Brexit: the next instalment
Outgoing CLA president Ross Murray assesses progress on the rural front so far
REMARKABLY, it was only three years ago that ‘Brexit’, the political soap opera of our times, wasn’t an everyday feature of our national vocabulary. It’s already ended the career of one Prime Minister and his successor is battling hard at the head of a weak, divided government. Only now, 18 months after the vote, and more than six months since serving notice to quit the EU, does it feel as if the political establishment is facing up to the decisions to be made about the future of the country, let alone that of the countryside.
For more than 43 years, our rural land use, access to markets, regulation, farm and environmental support and so much more have been shaped at supra-national level with neighbours. Brexit, therefore, requires a new way of thinking about the way the countryside works.
The party-conference season gave some pointers as to how the different political orthodoxies are wrestling with the issues. It certainly highlighted the tensions and inconsistencies that will play out in both Houses of Parliament. Early scuffles are evident as the EU Withdrawal Bill stutters through the Commons. These questions weigh heavily on the shoulders of the Conservatives, who called the referendum. So, too, does their sense of being the self-styled party of the countryside.
Two burning tensions dominate discussions. The first is the economic vision for Brexit. The free marketeers, whose orthodoxy promotes cheap food and reduced support for farmers, take a more aggressive attitude to transitional arrangements and much more. The opposite is a more traditional, or paternalistic, view of the countryside, where tolerance of change is lower and commitment to a family-farmed approach to the landscape is held with no less passion.
The second is over the environment. Michael Gove, a recent arrival to this brief, has had a dramatic impact. His declared mission is a ‘Green Brexit’. Many see in this an inevitable reduction in financial support for food production, but there is an inherent inconsistency in espousing higher standards of environmental protection and animal welfare on the one hand and expecting farmers to fend for themselves in a volatile global marketplace on the other.
Most Tory free-trade advocates see liberating the genetic, biological and technological innovations, from which agri-business has been held back by heavy-handed EU bureaucrats, as the quid pro quo for reduced financial support. It falls to the Secretary of State to square this circle. Watch this space for the shape of the Agriculture Bill, the 25-year Environment Plan and much else. All these will have Mr Gove’s paws on them.
For Labour and the wider ‘Left’, there are real challenges to credibility, but also opportunities. Their first problem is relevance: Labour’s rural reach has retracted since 1997, but Brexit, and a new, self-confident leadership, offers the chance to set out a vision. Their first task is to move beyond single issues, such as hunting or badger culls, and promote a distinctive message in the run-up to 2022.
Passionate and talented advocates are emerging. If they establish themselves and are given airtime, the debate will welcome them. As Labour’s conference showed, their impulse will be to support the smallest farms and farmers in preference to the large. The question is how an emphasis on fairness and income support can deliver a dynamic, profitable agricultural sector and better outcomes for the environment, where scale matters.
As with any minority government, smaller parties will play a big role. The nationalists have been flexing their muscles. Their concerns are understandable because Brexit poses fundamental constitutional questions over who decides what, from budgets to rule setting. In rural policy, no less than any other area, we are relying on all sides to find a workable compromise.
The debates are intensifying and it’s not easy to predict which vision for our countryside will win the day. However, we should be reassured by the consensus that exists around the pace of change and that the countryside fundamentally matters—and is for everyone.
Few have disagreed with the CLA that the first priority is to avoid dramatic or immediate dislocation. There is consensus against a ‘no deal’ outcome and agreement that current farm support must be transformed in carefully planned stages so that, ultimately, it better suits our own countryside.
Rural Britain asked for something different on June 23 last year. It’s clear that’s what we will get. Ross Murray is the outgoing president of the CLA. His successor, Tim Breitmeyer, gives an interview to COUNTRY LIFE on November 15
‘For Labour, there are real challenges to credibility, but also opportunities’