Lord Framlingham (Con)

My Lords, my text for today is “Barley, Not Bulrushes”. There is nothing more damaging to the fate of a nation than a Government with a huge majority taking massive decisions affecting us all without having the slightest understanding of what they are doing, or perhaps—which is even more frightening—understanding the damage that they are inflicting and being happy if the result is disaster because that suits their long-term ends. In the case of farming, it is this destruction of the independent small to medium-sized family farm, to be swallowed up by huge conglomerate blocs that are much more amenable to government control. Whatever the motive, the result is the same and it simply cannot be allowed to happen. Our striving to increase food production is as old as time itself, from hunter-gatherers to the sophisticated techniques of today, taking in the great improvements of the 18th and 19th centuries, led famously by, among others, Charles “Turnip” Townsend and Coke of Holkham. The latter would, I feel sure, strongly approve of his descendants’ efforts today. We have a long and proud history of making every acre capable of food production play its part in feeding the nation. Now, with a population growing at an alarming rate and growing demands not just to feed the people but to improve our lamentable record on self-sufficiency, what are the Government proposing to do? They are proposing to tax thousands of farmers out of existence: the kinds of farmers who not only make maximum use of their acreage but understand and care for our unique and vital countryside and its wildlife in a way that larger units simply cannot do. Taxing farmers in the way that is proposed is deeply shaming. Labour specifically promised not to do it. Breaking your word on an issue of this kind not only does huge damage to the Government’s reputation, which is really not my concern, but shames every parliamentarian in the eyes of the people. All this to fill an invented and entirely fictional £22 billion black hole, the script for the justification of which every Labour MP has learned by heart and repeats ad nauseam. This is childish and insulting to political opponents and, more importantly, the general public. The other tragic fiction is the need for net zero and all the dreadful consequences resulting from it. The idea that, to meet some scientifically unsubstantiated target by a rigidly imposed date, we should rewild thousands of acres of fertile farmland and smother vast tracts of land in hideous Chinese-manufactured solar panels, will have all our forebears who dedicated themselves to improving agricultural productivity turning in their graves. We must support our farmers in this battle, which, for the sake of the nation, they cannot afford to lose. The supermarkets must be made to understand that they cannot go on indefinitely screwing farm prices down. It really is farcical that milk, with all that goes into its production, often costs less than bottled water. Not so many years ago, the government department responsible for farming was MAFF—the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. It served farmers very well in many ways. We changed this—heaven knows why—to Defra, the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. There is no mention of farming or fishing. We took our eye off the ball. It is time to get our priorities right and put farming back centre stage where it belongs. I thank the noble Earl for allowing us the opportunity to set out our thoughts on this vital issue. I urge the Minister, when he responds to the debate, to make it clear to the House and to the country that, when it comes to keeping the nation fed, he understands the difference between barley and bulrushes.