Call from Senedd members over final say on farming support
He said: 'Today, we're simply asking that this Senedd be given the opportunity to vote: a final, binding vote on the sustainable farming scheme before it is implemented. We all remember last year's protests. We know the strength of feeling across the country.
'A scheme of this scale, affecting over 80% of Wales' land, must carry democratic legitimacy. Let us vote. Let the elected members of this chamber, from every corner of Wales and from every party, have their say.'
The former journalist, who is from a farming family, warned of a 'cliff-edge' in the transition from the basic payment scheme (BPS), which is set to fall by 40 per cent, to the SFS.
He said: "If you don't join the SFS, you forfeit your BPS. If you do join the SFS, you forfeit your BPS entitlements. There's no going back… for you and your business. Is it any wonder anxiety is soaring? Is it any surprise that our farmers' mental health is deteriorating?'
Labour's Lesley Griffiths, a former rural affairs minister, was extremely disappointed to see Welsh ministers cut a target of 43,000 hectares of new woodland by more than 60 per cent, with plans for 10 per cent tree cover on every farm ditched.
Peter Fox, a Tory council leader-turned Senedd member, said he was planning to retire as a farmer having 'just about had enough', with the new SFS 'still laden with bureaucracy'.
'Most farmers just want to farm,' he said. 'They want to produce food and they want to look after their farm… but the priority in this SFS is clearly no longer food production.'
Labour's Lee Waters warned the debate around farming has been dragged into 'culture wars', with divisions heightened by political debate.
Deputy first minister Huw Irranca-Davies said Senedd members would get an opportunity to vote on regulations related to payment rates underpinning the scheme in the autumn.
In the final vote before the Welsh Parliament breaks for summer recess, Senedd members voted narrowly, 22-20, against the opposition motion
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
41 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Two-tier policing is the nail in the coffin for Britain's social contract
Has a British Government ever appeared so terrified of its own people? More to the point, can you think of one that deserved it more? The social contract has been shredded. You go to work and pay your taxes for a state that seems to be crumbling into disrepair. In exchange, the Government takes your money, and uses it to fund an alleged secret scheme to fly in Taliban fighters to live on your street. But don't worry – we've got a new 'elite police squad' to prevent trouble. That police unit won't be patrolling your neighbourhood to keep you safe from harm. Rather, it will be tasked with scouring social media for protest pre-crime, monitoring your opinions for anti-migrant sentiment. The police might not have enough resources to deal with shoplifting. They might not have solved a single theft or burglary, or recover a stolen bike, across a third of England. But we are to believe they have resources for what really counts: scrutinising your views for wrongthink. The current state of affairs is so absurd that simply writing it down feels almost subversive. But each element is true: we do appear to have flown unvetted Taliban members into Britain. The Government really will be watching your posts for signs of dissent. This isn't some accident, some Civil Service blunder. It's by design. It truly appears that Labour's strategy is to impose ever more restrictions on the freedoms of the law-abiding, in the hope that eventually people will acquiesce with a resigned shrug. The problem is that it isn't working. The population is fed up with being punished for doing the right thing. The hectoring about slavery, imperialism, war and all the other iniquities of history used to justify sacrificing our comforts and liberties on the altar of mass migration is no longer having the desired effect. British citizens living today did not build the empire. They didn't enslave anyone. Why should they foot the bill for housing illegal migrants up in four star hotels in central London? Why should they put up with them working in the shadow economy? Unfortunately for the Government, the previously silent majority is beginning to vocally express its frustration. MPs and ministers are fearful that the country is becoming a 'tinderbox'. But even this isn't enough to convince them that we must change course. Why? Perhaps because doing so would be an admission of past failures. For decades we were told that mass migration was an unalloyed good while critics were denounced as bigots. To concede, after all this time, that it has not come without costs – at times intolerable costs – would be catastrophically damaging to the political class. The pro-migration fanatics, who promised to control numbers while throwing open our borders, who overrode objections to impose their policies despite what they were repeatedly being told at the ballot box, would be discredited. So instead, the state appears to be passing through the stages of grief. At first there was denial that people were worried about migration at all; Brexit had allowed us to be liberals. Then there was anger after Southport, with Starmer's denunciation of the 'thugs' taking to the streets. Now we seem to have reached bargaining: if we can stop people talking about it, perhaps they'll stop caring? It was a strategy that might have worked prior to the social media era, and in particular prior to Elon Musk's buyout of Twitter. Now, even the censorship of protest videos, arrest of people for incendiary content, and threat of mass scanning of output isn't sufficient to quell dissent. And though many of the protests now cropping up across Britain are peaceful, shows of police force are not enough to deter outside agitators from hijacking them. Tiff Lynch, the head of the Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers, last week warned that officers were being 'pulled in every direction' and commanders were 'forced to choose between keeping the peace at home or plugging national gaps'. Where do we go from here? As the costs of legal migration become apparent, with talk of labour market infusions and attracting the 'best and brightest' seeming increasingly hollow, overall numbers must be reduced. As the impact of illegal migration becomes clearer, the establishment must stop trying to guilt us into acceptance, and finally stop the influx. It's highly doubtful Yvette Cooper has the will or the way. The Home Secretary would prefer to silence opponents, by censoring and arresting those who speak out.
