect animals and that affect plants.
One of our first defences is to understand the threats and monitor the risks, which we do through established expert groups, the veterinary risk group, the human animal infections and risk surveillance group, and the plant health risk group. Our programmes of research support the expert groups. For example, for plant health, DEFRA has invested more than £8 million into ash dieback research, including the world’s largest screening trials for resistant trees, the Living Ash Project, while for animal health, DEFRA and the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council are funding £6.5 million of research projects to better forecast, understand, mitigate and avoid vector-borne diseases transmitted by mosquitoes and ticks.
Our second line of defence is detection through strong surveillance systems. Our network of official laboratories, veterinary investigators, border inspectors and bee, fish, and plant inspectors all contribute to the early warning detections for signs of disease or antimicrobial resistance.
Thirdly, prevention is key. As the saying goes, prevention is better than cure, so this Government will take action to prevent pests and diseases from arriving in the first place. Preventing an outbreak of African swine fever in the UK, for example, remains one of our key biosecurity priorities. Although, as has rightly been said, we have not had an outbreak of ASF in the UK, the overall risk of an incursion is currently assessed to be medium. We continue to prepare for a possible outbreak.
To help prevent ASF incursions in the UK, robust safeguards are in place, prohibiting live pigs, wild boar, or pork products from affected European Union areas from entering Great Britain. Enforcement is carried out by Border Force and Port Health Authority officers at seaports and airports. Under the enhanced safeguard measures introduced in the autumn—I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for York Outer for referencing them—travellers are no longer allowed to bring pork products into Great Britain unless they are produced and packaged to the EU’s commercial standards and weigh no more than 2 kg. DEFRA and its agencies continuously review the spread of ASF and other diseases, and are ready to introduce further biosecurity restrictions, should they be deemed necessary, in response to new scientific and risk data.
Our fourth line of defence is our response capability. Our disease contingency plans and underpinning legislation are regularly reviewed to ensure that they remain fit for purpose, and that we have the necessary capacity and capability to respond. We exercise our plans regularly and work closely with stakeholders on their own preparedness.
Dr Hudson
The Minister is turning to the contingency plans, so let me take us back to African swine fever, as he has not really touched on my question in that regard. Will there be the capability to have random spot checks within the port of Dover itself? We know that the inland centre will be up and running, but it is so important that unscrupulous people coming in know that they could be targeted within the port, so that these illegal meat imports can be snapped out.
Daniel Zeichner
I absolutely share the hon. Gentleman’s concerns. We are working closely with the Port Health Authority to make sure that everything that needs to be done can be done.
As I was saying, we exercise our plans regularly and work closely with stakeholders on their preparedness. The ongoing response to bluetongue and highly pathogenic avian influenza are cases in point. Officials from across the UK are working closely with sector representatives on the implementation of control measures.
Early identification was crucial in enabling a rapid response to the bluetongue outbreak. DEFRA provided free pre-movement testing to animal keepers in counties at the highest risk of incursion from infected biting midges originating from the continent. A restriction zone covering the counties affected by bluetongue has been established. That measure has been carefully considered to protect the free area from disease spread while allowing the free movement of animals in the zone, keeping business disruption to a minimum. On the question asked by the hon. Member for Epping Forest, permitted use of the BTV-3 vaccine is available, and I am told that just over 14,500 animals have been vaccinated so far.
To respond to my hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk, I am aware of reports that some meat processors may have taken unfair advantage of the bluetongue outbreak to reduce prices. That is dreadful; I do not condone that behaviour at all, not least since bluetongue does not affect the meat. My understanding is that it is not a widespread issue, and that prices paid to farmers for beef and sheep continue to be stable and at five-year highs. That is a good example of why this Government consider fairness in the supply chain to be critical for farmers across all sectors. I also reassure hon. Members that the bluetongue virus is not a public health threat and does not affect people or food safety. While no sick animal should enter the food chain, meat and milk from infected animals is safe to eat and drink.
A number of hon. Members raised the issue of virus yellows. A lot of work is going on with British Sugar, particularly at the John Innes Centre, which is just outside Norwich; I understand that there is a project involving the biotech company Tropic. I have stood in fields and looked at sugar beet suffering to varying degrees from yellows. Our proposals on genetic engineering may provide a solution in future, but in the shorter term some new innovations are being looked at. Those should give us better ways of tackling this disease, which is serious, as my hon. Friend the Member for South Norfolk said—particularly for our region in the east of England.
