FG manifesto: 100 days in - what do farmers and rural businesses need from Labour?

With the country now 100 days into the new Labour Government, Farmers Guardian has created a new manifesto on what farmers and rural businesses want from the Government.

FG editor Olivia Midgley, Patrick Holden, chief executive of the Sustainable Farming Trust, National Pig Association chief executive Lizzie Wilson, Minette Batters, tenant farmer and former NFU President, farmer John McCulloch,  Ed Barker, head of policy and external affairs at the Agricultural Industries Confederation and Mark Charter from Carter Jonas came together to discuss what the industry needs.

Farmers Guardian will always hold those in power accountable and continue to speak up for farming. 

Transcript

We're now a hundred days into the labor government, with the party promising a fresh start for farmers. The industry is now sat waiting for the autumn budget on October th. And here at EFG, we've been talking to major players in the industry and our readers to pull together a manifesto of what farmers and rural businesses need from labor.
The manifesto is available at Farmers guardian.com/fg manifesto and we'd really like for you to send it on to your MPs.
We'll hear from Farmers Guardian editor Olivia midgley. Minette batters, former NFU president and farmer Lizzie Wilson, National Pig Association chief executive. Ed Baker, AIC head of policy. Patrick Holden, chief executive of the Sustainable Farming Trust Joe McCulloch, a young farmer in Dumfries and Galloway.
A mock charter from Carter Jonas, who will discuss exactly what the industry needs to see.

Well, hello and welcome to this
Farmers Guardian webinar in partnership with Katya Jones. I'm Olivia midgley and I'm the editor of Farmer's Guardian. And this is all about asking what farmers and rural businesses want from the first  days of a labor government. After  years of conservative power, which has seen dramatic changes brought to farming businesses, including the biggest shift in agricultural policy since the Second World War, a new government brings an opportunity for positive change and for growth.
Now, more than ever, the industry needs the signals from the government of the day to bring certainty and give farmers the confidence to invest and grow and fulfill ambitions not only about producing healthy, nutritious food, but also in caring for our natural world as well. But with very little mention of food and farming in both Labor's manifesto manifesto, Keir Starmer's first speech as prime minister and in The King's Speech, many in the industry have been left wondering what Labor's vision for UK farming actually looks like.
So what should it look like? What should those priorities be? Well, we brought together a brilliant panel of speakers who are going to give us their thoughts and help us map out a clear plan that the industry would be able to hold the government to account on. Let me welcome them. First, we have Minette Batters, Wiltshire tenant farmer and former president of the NFU.
We have Ed Barker, head of policy and external affairs at the I say Agricultural Industries Confederation. Lizzie Wilson, who's the chief executive of the National Pig Association. Patrick Holden, a West Wales dairy farmer and founder and chief executive of the Sustainable Farming Trust, and John McCulloch, young farmer in Dumfries and Galloway, who's also a trainee auctioneer and a former national chair at the Scottish Association of Young Farmers Clubs, Agri and Rural Affairs Committee.
And also a huge welcome to Mark charter, whose partner and head of estate management at our event sponsors, Cottage Owner Suite. We thank customers to be able to part with this webinar.
So let's hear from our first speaker at minute. What would you like to see from a labor government? Live. Thank you. And very, very good evening, everyone. I feel a bit rusty, actually, having been out of this league for a while.
But for me, I think it's very much bringing those words to life. I mean, there weren't many words in the labor manifesto , but food security is is national security. And actually, what does that mean? And what is that going to look like? We know that labor have some really, really big ticket items that are going to have an enormous impact and potentially provide enormous opportunity for farmers across the country.
I mean, the plan to build , houses, every year, the role of GB energy and what that is going to mean for solar on land, that's one of the most contentious topics I dealt with when I was at the NFU. So I've sort of really focused on, on five points that, that I would like to see labor really delivering on and certainly setting the framework for those, when they're back after recess in September.
I've already said this to Steve Reid. I think there's a real opportunity for a global first, from the UK government. We have legislated to deliver biodiversity net gain. I believe that should be broadened to be food, nature and biodiverse net gain. But % of the country, there's a real opportunity to see an uplift and improvement in food and nature and biodiversity.
Yet the danger at the moment is by seeing land bought up by housing developers taken out of production trees planted on our grasslands, we can deliver all of this, and I would use the words together food and lecture and the energy being delivered together. The second point I'd make is on the land use framework. This is going to be absolutely pivotal with the plan that there is for those , houses every year, and it's why, I guess I made such a song and dance at the NFU about wanting this self-sufficiency target making sure that food is part of the strategic planning for the land use framework, because the real dangers for these legislated targets are
that food is left out, and it's simply becomes the poor relation. So that's got to be in there. I did think it was important that the conservatives have put it in, that I'd like to see labor really put that statutory underpinning that they have for, for nature and the environment. The third point I guess I'd make is looking at GB energy.
