SHEEP FARMERS have rejected suggestions that Brexit offers a chance to improve UK farm animal welfare, arguing instead that the treatment of livestock here is already much better than in those countries now hoping to target the British market with cheaper meat.
Giving evidence to a House of Lords’ Select Committee on the impacts of Brexit on their sector, the National Sheep Association challenged statements made by Food and Farming Minister George Eustice that Brexit should be used as an opportunity to increase welfare legislation, as a means of driving worldwide demand for UK farm products – and Mr Eustice's hint that future UK farm support payments could be explicitly linked to altered on-farm animal welfare practices.
NSA chief executive Phil Stocker said: “Recent comments from Mr Eustice suggest we are destined for higher welfare standards and even tougher legislation after we leave the EU. But if we look at sheep, there are few concerns over welfare conditions and where we can make gains is in the area of improving health – something that would increase efficiency and welfare at the same time."
Mr Stocker stressed that the UK was already world renowned for its high levels of welfare and sound regulatory platform. If improvements were needed, they were in flock health and disease control, where they would help bolster the international image of UK meat – more so than introducing any additional welfare legalisation could.
"In areas like this, the sheep industry needs help and encouragement, not further red tape,” stressed Mr Stocker, who suggested that Defra should focus on providing support for flock health planning, and enhancing the involvement of experienced sheep vets in the industry.
There was also a need for a clear system of capital investment support into farm infrastructure such as fences, handling equipment, soil improvement and other actions to aid efficiency, sheep health and environmental management.
“As we exit the EU, if we are serious about raising the health and welfare of sheep there are two key areas to concentrate on. One is a new approach to Government/public support to incentivise health, welfare and efficiency, and the other is ensuring enterprise profitability," said Mr Stocker.
"The Government and our levy bodies have a massive responsibility to ensure viable trade agreements, market access and product demand post-Brexit. There is absolutely no doubt that if sheep are profitable they are valued more highly, and if they are valued they will be invested in.”
Conversely, if markets were lost, sheep would be worth less and welfare would be at risk – a major concern given that 35 per cent of UK sheep meat production is exported and 96 per cent of it goes to the EU.
“If we crash out of the EU without tariff-free access we could be paying a tariff of 46 per cent on lamb exports into Europe," he warned. "That’s enough to make trade not work. Talk of new trade with other countries is all very well but for this to be done within two years is unrealistic. We either need a viable export trade or we need to find ways, within World Trade Organisation rules, to protect our own shores from cheaper lamb coming in produced to lower environmental and welfare standards."
For in-depth news and views on Scottish agriculture, see this Friday’s issue of The Scottish Farmer or visit www.thescottishfarmer.co.uk
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here