Metro
an hour ago
- Metro
Readers discuss Corbyn's 'own goal', Doctor Who and gorilla costumes
Do you agree with our readers? Have your say on these MetroTalk topics and more in the comments. The most significant thing that Jeremy Corbyn's new political party (Metro, Fri) is likely to achieve is dividing Labour's extreme left vote between two camps, which will reduce Labour's overall support, and therefore help more right-wing political parties such as the Conservatives and Reform gain traction before the next General Election. This should please rather than threaten 'the rich and powerful' he has vowed to 'take on'. As a football fan, Corbyn ought to know what is meant by scoring an own goal, but perhaps he doesn't. Robert Hughes, London I don't understand the furore about 16-year-olds being allowed to vote (MetroTalk, Tue). Regardless of whichever particular party is in power, MetroTalk will be full of letters asking why people voted for them. There will always be people unhappy with the government. Instead of the Opposition childishly trying to score points against whoever is in power, the only sensible solution would be for the government to be a Coalition, made up of members from every political party, working together for the good of the people instead of for themselves. Owen, London Wake up to find news on your TV shows in your inbox every morning with Metro's TV Newsletter. Sign up to our newsletter and then select your show in the link we'll send you so we can get TV news tailored to you. If 16-year-olds get the vote they will probably be drawn to the Lib Dems, purely because Ed Davey's stunts are social media-friendly. Why bother with politics when you could be rolling downhill, strapped to a giant Wensleydale? Tess Kamara, via email Perhaps if 16- and 17-year-olds had been allowed to vote in the referendum, we wouldn't have been subjected to the debacle that is Brexit. Roger Smith, Witham Policemen are noticeable by their absence in most towns and cities and rarely bother turning up when a crime is reported – yet a reported 5,000 officers are suddenly available to protect a convicted felon from America on his visit to Turnberry in Scotland? Martin J Phillips, Leeds I agree with Kim from Hornchurch (MetroTalk, Wed) about the grossly misjudged decision by the school that didn't allow a student to wear a Union Jack dress. However, that's not at all the same as an adult approaching a school wearing a gorilla costume. For those who think it's OK for a father to go to his child's school in a gorilla costume, I suppose it would also be OK if a parent approached a school wearing a motorcycle helmet or maybe with a clown's face painted on? It's interesting how when someone is admonished for doing something stupid and inconsiderate, they jump on to the bandwagon of calling those who disagree with their actions 'woke'. Kehinde, London The recent incident involving Chris Napthine collecting his daughter from school in a gorilla costume reminds me of the Not The Nine O'Clock News sketch where Professor Timothy Fielding is describing his early experience with Gerald the Gorilla. Fielding says, 'When I first encountered Gerald, he was completely wild.' Gerald then replies, 'Wild? I was absolutely livid! Stephen Dugdale, Sheffield In Wednesday's Metro, on page seven, there were two tragic stories of women being stabbed to death by their ex partners. One perpetrator was jailed for a minimum of 28 years and the other 15 years. Where is the consistency? Malcolm Hair, Surrey John Coyne (MetroTalk, Wed), voiced concern about Doctor Who stories not being as good as they once were. I agree. Some of the recent series have been quite weak and I have sat watching, almost willing a decent storyline to appear. More Trending Sadly, the least effective Doctor in recent times was Jodie Whittaker. I had no issue with the character being female, but Jodie was completely unsuited to the role. There are many fine female actors who could have done a far superior job. I understand that ratings have been falling and I am not surprised. If the writers don't write decent episodes and soon, then it will not be long before the series is taken off air and it may not return for some 20 years, as was the case, a few years back. Ed Lewis, Mansfield MORE: British & Irish Lions won't settle for a Test series win over Australia with an historic clean sweep on the cards MORE: Huge plumes of smoke seen for miles as 20 tonnes of tyres go up in factory inferno MORE: Thief hides 76 bottles of stolen wine in wheelie bin and flees in tuk-tuk
Metro
3 hours ago
- Metro
What's stopping Keir Starmer from recognising Palestine as a state?