The last thing we want to see is the nationalization of the food industry. But the energy and the commitment of GB energy is certainly something that should be looked at and worked with farming, you know, whether it's rooftop solar, individual wind turbines, anaerobic digestion, farming has a huge opportunity to be a big part of energy provision, within rural communities.
And that that must be part of the GB energy approach. I'd like to see as my fourth point, the expansion of the legacy producer organization scheme. You know, Lizzie, I know will have a lot to say on behalf of the pig sector. But when I look at the standards that pigs, broiler meat, eggs, fruit and veg are performing to, we need to have a scheme that replaces the old scheme that allows people to come into it, that really is ambitious about investment in these pivotal sectors that have been unsupported for so long.
I just make the point around regenerative agriculture a huge opportunity with %, of the country, that is a farm landscape. And what I said at the very beginning, I really think that that we need to be moving fast ahead, with this harvest thing, a scheme really, that is easy to access, that is valuing our permanent pasture that hasn't been done, to date.
That is really taking, I guess, the crops that we all growing where we are bringing nature and biodiversity in to those crops in a regenerative way that we are making sure that is out of the mass balanced approach, that we are really building a premium in market. And then finally, if we can get the food production bit right, the energy bit right.
I'd really like to see fast progression of the test and trial, with these catchment scale approaches to water quality. And that means that we need to tool much as we need to tool to measure our baseline. We also need a tool that is recognized on water quality. I think signing off militarily that test and trial to work on a catchment scale much bigger than landscape scale, is going to be really important for building that new economic model for the countryside.
So I live that's a whirlwind trip through a few points, but that's what I feel really needs to be focused on in the short term.
Brilliant. Thanks, Minette. And the industry really is we've we've had a really pivotal point, isn't it? Where do you think farming policy should go from here?
Thanks, Liv. I mean, start off, you know, we have to look back that over the last  or  years, Defra in particular has undergone considerable turbulence.
It's had numerous challenges thrown at it. Some external, some entirely self-made by by ministers at the time. And Minette will know better than anyone about the various ministers and varying policy shifts and zigzags that we've had along the way. So a period of stability in Defra, just predictability in long term outcomes and policy setting, I think, would be the best start.
That's the case for businesses as well who are looking to invest in UK agriculture. Number two, I think we can't overlook the fact that there is a considerable amount of existing stuff for ministers to have to deal with. There was a considerable legacy of policy issues, decisions that were just piled up. And I think, you know, when we've spoken to ministers already, I think there's there's at least a recognition and acceptance that there's a considerable amount of work that has to be, worked through issues like gene editing, deforestation, methane inhibitors, National Action plan on pesticides.
I mean, within ICI, we came across about, I think we worked about  different policies that needed a decision. And these are micro two to macro. And so having that time to be able to go through those is quite important. Before we start embarking on any, any real changes that are at a more radical level, because a lot of the industries have been sat waiting on these decisions for some time.
What I'd also say is that there's still a considerable legacy of retained EU legislation that falls most significantly on Defra as a department, and the different governments going to have to make a decision what it does with the, the volume of retained law, on statute. The third area that we really would want to focus on is on the, I suppose, the legacy of UX.
It in particular Labor's commitment to an SPS veterinary agreement. This is of great interest across a lot of agri businesses. We're still dealing now with the fallout of a UX it, I'd say  or . However many years on it is now, we're really starting to feel diverge agents, and we're starting to see the the variation in policies, and really micro issues as well start to manifest themselves not just between GB and the EU, but between GB and Northern Ireland as well.
So overcoming friction to trade, which is the case for a lot of imported agri inputs and supply goods, we're still seeing, how we get those solutions together. You know, it's going to take a very long time to agree anything with the EU. And so we really have to start that work now if we are to try and improve that, removing that friction in place.
And the last point on that is the divergence is also, it needs to be monitored. We've had absolutely no monitoring at a government level of divergence in policy between the UK and the EU. Over the last  or  years, it's been left to organizations like those on the call to have to just deal with it amongst ourselves.
And we really need to understand where that divergence says before we can even start to entertain an SPS agreement like that. I completely agree on a land use framework. We really need to crack on with that. Locally, to me, we've had decisions on considerable solar planning. That's gone through taking up prime agricultural land. And for me, it's it's really welcome that there is a commitment to a land use, framework.
But to leave this all at different door, I think is extremely unfair. It's a whole Whitehall issue. In fact, it's a whole UK wide issue to understand our own land as our asset and what we're doing with it, because the worry is it's just left is a deeper issue. And in other departments across Whitehall, for example, as Minette mentioned, about planning, about energy, get on with it and suddenly you have immediate conflict because it's a whole national asset.
So I'd say those are my sort of core, areas and certainly what we want to see, from a labor government in the first hundred days. Thanks. Said that, Lizzie, your members have had it particularly hard over the last few years. What do they want to see from the new incumbents at number ten?
