Thursday 14 May 2020

The Agriculture Bill



I have had a lot of constituents write to me about the Agriculture Bill which was debated in Parliament on 13th May.  

Agriculture is extremely important to the Truro and Falmouth constituency and I will always stand up for the interests and needs of our farmers in Westminster.  

Farming and food are key elements of our economy and environment. Our farmers generate over £112 billion a year, employ over 4 million people and provide a secure food system within our shores, feeding the nation and delivering a wide range of environmental and rural community benefits, many  of which are enjoyed far beyond the farm gates.  

The Government has committed the same level of cash funds for farmers until the end of this Parliament which will give our farmers the financial security and stability that they need after Brexit.

Now we have left the EU, we must make the most of this great new opportunity to create a new domestic agricultural policy that will stand the test of time. Leaving the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) gives us a chance to move towards an exciting future for farming and I believe that the Bill will make that future a reality.  

The CAP has impeded productivity , stifled innovation in the farming sector and failed to protect the environment. This Bill will reward the hard work of farmers with public money for the ‘public goods’ they produce including enhancing air and water quality, improved access to the countryside, measures to reduce flooding, improving animal welfare and tackling climate change.  

British food is the best in the world, and I share the ambition with many farmers in Truro and Falmouth of growing more, selling more and exporting more. With the focus on supporting productivity, the Agriculture Bill will help the farming sector realise that ambition. I believe that the new system of ‘public money for public goods’ will make it easier for smaller farmers to compete their showcase products on a global setting.  


Regarding New Clauses 1 and 2: 

It is extremely important that people have the confidence in the food that they eat, and I welcomed the Government’s commitment that any future trade agreements must uphold the UK’s high levels of food safety, animal welfare standard and environmental protection.  

The secretary of State for International Trade Liz Truss has said regarding a UK-US trade deal: 

‘Our team of negotiators will drive a hard bargain for all British industries and people. We are committed to our red lines – the NHS, the price it pays for drugs and its services are not for sale. There will be no compromise on high environmental protection, animal welfare and food standards. It is in the interests of both the UK and US to reach an agreement’ 

She has made clear that she is prepared to walk away from any trade deal that does not work for the UK.  

At this extremely important time in our country’s history it is really important that we do not hinder our fantastic new opportunity to trade with the rest of the world and we cannot begin to impose domestic production standard on food being imported. We don’t do this at present and it could subsequently lead to increased consumer prices at a time when people are already concerned about the impact of coronavirus on the cost of living.  

Therefore, whilst I really applaud the intent of the amendment, I believe that it ultimately would increase consumer prices.  

Many farmers in my constituency are concerned that opening up the markets to imports from the US in particular will disadvantage them but I strongly believe that the UK agriculture sector will greatly benefit from a UK-US trade deal.  

There are clear opportunities for agriculture. This is because food exporters to the US often face high tariffs. For example, the average tariff on British cheese is 17% which means US consumers must pay more, so our quality produce is priced out of the market. With lower tariffs this will benefit lamb, beef and dairy farmers and producers across the UK. This will help level up the UK with our local producers in Truro and Falmouth have access to new markets and opportunities to trade in growing markets.  

Rather than focusing on closing the UK market to imports, we need to be using Brexit as an opportunity to open up a new export market to high quality produce from our farms. This is why I am not supporting the amendments.  

Let me assure you that I remain fully supportive of high food production and quality, environmental welfare standards and environmental standards. 

Something I am actively looking into is improving food labelling. Currently we can see where our fresh food comes from, but I believe that we can do better. I want an improvement to the food labelling and want there to be food miles and CO2 emissions. I want new labelling to be eye catching, easy and promoted locally.  

1 comment:

  1. I would draw your attention to the work of your fellow conservative MP, Zac Goldsmith himself a farmer and recently elected Conservative MP for Richmond Park: "I don't see any conflict at all with Conservative thinking and the green imperative, particularly in relation to food security. We need to recognise that cheap food isn't as cheap as we think. If a company is producing food but exhausting and polluting the environment the taxpayer pays for that. That's less likely to be the case with more localised, organic agriculture so there is a kind of indirect subsidy there."

    He does however accept that our current model of food imports is damaging not only farm livelihoods but also animal welfare: "In Britain, we have relatively high animal welfare standards and effectively what we're saying to our farmers is - you have to adhere to these standards but we're still going to buy junk from the world's markets - .We're pushing them out of business, and doing nothing to curb cruelty. We should maintain our high standards, but we should impose the same standards on products we buy from abroad."

    It is rather misleading to assert that we don't impose domestic standards on foreign imports. We do impose standards on imports, standards of safety and ethical production. What we fail to grasp is that there is a conflict between being 'anti-protectionist' (or free trade if you will) and allowing products which are falsely cheap (in Goldsmith's words)to destroy our own market. We have allowed this to happen in almost every sector of our manufacturing economy and farming is about to go the same way.

    ReplyDelete