.jpg)
As we approach the 2026 Scottish Parliament elections, the publication of party manifestos provides an important opportunity to assess how Scotland’s political landscape is responding to the challenges and opportunities facing agriculture, food production, and rural communities.
From my perspective, and reflecting the priorities consistently raised by NFU Scotland members, this is not simply an academic exercise. The policy direction set by the next Scottish Government and Parliament will be critical in determining whether Scottish agriculture can remain productive, profitable, and central to the nation’s economic, environmental and social wellbeing.
Having carefully analysed the six main party manifestos alongside our own policy priorities, several key themes emerge. Encouragingly, there is broad recognition across the political spectrum of the strategic importance of farming, crofting and rural Scotland. However, the extent to which this recognition translates into policies that genuinely support a viable and productive agricultural sector varies considerably.
A top priority for NFU Scotland and our members is the need for certainty in agricultural support. Multi-annual, ring-fenced funding frameworks are essential to enable long-term planning and investment at farm level – and the delivery of what we are being tasked with alongside high-quality food production. On this issue, there is a notable degree of convergence across several parties.
The Liberal Democrats, Labour, and Conservatives all commit explicitly to multi-year funding settlements, aligning closely with our call for stability and predictability. These commitments reflect an understanding that agriculture operates on long investment cycles and cannot respond effectively to short-term or uncertain policy signals.
The SNP, while maintaining its commitment to direct support and continued investment in farming and crofting, is less explicit in setting out a multi-annual framework. While continuity is welcome, the absence risks creating uncertainty at a time when confidence within the sector is already under pressure.
In contrast, the Greens propose a significant restructuring of support mechanisms, including a Transition Insurance Fund focused on nature-friendly systems. While the intention to support environmental outcomes is clear, this approach raises questions about whether sufficient emphasis will remain on core agricultural production – and the viability of farming and crofting.
Reform UK’s position is more limited in this area, offering a broad commitment to productivity but lacking the detailed funding framework necessary to provide meaningful policy stability.
At the heart of our policy platform is the principle that food production and a profitable agricultural sector must remain a national priority. This is an area where clear differences between parties become apparent.
The Liberal Democrats set out an explicit commitment to maintaining livestock numbers and co-designing future agricultural policy with the industry. This reflects a strong alignment with our position that sustainable food production and environmental delivery must go hand in hand.
Similarly, the Conservatives emphasise food security and oppose policies that would reduce domestic meat and dairy production. Their approach reinforces the importance of output and resilience in the face of global uncertainty.
Labour adopts a more balanced approach, seeking to integrate food production with biodiversity and community outcomes. While this reflects a holistic perspective, proposed measures such as the capping of direct support payments introduce concerns about the potential impact on productive capacity and business viability.
The SNP continues to support “active farming” and resilience funding, which aligns in principle with our priorities. However, wider policy proposals, particularly those linked to climate, land use, and market interventions, create uncertainty about how food production will be prioritised in practice.
The Greens present the most significant departure from our position, advocating dietary change, reduced livestock intensity, and a reorientation of support towards ecological outcomes. While environmental ambition is essential, NFU Scotland’s view is that livestock systems in Scotland are an integral part of the wider ecosystem - supporting biodiversity, maintaining landscapes, and enabling the sustainable use of grassland. An approach that reduces livestock intensity risks undermining not only the productive base of Scottish agriculture, but also the environmental and socio-economic role that farming and crofting play across rural Scotland.
Reform UK, by contrast, adopts a strongly production-focused stance, prioritising output and deregulation. While this aligns with our emphasis on food production, it lacks the policy depth required to balance productivity with environmental and market realities.
Ensuring fair returns for primary producers remains a critical issue for us. In this area, there is some encouraging alignment across manifestos.
The Liberal Democrats propose legislative measures to rebalance power within the supply chain, directly addressing longstanding concerns about retailer dominance. Labour and the Greens also advocate for stronger procurement reform and increased oversight, although their approaches lean more towards regulatory intervention.
The SNP’s proposal to introduce price caps on essential food items represents a significant area of concern. While there is an accompanying commitment to protect farmers, the lack of clarity around how this would operate raises serious questions about potential impacts on farm profitability and market dynamics.
The Conservatives focus more on simplifying procurement processes and improving market access. While helpful, this approach does not fully address the structural imbalances within the supply chain. Reform UK’s position is less developed in this area, with limited detail on how supply chain fairness would be achieved.
All parties recognise the need for agriculture to contribute to climate, nature and wider environmental goals. The key question is how this is delivered.
We have consistently argued that climate policy must be practical, pragmatic, and compatible with maintaining food production and profitability. In this context, the Liberal Democrats’ emphasis on partnership, innovation, and technological solutions aligns closely with our position.
Labour also adopts a pragmatic tone, recognising the role that farmers and crofters already play in environmental stewardship and favouring incentive-based approaches. The SNP’s commitments to environmental delivery through active farming, alongside investment in peatland restoration and forestry, are broadly aligned too.
The Greens advocate a more interventionist approach, including stricter emissions targets, land taxes, and significant land use change. This raises concerns for NFU Scotland about the viability of agricultural businesses and the risk of reducing domestic food production.
The Conservatives and Reform UK take a more sceptical view of existing climate policy mechanisms, focusing on reducing regulatory burdens and costs. While this reflects legitimate concerns about competitiveness, it risks underestimating the sector’s role in environmental delivery.
A balanced approach to land use is essential to ensure that agricultural production, environmental delivery, and rural development can coexist. We have consistently called for the protection of prime and productive land alongside opportunities for diversification.
The Liberal Democrats again show strong alignment, recognising the value of productive land and supporting planning reform to enable diversification. The Conservatives and Reform UK similarly emphasise reducing planning barriers.
Labour and the SNP place greater emphasis on land reform and community ownership. While these objectives reflect broader social goals, they introduce additional complexity and uncertainty for land-based businesses.
The Greens propose more far-reaching interventions, including caps on land ownership, representing a significant departure from our position.
Encouragingly, there is broad cross-party support for improving rural housing, infrastructure, and connectivity – all key components of sustaining vibrant rural communities.
Workforce challenges remain a critical issue for Scottish agriculture. Access to labour, skills development, and support for new entrants are all essential.
The Liberal Democrats’ proposals on migration and a Next Generation farming scheme align particularly well with our priorities. Conservative support for new entrant loan schemes also represents a positive step.
The SNP’s proposals on migration and skills are relevant but less targeted specifically at agriculture. Labour addresses skills more broadly, with limited sector-specific focus. Reform UK highlights the importance of skills pipelines but again lacks detailed policy mechanisms.
Taken together, the manifestos present a mixed picture. There is clear recognition of the importance of agriculture, but less consistency in how that recognition is translated into policy.
No single party fully aligns with our priorities. However, several come close in key areas. The Liberal Democrats demonstrate strong alignment across multiple themes, particularly on funding stability, production focus, and supply chain fairness. The Conservatives align closely on food production and deregulation, though less so on supply chain reform.
Labour offers a balanced but more redistributive approach, raising questions about competitiveness. The SNP provides continuity but lacks clarity in some critical areas. The Greens diverge most significantly, prioritising environmental restructuring over productive agriculture. Reform UK aligns on output but lacks policy depth.
NFU Scotland is clear on what is required from the next Scottish Government and Parliament. Policies must prioritise stability, support productivity, ensure fair returns, and enable a just transition that works for farmers and crofters.
We stand ready to work constructively with all parties to deliver these outcomes, but we will also be clear where policies fall short of what our members need. Without this foundation, the wider economic, environmental, and social ambitions for Scotland will be difficult to achieve.