Thanks, Olivia. So I think a few specifics from us to start off with, particularly around border control.
You might have seen us banging on about this in the media. Great risk at the moment is African swine fever. We may be an island, you know, surrounded by water, which you would assume is is great protection for biosecurity. But African swine fever jumped km across the Baltic Sea to Sweden not so long ago.
That was human mediated. So for us, it's contaminated pigmeat coming in particularly particularly via Dover and the short stripes. We know that illegally imported pig meat is coming in in vast quantities. Not just pigmeat meat in general. So, you know, it's not just, asf that's a risk. It's for mouse disease, which will be even more of a disaster, obviously.
And that's, that's pretty much uncontrolled. I think no one really anticipated the vast volumes, is coming in and it would appear that it is actually organized crime. It's not just coming in for sort of personal use within certain communities. And then most recently, Dover Port Health Authority updated us with regards to the border.
Tom. And how that's, you know, it was delayed five times, and even now, it's not fit for purpose. There's, huge quantities of products of animal origin coming in from the rest of the world, completely unchecked. There should be a hundred physical checks made per day, and they're not even managing % of that. We know, we know that there are loads being auto cleared through the system that Dover that aren't even coming in through Dover.
And, you know, those loads might be, legally, commercial meat and could be illegally imported meat as well. And there's still no in sight with regards to personal imports. And we know there's more meat coming in, displaying the stamp that tells you that that product shouldn't have left its country of origin. So, that's that's a massive risk, not just for the pig sector, but, you know, the livestock sector as a whole.
So what we'd really like from government is an immediate, an independent review of all border controls at Dover, not just Dover, you know, just the stuff coming in through, airports as well. So all all points of entry into the UK, we'd like increased resources at borders and inspections. And because the last administration had committed to, to cutting those resources and a no brainer for us, there's a total ban on noncommercial meat imports as well, to be honest, ed touched on the EU veterinary agreement, and we know, labor have committed to building a better relationship with the EU, which would be really helpful if in the event we do end
up contracting ASF with regard to regionalization, so we'd still be able to export from an affected parts of the country. And I know that was announced in today's New Deal for farmers to address low confidence, but, we're still waiting for amendments to control measures that align with EU legislation to be introduced. They should have come in the beginning of this year.
And we know that the general principles of regionalization are enshrined within the TCA, but it would still need testing. And that would be in the event of a notifiable disease. I mean, that also touched on contractual practice and supply chain fairness. So we've got to a certain point and then, general election was called and we ended up in the pre-election period, we've seen the initial draft of the statutory instrument, and we're now down to the sort of nitty gritty, the last % that's critical.
So we really need that pushing through. And we need, labor to be robust on that. So, you know, if effects tangible change for producers, it provides them with the protection that they need. And it more proportionately distributes the risk of removal throughout the supply chain. I talked about divergence and a bit of clarity on the UK forest risk.
Commodities regs would be good at the minute if all that we've got. The known quantity is EU deforestation regulation. And if everyone is compliant with that, is it going to align with UK forest risk commodities. There's so much uncertainty at the moment. None of my producers can get, a price on soya for January . And if you can, there's a whacking great big premium on it.
So, so a bit of movement on that would be great, to be honest. And then finally, more generally, you know, any new policy proposals or legislation coming through, we'd like ministers to engage with industry to ensure that, you know, it's proportionate, collaborative, and it's feasible for us to deliver. And we'd really like more collaborative working and alignment across different departments, because that isn't something that we've seen especially, contradictory policy like animal welfare, sustainability, food production, food security, etc..
I'm just labor, you know, actually delivering on on their ambitions of, of being more punchy and wanting to deliver change and quickly. And then looking ahead, we've got a budget coming up in the autumn, some sort of support around, new buildings and infrastructure would be great, whether that's funding or whether it's support around planning to enable that to happen.
I think that's probably quite a list for now, but that's, that's it for the pig sector. Thanks.
we ended up with a very long list already. So, that was excellent. Thanks. Let's say, John is, as a young farmer and a really great advocate for the industry, both in the UK and further afield.
What do you think you and your peers with your whole careers had to view? What do you want to see and what support do you think you need to get on and have longevity in your careers?
Hey, thanks very much, Olivia, and good evening, everyone. I think in terms of the young people in agriculture, I think we need to see more clarity from the government. I think that's probably the first word that springs to mind for myself. And, you know, at the moment, as it's because we've already seen the forward aim and obviously, you know, think that things like, for instance, a badger coal and inheritance tax that's quite important to young people.
There's been a lot of family businesses really affected with know, especially TB and cattle. And you know, obviously young people waiting to take over farms. The whole inheritance tax issue, is quite important for labor. So I think we need to see more clarity around that. You know, obviously slightly different for myself in Scotland, obviously with agriculture being a devolved issue, but obviously the money that they get paid comes quite a largely from Westminster.
