Here’s some food for thought

THE countryside should take notice of Henry Dimbleby. The founder of Leon, which has a deserved reputation for fresh fast food, he’s been tasked with crafting a food strategy for the nation.

His report will have a major influence on the next Government when it’s published in late 2020. Mr Dimbleby has gathered around him a group of people that he sees as having lively minds, who will challenge conventional wisdom. He has also made a point of widespread consultation, including working closely with the Food and Drink Sector Council.

So far, so good, but, also, so opaque. We’ve no idea what he’ll come up with or whether he will address the real issues of farming and the countryside. As Defra hasn’t given him a steer, Agromenes suggests some fundamental issues that his report must take seriously if it’s to be acceptable to the food and farming community.

First, much of farming is unprofitable without subsidy. Wartime ‘Dig for Britain’ developed into Labour’s Deficiency Payments, which then changed with the coming of the Common Agricultural Policy. The system may have altered, but the effect was the same. Food production has been supported for 80 years. If we leave the EU, it won’t be.

The much-vaunted ‘payment for public goods’ will replace production support and reach fewer farmers and the total Treasury input to agriculture will be significantly reduced. That’s why Mr Dimbleby needs first to express how his plan will keep Britain farming profitably.

Secondly, he will have to address the profound contradiction in present Government policies. Defra ministers have guaranteed that Britain outside the EU will maintain the same—or even higher—animal-welfare, foodsafety and agri-environmental standards.

The International Trade Department is clearly bent on free-trade deals at all cost. Yet, it’s not possible to maintain those standards if our home market is opened to products that flout them. Mr Dimbleby must make it clear that trade deals should not be agreed without imposing the same standards on all imported food products.

Another issue is that the food and agriculture industry is mature and responsible, yet is treated with disdain by Public Health England and the Department of Health. The obsessives among health NGOS have encouraged Government agencies to go for confrontation, not co-operation, and to treat farmers and food companies as if they were tobacco businesses and, therefore, inevitable enemies of regulation. However, we will only solve the obesity crisis and improve diets by working with the industry to produce sensible regulation and a level playing field.

The report mustn’t perpetuate fashionable nonsense, either. For example, plant-based food isn’t necessarily healthier than eating meat. The Impossible Burger has as many calories as a good normal one. We should be aiming at a balanced diet where we eat less, but better meat.

Finally, it would help very much if Mr Dimbleby handed out a bit of praise. This year, farmers have had to fight against weather that has washed out crops from potatoes to winter wheat. Food companies have had to reformulate products to reduce sugar and salt, find ways to deliver fresh food with the minimum of packaging and battle with Brexit. Nothing will encourage them more than a few thank yous.

The whole industry is facing revolutionary change and Mr Dimbleby must remember it needs Government co-operation and encouragement if it is to learn to feed our people sustainably.

The Dimbleby Report mustn’t perpetuate fashionable nonsense. Plant-based food isn’t necessarily healthier than meat

Follow @agromenes on Twitter