On plant health in general, joint working with the horticultural sector takes place with the Royal Horticultural Society and the Horticultural Trades Association through the plant health accord, the tree health policy group and plant health advisory forum, and the Plant Health Alliance, which leads the plant healthy certification scheme.
As I have said, biosecurity has to be a shared endeavour. The Prime Minister and the President of the European Commission have agreed to strengthen the relationship between the European Union and the United Kingdom, and we are working with the European Union to identify areas where we can strengthen co-operation for mutual benefit. We have been clear that a veterinary and sanitary and phytosanitary agreement could boost trade and deliver significant benefits to the European Union and the United Kingdom, but delivering new agreements will take time. It is important that we get the right agreement, meet our international obligations, and protect the UK’s biosecurity and public health throughout the process.
Furthermore, maintaining our high standards requires constant investment. The hon. Member for Epping Forest made a powerful case about the Animal and Plant Health Agency at Weybridge. This Government are not in the business of making unfunded commitments, but we have announced £208 million for the next phase of the redevelopment of the Animal and Plant Health Agency’s Weybridge laboratory. I echo the powerful praise from my hon. Friend the Member for York Outer for Jenny Stewart and her staff—we should thank all those, right across the piece, who work on our behalf.
We believe that the £208 million investment will help to safeguard and enhance the UK’s capability to respond to the threat from animal and plant diseases, help to protect public health, and underpin the UK’s trade capability with animal export products, which are worth £16 billion per year to the UK economy. The APHA is also looking to grow its external income streams over the coming years to support the delivery of key services, recognising the efficiencies that we all need to deliver in these challenging times.
I have talked about bluetongue, so let me turn to the threat to our poultry sector.
Dr Hudson
I have a lot of respect for the Minister and I like him a lot as a person, too. I will ask a question about the APHA before he moves on from it. I acknowledge that the Government have put forward £208 million. The previous Government committed £1.2 billion. The APHA still needs £1.4 billion. I know that he cannot make Treasury commitments on behalf of the Chancellor, but please can he give assurances that DEFRA will keep making representations to the Treasury that the refurbishment we have discussed needs to be undertaken in full? The £208 million is a start to help with the transformation, but more money needs to be committed for national security. Please will he and his DEFRA colleagues make that case to Treasury? If the money cannot come from the DEFRA budget, it can come from the Contingencies Fund.
Daniel Zeichner
I hear and respect the point that the hon. Gentleman is making, but I gently point out to him that the country is in an economic mess and we can only spend the money that we have. That point will be reiterated in debate after debate. Every part of our rural economy, indeed every part of our country, needs a sound economic basis upon which to proceed. The previous Government did not take that view, but we will.
In response to the detection of two new cases of highly pathogenic avian influenza in poultry in England this autumn, DEFRA and the APHA have stood up the well-established outbreak structures to control and eradicate disease, restore normal trade and assist the recovery of local communities.
We are in a better place than in previous years, but there is absolutely no complacency. Hon. Members regardless of party have referred to the situation that we are in. It is too early to predict the outlook for future seasons, and risk levels may increase further this winter; obviously, we hope that they do not. However, this situation is associated with the migratory pattern of wild waterfowl and the environmental conditions becoming more favourable, sadly, for virus survival. As I have said, I was very taken by the points made by my hon. Friend the Member for South West Norfolk about the impact on the wild bird population as well as on our kept birds.
So, we continue to monitor closely the avian influenza outbreak and any effects it might have on bird keepers, poultry producers and processors, in addition to those wild bird populations that have been mentioned, particularly those of conservation concern. We urge all bird keepers, whether they have pet birds, commercial flocks or just a few birds in a backyard flock, to maintain stringent biosecurity in order to protect the health and welfare of their birds.
Slaughtering of turkeys and other birds for the Christmas market has already begun and we do not currently anticipate avian influenza to have any impact on supplies. Further information on the latest situation and guidance on how keepers can protect their birds from avian influenza can be found online from Government sources.