So, you know, a lot of my customers are saying, you know, what are the government going to do about things and, you know, support in the future for, for agriculture. So I think we need to be more clear about what exactly they want to support and how they're going to do it. You know, these green schemes that the they are supporting at the moment, how how that would affect farming and the future, how much longer they're going to have to take out, and what support are they going to get to do that.
And you know, that'll be quite different. Quite a you will not at the moment, I think, need to be much clearer.
in terms of the terms of the green agenda and kind of what they want to do, I need to be more and realistic in terms of their targets and how we would incorporate agricultural has to go to produce a realistic level of food going forward.
You know, I it was saying about being more self-sufficient in a sufficiency level, you know, that if they're going to be doing more green, green things in the future, then it's how they're going to incorporate those two things together. I think a lot of young people are really concerned about how they're going to run their business, but they're going to keep taking ground out for different schemes to to meet a climate target.
I think that's something.
Yeah, absolutely. I think you've just dropped out there, John. But I think the point that you're making with we definitely heard loud and clear that, you know, these schemes, cannot come at the expense of a food production.
Mark, we have such a rich plethora of farming businesses in the UK, and whilst there are many challenges, there are also huge opportunities as well.
Do you think farmers and I'm thinking in particular about your clients, do you think they have confidence this government will do the right thing for UK plc?
I think this week has probably in some degree turned everything on its head really, in terms of, you know, the Rachel Reeves statement and the Angela Rayner statement. And then we'll probably people can see coming in the autumn budget and the changes that could be coming down the tracks to many farmers and landowners in terms of changes to the underlying tax regime, which really underpins, you know, a lot of sort of agriculture and investment in diversified businesses.
I think
there is massive opportunity. The opportunity will be at a cost to some farmers, some tenants, in terms of when land and capital and windfall gains is released, developments via energy so that, you know, that that will look great, you know, just as biodiversity. What as well as it will create a huge influx of capital and revenue into the industry, but that will be at a cost.
So there will be winners and losers, I'm afraid, within the spectrum of of everybody on this call. But I think, you know, to build that confidence. I think farmers and landowners, if they're making long term investment decisions, what we need to see is that continued continuity of and consistency of policies across all areas of government, with them then keeping the deadlines and delivering the resources when they say they're going to do, if you know, if they can achieve that, which is probably the Holy Grail in many respects.
If they can achieve that, then everybody on this call can make those long term investment decisions knowing that risk is controlled.
Yeah, it's a great point. And Patrick just coming to you. They on that subject of of confidence hugely topical. You know the industry's been seeking certainty and confidence for so many years. And the latest episode about this week shows confidence is still very low. What do you think it will take to boost confidence among farming businesses?
Well, in a word, clarity.
I everybody's made some great points. I want to sort of make be a bit simpler about it. In a way. I think we as minute started with we're at a turning point, but I think the turning point is really historic because for the whole of my forward life, you know, I've been farming now for  years here, in West Wales.
I would say that it would be true to state that farming has been part of the problem in terms of climate, the destruction of biodiversity and asset stripping of the social fabric of this country. And I think you can't blame the farmers for that. It's the policy and economic conditions which have driven farmers relentlessly into, expansion.
I mean, just we heard I heard today that dairy farmers are still number of dairy farmers are dropping catastrophically. And of course, the numbers of herds are going up. And you can't blame the farmers. It's like intensify and expand or get out. And I think we need fundamentally different signals. And I think this has got to come from the top.
So here's my big idea. The Prime Minister should ask Rachel Reeves to come to a meeting and involve not just Defra, but the Department of Health, the Department of, of the Armed Forces, because they march on their stomach and we need to bring better food, climate energy, education. There needs to be an analysis of the way in which agriculture impacts on all those departments of state.
Rachel Reeves needs to hear this, because actually, the agriculture, the food system we have at the moment, again, no fault of the farmers, it's making a sick. We know about this, though, and we need to incentivize farmers to farm in a different way. And I would say the fundamental change this nature does it change from a chemically based agriculture to a biologically based agriculture.
So we need to put into place the conditions which make that possible. And of course, the first of these is money, because farmers basically will do what pays. You can't blame them for that. So we need incentives to make a transition to climate, nature and, health and culturally friendly agriculture so that we start to reverse these declines, in the number of farmers of the land, in the amount of nature which can co-exist with food production, and greenhouse gas emissions.
So I think we should set targets. The prime minister should set targets to follow, and that's lead in making agriculture not just net zero but carbon negative, which I believe is achievable. What we will have to make big changes in farming practice. They have to be economically viable. I was at the, the ministerial gathering in London last night.
I managed to talk to Daniel Zeichner, and I think he's a good guy. And the point I made to him is we should measure. That's my second point. Measure the impacts of the elms and all the devolved nations schemes, because at the moment they're not measuring. They have no idea which what's going to work or what isn't. To be fair, Daniel said, yes, I agree with you %.
