A local farmer explains how Brexit has hit Kent horticulture, and the trade with Europe
Some Kent farmers are taking their tractors out on the roads in go-slow protests that will inevitably cause traffic jams in places like Dover and the Ashford ring road. What are they so unhappy about? David Catt, a farmer from Kent, was invited onto GB News recently, where Jacob Rees-Mogg asked him about the benefits of Brexit for British farmers. David was so frank about the damage Brexit is doing to British farming that he was cut off while on air.
Pickers needed
Brexit has hit Kent farming, in particular, because fruit and vegetables require skilled pickers. Under the EU, there was a steady flow of good pickers throughout the harvesting seasons. Now those pickers from the eastern part of the EU (Poland and Romania) no longer want to pick up contracts in the UK as they can more easily find work within the EU.
Under the seasonal workers’ visa that applies for UK farms post-Brexit, farmers now recruit pickers from countries further away like Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, who tend to have language difficulties so take longer to train for the work– about three months of a six-month visa. As a result of the lack of pickers, Kent orchards are being grubbed up as farmers despair of getting a good return on the investment.
Red tape for exports
Then there is Brexit red tape for exports. This means that importers in the food business in the EU will avoid produce exported from the UK because the price has gone up due to these extra administrative costs.
Catt has retained good links with EU farmers. When last spring there were shortages of salad food in the supermarkets, he was able to source supplies quickly from Spain and Portugal. From farmers in Poland, supplying mushrooms to the UK, he was aware that they were suffering from a shortage of straw which they used to buy from Ukraine.
Straw is plentiful in the UK, so Catt prepared some lorry loads to send to the Polish mushroom growers. But this became financially unviable when it was realised that new Brexit border controls for importing into the EU meant that each 20-tonne lorry load of straw costing £1,200 had to get a phytosanitary check costing £450. This is just one example of how control of the UK as a ‘third country’ is stifling what could be a lucrative trade for UK farmers.
Sub-standard food imports
What makes Catt most cross is bad sub-standard food imports. Since Brexit, food checks at Dover have not been taking place. They are said to need 50,000 customs officers to fulfil the requirements of post-Brexit trade regulations. The checking keeps on being postponed, probably because the government knows it will lead to some shortages in the shops. There is likely to be an 18-hour delay at the phytosanitary checks now designated for Sevington. Because we don’t check properly, it is easy for EU suppliers to send the worse quality produce, like rejected meat, to the UK.
Many UK farmers are furious about the recent trade deals with Australia and New Zealand. This will allow cheap meat into UK supermarkets. It is cheap because it is produced with lower standards than that of UK farms, for instance using growth hormones, docking tails, and transporting live animals long distances in trucks across the Australian outback.
I can recall in 2016 reading the Brexit economist, Patrick Minford, raising exactly this argument for cheap food as a reason for Brexit, with some callous remark about uncompetitive British farmers having to leave the business. The point, as Catt is keen to argue, is that this ‘cheap food’ really amounts to sub-standard imports, which pushes down food and farming quality and reduces food security, while British farmers go out of business.
Deceptive labelling of packaged fresh food
Increasingly the supermarkets are buying imported fresh produce from overseas but labelling it as British just because it is packaged in the UK. This should not be allowed as it disincentivises British farmers to use land for British-grown crops.
Food security was well understood by farmers and the government in the wake of the wars of the 20th century. In the two decades after the war, there was price stability for farmers under the marketing boards and guaranteed prices. For instance, they knew that with 300 boxes of apples sold, a tractor could be bought. When the UK entered the EU, marketing boards disappeared, but the CAP subsidy gave some stability, although it favoured the larger farms which drove many of the old farming families out of the business as land was consolidated. Horticulture, in particular, was not so well supported under CAP.
Hop fields were also reduced in the 1970s because of a technical change in beer brewing, as hop extract replaced the dried hops.
Farmers who have thrived are those who were able to adapt their business model. Some were able to take out contracts with the supermarkets, such as large producers of raspberries or apples, where there is money to be made in the required packaging, although that still needs more foreign labour.
Need to diversify
Catt diversified into wholesale distribution with 18 vans and two lorries supplying independent food shops and restaurants in the South-East, and up to the London market. He also transports local dairy produce and imported dry goods to the same network. He points out that supermarkets destroyed the independent village shops and pubs. However, there is now an encouraging increase in the number of customers for local produce. He has been expanding his sales every month. During lockdown, he lost the sales to pubs and restaurants, but then there were sudden shortages on supermarket shelves which he was able to supply – which is, of course, an argument for retaining the flow of local produce for food security.
