RACHEL Reeves’ decision to overhaul agricultural funding in the UK Budget for the devolved nations is “destroying” what little post-EU financial support is left available to Scotland’s farmers, the SNP have said.
The Chancellor’s decision to integrate agricultural funding into each region’s block grant through the Barnett formula, rather than maintaining separate ring-fenced allocations, will mean the industry will see a reduction in financial support, experts have warned.
Funding for the sector will now compete with other regional priorities, such as health and education, as industry experts have warned the move could undermine the long-term stability of farming in Scotland.
The UK Budget overhaul changed how post-EU agricultural funding is delivered to devolved governments as, under the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), farmers in Scotland received billions of pounds of support from the EU on a multi-annual basis.
READ MORE: Date revealed for Alex Salmond's memorial service
Scottish farmers received £3.3 billion worth of financial backing between 2014 and 2020 – around 17% of the UK’s CAP funding.
Since Brexit, CAP funding has been replaced by separate devolved schemes, with ring-fencing designed to account for Scotland’s proportionally larger farming sector.
The SNP said the Tories failed to create a post-Brexit funding scheme for farmers that matches the certainty of CAP funding and that the Labour Government is continuing this failure.
SNP MSP Emma Roddick said farmers need and deserve better support from the government and has called for a return to a multi-annual funding framework like CAP.
She said: “We all know that Scotland’s farmers have suffered massively due to Brexit – loss of access to the single market, higher supply chain costs – and the loss of common agricultural policy funding.
“To see the UK Chancellor make this worse with the swipe of a pen by axing the ring-fencing designed to support Scotland’s farmers is truly shocking – and their inability to commit to extending the English scheme beyond 2025 – which will have a knock-on effect on Scotland if cut – shows how unserious the Labour Party are about supporting Scottish farmers.”
Reeves also announced that the £2.4bn English scheme can only be guaranteed until 2025, which could cause a knock-on effect on funding for Scotland if the scheme were to be cut.
The cut to the English scheme could mean further uncertainty for Scottish farmers – unlike the CAP funding, which was available on a multi-annual basis.
With its integration into the block grant agricultural funding is no longer guaranteed or isolated and will be subject to the same financial adjustments as other sectors.
Scotland’s block grant adjusts funding which is disrupted amongst other regional priorities based on changes in UK Government spending.
Chief executive of Scottish Land & Estates (SLE), Sarah-Jane Laing wrote to the Treasury last week to advocate for greater support for Scotland’s farmers amid the growing backlash to the budget.
In her letter, Laing said: “The Bew Review provided a welcome uplift in funding for Scottish farmers, reflecting their contribution to the UK’s food security and shared ambition for more sustainable and regenerative farming practices.
READ MORE: SNP plot to sabotage Labour bill with amendment to 'abolish House of Lords'
“This uplift was a short-term solution to historic inequalities in intra-UK funding allocations. The review recommended further work to establish a fair division of funding post-Brexit.
“SLE is concerned that the decision to alter this funding model could leave farmers in Scotland shortchanged in what is already a tightly squeezed agricultural support budget.”
The UK Government has been approached for comment.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel