If the general election is about Brexit then we should by now have a clear idea of what will happen to environmental protection and agricultural policy after Brexit. In particular, we should have a clear idea from the Conservative Party, although Labour (the only realistic alternative government (even though, in places other parties’ candidates may have stronger environmental credentials) ought to be clear too.
Having read the manifestos, this is the best I can do to sum up where I think the two main parties are on environmental protection and agricultural payments:
1.Environmental protection: site designation and species protection ie the type of stuff that is covered by the Habitats and Species Directive and by the Birds Directive.
The Conservatives will transfer all existing EU environmental protection into UK legislation (I think this is done in one go rather than four times in each devolved administration) and then keep the good bits and ditch the bad bits – but they haven’t told us which bit is which.
Labour will maintain and enhance current levels of environmental protection.
Analysis: look across the ocean to what Donald Trump has done to the US approach to climate change, pollution, protection of wilderness areas and funding for the environment within government. It won’t be that bad here, or that quick, but we can look forward to consistent reduction in environmental protection because of its supposed impact on the economy. It’s the current and recent Conservative governments that started with ‘greenest government ever’ promises and ended up with ‘gold plating’ and ‘green crap’. It is the current government that has to be dragged kicking and screaming gradually towards acting on air quality issues that kill thousands of citizens. The Conservative manifesto has signalled that there will be changes to environmental protection and I cannot believe that these will be for the good. This is what a hard Brexit will mean for our wildlife – less wildlife!
Labour have said that they will keep the current level of protection, alongside protection of workers’ and citizens’ rights, and I believe that is what they will try to do. There is no ideological imperative to start dismantling a system that has been built up internationally and collectively over decades, so Labour would probably not do much here.
Conclusion: voting Conservative is a very big risk if you care about the environment. There is little comfort in the manifesto whereas there is in the Labour manifesto; vote to keep the Tories out.
2. Agriculture funding: £3bn per annum is paid by the British taxpayer to farmers and landowners through the Common Agriculture Policy; post-Brexit we can do what we like with that money (since we are net financial contributors to the EU). We could spend it on the NHS or we could spend it better on rural payments which delivered more for the taxpayer and consumer. Although Brexit is likely to be environmentally bad news, a reformed system of agricultural payments is the silver lining on this dark cloud.
The Conservatives will maintain the level of funding for the length of the next parliament ie for three years after Brexit (for some obscure reason). After that, they will have a think about things. This is what the manifesto says and what Therese Coffey said at the Greener UK hustings event. So, the great opportunity is taken to mean keeping things the same with no indication of how they might change. But that fits with what has happened over the last seven years – there has been little or no reform and improvement of the system by Defra even in areas where they had the power to do so.
Labour (and they would have support from the Greens and LibDems on this) want a better system – one which rewards farmers for public goods, for outcomes, rather than just being a system of income support that rewards the wealthiest the most regardless of performance. But the manifesto is pretty vague on the future and this is an opportunity missed. Barry Gardiner seemed to say, at the Greener UK hustings, that Labour would support a cap on payments to individual land owners. And the are passages in the manifesto which taken together seem to suggest that farmers would have to deliver more for the money they receive (better soil and flood [protection etc).
Analysis: it’s difficult to choose because things aren’t very clear – maybe that’s one reason why farmers are dejected and confused by it all (see Guardian, Chronicle)! I don’t really know why farmers are dejected, it’s the taxpayer who is being short-changed here as vast amounts of money are poured into a system which doesn’t deliver for them. The LibDems actually have the best ideas on agricultural reform, but I can be fairly confident they won’t be in power the day after tomorrow.
Conclusion: we don’t really know enough about what either main party is planning to do. It’s actually UKIP which is clearest on this question – pity the rest of their manifesto is so ghastly!
[registration_form]
Pesticide regulation and invasive species are two other crucial environmental issues hugely affected by Brexit. To find out what the parties are saying about these and other key policies for bees, bugs and other wildlife see my manifesto analysis here – https://www.buglife.org.uk/blog/matt-shardlow-ceo/bee’s-eye-view-of-2017-election-manifestos