Sustainable farming changes 'once in a generation' for Wales
Rhodri Lloyd-Williams, who farms sheep and cattle across 750 acres of hillside near Talybont, Ceredigion, said it was "a massive moment".He said he was hoping for "clarity" after "years of uncertainty" following the Brexit vote in 2016.The SFS will replace EU-era subsidies, which farmers had received for decades based largely on how much land they had.On average, 67% of Welsh farm income came from subsidies in 2020-21.The new approach has far more of an environmental focus, with the aim of rewarding farmers for delivering "public goods" like wildlife habitat and soaking up carbon in the land.
Debate over the years has focused on how to make the scheme workable for farmers while ambitious enough to deliver against Wales' environmental goals.The government has already made some major concessions, such as scrapping a requirement for farms to have 10% tree cover to qualify for funding, after widespread farmer protests in 2024.Environment groups fear the final scheme will fall short of helping an industry set to become Wales' largest source of greenhouse gas emissions within a decade respond and adapt to the twin threats of climate change and nature loss."It's important to acknowledge that they've had a really tough job," Mr Lloyd-Williams said of the Welsh government. "There's no way when they make the announcement they'll keep everyone happy."As an organic farmer and member of the Nature Friendly Farming Network, his is exactly the sort of farming system ministers want to support, from rotational grazing of livestock to boost soil health, to planting hedges and trees.He said he would be glad to see the new scheme include "a bit more encouragement" for this sort of work, which he said could deliver "multiple benefits" for both the farming business and environment.But "first and foremost we need to keep Welsh farmers farming," he added."There needs to be enough support payments for everyone to maintain their businesses, because the worst thing that could happen is that we can't produce enough food in this country."
BBC Wales understands the scheme's final details were still being worked on as late as Friday, with an announcement expected on Tuesday.It comes ahead of the start of the annual Royal Welsh Agricultural Show next week, where politicians from all parties will be setting out their own vision for the future of farming and the countryside with less than a year to a Senedd election.
The SFS will have three tiers - a universal payment where farmers have to sign up to 12 actions from soil health planning and habitat maintenance, to online courses to enhance knowledge and skills related to sustainable farming.The scheme's optional layer is intended to top up farm incomes with further environmental work, including tree planting.A collaborative payment will also be available in future to support farmers working together on landscape-scale projects.
"Clearly we can't ignore the fact that we're moving away from a system of direct farm support to a system which focuses more on the environment," said Gareth Parry, head of policy at the Farmers' Union of Wales (FUW).Unions had "worked tirelessly" to try and ensure the scheme in its final form would provide "stability and economic certainty" for farmers, he claimed.The "million dollar question" would be how much funding was being provided.The announcement would "provide the first opportunity for farmers to really understand what will be required of them... and what they will actually be paid in monetary terms for doing those activities", he said."It's more than a once in a generation event," explained Prof Iain Donnison, head of the Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences at Aberystwyth University.He said there had been "very few times in history" where there was an opportunity to start from scratch, "to go back and ask actually what is it that we want from land and farming?""Though it will evolve over time, the main structure is likely to stay in place for many decades," he suggested.And "it affects all of us - clearly we all eat food, we all go into the countryside, things like clean air and water and conserving nature are important to everyone".
