
Labour's cuts to farming subsidies ‘threaten wildlife'
Labour's cuts to farming subsidies will threaten wildlife and damage attempts to protect the rural environment, countryside campaigners have warned.
They fear that cuts in the payments could see farmers being forced to work their land more intensively to make up the shortfall.
The Government has announced that the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) – which rewards farmers for managing their land in a way that benefits the environment – is to be revised after the spending review in June.
This will see a cap placed on how much money farmers can receive.
Farmers and rural groups have warned the result will be to further endanger wildlife, their habitat and the environment, such as hedges and woodland.
Tim Bonner, chief executive of the Countryside Alliance, told The Telegraph: 'With no guarantee of income for work to improve the environment many are having to take the difficult decision to revert to more intensive farming operations to generate enough money to keep their businesses afloat.
'Ministers need to understand that the delivery of environmental benefits requires farms to be economically sustainable. Short term financial decisions like the closure of SFI will have huge consequences for the future of the countryside.
'Many generational farms with an absolute commitment to conservation and restoring biodiversity are already reeling from the Government's changes to inheritance tax. This new uncertainty over agri-environmental payments means their business plans are in tatters.'
David Exwood, deputy president of the National Farmers' Union, added: 'Fields that may have gone into non-farm use – such as a buffer strip or for winter bird seeds – won't happen. Farmers can't now leave those fields empty, because they are not going to get the subsidy which was paying for an environmental good any more. Without it there will be a direct impact on the environment.'
Nearly 95 per cent of farmers had been planning to make new applications to the SFI, which aims to encourage sustainable food production while protecting and enhancing nature, before they were unexpectedly closed, according to a survey by the Country Land and Business Association.
Under the SFI, which had run since 2021, farmers were eligible to receive payments from the Government for carrying out sustainable work.
They could apply to any of over one hundred contracts, which included measures like hedgerow maintenance, soil analysis, reducing insecticide use and managing grasslands.
These replaced payments made under the EU's Common Agricultural Policy which were based on the amount of land farmed and tended to encourage intensive farming.
In some cases SFI payments were modest, such as £257 a year for pond management. Others were more lucrative and went some way to make up for low prices paid by supermarkets for farmers' produce.
They also compensated for the scrapping of the old Basic Payment Scheme, which provided a vital supplement for hill farmers and crofters.
Joe Evans, vice president of the Country Land and Business Association said: 'The UK Government rightly replaced subsidies with new schemes that pay farmers to transition farming practices to becoming more sustainable, as well as providing direct environmental benefits.
'The transition was going well, with more and more farmers planning their futures around nature-friendly food production. In closing the biggest scheme without a word of warning, trust that the Government is acting in good faith has been damaged.
'40 per cent of our members weren't in the scheme but were planning to apply.
'This will cause a major cash flow crisis for thousands of businesses who have already been hit hard by other policy changes; but perhaps even more fundamentally, will stall progress in reversing nature decline and climate change.
'Without it, farmers will have to do what they need to do to survive – which may include farming much more intensively, harming the goal of sustainable food production.'
Farmers have told The Telegraph they fear the cuts in environmental subsidies will have a dire impact on their attempts to safeguard nature.
Annie Brown, a third-generation arable and livestock farmer in the South Downs, said her small family farm will suffer if their SFI payments end.
Ms Brown's farm currently receives £50,000 a year in SFI payments, but these contracts are set to run out by 2027.
'This is the death knell of a lot of family farms,' she warned. 'We are resilient and we don't take much out of the business, but we need some support, and we need to know it'll be there for the foreseeable future.
'It takes us from actually making some money which we invest in the business to going cap in hand to the bank.
'The tapestry of our countryside is really under threat at the moment. You batten down the hatches, you don't invest. Some farmers will go under.'
Ms Brown, 65 prides herself on taking a regenerative approach to farming on the 625 hectare holding she runs with her sister Pauline. But she says they will have to stop some of the sustainable measures which SFI payments allowed them to do, like soil sampling.
'The old adage of farmers in the red can't be green is true,' she said.
The Government defended the changes to the sustainable farming subsidies.
A spokesperson for the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs said: 'We inherited farming schemes which were underspent, with farms missing out on millions of pounds.
'This Government is investing £5 billion into farming – the largest budget for sustainable food production in our country's history.
'We now have a record number of farmers into schemes and more money being paid to farms than ever before.
'Every penny in all existing SFI agreements will be paid to farmers, and the Government will reopen a new and improved SFI scheme with more details coming this summer.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
17 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Live Economy shrinks in blow for Reeves
Britain's economy shrank at the start of the second quarter, official figures show, in a blow for the Chancellor after her spending review. UK gross domestic product (GDP) contracted by 0.3pc during the month, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS). This was worse than analysts' fears that the economy would shrink by 0.1pc and follows a 0.7pc expansion during the first three months of the year. The data covers the month when Donald Trump launched his so-called 'liberation day' tariff onslaught which threatened to upend global trade. ONS director of economic statistics Liz McKeown said: 'After increasing for each of the four preceding months, April saw the largest monthly fall on record in goods exports to the United States with decreases seen across most types of goods, following the recent introduction of tariffs.' The figures come a day after economists warned that Britain faces tax rises in the autumn after Rachel Reeves unveiled her spending review. The Chancellor has made growing the economy one of her key missions as she battles to shore up the public finances. An expanding economy would mean that she is better able to pay off the nation's debt and would improve living standards. Ms Reeves said: 'Our number one mission is delivering growth to put more money in people's pockets through our Plan for Change, and while these numbers are clearly disappointing, I'm determined to deliver on that mission.'


