Reconnection

I've just been submitting my evidence to the National Food Strategy that Henry Dimbleby has been asked by the Government to lead. It's a good consultation as (unlike many) it doesn't tell you what the answers are and then asks how much you agree.There's an opportunity to comment very widely on all aspects of food, so what have I said?

 

Who am I and where am I coming from?

I have been a vicar in various rural locations for something over 30 years. In those roles I have seen the work of farmers in producing our food, the demands that makes on them and the contribution that many of them make to rural communities. I have also seen the role that food can play in bringing people together and creating community cohesion with the resultant social capital.  As a serving and now retired vicar in the countryside I have been aware of the work and insights of the various rural church organisations and have worked and continue to work alongside them.  I blog on rural issues from a faith perspective at https://ruralfaith.blogspot.com/.

Farm incomes

Farming is a way of life that is very diverse. Whatever similarities there may be, no two farms are the same.  Overall data and description will not capture the reality of life of any one individual farm or farmer.   There are some affluent farmers, but many are not.  At an average income per worker last year of just under £24k a year (government figures) for those below the average the rewards are clearly not primarily financial.  Farming is more than a job. It is a way of life which (for a variety of reasons) is largely asset rich and income poor (not unlike the church!) Any strategy that does not recognise and allow for the diversity of farm incomes is not likely to be fit for purpose. 

Market issues

Part of the reason – or on occasions the whole of the reason- that some farm struggle financially is because the “free market” is not actually free. The large number of “must sell” producers and the small number of “might buy” buyers produces oligopolistic conditions, not the conditions posited in Adam Smith’s “Wealth of nations” where he assumes multiple producers and multiple purchasers able to freely engage with each other on level terms. That is not the case in the UK food market and I have met too many farmers with accounts of supermarket buyers using their superior power to coerce suppliers. I have heard accounts of livestock being loaded on a trailer to go to the abattoir while at the same time the supermarket buyer on the phone re-negotiates and reduces the previously agreed price. I hear of apples (previously contracted for) being mysteriously rejected on “quality” grounds when there was a bumper harvest and the market price fell below the contracted price. Likewise I hear of a supermarket buyer buying potatoes for less than the cost of production because “if you don’t sell them to me for that price, somebody else will”. The Church of England’s Ethical Investment Advisory Group’s report   “Fairtrade begins at home: supermarkets and the effect on British farming livelihoods”  remains pertinent. The dominance of a few large retailers distorts the market and while for some producers local farmers markets or farm gate sales can help for many they are not viable. It is easier to sell half a dozen fresh eggs at a farmers’ market than a tonne of wheat!         

Subsidies

Farms also vary enormously in size and in type and any strategy must recognise this. Calls to limit amount of EU subsidy (or whatever replaces it) to an upper limit lack logic. Subsidies have, for the last decade or longer, been dependent on “cross-compliance”   which requires the farmer complies with certain basic environmental regulations in return for the payment. Larger payments have followed larger farmers cross-complying over a larger area and thus providing more environmental benefit. Any replacement scheme following the withdrawal from the EU should not be capped. The government has said that after withdrawal from the EU that they will “look after” farmers but is lacking any detail of what that “looking after” will be. It should be equally accessible to all farms.  

In respect of subsidies, it is worth considering who actually benefits. So far subsidy has been paid to farmers for cross-complying. But without those subsidies few farms would be economically viable.  The effect of subsidy is to enable farms to continue to supply food for below the cost of production to retailers to sell it cheaply to consumers. The subsidies may be paid to farmers (who face enormous bureaucratic hoops to jump through to get them) but the beneficiaries are the retailers (who can put cheap food on their shelves), consumers (who buy cheap food from the supermarkets) and politicians (who want to keep prices down). 