Ben Goldsborough
I gently ask a question about the insurance issue that I raised in my speech. Insurance is a huge part of the sectoral fragilities that we see in relation to this issue. Would the Department be able to look into insurance companies that refuse to give avian influenza insurance payments?
Daniel Zeichner
My hon. Friend makes an important point. Insurance is a complicated issue, but my officials are in discussions about what we might be able to do. Let me conclude—
Jim Shannon
First, I thank the Minister for his responses to us. I know that he will do this, but just to have it on the record in Hansard I ask him this question: will he have some discussions with the Minister back home, Andrew Muir, in relation to bovine TB? We have had some of the biggest outbreaks in all of the United Kingdom. Is it possible to work better and more closely together to try to address this issue? I understand that Minister Muir would love to hear from him and get his thoughts.
Daniel Zeichner
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. I very much enjoyed meeting Minister Muir a few months before the election, when I was the shadow Minister. Interestingly, it was bovine TB that was being discussed in the Assembly that very day. I absolutely take the hon. Gentleman’s point. I am keen to visit. When we are not having weekly debates on other issues, maybe there will be the opportunity to go to talk to friends in the devolved Administrations.
The Government do not underestimate the biosecurity threats we face or the challenges that the agricultural and horticultural sectors are facing. We will continue to test our capabilities regularly to ensure resilience and respond to those threats through exercises and horizon scanning. We will learn lessons when outbreaks do occur and make the necessary improvements. We will continue to work closely with sector groups on preparedness and response, and we remain ever grateful for their insight and commitment.
I thank all hon. Members for a well-informed and thoughtful discussion. I genuinely believe there are many opportunities ahead for the agricultural and horticultural sectors. We are absolutely committed to making the most of them, and to ensuring that the industry can best contribute to our country’s food security and economic growth.
Family Farming in Devon
Daniel Zeichner Excerpts(1 month, 2 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
Sir Geoffrey Cox (Torridge and Tavistock) (Con)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered family farming in Devon.
It is a great pleasure to have been able to secure a debate under your presidency, Sir Mark. I am extremely grateful to the Minister for attending.
With exquisite timing, the Conservative party has managed to list an Opposition day motion in the main Chamber tomorrow on exactly the same subject as this debate. Although I welcome that, I also welcome the opportunity of having the Minister much more up close and personal than is normally possible in the main Chamber for what I hope will be a relatively civilised debate—we do not always manage that in the main Chamber, perhaps, although one would hope we would. We are here to discuss not the general questions affecting the entire country in connection with farming, but questions most specific to Devon, although they share common themes and subjects.
I forget whether I have yet been able to induce the Minister to visit Devon, but we hope that he will do so in the new year because we are likely to have a Dartmoor forum, which he and I have already spoken about, in connection with an important development for the management of Dartmoor—the Fursdon review and its implementation. I will speak of those in due course.
To set the scene, in 2022 the economic output of farming in Devon was valued at £1.369 billion. More than 20,000 people are employed in farming in Devon on more than 1.2 million acres of farmland. By far the largest proportion of those acres are held and worked by modest-sized family farms of between two and 400 acres. No farming families in Devon continue in farming to grow rich; Devon’s farms are principally grazing livestock and dairy farms. They do it because it is a way of life, and because of the pride that they take in producing some of the finest food and produce on the planet.
Those families also do it because many, even most, of them have farmed in that place and within those communities for generations. The names of their forebears, engraved on the tombstones of their churches and chapels, bear witness to the continuity of which they are the stewards and custodians. It is that value, which is precious to the entire rural fabric of Devonshire, that I will speak of most acutely and strongly to the Minister.
There is a preciousness about farms, many of which have herds that may have been looked after and developed over dozens of years, sometimes even a century. There is all that cultivation and nurture and all those traditions that those farming families represent. Often a farm will support not simply one family, but several; I know of many surrounding my home. I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests—although I do not farm, I have farmland in Devon, and, depending on the vagaries of the sustainable farming incentive, I may well be a beneficiary of those schemes in a modest way. I tell that to the House and the Minister in candour before I start substantively.
I am familiar with my neighbours, my friends—those who farm near me, around me and throughout the whole of Torridge and Tavistock, which I have the honour to represent. As I have said, those farms sometimes sustain not just one family but several: there may be two or three brothers, with their families. Children on those farms may be hoping in due course to have the opportunity of farming themselves.