Sir Keir Starmer is coming under a lot of pressure to recognise Palestinian statehood. He's under pressure from 221 MPs – more than a third of all the people who sit in the House of Commons – who collectively signed a letter urging recognition. He's under pressure from Jeremy Corbyn's newly announced left-wing party, which placed alleged UK complicity in the Gaza horror at the centre of its launch, and the significant number of supporters it has attracted. And he's under pressure from top Labour figures, ranging from London Mayor Sadiq Khan to members of his own cabinet, who are pushing him on the matter both publicly and privately. Those calls have grown in the past few days, as images of starving children have been beamed around the world and French President Emmanuel Macron has announced France will formally recognise Palestine as a state. But the Prime Minister has remained firm, insisting he will only press forward at the moment when the move would have the maximum impact. Craig Munro breaks down Westminster chaos into easy to follow insight, walking you through what the latest policies mean to you. Sent every Wednesday. Sign up here. In a statement released on Thursday night, Starmer said: 'We are clear that statehood is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people. 'A ceasefire will put us on a path to the recognition of a Palestinian state and a two-state solution which guarantees peace and security for Palestinians and Israelis.' The UK is deeply entwined in the history of the region currently occupied by Israel and Palestine. In 1916, the British claimed control of the region called Palestine amid the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, and the following year, Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour said the UK would back a 'national home' for the Jewish people in the area. A little over three decades later, in 1948, David Ben-Gurion declared the independence of Israel. The UN admitted Israel as a member in 1949, but not Palestine. It was not until 1988 that Palestinian statehood was recognised by any UN member states, after the Palestinian National Council formally declared independence. Today, 147 of the UN's 193 member states recognise Palestine, including the vast majority of the countries in Asia, Africa and South America. The UK, US, Canada, Germany, Japan, Australia and New Zealand are among the nations that do not. In 2014, MPs in the House of Commons voted to 274 to 12 in favour of recognising Palestine as a state. But David Cameron's government responded with a line that remains familiar today – that recognition would wait until it was deemed most appropriate for the peace process. On the face of it, the British government appears to be closer than ever to announcing formal recognition of a Palestinian state. Among the high-profile cabinet members reportedly arguing in favour are Deputy PM Angela Rayner, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood. The UK has also been closely aligning with France on the issue, as part of the E3 group of nations alongside Germany. However, both Starmer and Foreign Secretary David Lammy have insisted publicly that the move is only worth making when it would be most effective in the pursuit of peace. On Tuesday, Lammy told the BBC: 'We don't just want to recognise symbolically, we want to recognise as a way of getting to the two states that sadly many are trying to thwart at this point in time.' Labour's election manifesto last year said the party is 'committed to recognising a Palestinian state as a contribution to a renewed peace process which results in a two-state solution with a safe and secure Israel alongside a viable and sovereign Palestinian state.' More Trending The letter signed by 221 MPs, organised by Labour's Sarah Champion, said the announcement of recognition should come at a UN conference co-chaired by France and Saudi Arabia on Monday and Tuesday. It said: 'British recognition of Palestine would be particularly powerful given its role as the author of the Balfour Declaration and the former Mandatory Power in Palestine. Since 1980 we have backed a two-state solution. 'Such a recognition would give that position substance as well as living up to a historic responsibility we have to the people under that Mandate.' Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: Will there be a bank holiday and trophy parade if England win Women's Euro 2025? MORE: Empty shops to be turned into clubs and bars under new government plans MORE: Trump warns 'there'll be no Europe left' before immediately hitting golf course