He is scornful about this government’s understanding of farming. Farmers have to be extra resourceful and able to adapt to the weather and the market. They have to diversify sources of income, for example, a farmer changing the use of farm buildings from storage to packing. However, this causes the rating office to reassess the rates category, adding further charges to the increased financial burden for farmers.
Once the rating office spots a new source of revenue for farmers, they tax it at business rates: for instance, solar panels, biogas, export consignments etc. The new farming grants to replace CAP may give the farmer, say £3-4m for a wildflower meadow, and the same amount for farm buildings. But it is foolish to put a wildflower meadow on grade one horticultural land.
Effects of climate change
The greatest challenge to farmers is now climate change. Catt has plante a vineyards that will start yielding in about five
years. Harvesting will be automated, so no need for human pickers. He is not worried by summer drought as it is on a greensand slope, with a line of groundwater at the base. French farmers are increasingly anxious about vineyards in areas which are becoming too hot and dry. Indeed, some big wine firms are buying up land in Kent for vineyards.
Produced in Kent
At the end of the interview, we took a photo of Catt standing beside one of his lorries bearing the “Produced in Kent” logo. This is not a farmer who is about to go out of business but one who can argue back at the leaders of Brexit that it is foolish to hamper British farmers, that we would be better back in the single market, that shoppers do not want bad imports, and that the government and the supermarkets must start being fair to farmers.
Reader Comment
A reader counters claims made in the above article, stating:
- Beef from cattle that received HGP treatment is illegal in the UK, irrespective of which country it comes from. It cannot be sold in the UK. The only beef able to be exported to the UK is from cattle reared to EU EUCAS accreditation, which includes no HGP.
- The live transport of cattle for slaughter does not take place outside of UK norms, on the cattle breeds for export to the UK.
- Tail docking is allowed in the UK as well, and very similar rules apply in both territories as regards its usage.
When asked for evidence about these counter-claims, he referred to a UK Trade Commission report, which states:
Hormone Growth Products (HGPs) – Page 44, Annex VI
“Does the use of hormonal growth promotants (HGPs) involve products likely to be imported into the UK in increased quantities under the FTA?”
“No. The Australian beef industry has set up a cattle herd segregation and processing system for producing hormone-free beef for European markets, the European Union Cattle Accreditation Scheme (EUCAS), which traces hormone-free cattle from birth and is jointly audited by Australian and EU government inspectors.
“It is not clear whether UK inspectors have audited the scheme since the UK left the EU, but we have no reason to believe the scheme is not reliable and robust. Under the system, hormone-treated and hormone-free herds are completely segregated to ensure that Australian beef exported to the UK is free from HGPs. 10% of Australian cattle properties are accredited to supply beef and cattle products to the EU market.”
On long-distance transport:
“Does this practice involve products likely to be imported into the UK in increased quantities under the FTA?”
“It is unlikely, though possible, that beef from stock that has travelled more than the UK limit of 28 hours will be imported into the UK in increased quantities under the FTA. Long distance transportation is mainly confined to the movement of bos indicus cattle reared on large farms in the north of Australia. Little of this meat is likely to be exported to the UK, as most Australian beef imported into the UK will be produced from bos taurus breeds of cattle reared further south (mainly south of the Tropic of Capricorn).”
On tail docking, the complainant stated that UK, Australia and New Zealand have similar rules but “the practice is more necessary in Australia and NZ due to the climate, and is not done to make the produce cheaper – it just increases the likelihood of the sheep surviving”.
Comments on this from David Catt:
“This year, 20,000 tonnes of Australian beef is being imported into the UK [the full annual quota is 35,000 tonnes]. Over the next decade, up to 110,000 tonnes per annum are coming. That’s the trade deal. That will destroy the UK beef and dairy industry, flood the UK market, and make home production unviable. When there is no UK beef being produced, what will happen to the price?”
Comments from the writer:
How rigorously the regulation is enforced at either end is crucial. For the phytosanitary checks now being introduced at UK borders, meat is in the medium risk category. Already alarm is being raised locally about insufficient funds for checks, and lack of trained personnel. There is the fear of further attempts by illegal meat traders to exploit any weakness at the borders.
