SCOTTISH ministers have told Michael Gove that they will not consent to his so-called green Brexit Agriculture Bill over fears of a farm payment power grab.
The leading Brexiteer and Environment Secretary launched the UK Government’s proposed new legislation yesterday, with a promise to change the system under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), where subsidies are almost entirely dependent on the size of the farm.
READ MORE: This is why the window to hold indyref2 opens AFTER Brexit
It’s part of his so-called ‘green Brexit’, where money will be given to farmers who do more for the “public good” and work more on “environmental land management”. That could involve work to improve air and water quality, boosting wildlife and habitats and tackling climate change.
But farmers are worried that it means a shift away from supporting food production, while Scotland’s Rural Economy Secretary Fergus Ewing said the legislation would ride roughshod over the devolved settlement and didn’t deliver on promises made to farmers.
Gove said the plans would help the UK “move towards a brighter future for farming”.
READ MORE: May says UK Government could refuse to pay £39bn Brexit bill
“After nearly 50 years of being tied to burdensome and outdated EU rules, we have an opportunity to deliver a green Brexit,” he said.
“This bill will allow us to reward farmers who protect our environment, leaving the countryside in a cleaner, greener and healthier state for future generations.
“Critically, we will also provide the smooth and gradual transition that farmers and land managers need to plan ahead.”
The current system of subsidies, known as direct payments, will be phased out over seven years from 2021. The National Farmers Union (NFU) Scotland said there needed to be more detail about how the funds will be managed and how much Holyrood would be involved.
President Andrew McCormick said they would analyse the bill with a fine toothcomb: “In past discussions on overarching UK frameworks and the bill, we have been crystal clear that the interests of Scottish agriculture will be best served by Scotland setting its own future policy so that it respects and underpins the unique agricultural profile of Scotland and recognises how Scotland differs from the rest of the UK.
“We fully accept the need for commonly agreed frameworks to preserve the integrity of the UK internal market, recognising that the most important outlet for Scottish produce is within these shores.
“Preserving or enhancing future funding levels for Scottish agriculture remains a red line issue for NFU Scotland as we are clearly stepping away from previous funding arrangements determined by the CAP. We also want to be reassured that previous commitments on how Scotland’s share of the agricultural pot of funding will be determined will be delivered on.”
The Scottish Government are understood to be worried that the powers in Gove’s bill could see Scottish Parliament unable to continue to provide support for beef and sheep farmers, and could mean an end to the Less Favoured Area Support Scheme which provides support to farming businesses in remote areas.
Ewing called it a “missed opportunity”.
Rural Economy Secretary Fergus Ewing
“The UK Government’s Agriculture Bill completely fails to meet the key tests of delivering on promises made to Scotland, respecting the devolved settlements, and righting long standing issues.
“It represents a missed opportunity for the UK Government to deliver on promises made during the referendum and since – namely that Scottish farmers would continue to receive at least the same level of funding as they currently do in the event of Brexit.”
“This Bill rides roughshod over the devolved settlement. For example, on compliance with WTO rules, the Bill could create sweeping unilateral powers that could constrain policy choices in Scotland. It is therefore of serious concern that the UK Government could impose unwanted policies and rules on Scottish farmers in areas of devolved competency.
“Unless and until the attempts to grab key powers that impact on farming and food production are addressed and revised, we are clear that we cannot and will not bring forward legislative consent motions for primary Brexit legislation, such as this, until the Sewel Convention is made operable again.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel