Proposals from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) to change food labelling conventions in the UK have led to a ministerial debate.
The department’s secretary of state, Steve Barclay, has suggested introducing new label requirements for British products that emphasise their high welfare standards and the comparative quality of UK produce.
However, Kemi Badenoch, his counterpart at the Department for Business and Trade (DBT), warned the plan would lead to an increase in food prices, making British products less competitive and could also antagonise trade partners.
Price concerns
Put forward in January, the proposals seek to highlight the standards to which British food is produced, without the chemical interventions such as hormone treatments, that are widely permitted elsewhere.
Barclay explained this would address the issue of UK farmers competing domestically with products of a lower standard, which he characterised as not being “clearly labelled to differentiate them”.
In a letter written to Barclay, seen by the FT, Badenoch said she was “very concerned about the costs of such an approach on domestic producers and exporters to the UK” and called for an analysis of the impact the proposals would have on food prices before a public consultation.
She also flagged that the proposed changes could fall foul of World Trade Organization (WTO) rules prohibiting perceived discrimination against imported products.
Friendlier farmers
Barclay’s proposal has been interpreted as an attempt to all farmers’ concerns, amid a spate of European farming protests and rising discontent among UK farmers.
But the National Farmers’ Union’s (NFU) director of strategy, Nick von Westenholz, said that food labelling was not the answer to concerns over the UK’s food import standards, telling the FT that “The best way to achieve this is at source, by ensuring imports are legally required to meet the same high standards that British farmers produce to.”
Recent attempts to build this provision into trade deals has fallen flat, with Canadian farmers’ anger at not being given the same access to the UK market as their British counterparts as a result of stringent food standards contributing to the deal falling through.
Laura Williams, customs and trade specialist at the Institute of Export & International Trade (IOE&IT), agreed there could be unintended consequences were these new rules introduced:
“The biggest feedback from our members about additional labelling is that putting further requirements on UK businesses goes against promises made to the food industry. It will have an impact on costs and prices, which in turn could make UK produce less desirable on the international market.”
Sunak at NFU
The label debate follows prime minister Rishi Sunak’s appearance at the NFU’s annual conference in Birmingham yesterday (20 February), where he pledged to offer farmers greater support.
Ahead of a likely general election this year and with polling suggesting potential losses in traditionally Conservative rural seats, he announced a support package of £220m to fund technology and productivity initiatives, telling farmers:
“While the importance of farmers will never change, farming is going through its biggest change in a generation. As it does so, this government will be by your side.”
Sunak also sought to reassure farmers on the topic of food security in the light of ongoing disruption caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Since 2022, general fuel price rises, as well as an increase in the cost of other key products, such as fertilizer, have significantly added to agricultural costs.
Sunak was the first British prime minister to attend the conference in over 15 years, since Gordon Brown’s 2008 appearance.
