New Government, new opportunities for agriculture

Opportunities among tough times

It’s no surprise that there are limited funds for investment into public services. As Tom Bradshaw, NFU President stated in his talk at Cereals last month, the new government has inherited an £18bn deficit. It is likely that only the protected departments (traditionally those responsible for the NHS, schools and overseas aid) will escape yet more pain.

Defra, it hardly needs pointing out, is not a protected department.

But there are ways in which agriculture and horticulture – and the associated technologies – could still benefit. And never before has the phrase “joined-up government” been more important.

Industrial sector strategies

Countries that have industrial sector strategies generally perform better than those without. We have already heard noises from the new government that longer-term funding cycles for R&D might be under consideration (up to 10 years, rather than the usual three). This would be great news (with appropriate checks and reviews) and would bring the UK in line with other countries such as the Netherlands, as well as being more appropriate for the seasonality of agriculture and horticulture.

Importantly, a good industrial sector strategy enables real cross-sector co-operation, with every department understanding its role in helping grow different sectors. The agri-tech strategy of 2013 saw £160m of new money – drawn from three collaborating departments – invested into the delivery of what new technologies could do for agriculture. The Industrial Strategy of 2018 resulted in an additional £90m invested in the “Transforming Food Production” collaborative R&D fund for our industry.

We stand ready to support similar approach – where the different departments, whose decisions, activities and priorities can have a big impact on our industry – can help. Or if not help, at least avoid unintended consequences and unhelpful interventions.

Pulling the Levers of Regulation

An important lever Government can deploy is regulation. The environment in which innovation operates needs careful management and the way in which the UK has done this has always been a badge of honour globally.

The proposed Regulatory Innovation Office (RIO) was announced as part of the Labour Party plans in October 2023 positioned as helping gain access to medicines more rapidly. And herein lies an opportunity for agriculture and horticulture.

The aims of the new RIO, among other things, include:

• Setting and monitoring targets for regulatory approval timelines
• Providing a “strategic steer” for regulatory priorities
• Provide a greater role for the existing Regulatory Horizons Council (RHC) – with a new requirement for Government to respond to its reports within a set time period.

We have been here before with refreshing and streamlining the regulatory process. Indeed the former Department for Trade and Industry was rebranded to the Dept for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (which existed from 2007 to 2009).

And the 2021 Task Force for Innovation, Growth and Regulatory Reform made recommendations to the government about ways to unlock growth by creating the necessary environment for regulations to empower, rather than hinder, growth.

It’s been hard to track impact of this initiative, however our historic call-to-arms seems to have been heard, not least around the use of drones in our sector, the growing of hemp and the rules around seasonal workers.  The UK’s Genetic Technologies (Precision Breeding) Act last year marked a step change in the use of new breeding tools.

A National Wealth Fund – Where is Agriculture?

And finally, a proposed National Wealth Fund – a £7bn target to leverage private investment. It is designed to help secure additional funding into offshore wind, tidal energy, green hydrogen and carbon capture and storage.

There is a fear this might compete with other initiatives such as Great British Entergy and the National Infrastructure Fund, but regardless, one would hope there is a potential for agriculture to be part of this conversation – not least around carbon.

And so to the Future

Without bringing personalities into the conversation, we have a Cabinet and close advisors with a wealth of knowledge about healthcare but perhaps – aside from a couple of notable exceptions – with less experience in agriculture. We must all stand ready to help advise and – should an industrial strategy come to pass – input for the collective good, rather than individual agendas.

Then we can see real, long-term change.