Agricultural Land: Protection

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—(Jeff Smith.)

I am so pleased to have the opportunity tonight to share my pride in the rural areas of my constituency of Aylesbury, to share my admiration for those who work on the land and care for it, and to set out how we can enable both our urban and rural communities, and our natural environment to thrive. I am grateful to the Minister for being present.

I bring forward this debate in part to reassure my constituents of my own and my Government’s commitment to protecting our natural environment and safeguarding our agricultural land. This is a subject of debate in my constituency, as this new Government take forward the planning reforms that are so necessary for our future growth. After 14 years of deep turbulence and decline, with damaging consequences for nature and for our communities, I will suggest a better way forward, rooted in clear principles, more predictability and a dose of pragmatism.

First, let me turn to how we protect and enhance our natural environment, and give some context relating to my constituency. We are in a beautiful part of the country, which includes the Chiltern hills and historic woodlands and waterways, where 14% of the constituency is designated as green-belt land, but under the previous Government we were subject to extensive house building—more than 13,000 new homes in the past 10 years, and counting—which has led to great pressures on services and infrastructure and also on our natural environment.

My constituents understand the urgency of addressing our national housing crisis. The statistics speak for themselves: nearly 1.3 million households are on social housing waiting lists, including 6,000 in Buckinghamshire, and young people under 30 today are less than half as likely to own a home as young adults in the 1990s. Equally, many of my constituents understand the need for investment in renewable energy, whether it is onshore wind or solar panels, to get us on track for clean, secure and more affordable power by 2030, but they and I are conscious of the tension between the need for planning reform, whether for the purpose of building houses, energy or other infrastructure, and the need to protect our natural environment. How do we navigate that tension? Let me make three points based on Aylesbury’s experience.

First, we need to ensure that clear environmental safeguards are embedded in planning policy, and to that end the proposed changes in the national planning policy framework are strong: for example, the emphasis on a “brownfield first” approach using previously developed land for new housing and therefore protecting green spaces; the introduction of grey-belt land, which of course needs tight definition but should ultimately enable a more strategic approach to building on certain types of green space; and the “golden rules” in the NPPF, which ensure that any green-belt building will bring benefits for nature and for community access to green space. That will be a welcome contrast to the haphazard raids on green-belt and greenfield sites that took place under the last Government. In Buckinghamshire as a whole, for example, between 2019 and 2022 11% of new residential addresses were built in designated areas of outstanding natural beauty, compared to a 4% national average. This building has been happening, and my constituents tell me that the rationale for it has not always been clear.

Secondly, we need to learn from the pockets of good practice. I can point to one example in Aylesbury: the Kingsbrook development, on the edge of town, where housing and nature co-exist well. Kingsbrook was built with the help of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, and includes 250 acres of wildlife-rich open space, with hedgehog highways and community allotments. I invite members of the Government to visit it, and to learn from such examples. Where it is not possible for developments to include so much green space, we need to ensure that there is ready access to nature nearby—as a member of Aylesbury Ramblers reminded me recently, while describing his battle with the council to keep footpaths in and out of Aylesbury clear.

Thirdly, of course, it is vital that where nature must be protected we do that, and that we do not just protect but strengthen and enhance it. I have seen wonderful examples of that in my constituency. I have observed the work that the Chiltern Society does with its 700 volunteers—for example, sowing wildflowers, or clearing more than 30,000 metres of footpaths and 2,000 miles of cycle paths and bridle paths in the last year alone. In recent years, however, it has seemed as if they are working against, not with, successive Governments who have shown little regard for nature. That is perhaps best exemplified in my constituency by the release of sewage into the rivers for 3,000 hours last year alone, with devastating consequences for nature. I am pleased by the early work of our Government to review the environmental improvement plan, paving the way, we hope, for the ambitious global goal of safeguarding 30% of our land and sea by 2030, but this is just the start, and the test will be whether these safeguards are indeed in place in constituencies such as Aylesbury across the country.

Of course, the NPPF rightly contains protections for the best and most versatile agricultural land as well, but, ultimately, protecting and strengthening agricultural land means supporting the farmers who steward and manage it. I have spoken to many farmers in my constituency, for instance during a brilliant visit to Ledburn farm on the Ascott estate, a producer of the wheat for my kids’ Weetabix. I know that farmers have been under great pressure in recent years, from weather events, disease, economic volatility, Brexit, rising energy costs, rising rural crime—you name it—but I also know that they work incredibly hard to keep putting food on our tables.

May I commend the hon. Lady for bringing forward this matter? She is absolutely right to highlight the issues affecting farmers. She may not be aware that my constituency is one of the few areas of rich agricultural land that can produce three potato crops a year. It is essential that we ensure that farmers can and do make the most of the possibilities—not simply in lush Strangford, but in Aylesbury and across this great United Kingdom.

Does the hon. Lady agree that we need the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to engage with grassroots farming and to support farmers, thereby ensuring that we increase food security in the United Kingdom while protecting our agricultural land? The Minister is in his place, and there is no better person to do just that.

I agree that supporting smallholder farmers is absolutely essential.

There is too much to say in the time we have available tonight, but I will pull out three particularly important ways to help set up our farmers for success. First and foremost, we have to ensure the long-term financial sustainability of British farming. The environment land management schemes have been unclear, difficult to navigate and poorly tailored to different contexts—in the case of Ledburn farm, to the heavy clay land. As a result, the uptake has been low, but farmers remain in need of that support and we have to find a way to make it easier to access. Equally, farmers are forging ahead and finding ways to diversify their income, but there is much more we can do to support that—for example, by making it much easier to change the use of existing farm buildings, or to develop lower-grade agricultural land, if it creates renewable energy sources or affordable housing for farm workers.

Secondly, we have to promote and support farmers to roll out sustainable farming practices that address challenges such as soil erosion and low land productivity—for example, by supporting the farmer clusters that have become increasingly prevalent across Buckinghamshire, which bring together farmers to help explore best practice and to share ideas for enhancing natural habitats on their land.

Thirdly, we need to invest in the next generation of British farmers. This means ensuring that we give the profession the status that it deserves in the first place, and that we start educating children about it at a very young age. That means creating pathways into the farming sector—for example, through investing in specialist technical education and expanding agriculture apprenticeships. It means making it not just attractive but affordable to live in rural communities and to pursue a career in farming, particularly in places such as Buckinghamshire, where there is far too little affordable rural housing and services. As a result, the pull to towns is too strong. In short, we can put all the necessary protections in place for quality agricultural land, and I am confident that we will, but without a thriving farming sector to safeguard that land, they will have little impact.

Order. It is highly unusual for other Members to contribute to an Adjournment debate, because it is a conversation between the lead Member and the Minister. I believe that you have sought permission, but it is still highly unusual, so I assume that the contribution will be short before the Minister responds.

Thank you very much for your permission to speak in this debate, Madam Deputy Speaker. I want to support the representations from my hon. Friend the Member for Aylesbury (Laura Kyrke-Smith), because some of the things that she raises are also relevant to my constituency and those across the country.

As my hon. Friend said, the case for more genuinely affordable homes is clear. That is accepted in my community as much as in hers, if not more so, as so many people struggle in the private sector and house prices spiral due to the pressure of unregulated short-term holiday lets, driven by many people’s huge and understandable desire to enjoy the delights of Margate, Broadstairs and Ramsgate.

We need new homes. I have spoken to far too many people in their 30s and beyond who live in their childhood bedrooms, sometimes with a partner. They are desperate to be able to start their lives in a home of their own, but they are priced out of their own community. We also desperately need the infrastructure to support the families who will live in those homes, and we need to protect and enhance not only the nature that we love but the nature that is essential to our own economy, wellbeing and future.

I came here to change the rules, Madam Deputy Speaker, although of course I observe the ones that you enforce in this House. It is clear that the current rules do not serve our need for homes or our need to protect and enhance nature. They do not enable the right infrastructure to be built, nor do they effectively help us identify and protect our vital farmland. Those who protect the status quo in this argument are condemning our country to failure. Those who think that any of these four elements—homes, farming, nature or infrastructure, including energy—should drop off the list of our priorities do not understand the importance of shaping our communities to benefit our residents, now and for the long term.

My thanks to my hon. Friend the Member for Aylesbury (Laura Kyrke-Smith) for securing today’s debate, delivering such an excellent and thoughtful speech and speaking so eloquently about her lovely constituency, and also—like my hon. Friend the Member for East Thanet (Ms Billington)—for teasing out some of the challenges, particularly around housing and the importance of nature.

Nature underpins everything from our personal wellbeing to our economy, but the truth is that nature is in crisis. That is why the Government are committed to charting a new course and ensuring that nature is truly on the road to recovery. Ensuring nature’s recovery is one of my Department’s five key priorities, alongside cleaning up our rivers, lakes and seas; moving to a zero-waste economy; supporting farmers to boost our food security; and protecting communities from flooding. It is nature’s recovery that will support and complement those other priorities and contribute to the Government’s central mission for economic growth.

My hon. Friend the Member for Aylesbury raised the important issue of planning reforms. The Government are determined to transform the planning system to ensure a win-win for house building and for nature. Nature recovery is a top priority, alongside the need to overhaul the planning system, grow the economy and reach net zero. It is not a matter of choosing one of these priorities over another. Sustained economic growth depends on a healthy natural environment.