The Welsh government said its new scheme would "create a partnership between Welsh farmers and the people of Wales to support sustainable food production while addressing climate change and nature recovery".The plans had been "simplified following extensive consultation with the agricultural industry" and were "designed to be accessible to all types of farms, including tenant farmers and new entrants", it added. Deputy First Minister Huw Irranca-Davies described it as "a scheme for the whole of Wales – a whole farm, whole nation approach".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
5 minutes ago
- The Independent
Smiling Starmer steals PMQs victory as Badenoch misses her mark
Beware the phrase 'everyone knows'. When a consensus takes hold it is worth checking that it is soundly based. Everyone knows, for example, that the Labour government has made a terrible mess of its first year. That means it should be simple for the leader of the opposition to embarrass the prime minister in the Commons, because all she had to do was to ask awkward questions that expose the government's record. Kemi Badenoch made a good start, by quoting Richard Hughes, the chair of the Office for Budget Responsibility, who said yesterday: 'Higher and higher levels of taxes are … not good for growth.' She asked Keir Starmer if he agreed. Funnily enough, he didn't answer the question. 'I tell you what's bad for growth,' he said. 'Fourteen years of Tory government.' Lincoln Jopp, the theatrical Conservative MP, later said he could see why they were called 'Prime Minister's Questions and not Prime Minister's Answers'. But Badenoch ploughed on, asking Starmer for a definition of the 'modest incomes' earned by 'working people' that some of his ministers have implied would be exempt from tax rises. He gave a surprisingly specific answer, saying that he was working for 'the sort of people who work hard but haven't necessarily got the savings to buy their way out of problems'. In other words, the chancellor was thinking of taxing savings – despite what Rachel Reeves said in opposition: 'There are people who do have savings, who have been able to save up, and those are working people as well.' Strike one to Badenoch. Starmer ended his answer by accusing his opponent of talking the country down, to which she responded: 'I'm not talking the country down, I'm talking him down.' Strike two to Badenoch. But that was about it. She tried to get the prime minister to admit that a tax on pension contributions would be a tax on 'working people', but he said, 'I'm not going to write a Budget.' She then asked a complicated question that I thought was absolutely fascinating, but which in the cut and thrust of adversarial debate made no sense at all. She started by saying that the Tories had an alternative to tax rises. This was a response to last week's exchanges, when Starmer said she complained about tax rises but wanted the spending on the NHS made possible by those taxes. He challenged her to say how else the Conservatives would pay for such investment. She didn't answer it then, but it clearly rankled, so she said today that the alternative to tax rises is 'cutting spending'. She pointed out that he had retreated from cutting the welfare bill, which had 'sent a signal' to the markets and sent the cost of borrowing up. Finally, she got to a question, which was to ask what he would be doing 'over the summer to get a grip on the cost of borrowing'. The analysis was a mini economics lesson. She is quite right that the markets are nervous because they think that spending and taxes are in a never-ending upward ratchet, but the question at the end fell flat. Given the state of the economy, and the painfulness of Reeves's dilemma over the Budget in the autumn, it is surprising that Badenoch cannot make life a bit more difficult for Starmer. Given that 'everyone knows' Labour has made a bad start in its first year, the prime minister seemed unexpectedly cheerful, as if he knows something the rest of us don't. The fundamental problems for Badenoch remain the same two that she has been worrying about for a week: that it was her party that left things in a terrible state, and that she doesn't really have an alternative to Labour's attempts to clear it up. Starmer cannot go on blaming the state of his inheritance for ever, but he can continue to ask what the Tories would do instead. She says she would cut public spending, but the Tories were no good at that when they were in charge. When she and Starmer traded their end-of-year report cards on Labour's first year, his list – including breakfast clubs and four, now four-and-a-half, million NHS appointments – didn't sound too bad. When she said 'the worst is yet to come' and he responded 'we're only just getting started', he sounded the more believable.
The Independent
5 minutes ago
- The Independent
Passengers intervene to stop Labour MP being ‘hassled' by man on Tube
Labour MP Stella Creasy thanked London Underground passengers for intervening when she was harassed by a man on the Victoria Line. Ms Creasy is considering reporting the incident to the police and has appealed for witnesses to come forward. This incident follows a history of abuse and harassment faced by Ms Creasy, including from anti-abortion activists and a man who was jailed in 2014 for sending her violent messages. She was previously forced to install a panic button at her home due to threats received after supporting Jane Austen's image on a banknote. The incident highlights concerns raised by a recent cross-party inquiry, which warned that abuse and intimidation against MPs are undermining democracy, and called for a review of electoral law and enhanced security for political candidates. Stella Creasy thanks passengers for intervening as she was 'hassled' by man on London Underground
The Independent
5 minutes ago
- The Independent
Healey admits most people caught up in MoD data leak not eligible for UK asylum
Defence Minister John Healey says there is no justification for most Afghan people identified in the Ministry of Defence data leak to claim asylum, as they had no connection to Britain 's armed forces. Mr Healey said that the majority of names in the leaked dataset were not eligible for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP) scheme. The data breach, which wrongly released the details of more than 16,000 Afghans and raised fears they could be targeted by the Taliban, was described by Mr Healey as a serious departmental error. However, he said there was never a plan to bring everyone from that dataset into the UK. Watch the video in full above.
