Without food, there’s no health or security

Food production in Britain is in crisis. Attacks come from many directions: successive governments’ climate change and net zero policies; tax changes; stubborn refusal to detach from the EU orbit; agricultural land grabs by developers; and the globally controlled companies that adulterate our food.

Measures that seem desirable and progressive on the surface in reality contribute to less access for workers to decent food produced at home. Instead of accepting ongoing damage to our ability to produce, the CPBML argues for workers to take control and think in terms of “Food for the People”.

The Climate Change Committee, a likeminded group of individuals appointed by government, has agriculture in its sights. Their Seventh Carbon Budget, looking forward to the period 2038-2042, calls for total decarbonisation by 2050. This report claims that agriculture accounts for 11 per cent of our greenhouse gas emissions, the fourth highest sector in the economy, but then draws perverse conclusions.

‘The Climate Change Committee has agriculture in its sights, calling for total decarbonisation by 2050…’

It argues that farmers should shift into woodland creation, peat land restoration and growing energy crops. Upland farms are a particular target – so they propose “destocking” uplands. A warning against increasing food imports is welcome, but this particular one is for the wrong reasons. It’s not because of the risk to national food security, but because it would cause “carbon leakage” – more carbon emitted elsewhere for producing our food.

The committee calls for incentives for farmers and land managers to diversify income streams. Elsewhere the Land Use Framework aims to take about 760,000 hectares out of production, nearly a tenth of farmland, turning it into heath land or woodland. A further 9 per cent will need to change to create climate benefits.

Reeves’s attack

The attacks on farming came to a head in 2024. The newly elected government lost no time in showing its priorities. Before the general election, Steve Reed, now the minister in charge of the Department of Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), promised farmers no changes to inheritance rules, including agricultural property relief.

These tax exemptions were introduced in the 1980s with the aim of allowing family farms to stay in the family after the death of an owner. Then the Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, overthrew this idea in her October budget. She said that any farm worth over £1 million would be subject to 20 per cent inheritance tax.

That this is an ideological attack is reinforced by the words at the time of John McTernan, once an advisor to the Blair government. He said that “farming is an industry we can do without” and that Labour should “do to farmers what Thatcher did to the miners”. A government propaganda offensive after the budget tried to paint farmers as rich, claiming that the tax change would affect only the largest farms: it failed.

Just as anyone who lives in a mortgaged house may appear wealthy on paper, so it is for farmers, laden with debt for machinery, feed, seed, fertiliser. Farms are the victims, as are all workers, of rocketing energy costs.

Tax advisers are fond of saying that inheritance tax is voluntary – and it often is for “high net worth individuals”, who can afford expensive accountants to set up discretionary trusts. In the same budget, Rachel Reeves also decided to accelerate the wind-down period of farm subsidies – some farmers will lose nearly 80 per cent of their income this year.

This attack has prompted widespread demonstrations and action against these anti-farming, anti-food production measures. In London, Edinburgh and Cardiff, at ports, at distribution depots and anywhere ministers raise their heads, farmers are making their point.

Even the chair of the Commons Environment committee admitted that “we have got an agricultural policy that is actually taking people out of food production”.

Fundamental to food security is not just production but also food quality. Obesity is rife – the 2022 Health Survey for England estimated that 64 per cent of adults and 27 per cent of children were either overweight or obese. Obesity is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease, musculoskeletal problems and type 2 diabetes. The NHS spends considerable resources on treating the consequences of poor diet.

Ultra-processed

The crude adulteration of food in the nineteenth century has been replaced by ultra-processed products, laden with sugars and fats, on the shelves of supermarkets. Additives such as preservatives, colours, and colour stabilisers used widely in food, drinks and medications have resulted in an increase in allergies.

‘Capitalism has failed to protect our food supply and the drive to war presents a new threat to food security…’

But capitalism has no interest in providing good quality nutritious food for workers. Left unchecked, it would gladly keep us at the barest minimum necessary for us to sustain our existence, remain productive and reproduce.

The sustained attempts to suppress wages play their part in ruining our diet. A House of Commons Library Research Briefing in September of last year reported that 7.2 million workers, 11 per cent of the population, are in food poverty, including 17 per cent of our children. The Trussell Trust, which runs a network of food banks, reported supplying the highest number of emergency food parcels they had ever distributed – 3.12 million in 2023-2024.

How can we tolerate this? Food parcels, the modern version of the Victorian soup kitchen, are no long-term solution. Cheap food is frequently bad food, produced inhumanely. The fight for wages is the key to being able to afford a good diet.

Planning

After Brexit, the CAP was replaced by new subsidy arrangements. The direct payments scheme which paid farmers based on the amount of land they farmed, was tapered off. Farm incomes are falling as a result – by 19 per cent in 2023 according to DEFRA’s own statistics.

Farmers and the government are engaged in a continuing battle over the new scheme. The National Farmers’ Union has insisted that food production be given as much support as the green initiatives.

The NFU has also pointed out the many other flaws in the government’s food and agriculture polices.

As well as the withdrawal of the budget tax proposals, farmers demand a ban on substandard food imports, a ban on dishonest labelling, and measures to increase food security.

Supermarkets

So great has been the pressure from farmers and their supporters that the major supermarkets – Morrisons, Aldi, Lidl, Tesco, Asda, Sainsbury’s – are converts to food security. All are now lined up behind the farmers and exerting pressure on the government to change course. Supermarkets also bear a significant measure of responsibility for the fraught condition of British farming, squeezing their margins with low food prices – but it’s a start.

By understanding Britain’s unique geology and climate, we know what we can grow most effectively in our conditions, what we might export to others, and what we might import. Revolutions in agricultural production in the eighteenth paved the way for the industrial revolution. When workers moved to the cities, new productive techniques made it possible for them to be fed.

So, the question in 2025 is what do we need to do collectively to ensure food security, for families and households and for the country? Capitalism has failed to protect our food supply and the drive to war presents a further threat to food security.

Our farmers say, “No farmers, No food, No future”. We say, “Food for the People – for health and security”. But who would be surprised to hear the government echo the words of Rudolf Hess in 1936 as Nazi Germany prepared for war: “Kanonen statt Butter”, “Guns before butter”?

• This article is based on the introduction to a CPBML public meeting in March.

• Related article: Food for the People

• Related article: Previous government attacks