     

International issues

The pressure for cheap food needs to take into account that farming is a worldwide activity and any food strategy needs to recognise that and have a “level playing field” for UK farmers.  There is intense vociferous lobbying for high animal welfare standards in UK farming. There is no problem with that as most farmers I have met want to farm to high standards of animal and environmental welfare. But as farming is a worldwide industry, it is pointless raising UK standards if the rest of the world does not follow or if the UK cannot require imported food is produced to at least the same high standards. The facebook post from Compassion in World Farming  with the headline “Cage farming is a nightmare that you can stop” and emotive photo is actually wrong as it relates to a petition regarding UK farming practises.  A more accurate headline would have been “Cage farming is a nightmare that you can export”.  The withdrawal of the UK from the EU and the subsequent need for trade agreements make this a challenging area and the government will need to be robust

Environmental issues

 Environmental concerns need to recognise the wide variety of type of farm land and soil type. Farming enterprises that will flourish with rich soil types will not be viable in other terrains. Any food strategy should recognise that much land is pasture and only really suitable to be used for grass. Over simplistic arguments about carbon emissions from different foods should be avoided.  The carbon footprint of extensively grazed livestock is very different from “feedlot” beef.  Moreover, if grassland is not to be used for livestock production (because the anti-livestock lobby maintain it is bad for the environment) then what is it for? Nor should it be assumed that vegetable and fruit production is necessarily environmentally friendly.  My blog   “That run in between the NFU and the BBC” recounts a “farm” that is entirely animal friendly and as a consequence produces no food (There are moral questions about that in a world where people suffer from malnutrition) and “A case for eating a mixed diet or why a vegan diet isn’t morally superior” among other things addresses whether vegetable farming is necessarily environmentally good.

Time frame

Any food strategy should recognise that farming is by nature a long term activity. From insemination to abattoir takes certainly months and frequently years. A dairy cow is not a machine that can be switched on and off.   Top fruit production needs time for trees to grow. The short-termism of the market, uncertainty (particularly from Brexit) and lack of clarity over government policy sit very uneasily with the nature of farming creating significant difficulties for farmers.

Underlying issue – disconnection

If those are some of the challenges, it seems to me that one of the underlying issues is of disconnection and consequent lack of trust between producer and consumer.   When I was a child (in the 1960s) my mother bought meat from the local butcher which had a sign “Cuts from the best Scottish farmers” (We lived in Edinburgh.) My mother knew the butcher. The butcher knew the abattoir. The abattoir knew their farmers.  The supply chain was short and managed by relationship. I imagine any paperwork was minimal. Pressures to achieve economies scale have resulted in long supply chains with resultant rupturing of relationships. Connection to food producers was reinforced by holiday visits to an uncle’s dairy farm and (as a teenager) holiday jobs working on farms. School friends had similar jobs.   

Lengthened supply chains, (legitimate) concerns about safety of children and teenagers on farms, and larger more complex machinery have increased paperwork (the supply chain is now regulated by bureaucracy not relationship) and disconnected  producers from consumers.  There is no going back from that and this submission is not a plea for the “good old days” but there is a major piece of work to be done on reconnection.  There is already much that is done that is good.

• Farmers’ markets are valuable not just because of providing an additional funding stream for farmers but because it creates relationship between producers and consumers.  I hope this strategy will build on this good work. 
• The NFU’s Open Farm Sunday likewise helps build reconnection and which I hope the strategy will recognise and build on.
• Churches and other faith communities can play a role. One church service I was recently at when the theme was Jesus the good shepherd, a farming couple were interviewed about their work as shepherds. The congregation was held spellbound.   I hope this sort of approach can be encouraged.
• Schools should have time in their overly-busy curriculum time for farm visits and resources should be made available to deal with the transport and administrative costs associated with this.  LEAF  is a good resource.

Reconnection should help with a re-valuing of food. As consumers become more informed about the time effort skill and sheer hard work that has gone into producing food then food should become more valued and food waste addressed.  The French policy of forbidding supermarkets from wasting food   should be considered as a model for the UK. This will assist with lowering the environmental impact of food

Similarly environmental benefits will be gained by introducing a bottle deposit scheme for the whole of the UK not just Scotland

 

Community life

Food plays a role in community life. Churches are discovering the opportunities of “Cafe Church” – a relaxed opportunity for worship- in the context of food. The widely used Alpha course is dependent on a shared meal. In the scattered rural area where I live the churches (in addition to a quarterly Cafe Church) have a monthly meal “Friendship Food and Faith” which, in the context of a meal enables friendship and faith to grow. Also there is a monthly community lunch at a very affordable price which is well supported and valued.