VICTORY FOR FARMERS ON FOOD RULES
THE Government has been heavily defeated in the Lords over a cross-party move to guarantee British farming’s high food standards post-Brexit.
Peers backed by a majority of 95 a change to the Agriculture Bill aimed at blocking the import of foodstuffs produced abroad to animal welfare and environmental standards lower than those adhered to in the UK.
Voting on Tuesday night was 307 to 212 for an amendment proposed by Lord Grantchester which sought a “requirement for agricultural and food imports to meet domestic standards” – amid fears that British farmers could be undermined by future trade deals.
The Government suffered a further defeat when the Lords supported an amendment tabled by Lord Curry of Kirkharle which would strengthen the powers of the newly established Trade and Agriculture Commission and give MPs greater scrutiny of its findings and recommendations.
The passing of the amendments this week follows a concerted period of lobbying by the National Farmers’ Union (NFU), which first called for a Commission to uphold farming’s high production standards post-Brexit in September, 2019. More recently, the organisation’s public campaign on food standards saw
‘Low quality food cannot be allowed to jeopardise rural communities’ LORD GRANTCHESTER
over a million people sign a petition and 78,000 writing to their MP.
In a lengthy debate in the House of Lords, many peers spoke about the potential dangers of opening up the UK’s borders to cheap, low-quality imports and the effect this might have on British farmers.
Speaking for the opposition, Lord Grantchester warned: “Low-quality food cannot be allowed to jeopardise rural communities by undercutting UK farmers with products using methods that would be illegal here.”
It was vital to signal to existing and future trade partners that the UK was committed to championing high quality standards in food, he added.
Independent crossbencher Lord Krebs, a former chairman of the Food Standards Agency, said there were “uncertainties” over assurances given by ministers on the issue.
It was only by supporting the Labour-led move that peers could be sure the Government was “bound to its commitment not to import food of lower standards than our own domestic products”, he said.
Baroness Boycott, a crossbench peer, said chlorinated chicken was the “tip of the iceberg” of “bad food” which could come into the country.
“Low-quality food is unhealthy food,” she said. “It has usually meant deforestation in its production and terrible treatment of animals.”
Green Party peer, Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb, described the amendment as essential to protect British farming against America’s “vile” animal welfare standards.
But Tory peer Baroness Noakes said: “The Government’s policy is clear. They are committed to higher food and welfare standards. We do not need to write into law what the
Government is committed to.”
Lord Gardiner of Kimble said the Government would not compromise on its manifesto commitment to the UK’s high food standards in future trade agreements. None of the 20 continuity agreements which have been signed to date had undermined domestic standards, he added.
The Government was dedicated to improving animal welfare standards and had robust processes in place to protect them,” Lord Kimble said.
The Agriculture Bill is expected to
return to the House of Commons in October, when MPs will consider the amendments made by the House of Lords and decide whether they will pass into law.
The NFU wants Parliament to be provided with independent advice about the impact every trade deal will have on British food and farming standards before it decides whether to accept or reject those deals, as currently there is no requirement for Parliament to debate trade deals before they are signed into law.