These people do not farm to grow rich; they farm for the reasons that I have given. But they also farm because they love that way of life—they have grown used to it, and know that they are following in the footsteps of their forebears. They farm because they are proud of the produce and the animals that they rear.
That is why there is a special value in farming families and family farms in Devon. True it is that the produce is the most important thing, of which they are most proud, but they also contribute to the fabric. The Minister would love to come to the rural shows—the Clovelly show, the Okehampton show, the Holsworthy show and all the shows that take place throughout the summer months in Devon. They are extraordinary events at which people—not just the farmers, but the ancillary trades that depend on them—get together. In a convivial setting they discuss their industry and trade and create the fabric of rural life, which is so precious.
Farm incomes have been falling. That is not a secret—the Minister will be well aware of the fact. From time to time, fortunately, farmgate prices have remained relatively buoyant, but average farm business income for the year 2023-24, to the end of February 2024, was lower for all farm types except specialist pig farms and specialist poultry farms. Almost all the farms in Devon, bar those relatively rare exceptions, saw falling average business income.
On dairy farms, following the two better years, when farmgate prices were relatively buoyant, average farm business income was 68% lower, with a fall in the farmgate price of milk being the primary driver. On lowland grazing livestock farms—beef, sheep—average farm business income fell by nearly a quarter, to £17,300. For grazing livestock farms in less favoured areas, higher fixed costs were only partially offset by an increase in output of £23,500, which was 12% lower.
From those falling incomes must be deducted the living of those who work the land. Those incomes do not take into account the unpaid labour of those who own or tenant those farms. Families who live on them—sometimes several families—must from that £17,300 or £23,500 take their own living. We can see that most people would not regard the figures we are speaking about, falling as they have been in the last year or more, as easy to live on, particularly for more than one person, for multiple families.
These farming families, of course, have to live with not only the hardness of their way of life but the unpredictability of the weather. They also, sadly, live with a different kind of unpredictability and a different kind of weather: the political weather. I would not be exaggerating if I said that these days those farmers in my constituency, and I suspect it is not much different in the rest of the county, probably regard the political weather as even more random and unpredictable than the actual weather itself.
I mean no party political point, because I accept entirely that the weather under successive Governments has always been relatively unpredictable, but recently the weather has achieved a combination that could be described, without too much poetic hyperbole, as a perfect storm. We have had the Budget’s accelerated cuts to the basic farm payment, the delinked payments. It is true that the progressive reduction to the basic payment was introduced in 2021. It is perfectly true that, across all farm types, the average net payment received in the reference year 2023-24 was approximately £18,300—but that was 21% lower than the year 2022-23. Nevertheless, that average of £18,300 still accounted on average for 40% of farm business income.
In the meantime, the environmental land management scheme, which includes the sustainable farming incentive, is not replacing the income lost to farms. Considerable progress was made this year to improve those schemes under the last Government, but, while across all farm types net income from agri-environment activities increased by an average of 14% to £10,600 on average, which is welcome, that is by no means sufficient to replace the 40% of farm business income that the basic farm payment still comprised in the year 2023-24.
As a result of this Budget, family farms will now experience a further 76% cut this year in the delinked or basic payment, with a cap of £7,200. For many families, that will represent a dramatic and unexpected reduction, for which farm businesses have been able to plan, and which will require readjustment and inevitable retrenchment of investment and employment. The payments will, of course —as they were always intended to—reduce progressively over the next three years, but farmers were entitled to believe that they would be reduced proportionately. Instead, the Chancellor of the Exchequer has reduced them by 76% against the reference year, in a manner wholly unexpected to the industry.
Cumulatively, I will describe the additional problems that that has meant. There has been an inability to plan and an inability to adjust one’s cash flow. Halfway through potential investments on their farm, farmers find that the income they expected to have is not the income they will have. That is unhelpful. At the same time, the countryside stewardship higher tier scheme has been postponed, it is said possibly until mid-2025—I would invite the Minister to give us his view on when that scheme will be available.
