Good morning again ladies and gentlemen.
There is absolutely no doubt that as an industry we continually face an ever-increasing list of challenges. Whether that’s with ongoing energy prices, concerns over future policy and funding, transport infrastructure, education or species management to name but a few, we as a union are continually lobbying to make sure correct political decisions are made in the best interests of our members.
Some of these challenges are warranted and we do need to take responsibility for delivering more for the wider benefits of society. However, there is still too much ill-informed rhetoric from not only a loud minority within our population, but sadly there are government decision makers on all sides of the border who are not aware of unintended consequences.
We keep hearing that our top priority is climate change and we are told we need to do more as an industry to improve on how we lower our greenhouse gas emissions and that is correct.
Then we hear that we need to do more for the environment as that is also at the top of the priority list as according to the state of nature report and others we continue to lose numbers and diversity of species, this is also to a degree correct.
Then last and noticeably at the bottom of the pile is our ability to produce food for not just ourselves but others who are less fortunate.
What always astounds me is the lack of recognition that without what in many people’s eyes is the least important, (food production), we will not be able to address any of the former challenges ahead as we will not have the people on the ground with the skills, knowledge and technology to do it for us.
So, what is the problem? The problem is we, as an industry, have to deal with political decisions that were made by people that are no longer in power, and as the only constant, we are the ones who have to pick up the pieces.
There are far too many examples of this, in the last three years from a UK perspective, we’ve had three Prime ministers, three Chancellors, three Secretaries of State for DEFRA and three Home secretaries. All of whom made decisions that we will have to deal with for the foreseeable future.
From a Scottish perspective, as a result of the Bute House agreement, we now have a real hardening of the green agenda which is seriously worrying not only from a food security point of view, but unbelievably so from an environmental perspective, again due to the lack of understanding of how our rural landscape works.
Last, but by no means least, the implications from European decisions are still having an impact on us and it’s still vital we continue to have that dialogue with not only our European counterparts, many of which have the same problems as ourselves, but also with their decision makers.
I’m going to highlight why these decisions are having a negative impact on us and what your union is doing for you to negate these impacts as much as possible and to highlight some of the positive contributions our industry makes to society that are still overlooked.
I’m going to have to start with Brexit. You’d think, given we have just passed the third anniversary of us technically leaving the EU, we would have solved most of the problems. That’s certainly not the case.
Sadly, when you look back 7 years ago, all the issues around trade, labour and support that we were extremely concerned about have come to fruition.
If that’s not a clear indication for the government to listen to industry before making decisions on the back of getting more votes, rather than doing the right thing for the country, then I don’t know what is.
That is also something that our previous Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs Fergus Ewing said to me relevant to future policy. If you want any industry to change then let the industry lead that change as they understand how it works.
Very wise words indeed. However, it must also be said, that Fergus as cabinet Secretary had the luxury of not having to work under The Bute House Agreement whereby having the freedom to make correct decisions in the best interests of our rural economy was sold from under their feet.
And here’s me all this time thinking that FREEDOM was a word that the Scottish government would buy into, obviously not on this occasion.
So here we have it, Brexit in a nutshell, every single sector of Scottish agriculture is represented on this slide. Cereals, milk, fruit, sausage, bacon, eggs, haggis, black pudding, potato scone, tomatoes and mushrooms.
Now I’m not suggesting for one second that we should all be eating this every morning, although I’m fairly confident looking round the audience there’s some would have a fair stab at it. The point of this slide is to ask how many people, when they sit down for their breakfast, actually think about where it came from?
And more importantly consider when, during the process of growing and rearing this meal, how much care and attention was given to animal welfare, the environment, its contribution to climate change mitigation and, indeed, its contribution to our own economy, not someone else’s.
Now, if you pardon the pun, this meal and all it stands for is what’s at stake here. Because if we get our future policy in agriculture wrong, and I’ll come to that later on, and listen to the ideology of those blinkered people who cannot see the wider picture, then we will go in a backward direction in terms of delivering the wider benefits we all want to see.
So a bit on trade. The Australian deal was a classic example of this. Despite assurances from the then Secretary of State for the Department of International Trade Liz Truss that there would be safeguards in place and our concerns would be recognised, we all know what happened. We buckled to get a trade deal over the line as quickly as possible to make Brexit look like a walk in the park.
The worst implications of this deal will not be felt for some time yet but as our market access looks to be much more appealing than what I understand the European one will be, then unless we set something meaningful in place to help our consumers choose the right product for the right reasons then we could be in serious trouble.
I am not saying for one minute that Australian beef does not conform to many of our food safety and welfare standards. However, I am saying that their methods and costs of production are on a completely different scale to what we do here.
