Steve Reed’s chicken clanger - did the government mean to back river polluting poultry sheds?
In January, the food, farming and environmental sectors head to two conferences – the Oxford Farming Conference (OFC) and the Oxford Real Farming Conference (ORFC). Both are held at the same time, and both seek to discuss solutions to the challenges farmers face. As is customary, the Defra secretary addressed OFC – Soil Association's Head of Food Policy, Rob Percival, reflects on the announcements:
A parade of tractors blasted their horns in protest outside as Steve Reed, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, addressed the Oxford Farming Conference. Indoors, the mood was overcast, with the Inheritance Tax and stretched farmer finances front and centre of everyone’s mind.
Reed’s speech was bland, offering little of substance. Amid the usual concessions thrown at farmers’ feet – “the primary purpose of farming has - and always will be - to produce the food that feeds the nation” – was an announcement of reform to the planning system.
“In Spring we will consult on national planning reforms to make it quicker for farmers to build farm buildings, barns and other infrastructure they need to boost their food production,” Reed said. “Planning rules have got in the way for too long.”
Such a commitment would raise eyes among environmentalists, for whom the planning system is already failing to prevent harms from agricultural production, which is the biggest driver of pollution in the UK’s dying rivers – bigger even than sewage, on average.
But then Reed dropped what appeared to be a bombshell, promising to tear up planning rules to help "chicken producers who want a larger shed to boost the amount of food they produce".
UK poultry production is already highly industrialised with manure from factory chicken farms causing a pollution crisis in our rivers. What’s worse, intensive poultry farms in the UK are implicated in overseas harm as they feed their birds largely on soya imported from Latin America. And all that before we even get onto the issues of poor animal welfare in these 40,000+ bird sheds. All of this prompted the Soil Association and other organisations to call for a ban on the construction of new Intensive Poultry Units (IPU’s) – an ask that more than 30,000 people backed in our petition last year.
And it appeared that the Defra secretary was promising to make it easier to build large sheds? The last thing we need is yet more chicken muck. Government should be helping our intensive chicken farmers to shift to more sustainable approaches and get away from damaging industrial approaches, which are largely controlled by international corporations.
Did he really mean it? Does the UK government really want to see more factory chicken farms?
The Guardian ran the story, capturing the outcry that followed. But did Reed really mean it? Given that rivers are a hot political issue, and Defra has committed to prioritising action to clean up our watercourses, it seems questionable that they would seek to de-regulate the intensive poultry sector.
If he really did mean it, such a move might involve significantly weakening the Habitat Regulations, which aim to prevent harm from construction and developments, so that nutrient pollution wasn't such a central consideration. But again, this would seem to be politically explosive.
More likely, Reed had smaller scale producers in mind and was proposing to make it easier for farmers to diversify their business. This would appear to be more reasonable but, if it the case, the ambiguous, clumsy wording has caused alarm and pressure that is entirely of the Government’s own making.
Sustainable school food is vital – why was it missing from the Environment Minister’s speech?
And there are further oddities in Reed’s speech. The Labour manifesto committed to action on public procurement, ensuring schools, hospitals and other public settings sourced more British, local and sustainable food. But Reed’s speech notably omitted any mention of schools when he reiterated this commitment, referring only to the food served “in hospitals, army bases and prisons”. Is the government backtracking on its manifesto promise, or is this just further evidence of sloppy speech writing?
Either way, the outlook is concerning. We need government to stick to its manifesto promises – and we need much bolder action.
At OFC Reed committed to monitor how much British food is bought in the public sector - but simply monitoring will not be enough. We need mandatory standards that actively help to get more British food on the public plate, especially local fruit and veg in schools and hospitals – and we must make sure this is coming from nature-friendly farms like organic.
Indeed, on the eve of Reed’s speech, the Soil Association brought together around 100 people from across the farm to fork spectrum for the Great School Dinner Debate.
This brought together farmers, environmental campaigners, caterers, teachers, councillors, government advisors, and academics who discussed the many barriers we currently face in getting more sustainable food into public settings. But a message of hope also shone through – we know that this is essential, and it was great to see so many people united around the power of school food.
With so much at stake – a food strategy, farming roadmap, and land-use framework in the pipeline – stronger and clearer leadership is urgently needed.