Does Labour Care About Nature? Their Latest Attack Suggests "No"

The Guardian broke the news yesterday that the Labour government is planning to remove its nature-friendly farming fund support for British farmers —  except for those who manage small farms —  at the next spending review. It is the latest blow in what has been a constant torrent of bad news for both farmers and nature ever since the proverbial dam broke last year when the infamous change to inheritance tax for farmers was announced. This tax change, which threatens the viability of many family farms, hit the farming community really hard. It seemed like a direct attack, a shattering of promises, and the potential unravelling of centuries' worth of good work done on the land. Farmers were left confused, angry, and fearful of the future. Little did they know that this was just the start of a relentless barrage of attack that this Labour Government has heartlessly and thoughtlessly unleashed on farmers, farms, and nature.

The barrage needs to stop before it is too late.

What we are about to lose

The funding for nature-friendly farming the government wants to slash is largely a subsidy paid to farmers in return for  biodiversity-enhancing farming practices and habitat creation. The fund, with its numerous options and schemes, was designed to replace the subsidies British farmers once received through the somewhat generous but flawed EU Common Agricultural Policy. As many have pointed out, Brexit gave us in Britain the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to reimagine how we can support our farmers. Though far from perfect, the nature-friendly fund/subsidy that the previous Conservative government came up with benefited farmers, benefited nature, and ultimately benefited us all. It was what our beleaguered countryside needed.

Much good was done for nature under these nature-friendly schemes, and much good was in the progress of being done by farmers who longed to see nature flourish again on their lands. All this good is now under direct and imminent threat.

The bind our farmers are in

Farmers’ incomes are already pitifully low. In response to this unexpected news, even farmers who are instinctively nature-friendly are throwing their hands up in the air in desperation, lamenting that they too will be forced to intensify almost every square inch of their farm in order to make ends meet for their families. They don't have much choice, especially when future trade deals threaten to undercut their production and subject them to rampant overseas competition. 

This will be catastrophic for nature, traditional farming, and the long-term health of our ‘green and pleasant land’. It will mean a return — on some farms at least — to some highly destructive practices of farming — of the kind agrarians have been railing against for decades. And on many farms we can expect to see the loss or degradation of valuable farmland semi-natural habitat and declines in cherished farmland wildlife.

But who can blame the farmers? Farming in this highly intensive manner is what you or I would most likely do if we were in their boots, especially if the bank manager was to start knocking on our door. Ultimately, nature doesn’t pay farmers; crops and livestock do. Whilst the bank manager might say “That’s nice” to the farmer who proudly shows them the wildflower meadow, they will still demand their monthly payment. And payment in songbirds and wildflowers will not suffice.

Labour should be worried, but they are more concerned with AI

Threatened with farmers en masse ploughing up wildflower strips and using more chemicals and inputs on their fields, you might think this Government would be concerned — especially considering their claims in their 2024 manifesto to “deliver for nature” and to “restore and protect our natural world.” Instead, all the actions of this government up until now suggest these were empty slogans written out of a sense of duty rather than of desire. Instead of fulfilling their manifesto pledges, the Starmer administration appears to be transfixed on economic growth and productivity gains at all costs. Even if that cost is nature.

The tragedy is exemplified by Starmer and Reeves appearing to be more concerned about Britain being globally competitive with AI — making Britain a “powerhouse” for artificiality — than on conserving the real, treasured, and immensely valuable natural world that calls Britain home. Once lost, nature is hard to bring back. Sometimes, the loss is irreversible. Wildflower meadows, old hedgerows, and rare farmland birds can’t just be revived on demand once GDP and national productivity — all boosted by that coveted AI — have risen to a “desired standard”.

This government is thus sacrificing what is truly and immeasurably valuable on the altar of artificiality and short-term economic gains. It is an attitude of gross foolishness — and one for which future generations will judge them with contempt. And rightly so, for failing to steward and protect beautiful habitats and the creatures they contain is sacrilegious to our national identity.

A plea to the government

So, this is my message to the Labour government if they are willing to listen (their track record of stubbornly ignoring farmers and conservationists suggests they are not). You are going down a foolish path. You are abjectly failing to steward the wildlife and the habitats which have been entrusted to you as leaders at the helm of this country. Your governance will cause a great and dirty stain on the heritage of our magnificent countryside, and you will be held responsible for the undoing of centuries of good and beautiful work between humans and nature. Ultimately, your legacy will be defined as “The destroyers of nature”, the ones who oversaw its demise and held it in derision. And you will get your just reward: the contempt of future generations.

Nature cannot stand four more years of your cuts and profiteering at its expense. You must change course — for the cuckoo’s, the skylark’s, and the barn owl’s sake.