logo
Cutting nature-friendly farming budget would be ‘devastating', Government warned

Cutting nature-friendly farming budget would be ‘devastating', Government warned

Environmentalists warned that cutting the spend on the post-Brexit farming schemes, which pay farmers and landowners to deliver public goods such as hedgerows, wildflower habitat and clean water, would 'remove all hope' of the Government meeting targets to reverse nature's declines.
And farmers, who have already been hit by changes to inheritance tax and the abrupt closure of this year's sustainable farming incentive (SFI), the biggest strand of the environmental land management scheme (Elms), said cuts would be 'disastrous'.
The warnings come in the face of reports that the Environment Department (Defra's) nature-friendly farming budget, which has replaced EU agricultural subsidies based mostly on the amount of land farmed, will be cut in the forthcoming spending review.
Nature-friendly farming schemes pay for measures such as cover crops to support healthy soils and wildlife and reduce flood risk (Emily Beament/PA)
The Government announced a 'record' £5 billion spending over two years on sustainable farming, but the long term future of the funding looks threatened by looming departmental cuts, while there are concerns cash could be targeted at small farms or in certain areas rather than across the countryside.
Environmentalists warned that the nature-friendly farming budget was the UK's biggest spend on nature and, with 70% of land used for farming, key to meeting the Government's manifesto pledge to achieve targets to halt declines in nature by 2030.
Barnaby Coupe, senior land use policy manager at The Wildlife Trusts, says: 'Rumours of further cuts to the farming budget are deeply concerning and, if true, would cripple funding for restoring nature and remove all hope of reaching the Government's targets for wildlife recovery.'
He warned the £2.5 billion a year in the current farming budget 'already falls short' of what was needed, adding: 'Whittling this down further will see progress stall and reverse.'
'If the cuts go ahead, the Government's promise to bring back wildlife will be in tatters – and farmers will be left unsupported to adapt to extreme climate change and exposed to the whims of market forces demanding unsustainable and intensified food production.'
Richard Benwell, chief of Wildlife and Countryside Link, said: 'Cutting the nature-friendly farming budget would be devastating for nature, farmers and rural communities.'
He said that a transition to nature-friendly farming could help reverse declines in rivers, woodland, wildflowers and wildlife, at the same time as reducing air, soil and water pollution, and supporting a thriving profitable farming sector and rural communities.
'But without a decent budget to pay farmers for the environmental benefits they provide, the future of entire ecosystems will be in doubt.'
Martin Lines, chief executive of the Nature Friendly Farming Network (NFFN), said: 'These cuts would be disastrous if implemented, with the negative impact felt far beyond farming and reaching the wider public.
'Investing in nature-friendly farming helps protect communities from the devastation of flooding.
'It reduces the impact of climate change by protecting and restoring carbon-storing habitats such as peatland.
'It also supports the delivery of affordable, renewable energy.'
He said that if the Government was serious about sustainable growth and long-term food production, it needed to invest in England's landscapes, adding: 'Farmers are ready to play their part, but they are being let down by ministers turning off the funding tap.
'The simplest, most cost-effective solution to the problems we face is to invest now.
'If we fail to act, and wait until the impacts of climate change worsen, the cost will be far higher,' he warned.
National Farmers' Union president Tom Bradshaw said: 'Alongside numerous rural, environmental and nature groups, including the RSPB and National Trust, we have repeatedly called for government to honour its commitments, with budget and partnership, to protect nature and restore habitats through agriculture.
'But without funding, this will be government giving up on its own environmental targets – targets which it relied on farmers to deliver.'
He warned that farmers would be left 'prioritising economic returns and balancing tough choices between farming the land as hard as they can just to make a living and continuing to focus on environmental works they have been proud to deliver'.
And he said farms of all sizes had a key role in helping deliver for food, nature and climate.
Defra said it would not comment on speculation.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

MP: Grenfell-style mistakes could be repeated over battery storage regulation
MP: Grenfell-style mistakes could be repeated over battery storage regulation

Powys County Times

time42 minutes ago

  • Powys County Times

MP: Grenfell-style mistakes could be repeated over battery storage regulation

The Government risks repeating the mistakes of Grenfell unless safety regulations on battery storage units are brought forward, an MP has warned. Liberal Democrat John Milne said there were 'alarming parallels' with the systemic failure which led to the west London tower block fire. Currently there are no laws which specifically govern the safety of battery energy storage systems (Bess), according to the House of Commons library. However, individual batteries could be subject to product safety regulations. Speaking in the Commons, Mr Milne accused the Government of being 'too complacent' as he called for enforceable regulations for the design and construction of the storage systems. The MP for Horsham said: 'The Grenfell disaster was the end result of many failings by both individuals and companies, but at its heart it was a failure of regulation. 'The rules left things wide open for exploitation by cost-cutting developers, and that is exactly what happened. 'Just as with lithium-ion batteries, a new technology, in this case cladding, was being used at scale for the first time without proper understanding of the risks. The time to act is now.' He continued: 'The Government itself has responded to all questions from myself and others to say that it considers the present regulatory regime to be robust. I am tempted to say pride comes before a fall. 'In the last few weeks a Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesman has stated that battery fires at storage sites are rare in the UK, we already have high standards in place that require manufacturers and industry to ensure batteries are safe throughout their lifespan. 'This is just too complacent. 'Fires as a result of cladding were also incredibly rare, but that did not save 72 lives at Grenfell.' Mr Milne said the industry would benefit from clear guidance, before adding: 'Any guidance needs to cover-off a number of areas, including transport of batteries to the site, design and construction, fire-fighting, ongoing inspection and decommissioning. 'In the short term, if the Government is for any reason still reluctant to regulate, perhaps it could issue clear national guidelines which are capable of being updated annually. 'Enforcement might then take place through the insurance industry, who would be likely to insist that any new applications followed such guidelines, as no project can go ahead without insurance, it is enforcement by the back door. 'Grenfell was a wholly predictable tragedy. A similar fire at Lakanal House in Camberwell, which killed six people, should have made us understand the risk, but the warning wasn't heeded and history took its course. 'We can't go back in time to stop Grenfell, but we can act now to avoid making the same mistake again with battery energy storage systems.' Elsewhere in the debate, Conservative MP for Mid Buckinghamshire Greg Smith said there should be minimum distances between battery storage sites and housing. Mr Smith said: 'This is not a debate about the principle of energy storage, although I am in principle opposed to such schemes taking agricultural land and challenging our food security, but today's debate, which is deeply concerning, and what this House must urgently address, are the real, growing, and too often overlooked safety implications of these installations, particularly when placed in close proximity to villages, and rural road networks ill-equipped to support them.' He added: 'At the very least the Government should introduce clear national guidelines on the siting of Bess installations, including minimum separation distances from residential properties, fire resilience standards, mandatory site-specific risk assessments and restrictions on placing these facilities on, or near, rural roads.' SNP MP for Aberdeen North, Kirsty Blackman, said developers should pay towards fire mitigation measures. She said: 'If we're saying to those organisations that are creating the battery storage sites, you will need to pay for the fire safety assessment, you will need to consult the local fire and you will need to pay for the training of those local fire teams in tackling fires at battery energy storage sites, I think that would be the most reasonable way forward. 'Ask them to pay for that training, because it's them that are going to be making a huge profit off it.' Energy minister Miatta Fahnbulleh said: 'It is often claimed that there is no regulation in this sector because there is no specific law addressing battery safety. This is simply untrue. 'The safety and standards of batteries are assured throughout their life cycle. The Government is therefore confident that the safety risks posed by grid-scale batteries are relatively small and well managed.'

MP: Grenfell-style mistakes could be repeated over battery storage regulation
MP: Grenfell-style mistakes could be repeated over battery storage regulation