The Independent
21 minutes ago
- The Independent
Britain morphing into ‘National Health State', says think tank
Britain is turning into a 'National Health State', a think tank has said after the Chancellor gave the NHS a major funding boost in her spending review. The health service was the big winner of Wednesday's spending review, receiving an extra £29 billion per year for day-to-day spending and more cash for capital investment. Overnight, the Resolution Foundation said Rachel Reeves's announcements had followed a recent trend that saw increases for the NHS come at the expense of other public services. Ruth Curtice, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation, said: 'Health accounted for 90% of the extra public service spending, continuing a trend that is seeing the British state morph into a National Health State, with half of public service spending set to be on health by the end of the decade.' Defence was another of Wednesday's winners, Ms Curtice said, receiving a significant increase in capital spending while other departments saw an overall £3.6 billion real-terms cut in investment. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) made similar arguments about 'substantial' investment in the NHS and defence coming at the expense of other departments, although the think tank's director Paul Johnson warned the money may not be enough. He said: 'Aiming to get back to meeting the NHS 18-week target for hospital waiting times within this Parliament is enormously ambitious – an NHS funding settlement below the long-run average might not measure up. 'And on defence, it's entirely possible that an increase in the Nato spending target will mean that maintaining defence spending at 2.6% of GDP no longer cuts the mustard.' Ms Curtice added that low and middle-income families had also done well out of the spending review 'after two rounds of painful tax rises and welfare cuts', with the poorest fifth of families benefiting from an average of £1,700 in extra spending on schools, hospitals and the police. She warned that, without economic growth, another round of tax rises was likely to come in the autumn as the Chancellor seeks to balance the books. She said: 'The extra money in this spending review has already been accounted for in the last forecast. 'But a weaker economic outlook and the unfunded changes to winter fuel payments mean the Chancellor will likely need to look again at tax rises in the autumn.' Speaking after delivering her spending review, Ms Reeves insisted she would not have to raise taxes to cover her spending review. She told GB News: 'Every penny of this is funded through the tax increases and the changes to the fiscal rules that we set out last autumn.'


Daily Mail
24 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
BREAKING NEWS Rachel Reeves' spending splurge plans are ALREADY in chaos after GDP fell 0.3% in April - fuelling fears she WILL have to hike taxes
' spending plans have already been thrown into chaos today after figures showed the economy tumbling into the red. GDP was down 0.3 per cent in April, worse than analysts had expected, and raising more questions about the realism of the Chancellor's splurge on services. Although UK plc has still grown over the past three months, evidence has been mounting of a slowdown. Ms Reeves admitted the data - which coincide with the huge national insurance tax raid on businesses taking effect - were 'disappointing'. ONS Director of Economic Statistics Liz McKeown said: 'The economy contracted in April, with services and manufacturing both falling. However, over the last three months as a whole GDP still grew, with signs that some activity may have been brought forward from April to earlier in the year. 'Both legal and real estate firms fared badly in April, following a sharp increase in house sales in March when buyers rushed to complete purchases ahead of changes to Stamp Duty. Car manufacturing also performed poorly after growing in the first quarter of the year. 'In contrast April was a strong month for construction, research and development and retail, with increases in these only partially offsetting falls elsewhere. 'After increasing for each of the four preceding months, April saw the largest monthly fall on record in goods exports to the United States with decreases seen across most types of goods, following the recent introduction of tariffs.' In the Spending Review yesterday, Ms Reeves set out plans to 'invest' a staggering £4trillion to fund 'the renewal of Britain'. She said the plans, which include another huge dollop of cash for the NHS, would end the 'destructive' austerity of the last government and boost economic growth. Labour strategists hope the costly gamble will pay off by cutting hospital waiting lists, improving the creaking infrastructure and pump-priming the economy. But experts warned the scale of the spending, coupled with the deteriorating public finances, would force another round of damaging tax rises this autumn. The Conservatives accused Ms Reeves of adopting a reckless 'spend now, tax later' approach. The Chancellor insisted her plans could be funded by the eye-watering tax rises she imposed last year. She refused to rule out tax rises this autumn, saying only that taxes 'won't have to go up to pay for what's in this Spending Review'. But the small print of yesterday's Treasury document already includes one significant new tax hike, with the Chancellor pencilling in council tax hikes that will add more than £350 to an average Band D bill by 2029 to help fund local services and the police. Asked to rule out further tax rises, Treasury minister Emma Reynolds said: 'I'm not ruling it in, I'm not ruling it out.'