The Secretary of State has already confirmed that the Government are undertaking a rapid review of the environmental improvement plan. Our review will ensure that it is fit for purpose to deliver on our legally binding Environment Act 2021 targets and our international commitment to protect 30% of England’s land and sea by 2030. So this debate is extremely timely, and I will seek to address and respond to the points raised.

Would the Minister be keen to meet some of my constituents, who are threatened by the actions of EDF and Hinkley Point C, which wish to create salt marsh on land that is currently farmed in north Somerset? That is causing a huge amount of distress to people locally, including young Sophie Cole, whom I met this weekend and who has just started on her path as a young farmer. She is 28, and she and all the villagers in Kingston Seymour are very keen to make sure that the Minister understands the tensions between the creation of salt marsh at the behest of Hinkley and their natural desire to carry on farming that has taken place for hundreds of years.

I would be happy to learn more about the issues that the hon. Lady has raised.

The Government will optimise ELMS so that they produce the right outcomes for all farmers while delivering food security and nature recovery in a just and equitable way. We will confirm plans for the roll-out of schemes and our wider approach as soon as possible. ELMS, including the sustainable farming incentive, countryside stewardship and landscape recovery, will contribute to the biodiversity targets at scale by supporting nature-friendly farming and creating and restoring wildlife-rich habitats. They will also help to restore and improve the condition of protected sites, including sites of special scientific interest. From this year, ELM agreements are expected to bring or maintain up to 480,000 hectares of eligible SSSI habitat in England under favourable management, and to create or restore up to 300,000 hectares of wildlife-rich habitat, in addition to up to 200,000 hectares of peat and woodland by 2042.

In addition to the action that we will take to recover nature by creating and restoring habitat, we will take action to effectively protect wildlife-rich habitats and species. That protection is crucial, as species are in decline. That includes important farmland species such as farmland birds, including the turtle dove, which has declined in the UK by 97% since 1994. However, where nature-friendly farmers and major partners such as the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, the wildlife trusts and the National Trust, have put the right ELM measures in the right places, we have seen increases in scarce farmland bird species such as chough, cirl bunting, and stone curlew.

Our work to protect nature will include action to restore our protected sites, which are vital wildlife havens facing increasing pressures from climate change, pollution, and invasive non-native species. Natural England is working to get protected sites into favourable condition. That includes piloting new powers to put in place protected sites strategies to deliver improvements in partnership with others and working with the SSSI major landowners group to develop landscape-scale approaches. Natural England is also working with farmers through the catchment-sensitive farming programme to improve water and air quality on farms around protected sites. That includes helping farmers to secure funding to make management changes to improve their condition.

The Minister talks about partnerships, and among the key partners in restoring nature are, of course, small family farms. I have heard speculation that Wednesday’s Budget might remove agricultural property relief on inheritance tax. Of course, the Minister will not be able to comment on the Budget—I will have to wait until Wednesday for that—but if somebody were to float such an idea, would he combat it?

The hon. Gentleman is not going to tempt me. He will have to wait until Wednesday, I am afraid.

One of the key criteria for land to contribute to our 30by30 commitment is protection, as areas counting towards the target should be protected from loss or damage to important biodiversity. Land contributing to 30by30 should be secured for long enough to secure good biodiversity outcomes, generally for at least 20 years. Some areas, including those under intensive farming, are not suitable for 30by30, but our approach recognises that nature-friendly land uses may be able to play a role in supporting our goal.

It is disappointing that the good work done by wildfowling clubs across this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is not often mentioned. They rent and own salt marshes—they own land as well—and they manage them so that wildlife and plant life can blossom. It is done in partnership with landowners, Natural England and many others. Will the Minister recognise the good work that wildfowling clubs do and their contribution to a better life?

Of course, I join the hon. Gentleman in recognising the role of wildfowling clubs and many others who play an important role in the countryside.

The Government also place great importance on our agricultural land and food production. The national planning policy framework sets out how the best and most versatile agricultural land should be reflected in planning policies and decisions. The framework is clear that, where significant development of agricultural land is necessary, areas of poorer quality land should be preferred to those of a higher quality.

Meeting our ambitious targets on nature restoration, alongside our priorities on food security and accelerating to net zero, will require careful thought about how we use our land, which is why the forthcoming land use framework for England will consider cross-governmental issues such as energy and food security, and how we can expand nature-rich habitats such as wetlands, peat bogs and forests.

The 16th UN biodiversity summit is currently under way in Colombia, where the importance of biodiversity and ensuring that we achieve our national targets and international commitments will once again be in the spotlight. The Government have also recently appointed Ruth Davis as the UK’s first envoy for nature, and she will champion our ambition to put nature at the heart of our foreign policy and help us to deliver our commitments for nature recovery.

I finish by thanking my hon. Friend the Member for Aylesbury for securing today’s debate. I look forward to working closely with her and others to ensure that we begin to make real progress on the Government’s priorities of nature recovery and boosting our food security.