Because Rachel Reese won't give me any money if I can't demonstrate that I'm delivering on climate, nature, and positive social outcomes. So that's my second point, that link the measurement, which I believe should be a condition of all, farmers carrying on with elms, to measure their impacts. And then the government can gather data until the Treasury actually with delivering real value for money.
And then I think if you look at that to labeling, then you can get the power of the market work. And above all, you need to involve the food industry, not just the food industry, the banks, the financiers, all the people that I'm now working with, the Disabled Sustainable Markets Initiative to get them to help fund this transition.
So I think it's big picture, big change of farming practice, measure the impacts, reward the farmers for delivering positive impacts on climate, nature and and social and health outcomes, and drive that with an investment in public education because we need to start with children. Nobody knows the story behind that food these days. And we need a massive investment to educate the next generation, because only when we have informed consumers will this become a political issue for the government.
And let's be honest, the way that it's been included, agriculture hasn't really been front and center stage. At the announcements that Steve Reid has made so far is a reflection of that. For Keir Starmer at the moment, he doesn't think agriculture political priority.
I think that point about, you know, labor has said, hasn't it, that it wants to be a big grown up government and cross-departmental working is something that it is really keen to do.
So if we can just join all those dots, then, that would be a huge step forward, wouldn't it?
I'm just remind you each last night and it was great. You know, it's very short. But he, he, like me is a Londoner. You know, I don't think it's hard for him to understand all these things in a hurry.
So we've got to work together in an unprecedented way to make sure that for labor, they understand the political importance of a change in farming and food.
I think we've had about four questions on this topic.
So I'm going to ask it, inheritance tax. And there's a real concern that the government will remove inheritance tax relief and the knock on effect that this will have on the industry. Freddie, you're on the call to thanks for this one. Mark, could you just walk us through what labor have actually indicated on how a change in relief could affect businesses?
Yeah, no. That's fine. I think
in respect of understanding reliefs, I think everybody focuses on because it's got the word agriculture in the relief in terms of agricultural property relief as being the relief relevant to our sector and industry, but actually sitting alongside that, which obviously covers all businesses is business, property relief and and for real agriculturalists, and farmers, you know, you've you've got tax reliefs and they sort of run side by side with each other.
So whilst you can imagine that there might be a view that agricultural property relief could be up for review, particularly in respect of tenanted land, depending on the term and the nature of the tenancy and whether it is really farmed or not by the owner. You know, for real farmers, you know, business property relief will still kick in and protect them.
But I think, you know, those that you know, own land and don't necessarily farm land and haven't actively farmed land for the qualifying number of years will have, you know, I think, you know, they could understandably at risk be at risk because that sector runs contrary to, you know, the the labor, you know, much vaunted labor working person, which is, you know, I'm sure we'll hear, you know, time again being the bedrock to all of the tax changes in terms of protecting the working person.
And clearly, if you're not owning land for producing food and actively farming, you know, I fear you will get caught by that. I suspect.
there anything farmers can do and what you know, where where would they get advice from? Yeah, I think I think yeah, absolutely. I think actually the real adviser in this sector needs to be the accountant. That needs to be the first port of call.
And it's understanding how your business is and is structured, whether you're a partnership sole trader in company and just getting the right model and the right fit for you. And you know, if you are farming, you know, making sure that that evidence and that paper trail is that back up your claim to be a farmer. So if you're a multi-generational farming family, you know that that elder generation, you know, is absolutely still in the farming partnership is at the farm meetings that their attendance is minuted and the decision making process is seen to involve all of those generations so that, you know, everybody, that, you know, they look like a farmer, they talk like a
farmer, they work like a farmer. So they, you know, they tick that farmer test.
how can the the new government use its farm policy to improve the profitability of farmers? Too often few, Tim, few farmers make a profit without support. I mean that you want to kick off with this one.
How can the government help improve the profitability of farmers? You know, I'm guessing a range of options rather than just, you know, pure financial support, grant schemes? I'm thinking of the things. What what are your thoughts on that? Well.
Profitability is absolutely key. And and we are halfway through the transition. And Z referred to we had so much chop and change in that journey. So we've d length now from cap payments of the pound asked for halfway through. And I think there's a really big question left to answer, about, you know, we have the highest level of environmental regulation and legislation of any country on earth effectively.
And that was what George used to set out with the environment on the top, that this was going to be, you know, the gold star status across the world. And it it comes at a price, you know, for farmers to be farming and this high cost environment, they have to be paid. And I think we really have to have, a way of putting nature on the farm business spreadsheet so that it really is being valued.
And there is a value coming back to the farmer. There is another question to answer around how we manage risk. You know, the only way we have managed risk and livestock and broader farming is through that land based payment. If you take that away, you know, we saw government and indeed I was a recipient of the flood recovery fund, but it took a long time.
I didn't get my payment until the end of June, and it was definitely deemed very unfair with some people not getting it. So how do we manage, risk in a world where is gone? That question needs to be answered. There's another question around market failure. No one saw it more than the pig sector. When a market fails, what is the mechanism and where is the budget?
Now, we know in the agricultural that there was no mechanism to have that emergency fund for market failure situation. And then finally, you know, the role of the crisis adjudicator. I absolutely think we have to have a framework that builds in shareholder board responsibility to deal with, ESG requirements. And at the moment, you know, everybody just wants more and more and more and nobody wants to pay for it.
And there's there has to be a defined value to all of this. So there's no one silver bullet. There are lots of silver bullets that need to come together to answer that massive question on profitability, Lizzie, the pig sector has just been at the sharp end of this whole, debate. What would you like to to see? How do you think the government could help?
I think it's just as Minette said, it's it's supporting the domestic sector and providing an enabling environment. And whether that is, reviewing fairness within the supply chain as it's done for dairy, pigs eggs, it will do for horticulture, obviously. And, you know, ensuring that each part of that supply chain is held accountable, that everyone is treated fairly and that farmers are, as Minette said, paid a fair price for a fair product.
It's ensuring that we have access to, critical inputs like labor, you know, every single farming sector suffers from a desperate lack of labor. And I think, you know, the conservatives were were, you know, architects of their own downfall. They were so restricted by their own legacy over Brexit with regards to immigration, etc., that they really suffered.
Whereas, you know, labor has a unique opportunity now going forward to be able to deliver on on those specific areas where we need a bit more support. We mean, as the pig sector, where I was, I would say this anyway, but I think we're very dynamic, we're very proactive, and we do try and find our own solutions, but especially around labor where we're all, competing for the same small pool of people and we are going to need external support on that from government.
And then just support on things like planning, you know, the number of ministerial meetings that we've all been to and planning is brought up time and time again, and everyone knows very sagely, because everyone knows what the issues are. You know, as soon as, a pig unit applies for, planning permission, you know, just to reinvest, to improve the buildings that are over  years old, you know, horribly inefficient.
And, you know, as soon as pig is mentioned within the application, all the red flags go up. You know, what's requested of them is, is entirely disproportionate. We've got nutrient neutrality to contend with. You've got lots of local opposition. But equally, we've got to contribute to food security, you know, with this scope, three emissions to think about.
There's issues around around betterment. So it's actually, you know, and I know there was some planning announcements, yesterday day before, but there's nothing in there for agriculture again. And we can't move forward whether that's, you know, new infrastructure, whether that's, improvement in animal welfare, whether that is, you know, new slurry storage, for example, with regard to water quality, we can't do any of that and capitalize on the grant schemes coming from government.
If we can't get that through planning permission in the first place.
Thanks, Lizzy. Yeah. Did you want to come in there? I want Patrick, yeah. Addressed that definitely on planning. I mean that that's the case across all agri businesses pre and post farm as well, whether that's, you know, abattoirs, post farm trying to increase that throughput on our size.
You know particularly on, on on the pre farm side that planning is just holding back so many businesses to expand to improve their customer offer to farmers. But of course one of the other areas is the new buildings, new feed mills. There's loads of things happening in fertilizer sector, really interesting products coming through. And of course for a lot of farms, that's scope one emissions.
And eventually for wider end food supply chain. That's understandably obsessively looking at it's, accounting for its carbon and other metrics in its supply chain. Obviously, that's where it stems from. And so if, the pre farm side, we can't get that planning through for, for a core infrastructure. Then we're really going to struggle to, to, to make that dent on, on that on farm level as, as me that's mentioned, there are some, you know, when we are getting through planning, there is some really innovative stuff happening.
Europe's newest female is in North Yorkshire and it's footprint in terms of what it's delivering on. Feed is significantly below it just through, the, the efficiencies that it's delivering but also capture on, on energy use and so on. So degree planning on my worries. Planning is kind of our de facto food strategy for the at the moment because, you know, that's where food, food security is being delivered by local planners because they're the ones that really hold the the key over driving significant, changes in our core infrastructure.
Thanks, said Patrick.
How can farmers increase their profitability? We need a new income stream, a third income stream, to complement what we get from the sale of our products, from the government, because the government isn't going to give us a lot more income. They simply haven't got enough money. So we need to get that income for the delivery of public goods, for carbon, for biodiversity net gain and for positive social impacts, including improvements of public health and educating the next generation.
So if we are measuring the impacts annually of, farming systems on climate, nature and social positive impacts, then we can, once we've collected the data of where seem to be delivering on all those fronts, then banks, asset managers, the industry, the food industry themselves, both retailers and food companies and water companies and utility companies could all come together and fund an acreage payment, which could, I think, be up to  pounds an acre or even more maybe for the delivery of those public goods.