The new, expanded sustainable farming incentive for 2024 does not appear to be readily available to all farmers, particularly to upland farmers, who have had so far very little access to that scheme. The countryside stewardship higher tier and the SFI 24, with the activities that are now coming onstream—or that will do, because I understand that some of the endorsed activities are still not ready—offered some prospect of mitigating the dramatic losses that the Budget has imposed, but the postponement has been a serious blow. Farmers are marooned in legacy schemes that are being extended in mirror agreements and cannot conceivably make up or mitigate the loss of direct payments that they are suffering because of the unexpected reductions.
The Ministry has also suddenly halted capital grants. The sudden closure of the capital grant applications has been a huge shock. Farmers are being asked to adopt measures to improve the environment, but have been left without access to the very grant schemes that would enable them to do so and help with their cash flow and their productivity. With applications timed specifically to fit in with the farming year and their enterprise activities, and no confirmation that all applications already in the system will progress, further uncertainty is caused to these businesses. Will the Minister comment on that?
Sir Geoffrey Cox
I saw him, in his characteristically civil and polite way, gently shake his head. Nothing would more alight the hopes of those I represent than if that gentle shake of the head meant something—meant that we were wrong to say that the capital grants had been ceased and meant that all those writing to me and colleagues, asking what to do now, have been living in an unnecessary nightmare.
I implore the Minister, if that gentle shake of the head meant anything, to let us hear it now. Let us hear him boldly strike out and say, “The capital grants will be resumed. They will not be postponed or delayed to 2025. Some relief is available to those who desperately need it.” Because they—the farming families of whom I speak—will also be affected by the increases in employer national insurance contributions and the minimum wage, and by the various measures, some quite small, that the Budget took in connection with those who pursue family farming.
In the meantime, like a slow and steady drumbeat gathering force, behind the ever more implausible rhetoric of support, they see and hear the concrete commitments of this Government. They witness the Government in action, not in words. They see how the Prime Minister at COP29 committed himself to a climate change target—a perfectly reasonable thing, some may argue, but the Climate Change Committee has told him that in committing to that target he will need to reduce the consumption of meat and dairy products by 20% over the coming five years.
These are the signs of the political weather, and so are the small measures—the small signs that, beyond the talk, indicate the revealed preferences and priorities of a Government. It is not about what the Prime Minister says when he stands at the podium and speaks to the National Farmers Union; we have already learned that we cannot trust that. What we realise, and what those listening today have begun to realise, is that it is in the small as well as the large measures that the Government are revealing their visceral and real preferences and priorities.
The small things include the reclassification of double-cab pick-up trucks. That might even have been missed in the Budget. Squirrelled away in the small print was a lancet aimed straight at hundreds of farming families in Devon, many of whom have a double-cab pick-up truck. Now, that is no longer deductible: it is not to be treated as a business expense simply because it has a back seat, when for years it has been so treated by the Revenue. The small measures reveal the real preferences and priorities of a Government. It is not the words, the rhetoric or the talk; it is what they do by which they are judged.
Of course, all those measures are outweighed by far by the subject that tomorrow’s debate will no doubt cover: agricultural and business property relief. The Government’s figures on the policy have now been widely discredited. The £1 million cap is not only on agricultural property relief but on business property relief. Both reliefs are used when a farm is passed to the next generation. As agricultural land prices have increased, a 200-acre farm, let alone a 400-acre farm, will almost certainly have a capital value, on the land alone, of more than £2 million. That same land often sustains multiple families—the brothers, the sisters and the cousins, all of whom farm that land—and from that exiguous amount of £17,300, or £23,500 in an upland area, they all have to take their living, provide for their children, pay for their energy and so on.
These farms are not wealthy; they are, as is so often said, asset-rich but income-poor. The Government say that the relief is doubled for a couple. However, bear in mind that a farm will have not just the land but other business assets, equipment and livestock, all of which require the business property relief to be deployed. And the business property relief, combined with the agricultural property relief, is now capped at £1 million.
As I said, the Government say the relief is doubled for a couple. But what about the 46% of farms that are owned by a single owner? If, for example, someone’s spouse has already died, they cannot inherit the allowance from their deceased husband or wife. The 46% of single owners of farms will receive no double relief—only the £1 million.