This, once again, has come about because of someone making a wrong decision without fully understanding the unintended consequences then moving on. In this particular circumstance that said person moved on to be Foreign Secretary then Prime Minister and the rest, as they say, is history. BUT, yet again, it is the industry that needs to pick up the pieces as the only constant remaining.
This slide here is a picture of the Harris Ranch in California. My oldest daughter Jillian was there with the Young Farmers Agri-Affairs committee back in 2018. When she was there, there were 115,000 cattle on this one feed lot.
This is the kind of thing we may be up against if we continue to look at trade deals in such a manner. Where agriculture is used as a pawn to achieve market access for things like financial services, technologies, aeronautics etc.
Every other country now sees us as an easy target and will want the same market access that Australia and New Zealand have been granted. It’s not only the individual deals that are the problem, it’s the cumulative effect of many deals that could write off the ability of our industry throughout the UK to be part of the solution on so many fronts and continue to maintain landscapes such as this.
All the UK farming unions have been raising this issue at the highest level and are determined to make sure no further deals are made without full engagement with the industry.
For example a deal with India could have a devastating effect on the industry with imports of egg powder - as if the poultry sector hasn’t suffered enough with Avian Influenza and low returns.
Canada is another example whereby their determination to include beef that has been reared with hormones in any deal is relentless.
We need to take a leaf out of the Australian’s book here. When I spoke with the Australian High Commissioner George Brandis about their deal, he was astounded that our politicians were not engaging with the industry, which was the case with the Australians.
When we were down in London in the back end, we had a meeting with the Minister of State for the Department for International Trade Greg Hands, who is now, since Tuesday, Tory party chairman. We’ve met him several times before and he is still adamant that one of the main reasons for signing these deals is to get quicker access to the CPTPP - the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership - which would give us great opportunities for export.
He told us that we would have access to this ground breaking deal within two years, that’s now only 20 months away, and I thought I was optimistic. I still have my doubts about agriculture’s interests being looked after.
We will continue to engage at every level possible to make sure our voice is heard, to make sure positive change on all elements of trade, including the current asymmetric trading with our closest neighbours in Europe is implemented.
Moving on to labour, and there is a link here between the Australian deal and labour, again with decision makers recognising that mistakes had been made.
I remember speaking to Lord Daniel Hannan, MP, pro Brexiteer and founder member of the vote leave campaign on Newsnight with Emily Maitlis over a year ago. He said, at that time, Brexit is giving the UK fantastic opportunities for export. Well, I don’t think our industry is very well placed to be exporting agricultural products to Australia. I’m not sure what planet he was on then, but since that interview, he has now said that, actually we might have been better to have stayed in the single market. It would have saved us a lot of trouble. You don’t say.
That Ladies and Gentlemen is a massive understatement. Not only is agriculture suffering from a serious lack of labour, but many other industries are having a similar problem. This is something we have had some wins with, but we need to keep the pressure up or our growing fruit and veg sector, which has been a great success story, will fall apart far quicker than it grew and lose with it a massive contribution to our food and drink revenue.
When I say we have had some wins here, I want to add that credit for this must go in part to The Secretary of State for Scotland Alister Jack.
We have had a constant dialogue with Alister over this extremely serious issue and without his intervention we might not have raised the seasonal workers pilot to where it is now. However, we’re still not there. We are currently lobbying hard to get the seasonal agricultural workers pilot up to 55,000 and to address the issue around the costs involved with visas.
If we don’t get this addressed soon, we might not be in the position to even attract these essential workers over to the UK, especially as other economies are becoming more attractive.
The alternative is of course just to import from other countries. Yet again a statement that was made by Daniel Hannan recently when he stood up in parliament and said it would be far better for the UK to import lamb from New Zealand than support our own producers as it would be far better for our carbon footprint. Talk about making your blood boil.
So, this could be the alternative when it comes to us not growing our own fruit and veg. Places like the province of Almeria in Spain, where there is serious concerns around workers dwellings and pollution to the environment, would happily fill our shortfall but at what cost?
Almeria produces around 3.5 million tons of fruit and veg every year under 40,000Ha of plastic, enough to make them a major contributor to filling the shelves across Europe and the UK.
So much for addressing climate change and the environment. Is this really what our governments want to support?
It is utter hypocrisy given what we as an industry are being asked to do in the interest of fair work and the environment and it simply has to stop. Where are the environmental agencies and workers’ rights representatives in situations like this?
And it’s the same situation with so many products that arrive on our shelves. We are still importing so much pork from areas that threaten the health of our national pig herd. Surely the recent findings of illegally imported meat in the containers at Dover were a real wake up call.
Sadly, a lot of this information falls on deaf ears. It's fairly plain to see that despite government commitment to supporting our industry, the reality is far from the spin. A cheap food policy is what is wanted and we are paying the price.
So how do we address this? Well helping our consumers know what they are buying might be a start. For as long as I can remember, we have talked about labelling and how to make it clear. Yet, there’s still confusion.
Should it be a saltire, a union Jack, QMS or Red Tractor? Regardless, there is still confusion. Take the classic example of Scottish Smoked salmon or Smoked Scottish salmon.
They both sound fantastic but could be completely differently reared products from different countries. We need to have something simple that allows our consumers to support us.
All too often our consumers are hoodwinked into thinking they are backing Scottish farmers and crofters but because of either co-mingling of products by retailers on their shelves or unclear labelling they can be supporting other country’s economies with poor environmental practice.
This slide shows clearly how easily our consumers can be confused. These two packs of tatties were on a shelf supporting home grown produce. As you can see the one on the left says the Country of Origin is the UK but the one on the right is product of Israel. And of course, labelling on our shelves doesn’t address the food service sector where a third of our food is consumed.
We fully understand that our consumers are facing difficult choices right now, but unless we see true fairness in the supply chain back to the primary producer then we risk limiting their choices even further. We all have a role to play here but both government and retailers must seek to maintain long term continuity of supply by utilising a fair pricing scheme for seasonal home grown produce.
As you all know, I co-chair the Agricultural Reform Implementation Oversight Board, or ARIOB as it’s known, and it’s certainly a thankless task because it doesn’t matter who I speak to from all walks of life, no one’s happy. Some would say that’s a positive. Something that is still not widely understood is that this board exists to advise Scottish Government on the direction of travel on future agricultural policy. It does NOT take the decisions.
That is why taking on this role does not stop me from being critical on some of the decisions being made by Scottish Government. In fact, I have repeatedly highlighted the fact that it is the lack of decision making that is the biggest criticism, and if the Scottish Government had just listened to us back in 2018 we could all have been started on this journey of change by now.
Last year, when restrictions were lifted, we immediately took to the road once again to speak to our members from Shetland to Stranraer to make sure we were still on track lobbying in their best interests.
I can assure you that your interests are fully conveyed into the ARIOB. Indeed, after our very successful rally at Holyrood on the 2November, the whole of the Scottish Parliament can be in no doubt of where our priorities lie. Food Needs A Farmer.
Having nearly 50 MSP’s turning out to speak with us led to further discussions and questions being raised in the chamber and at committee level. This type of engagement is vital to make sure the industry is listened to.
I do have major concerns when it comes to the lack of understanding of what happens on the ground. One of the biggest is that, as food producers, we are only 1% of our population. We deliver the most important energy source of all and yet there is a far bigger percentage who seem to be the experts.
We forget that the vast majority of the population go about their daily lives without a care about how their food is produced because of a remarkable underestimated industry that has risen to the challenge of keeping our shelves full.
Unless we get our future policy correct and listen to those who live and breathe this industry, this will change on an unimaginable scale and it will not be farmers and crofters that will be jumping, it will be our consumers who will point out that this happened on the watch of a government who were taken in by false rhetoric.
Brexit, the Covid pandemic and the devastating war in Ukraine, which has been going on for nearly a year, should be opening government’s eyes in terms of what is important right now and the critical role that the nation’s food producers play.
We must have a re-set of where our priorities lie. We took our eye off the ball with energy and allowed others to produce it for us because it was cheap. Our own industries, not just agriculture, have suffered because of this drive to have everything cheap.
That’s now changed, and we are at the mercy of those who can provide energy for us. If this happens with food production then we will not only lose our ability to feed ourselves, we will lose our ability to look after the environment.
I would like to illustrate just one of many areas where we need to have a rethink about consequences. So called rewilding, and one of the species involved.
The beaver issue is something that years ago people laughed at despite a real warning from the industry that this is very serious. In fact, at this AGM back in 2018, Pete Grewar stood up and said as far as he was concerned, the impact of beavers on his business was bigger than Brexit, and I’ll now show you how this has come to fruition. When beavers achieved protected status in May 2019 after their illegal release years previous, the then Cabinet Secretary Roseanna Cunningham agreed that only natural expansion would be tolerated and prime and productive land would be protected by lethal control licences.
However, after the Bute House agreement, this changed whereby we now have a situation where translocation out with existing areas will be permitted. Ladies and Gentlemen, this will cost our country tens of millions of pounds in the coming years due to the damage not only to agriculture but also to the natural environment and, more worryingly, the safety of our general public.
This slide shows an unseen burrow through a flood bank protecting high value crop land in 2020. Fortunately, the water dropped as quick as it rose but there was still a loss of crop in the region of £25,000 plus extensive works to reinstate the flood bank.
Last year however, further along the bank another beaver burrow led to the complete blow out of the flood bank. The crop had been harvested but the cost of re-instatement this time will cost around £50,000.