But first of all, we have to measure and then we have to change the farming systems which are going to deliver those public goods. That's the challenge. But I think that's the way we can improve our profitability, as well as hopefully producing more climate friendly and nature friendly food, which is going to command a better price in the marketplace.
Thanks, Patrick.
this is perhaps a broader, question. And so we'll start with that. Do you anticipate a continued expectation from the new government that we must diversify in order to subsidize our farming businesses? Who wants to start with that one?
go for it, Marc.
Yeah. No, I'm happy to say I, I think I would probably disagree with the use of the word subsidize ophthalmic businesses. I think it's really to complement the farming business. And I think from what we're seeing into the way we're acting for landowners, farmers, tenants, occupiers, you know, that that layering of income and being able to lower income across your business from that variety of sources.
I mean, you know, I think that is, you know, it is now, but I think it is absolutely the future. And I think that will have to be continued diversification in businesses. And some of those will be small scale diversification in terms of, you know, just finding  or  acres for, dog training or dog walking that just might produce you  or  or , pounds a year, or turning a whole barn over to warehousing and storage that can produce you , pounds a year.
But I think, you know, I think no matter where we go on subsidies and commodity prices, you know, where agriculture is and farming is in the sort of supply chain, I think, I think diversification is essential to complement income and create those layers and security.
Thanks, Mark. I've got another more of a comment here, but, I can't see how the government can build all these extra houses. So this is the . million new homes, that Labor's pledged to build in the next five years. We're struggling just to simple renovation. And we've been told and we can appeal, but the backlog for appeals is the nine month wait.
Yeah. So labor have a clear plan about a clear desire to build more homes, I guess. But it's two pronged, isn't it? It's. Where do these new homes go? But also reform of the planning policy to enable, farm businesses to diversify and expand or build new homes themselves, obviously, because, there are huge opportunities there as well.
Just got another question on, diversification.
So this is from, Emma Sturdy, who thanks for your question. I'm. So I know Emma is locked in a tenant farmhouse. She's locked in a battle with a solar developer at the moment. Who is wanting to use % of good agricultural land to thank Emma, to use for solar production and add one for you that the food versus fuel debate is is a perennial one, isn't it?
But now probably more pronounced with noises made by Ed Miliband and other ministers, about this need for, to shore up our, renewable energy production. Can we have both?
Absolutely. We can have both. I think what is why on so many people up, quite understandably, is that that doesn't seem to be any national view as to where our best land assets are when people see, you know,  acre solar farms in on the Suffolk Cambridgeshire border in an area that is, you know, not just prime arable, but outdoor pigs, you know, like land parts of the country, very versatile land understandably rankles a lot of people because you know that once
that land is gone, despite what many say, that you can, you can graze underneath them. It's it's taken out of production for a considerable period of time. You lose critical mass in the industry. That one thing that the Henry Dimbleby report did in its evidence pack was it showed quite how little high value, productive land that we have actually in this country that we're relying upon for a considerable amount of our calories.
And I know it's not always about calories, but it show that when you when you lose those assets, you know, you you've got a declining land mass, all those invested into the UK, elsewhere, you know, all those that are supporting. Look at it, look at the UK and think, well, are they really serious about their agricultural production? Now obviously there are other renewables, wind, which obviously are slightly less, invasive on land, but obviously it still takes out far more land than you'd consider.
But it just has to be more strategic and obviously within the fuel debate as well. One thing that often comes up is biofuels. Obviously that's a that's a wide, wider debate. You know, the serious side is delivered an important revenue stream in volatile markets as an output as a market globally, though, there's a huge amount going on.
You only have to look at what's happening in California with soybean mandates. So that needs a quite a clear policy. I think from, from, from government in terms of long term understanding, not least so the market and farmers know where to invest for all the infrastructure that we now have in the UK that supports it in decarbonization.
Quite right. We should burn ban all solar farms and biofuel production on productive agricultural land immediately. It's a scandal. It's a misuse of public money.
And this this is the unfortunate, experience that Emma and her family have found themselves in at the moment. They're living through this, and this just asked a follow up question. Very relevant to this.
I should make sure to mention that there will be winners and losers in terms of moving forward with new planning policy. If I may say so. This attitude by agencies, much of the problem that is need to be losers with regards to tenant farmers. But it doesn't need to be losers with regards to tenant farmers and change of land use.
There needs to be fairness in terms of compensation offered. I mean, it seems a fair point, doesn't it, Mark? How would you answer that one?
Yeah, no, absolutely not completely. But you know, it. It must feel very raw. For Emma sort of to see, you know, a large chunk of the farm going and, you know, the reality is of the legislative framework that frames agricultural tenancies does mean that, you know, if you're in Emma's position, as opposed to the landowners position, which I sort of more often, you know, represent the, you know, the compensation you can get of six times your rent and you get a notice to quit, you know,  or 
pounds an acre at most for the loss of a large part of your business. You know, it will hurt. So you know, for that to change, we'll need the legislative framework around compensation to tenants to change. And and we've gone through quite a lot of consultation, of sort of, you know, the landlord and tenant charter and looking at different aspects of that.