I say to the Minister that what is particularly wrong about this situation is—
The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Daniel Zeichner)
It is always a pleasure to serve when you are in the Chair, Sir Mark. I thank the right hon. and learned Member for Torridge and Tavistock (Sir Geoffrey Cox) for bringing this debate in his characteristically forceful way. He seduces; he charms; he flatters. I particularly enjoyed his account of the centuries it has taken to produce the wonderful farms we see in Devon—centuries, of course, that preceded the current agricultural property relief regulations. I also enjoyed his account of the weather that the previous Government created, which left the farming sector in such a parlous state for the new Government to inherit. But he also encouraged me to visit Devon, and I can tell him that, actually, within my first 10 days of being appointed as Minister I had made my way to Devon, as I had done in opposition on a number of occasions, and thoroughly enjoyed it.
However, I also frequently heard from local people that they were concerned about others coming to buy up land over the top of local people. I suspect that we can share our concerns on some of these issues. The right hon. and learned Gentleman referenced the excellent debate that he secured in this Chamber last year on the future of Dartmoor, which I will come on to.
Many important points have been raised, and I have listened carefully to all the thoughtful contributions. I was particularly struck by the comments of the hon. Member for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith). I will go away and look carefully at her points about the moorland stocking rates, which I know my officials are looking at closely, and how they affect Greenwell farm. I always listen closely to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), and the hon. Member for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord) also made important points. I was struck by the points made by the hon. Member for Winchester (Dr Chambers), particularly around border controls. I remind him that one of the first things we did was to strengthen those controls, so I very much agree with him about threats at the borders.
We absolutely recognise that the farming sector is vital. Family farms are crucial: they produce our food, steward the environment and look after nature. We are all indebted to farmers across this country for doing that, and we all recognise the stresses and strains, the mental health challenges, which the hon. Member for Winchester mentioned, and the pressures from the weather and from disease in the last few years. That is why this Government are investing £5 billion into farming over the next two years—the largest amount ever directed towards sustainable food production, rural economic growth and the recovery of nature in our country’s history. That should send a powerful message to farmers about the value we place on all that they do. Within that, we have committed £1.8 billion for environmental land management schemes, delivering improvements to food security and biodiversity, tackling carbon emissions and improving water quality, air quality and flood resilience.
I will address the point about basic payments made at the beginning by the right hon. and learned Member for Torridge and Tavistock. He is right: we are accelerating the end of the era of payouts to landowners simply for owning land, and the fastest reductions in subsidies will be for those who have historically received the largest payments. For example, it is true that the 4% who received more than £100,000 in subsidies in 2020 will receive no more than £8,000 in 2025, whereas the majority of farmers who receive less than £10,000 to start with will see a gradual reduction in their delinked payments, but they will all have access to ongoing funding through SFI and other schemes. That is the key point. We are speeding up that vital transition, which I fully recognise the previous Government set about initially, to get to a better place in terms of the environment.
The issue of capital grants is interesting, because I must tell the Opposition that there is no magic money tree. The reason why the capital grants have stopped is that they are oversubscribed. We have seen an unprecedented demand this autumn. The Rural Payments Agency received more applications for capital grants from May to November 2024 than over the whole of the 2023-24 financial year. They are also worth more—as of November ’24, the standalone capital grant applications were up by 45% compared with the whole of the last financial year. This is a basic problem that we inherited: there is no management of public funds. That is the core problem that the whole of Government faces with our inheritance from the Conservatives, and we will deal with those points.
I turn to the Dartmoor issues, which the right hon. and learned Member for Torridge and Tavistock rightly raised. On 29 October, we appointed Phil Stocker to chair the new Dartmoor Land Use Management Group, which was one of the central recommendations of the Fursdon review. We are moving forward with David Fursdon’s recommendations to create a long-term plan for land use that preserves the cultural heritage of the area, recovers nature and boosts food production. The group will provide a space for stakeholders to discuss important issues and work to strike the right balance between food security and preserving the diversity and abundance of nature in the area. Mr Stocker will be responsible for steering the group to meet its aims and objectives, and one of his first tasks will be to identify and appoint members who bring the necessary knowledge, expertise and engagement to the group. That process is under way, and we expect the first meeting to take place shortly. I absolutely hear the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s invitation, and at an appropriate point I will, I hope, visit and constructively support the work being done.