Western Telegraph

time43 minutes ago

  • Western Telegraph

MP: Grenfell-style mistakes could be repeated over battery storage regulation

Liberal Democrat John Milne said there were 'alarming parallels' with the systemic failure which led to the west London tower block fire. Currently there are no laws which specifically govern the safety of battery energy storage systems (Bess), according to the House of Commons library. However, individual batteries could be subject to product safety regulations. Speaking in the Commons, Mr Milne accused the Government of being 'too complacent' as he called for enforceable regulations for the design and construction of the storage systems. The MP for Horsham said: 'The Grenfell disaster was the end result of many failings by both individuals and companies, but at its heart it was a failure of regulation. 'The rules left things wide open for exploitation by cost-cutting developers, and that is exactly what happened. 'Just as with lithium-ion batteries, a new technology, in this case cladding, was being used at scale for the first time without proper understanding of the risks. The time to act is now.' He continued: 'The Government itself has responded to all questions from myself and others to say that it considers the present regulatory regime to be robust. I am tempted to say pride comes before a fall. 'In the last few weeks a Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesman has stated that battery fires at storage sites are rare in the UK, we already have high standards in place that require manufacturers and industry to ensure batteries are safe throughout their lifespan. 'This is just too complacent. 'Fires as a result of cladding were also incredibly rare, but that did not save 72 lives at Grenfell.' Grenfell Tower (James Manning/PA) Mr Milne said the industry would benefit from clear guidance, before adding: 'Any guidance needs to cover-off a number of areas, including transport of batteries to the site, design and construction, fire-fighting, ongoing inspection and decommissioning. 'In the short term, if the Government is for any reason still reluctant to regulate, perhaps it could issue clear national guidelines which are capable of being updated annually. 'Enforcement might then take place through the insurance industry, who would be likely to insist that any new applications followed such guidelines, as no project can go ahead without insurance, it is enforcement by the back door. 'Grenfell was a wholly predictable tragedy. A similar fire at Lakanal House in Camberwell, which killed six people, should have made us understand the risk, but the warning wasn't heeded and history took its course. 'We can't go back in time to stop Grenfell, but we can act now to avoid making the same mistake again with battery energy storage systems.' Elsewhere in the debate, Conservative MP for Mid Buckinghamshire Greg Smith said there should be minimum distances between battery storage sites and housing. Mr Smith said: 'This is not a debate about the principle of energy storage, although I am in principle opposed to such schemes taking agricultural land and challenging our food security, but today's debate, which is deeply concerning, and what this House must urgently address, are the real, growing, and too often overlooked safety implications of these installations, particularly when placed in close proximity to villages, and rural road networks ill-equipped to support them.' He added: 'At the very least the Government should introduce clear national guidelines on the siting of Bess installations, including minimum separation distances from residential properties, fire resilience standards, mandatory site-specific risk assessments and restrictions on placing these facilities on, or near, rural roads.' SNP MP for Aberdeen North, Kirsty Blackman, said developers should pay towards fire mitigation measures. She said: 'If we're saying to those organisations that are creating the battery storage sites, you will need to pay for the fire safety assessment, you will need to consult the local fire and you will need to pay for the training of those local fire teams in tackling fires at battery energy storage sites, I think that would be the most reasonable way forward. 'Ask them to pay for that training, because it's them that are going to be making a huge profit off it.' Energy minister Miatta Fahnbulleh said: 'It is often claimed that there is no regulation in this sector because there is no specific law addressing battery safety. This is simply untrue. 'The safety and standards of batteries are assured throughout their life cycle. The Government is therefore confident that the safety risks posed by grid-scale batteries are relatively small and well managed.' She added there is 'scope to strengthen' the planning process.

Foley announces further reduction in childcare fees
Foley announces further reduction in childcare fees

Belfast Telegraph

timean hour ago

  • Belfast Telegraph

Foley announces further reduction in childcare fees

Under the new maximum fee caps for providers availing of State support through Core Funding, the highest possible fees will be no more than 295 euros per week for a full day place of between 40-50 hours per week. This will bring these fees closer to the average weekly fee of 197 euros for full day care. The move comes after the Government committed to progressively reduce the cost of early learning and childcare to 200 euros per month during the lifetime of the coalition. It follows an initial fee cap which was put in place last year limited to new entrants to the scheme. That cap will now be lowered and applied to all new and existing services receiving the State funding from September, which will further lower the maximum fees that can be charged depending on the number of hours provided. Fees for parents are further reduced by State subsidies under the National Childcare Scheme and the free, universal two-year Early Childhood Care and Education pre-school programme. A parent being charged the maximum permissible fee of 295 euros per week for a full day place would be entitled to receive the universal National Childcare Scheme subsidy of 96.30 euros, meaning their own co-payment would be no more than 198.70 euros per week. Higher subsidies are available for many parents depending on their level of income as well as the age and number of children in their family. The measure was announced by Children's Minister Norma Foley on Thursday. She said the move would reduce costs for families who are facing the highest fees across the country in around 10% of early learning and childcare providers. At the same time, State funding for early learning and childcare providers through Core Funding is being increased by 60 million euros for the forthcoming 2025/2026 period, bringing it to a record level of more than 390 million euros. The Department of Children said 'unprecedented funding' will ensure an existing fee freeze, which was introduced in 2022, will remain in place for participating services. Speaking to reporters at the Department of Children, Ms Foley said: 'We have made considerable progress over the last number of years but today we're also cognisant that it is an unfinished journey – and we remain on the journey.' She said the fee cap would support parents who are 'paying extraordinarily high fees'. As an example, Ms Foley said: 'Parents who are paying particularly high fees are paying between 300-325 euro. 'The fee cap will reduce that to 295 euro, and when the subsidy which is already in existence gets factored in, they would pay less than 200 euro. 'So on average right across the year, that is a saving for those parents of approximately 1,500 euro.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store