6. 4. Statement by the Chair of the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee on the Committee's Inquiry into the Future of Agricultural and Rural Policies in Wales

Part of the debate – in the Senedd at 4:05 pm on 9 November 2016.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mr Neil Hamilton Mr Neil Hamilton UKIP 4:05, 9 November 2016

I congratulate my friend Mark Reckless on the impressive way in which he chairs the committee and the way he has delivered his statement today. Also, I would like to commend the committee for the serious job of work that all members of it are doing. I’m not normally associated with the word ‘consensus’ very much, but I am delighted to hear that the committee has arrived at a broad consensus approach, and I hope that that will extend beyond the confines of the committee and into the Assembly as a whole. Agricultural policy in the context of leaving the EU is vitally important. It has been overwhelmingly dominant in EU spending ever since we joined back in 1973. It is right, therefore, that it should have paramount importance in policy development in Wales, to which the freedom is now given to develop an agricultural policy to suit our own needs, specifically for our own nation. I am pleased to hear what Simon Thomas said in his response to the statement earlier on, and the positive way in which he approaches the opportunities that now lie before us. It is, of course, vitally important that the funding of agriculture in Wales is preserved as it is handed down to us from the EU. I appreciate, as Huw Irranca-Davies said, that this isn’t something that is set in stone for all time. But, at least for a significant process of transition, stability does depend upon people knowing that what they have been used to can be relied upon. Bearing in mind that we joined the Common Market, as we then called it, before the Barnett formula was invented, the obligations for funding agriculture predate that formula. For the time being, at any rate, it is essential that what is spent on farming in Wales is protected. I’ve strongly supported the First Minister and the Welsh Government’s view that the UK Government should guarantee every penny of funding that the EU currently spends in Wales. I think the corollary of that argument is that the Welsh Government itself must now step up to the plate and guarantee, for a significant transitional period, the level of funding that will be handed down to it by the UK Government in respect of agriculture, if that is what, in effect, happens in due course.

I’m pleased at the emphasis that has been put upon the support for marginal farming, and in particular for the uplands. We have to recognise the political reality in which we all operate—that the agricultural community is a small proportion of the total population, and we depend upon the consent of urban populations for the degree of subsidy that rural areas receive. One of the ways in which we can maximise the potential of that is treating farmers as custodians of the countryside as much as the growers of food. Although I do believe that food security is an important element as well, we still have a very substantial deficit in food production in this country. We have massive imports, and that, in the context of the negotiations coming up with the EU as to our future relationship, is a weapon that we should use to the full. In our own hands, we have a £10 billion-a-year deficit with the EU on food and drink. Therefore, they have every interest in maintaining the existing access to the single market. There is also the important element, which has been mentioned so far, of future trading opportunities between Britain and the EU, and Wales and the EU in particular. Simon Thomas was right to point out the dependence of Welsh farming upon exports, and this is a challenge for the future, undoubtedly, particularly for producers of lamb. We have to recognise that the world doesn’t stand still and countries like New Zealand have faced huge challenges in the past—they abolished all their agricultural support overnight—and yet agriculture in New Zealand thrived. Maybe there are lessons that we can learn from such experiences in the committee as well—not that that’s something that I’m recommending, but, nevertheless, the response to such shocks does offer opportunities for us to learn as to how we can cope with them. Trade promotion is another important element of this as well, where we’ve got greater freedoms as well.

The last point that I will make is that it’s not only agricultural policy that is devolved to Wales, but also environmental policy, and this gives us the opportunity to look at the current regulatory regime and to see whether, in certain instances, it is disproportionate in the costs that it imposes upon farmers relative to the public benefits that are supposed to derive from it in other areas. Given the remoteness of Brussels and the opacity of the way in which decisions are made there, and the importance of lobbying groups in the making of public policy, and the unaccountability of the people who take the important decisions, I think this gives us a huge opportunity in Wales now to reconstruct—over a substantial period of time, no doubt, because the job is huge, as my friend has pointed out—in that it gives us the opportunity to have a look at agriculture in the round, both the costs regime as well as the trading regime. Because, ultimately, all of this affects the viability of farmers and the life in the countryside of many others who depend for their livelihoods upon them.

So, I congratulate my friend, as the chairman of the committee, once again, and the Members who serve under him, and I look forward to further reports in future.