I also understand that the right hon. and learned Gentleman met officials from Natural England in October for an update on progress implementing the Fursdon review. We have been in discussions since I took up the role, and we wish the whole process well.
I will turn to the agricultural property relief issue—a well-rehearsed debate that will continue in the main Chamber tomorrow. I will repeat the points that I have made before. We are confident that the changes are proportionate and that smaller farms will be protected. Those above the threshold will have 10 years to pay the tax, with zero interest incurred. No one is doubting that it was a difficult decision, but the truth is that the economic situation that the Government inherited has required us to make tough choices. I reassure Members that based on the figures we have, which are the only ones we can go on—actual claims on estates—we reiterate our point: we feel that the vast majority of people will be not be affected.
Robbie Moore
On that point, will the Minister confirm whether, when the Government brought in the £1 million cap, they took into account the size of farming units in any analysis on its impact on future IHT claimants?
Daniel Zeichner
That will be debated further. On our side, the debate will be led by Treasury Ministers who are in a better position to answer those kinds of questions. However, the complexity and the different range of set-ups and structures that family businesses have makes it difficult to make that assessment. The hon. Gentleman will know that when it comes to legislation, there will be a full assessment and we can look into those details then. I stand by the figures that the Treasury has given us. We expect that the changes will affect only around 500 claims for agricultural property relief in 2026-27, so we believe it is a fair and balanced approach.
Caroline Voaden
I would like to ask the Minister whether the Treasury consulted DEFRA on the tax change before deciding to go ahead with it in the Budget.
Daniel Zeichner
The hon. Lady will know that we are one Government and we stand together. Going forward, we are picking up the mess that we inherited, and that is the problem we face. On each of these issues in turn, we have to answer the basic question: who will fix the economic mess? The answer is this Government.
Robbie Moore
Only because I will not have the opportunity to raise this point at the Dispatch Box tomorrow if a Treasury Minister is responding. Will the Minister correct me if I am wrong? When the Government introduced the £1 million cap, they did not look at the size of family farms that will be impacted. Surely they do not understand the value of an estate on death if they have not looked at the size of it, therefore how can they understand correctly the number of claimants who will be impacted?
Daniel Zeichner
We can, because we simply look at the number of claims that have been made in the last few years. That is how we arrive at that conclusion.
Sir Geoffrey Cox
The figures that the Treasury published simply deal with the use of agricultural property relief. What they do not show is how many farms had already used their business property relief before needing to rely on agricultural property relief. They do not take into account the fact that it is not just APR, but BPR, being capped.
Daniel Zeichner
I refer the right hon. and learned Gentleman to the letter that the Chancellor sent to the Chair of the Treasury Committee, which goes into the issue in some detail. It says:
“Currently, of the population of affected estates that claim both APR and BPR, almost a quarter of claims include a claim for”
shares on the alternative investment market. That begins to show the complexity and that the situation is not always as it seems.
I will move on to the double-cab pick-up tax. As I suspect the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows, that was based on a legal judgment by the courts. We respect that judgment, as I am sure he would wish us to. We are also saying, generously, that it will not affect the capital allowances treatment of anyone who already owns a double-cab pick-up. Anyone already leasing a double-cab pick-up from their employer as a benefit in kind will have until April 2029, or their lease expires, before these changes affect them.
I am conscious of the time, so I will just touch on bovine tuberculosis—a hugely important issue that of course has caused huge cost and huge suffering for many farmers. As the right hon. and learned Gentleman acknowledged, the Government have started work on a new bovine TB eradication strategy. The key part of that is pushing much more swiftly on developing a cattle vaccine, which I genuinely think will be the ultimate answer to this very difficult problem, and it very much builds on the evidence and conclusions of Sir Charles Godfray’s 2018 independent review. Alongside that, we will do the first badger population survey in more than a decade, develop a new national wildlife surveillance programme and establish a new badger vaccinator field force. I genuinely think that we can work together on eliminating the scourge of bovine TB.
I conclude by thanking all hon. Members for what has been an informative debate. It is always good to talk about what is happening in Devon. Let me reassure the House that I am absolutely committed, as are the Government, to a strong future for family farms and food producers across the country. I am sure we will be continuing the debate.