But it was interesting that that aspect actually wasn't challenged. So the no, no steps to bring forward legislation to that was brought forward. I think it's yeah, absolutely. You know, Pfaff, say, you know, the NFU and the CFA and the body that works between landowners, agents and tenants to, you know, take that on board because it's the one area in the whole system where you could, you know, have some sympathy with the tenant.
I wouldn't necessarily say that we should be changing the ability for the landlord to take it back, but I could completely understand that six times your rent probably isn't enough compensation to succeed to see you. Right? As a consequence of what you're facing.
Thanks, Mark. And we're going to have to speed through now because we're running out of time and there's loads of questions.
So, John, I can see your back in the room. So this might be a good one for you to answer from. These from Marie. From a farming perspective, lessening risk, of course, is important. But how do we see the going to be becoming less of a risk
with the lessening of the magical, along with the current testing regime, being, fit for purpose?
So this is, Labor's manifesto pledge to to really, wind up the magic of the magical, what impact that would have. Farmers. John.
Thanks, Olivia.
No, I think, when it comes to TV, obviously my father is a sort of pedigree head of the livestock and cattle.
And so it's like, and obviously Stephen's are hugely important in terms of the bills and the animals getting sold all over the country. And, you know, there's been issues, especially in Scotland, southwest Scotland lately, and a lot of dairy farmers have had issues with TV and, you know, the badger call with something at least it looked as if something was being done to try and at least lessen the risk from TV.
And now obviously the the labor going to wind that down. And I think that's quite disappointing that, you know, something is actually being done to do that that's going to be ruled out. And I think a lot of a lot of farming families have been affected with TV. You I like, you know, it was a at least at least there's something being done to try and lessen the impact of that hard and do that.
We know farmers will be quite disappointed about that. You know, I don't know how they will try to try to solve the issue. I think it's something that something that's going to probably be an issue for quite a while longer. But I think the labor government should rethink their stance on the budget going.
Absolutely. And follow the science, which yeah, we would hope that would be the case. Caroline Miller, thank you for your question. So Caroline says that the biggest challenge that, she faces when working in agri tourism in Scotland and farm retail is access to labor. Lizzie, you mentioned this, access to labor is just another, huge issue, isn't it, for farming businesses?
What what could the government do to make access to labor? Easier across the board?
I think a lot of, farmer members would say that you need to start promoting agriculture as, a positive career option right from the beginning, you know, from a really young age throughout schools. And I think a lot of farmers would argue it's not it's the detail isn't taught within the curriculum, you know, the the vast range of career opportunities within each sector, isn't it?
Or, you know, it's it's not just working on a farm. There's all the ancillary trades that go with it. You know, we we all know how complex, different agricultural sectors are. And, you know, looking ahead to all the new AI in technology that's going to be available as well. And it's just ensuring that it's, it's an attractive option.
You know, we know farming is hard. It's long hours. It's working weekends, it's working bank holidays. We've we've all been there and done it, but I think we, we need help with that, school curriculum, and throughout universities as well. You know, we, we do our best in the pig sector. We have scholarship schemes with Harper Adams, for example.
We have ladies and and pigs that go into school, and HDB has an educational program. But I think government could do more, with the actual a mandatory curriculum to help us. And then of course, sourcing labor, from further afield when it's required. We had to fight tooth and nail, after Covid and Brexit to actually fully staff, abattoirs.
And that's why we ended up in such a mess, because we just couldn't slaughter the number of pigs that we needed to because we didn't have access to that labor and government made that as difficult as they could, you know. And Minette will tell you, trying to actually engage with the Home Office is is virtually impossible. They just don't speak to you.
And we were absolutely desperate. So I said just providing a more enabling environment for us to be able to, staff our farms and, and, you know, and with good quality staff, not just people who are who we think will rock upon a weekend and chuck some feed about, you know, they need to actually care about the animals and have a certain skill set.
So yeah, support that. I would be really good for us.
Thanks, Leslie. A great point there. And unfortunately we are running out of time. But what a great place to end on. What a rewarding career choice we've all made working in agriculture. So, yeah, I just wanted to say a huge thank you to to you, to all our speakers for a fascinating discussion that we've got so much, stuff that to put together and, and manifesto, if you will.
And thanks to our audience for listening and to you for all, for your questions as well. That was a really lively discussion.

Thank you very much to all of our guests and here at Farmers Guardian. We'll continue to hold those in power to account. You can view the manifesto by going to Farmers guardian.com/fg manifesto. And we also want to hear your views. Get in touch FG editorial Agri connect.com. That's it for this episode of the Farmers Guardian podcast. Thank you very much for listening.
And goodbye for now.