A DEMAND for the protection of Scotland’s globally recognised high food standards has been made by Rural Economy Secretary Fergus Ewing.
His call comes amid fears they will be sacrificed by the UK Government in order to secure non-EU trade deals.
The UK Government’s published mandate for talks with the European Union, their own Agriculture Bill, and public statements on food standards to date have yet to provide any reliable assurances that hormone-injected beef and chlorinated chicken – among other products from around the world – will not be granted access to the UK market, according to Ewing.
“It is very concerning that the UK Government has repeatedly refused to provide the necessary assurances that food standards will not be sacrificed in the pursuit of non-EU trade deals,” he said.
READ MORE: SNP to vote against ‘power grab’ post-Brexit Agriculture Bill
READ MORE: Farming leader in warning over ‘morally bankrupt’ Brexit trade deals
“I agree wholeheartedly with the NFU who only last week said it would be ‘insane’ to allow food onto our shelves and into our fridges that is produced at a standard which is currently illegal in Scotland and the rest of the UK.
“Lowering standards in the pursuit of trade deals would do untold damage to the UK and Scottish food production industry, especially when the majority of our produce is currently exported to the EU.
“That is why I have written to the UK Government seeking urgent assurances that food and animal welfare standards will not be lowered. In the meantime, I have suggested amendments to the UK Agriculture Bill to protect standards and will continue to work with stakeholders to protect our vital food production and processing sectors.”
Last month the SNP voted against the second reading of the Government’s Agriculture Bill, saying it represented an attempted Tory power grab on Holyrood.
The Bill sets out the UK’s approach to farming now it has left the EU, with ministers looking to replace the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) that has applied in Britain since 1973.
The SNP’s Deidre Brock said the Bill disregarded the devolution settlement as it attempts to seize key powers from the Scottish Parliament that impact on farming and food production.
“The proposals in the Bill are not just bad for Scotland, but the other devolved administrations,” she said. “The new English system of farm support will move cash away from food production and towards a concept of public goods risking serious long-term problems for the whole of the UK.
“Scotland’s farmers and crofters have had nothing but contempt from the Tories and years of uncertainty – and now they face a Tory Trump trade deal that threatens to undermine our world-renowned Scottish produce and an Agriculture Bill that is still trying to grab devolved powers on key farming and food issues.”
Labour is also worried about the Bill. Shadow environment secretary Luke Pollard said that without legal assurances, chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-treated beef could be just a sample of the food products that will become available on UK supermarket shelves once the transition period is over in 2021. The Labour agriculture spokesperson said allowing such imports would not only lower standards but also undercut British farmers and producers.
“We won’t accept chlorinated chicken in our supermarkets or Boris Johnson selling out our animal welfare, food and environmental protections in a bid for a trade deal with Donald Trump,” he said.
“Promises that ministers have made to maintain standards aren’t worth anything until they are written into law, and unless they do so we must surely conclude that they intend to break these promises during trade talks with the USA.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here