These flood banks were built centuries ago to protect very limited high quality land capable of growing high value crops. Who is paying for this damage?
This cannot continue or we will simply revert to more imports. At least now it’s not only farmers who are seeing the wider implications of this massive oversight, the following few slides taken close to home will show why the general public are now seeing the other side of this so-called fantastic reintroduction.
Of course it’s not just beavers that are causing extensive and costly damage, we are fully aware of the wider implications of other species, not only on agricultural production but also on the wider environment and socio economic benefits active farming and crofting brings to Scotland. Rewilding sounds wonderful to some. However, barren landscapes will only lead to two things, land abandonment and wildfires.
I have spoken to the fire service, and they are incredibly concerned about increased fuel load on much of our hillsides in Scotland due to the lack of livestock grazing and the drive to stop controlled muirburn.
It is widely recognised by the fire authorities that, on many of Scotland’s rewilded hills and glens, the amount of scrub is now five or six times above the level at which a wildfire can be safely contained.
This should be a wake up call not only to those who are concerned about the environment but also to those who are thinking that blanket forestry for carbon credits is the way forward.
So what, might you ask, has all this got to do with the ARIOB. Well don’t forget that this group does not only consist of like-minded people with farming and crofting in their hearts, this group has very wide-ranging views of how future policy in agriculture should be driven.
So, when people say I would be better off being outside this group throwing stones and being heavily critical of such a slow process, it might be worth reflecting on what the alternative might be if we we’re not at the table trying our damndest to get decision makers to see the wider picture.
Tomorrow we must hear from the Cabinet Secretary that progress has been made. There will still be a long way to go but the Cabinet Secretary must make clear the direction of travel.
Science will continue to show the positives of our industry, especially when it comes to soil health. Although we can do much more to improve our carbon stocks, there is absolutely no doubt that, from a global perspective, we are starting from a great place.
A recent report from Rothamsted only just released on the 23 December has recognised the importance of farmyard manure and its relevance to a dramatic reduction in nitrous oxide emissions from our arable soils.
We’re all fed up of the constant negativity against our industry but the evidence provided by research institutes such as Rothamsted and indeed much of the findings of our fantastic research institutes in Scotland, is now highlighting how important a role farmers and crofters can play in climate change mitigation.
It’s high time our governments started to listen to the facts and not the rhetoric. Only then will we be able to keep the lights on in our rural areas and address food security concerns. The facts are important, and we have a part to play in defining them.
This is something we should be doing anyway but many of us haven’t been paying enough attention to it, or at least I haven’t till about 6 or 7 years ago.
You can see here on the first slide, the acidity of my soil, in red, is shockingly low and yet the phosphates are through the roof. At least the carbon assessment is good and there’s almost 57 tonnes of carbon per hectare. Oddly enough we don’t get any credit for that either.
This field is better but worryingly the potash levels, again in red, are far too low. Knowing the state of your soil can deliver huge benefits for your crop; your pocket and the environment as good soil health will be much better at maximizing sequestration.
Through consistently pushing this message even the Climate Change Committee, chaired by Lord Deben, has now recognised that we need to measure sequestration properly to get the net result. That is a seismic change from where that committee sat two years ago when it was all about total emissions.
We have pushed hard to get support for soil testing, and this has proved successful with up to £30 per ha available for GPS testing like I have highlighted and the deadline for submitting claims for soil testing and carbon audits under the first round of the Preparing for Sustainable Farming programme closes on 28 February.
As an industry we have embraced technology but still do not get the recognition for it. And we need governments to push harder when it comes to embracing new opportunities such as using hydrogen not only for power but for producing fertiliser. Better grid connection is something we must achieve to enable our industry to embrace renewables more, again we are lobbying hard to make this easier and more affordable. Then there’s gene editing that could allow our research institutes to develop pest and drought resistant crops that could not only help us but help countries across the world that are struggling.
Sadly, the latter one is purely political and too many still associate gene editing with GM like this ewe lamb I have here.
Ladies and Gentlemen, this is the most important slide I have up here. We must make sure we create opportunities for the next generation to see a fantastic future in agriculture, this will take education at all levels, from primary schools all the way up to government.
Or is it from government all the way up to primary schools, I can’t remember.
Whichever way round it is we are already engaged in this process and will continue to be until we address the current disconnect we have.
I must thank our fantastic staff body for their magnificent efforts on our behalf, you are never appreciated enough. Also to my two vice Presidents Andrew and Robin for their support, and all the board who have supported me through a pretty challenging year.
And lastly, I must thank my family at home, as their understanding and commitment allows me to continue to do my utmost to promote farming and crofting in Scotland, which I will continue to do so over the next two years.
Thank you.