Farming and fishing post-brexit is all still to play for
● High stakes and much remains uncertain ahead of the UK’S planned exit from the EU on 29 March next year
Few groups in Scotland have followed the tortuous Brexit negotiations with more apprehension than our farmers and fishermen. With the signing of the 585-page withdrawal agreement in Brussels after two and a half years of argument, many hoped there would now be clarity and settlement.
This is not the case: even if Prime Minister Theresa May achieves a miracle and secures agreement in the Commons, there is still everything to fight for – and that fight is set to extend long after 29 March 2019.
Grants, subsidies and quotas for farmers; availability of critical seasonal labour; food safety regulation; reciprocal trading arrangements; border regulation and protocols: much has still to be agreed beyond the transitional phase that leaves the common agricultural policy (CAP) broadly intact.
As for fisheries policy, hopes of a radical improvement in the deal for fishermen and a reversal of years of decline since 1972 have been dealt a blow by declarations from France and Belgium that they intend to push for access much as before. Post-brexit prospects appear chaotic.
So, what’s at stake here? While small as a proportion of Scotland’s GDP, farming and fisheries are a key part of Scotland’s economy. Over the past ten years, food exports have more than doubled. The food sector has a workforce of 66,600 and the industry is now reckoned to be worth £14 billion.
Last year Scotland’s food and drink exports rose by £500 million to more than £6bn, with malting barley growers for Scotch whisky helping drive the increases as well as livestock producers.
Food exports performed strongly, adding £215m to a record £1.6bn in 2017 with animal feed, dairy and egg products among the biggest increases.
Total food and drink exports to the EU are worth more than £2.3bn, accounting for 41 per cent of our total overseas food and drink exports. Whisky exports dominate the food and drink sector north of the Border. The sector added £356m compared with 2016, bringing the total value to £4.3bn.
Scotland’s fishing industry has been in sad decline for decades. But the total value of fish landed by more than 2,000 Scottish registered vessels last year was £560m, with the tonnage of fish landed up 3 per cent to 466,000 tonnes.
As for EU funding, the UK overall receives some £2.4bn in direct EU farm support and in many cases farm businesses would not be profitable without it. Westminster has committed to maintaining the current level of direct payments until 2020 but after that the future is uncertain.
Scotland’s farming lobby has lost no time in the wake of the draft withdrawal agreement in setting out key areas of concern – and these portend a long and arduous battle with Brussels. During the “implementation period” to 31 December 2020, agricultural policy in the UK and Scotland, says Jonnie Hall, director of policy at the National Farmers Union Scotland, “will look, taste and smell like the CAP – because it will be the CAP”.
While farmers hoped that the EU exit would be opportunity for new policies bespoke to the unique needs of Scotland, progress has been obscured in a highly politicised process, with key areas mired in uncertainty.
Hall has three concerns. The first is the ability of the Scottish government to make payments to farmers and crofters for scheme year 2019. Legislation has been passed that will “cut and paste” all EU rules and regulations on day one of EU exit. However, the UK and Scottish governments disagree on which parliament has authority here. Matters await the judgment of the Supreme
“While farmers hoped that the EU exit would be opportunity, progress has been obscured in a highly politicised process, mired in uncertainty”
Court on whether the UK government’s Withdrawal Act or the Scottish Government’s Continuity Bill will prevail.
A second concern is the ability of the Scottish Government to make payments to farmers for 2020. The EU text of the direct payments regulations applies to the years up to 2020 – the end of the current round of the CAP. But the draft withdrawal agreement says direct payments to farmers under CAP support schemes shall not apply in the UK for claim year 2020 because of the way the EU finances the CAP.
This was due to an oversight in the drafting of the UK Agriculture Bill, currently going through Westminster. MPS are considering an amendment to correct this for England. Similar legislation is required for Scotland. But, says Hall, there is no clarity on the legal vehicle for the Scottish Government’s Stability and Simplicity transitional model to be delivered – nor for payments to be made to farmers and crofters for claims made under CAP Pillar 1 schemes in 2020 or beyond.
Finally, clarity is needed on the ability of the Scottish government to develop, implement and make payments for a new (i.e. “noncap”) agricultural policy in 2021 and beyond. Until then, agricultural support in Scotland will continue to be entirely tied to existing CAP rules. To develop and implement a new, “non-cap” policy from 2021, primary legislation is required.
The SNP administration is keeping open the option of introducing its own Scottish Agriculture Bill. “Given the wider uncertainties around Brexit”, writes Hall, “very clear and solid commitments on actions by governments in Holyrood and Westminster are required.”
If the outlook for farmers looks problematic, that of Scotland’s fishermen is even more so. Fisheries policy has long been at the heart of concerns over EU membership. One of the most contentious consequences of the signing of the 1972 European Communities Act was a calamitous decline in the fortunes of our fishing industry. It brought a painful loss of jobs and livelihoods across many of Scotland’s coastal towns critically dependent on fishing for their survival.
EEC membership made the UK subject to the common fisheries policy. The UK government, desperate to secure EEC membership, failed to negotiate more favourable splits based on the actual stocks of its fish. The UK’S exclusive zone was cut to just 12 miles – and even that has depended on a concession that has to be renewed every ten years. The biggest effect on this oncegreat industry was in the early years. But even now, the damage continues.
Agriculture Secretary Michael Gove had pledged to withdraw from the 1964 London fisheries convention and take back control of the zone between six and 12 miles out. Withdrawal from the CFP and control of the remaining UK EEZ up to 200 miles (or halfway, in the case of nearby countries) was intended to follow immediately after Brexit on 29 March next year.
But barely had the withdrawal deal been signed than doubts arose. The document published alongside the agreement made clear that EU countries sought to negotiate access to UK waters based on existing rights and were still seeking to negotiate continued access to UK fishing grounds during the two-year transition period. It said a fishing deal was a priority and “should build on, inter alia, existing reciprocal access and quota shares”.
This, as First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has pointed out, could not be squared with promises made to the UK fishing industry
– and the assertion by Theresa May that her deal would take the UK out of the CFP. French president Emmanuel Macron stressed the importance his country placed on fishing, planning to “defend access as part of the indispensable balance”. Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte has made similar statements.
A settled deal for farming and fishing? All, it seems, is still to play for.