Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee

The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee quizzed Professor Tim Lang, Dr Hannah Brinsden, and Karen Betts on the resilience and fairness of the UK food supply chain, tracing lessons from Covid-19 and the Ukraine crisis. The session highlighted structural vulnerabilities in a highly connected, just-in-time system, with emphasis on energy costs, inflation dynamics, and market concentration. Witnesses urged stronger public planning and governance, including a long-term national food security framework or food Bill, better public engagement, regional diversification, and targeted government support (notably for energy-intensive parts of the food system and for SMEs). They also pressed for a more joined-up government approach (procurement, regulation, and policy alignment) and an institutional mechanism to steward food security as a national priority. The discussion surfaced policy recommendations and signals around: long-term legislative frameworks for food security; a cross-departmental “Food Inflation Gateway”; expanded investment and R&D incentives; regional and SME diversification of supply chains; safeguarding public nutrition in resilience planning; and a shift from purely market-led resilience to a more strategic, public-interest orientation in the food system.

This joint EFRA and Environmental Audit Committee pre-appointment hearing scrutinised Dame Helen Ghosh’s suitability to chair the Office for Environmental Protection (OEP). Key focus areas included the independence of the OEP from government, governance safeguards, and resourcing pressures that affect delivery of environmental priorities. She set out top priorities (nature-friendly farming, protected sites, and integrated infrastructure/planning) and argued for prioritisation given finite resources. The session also explored how the OEP would engage with devolved administrations (Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland), the implications of potential closer EU alignment, accountability to Parliament, and approaches to stakeholder and public engagement. The witness stressed that the OEP must operate as an independent regulator, emphasised the need to join up government policy, and discussed leadership style and culture. The committee raised concerns about recruitment processes, transparency, and the OEP’s ability to deliver under budget constraints, while seeking clarity on legal frameworks (Environment Act) and the role of the OEP in enforcement-adjacent activities.

The EFRA evidence session scrutinised the roles, powers, and resourcing of the Groceries Code Adjudicator (GCA) and the Agricultural Supply Chain Adjudicator (ASCA), alongside industry bodies responsible for fertilisers and food supply. Key points include: the GCA’s funding via a mandatory supermarket levy and a budget increase to £3.5m with nine staff, and its reported 92% perceived retailer compliance in 2026, underpinned by a confidential, collaborative approach with retailers; the use of a backstop investigation and arbitration/civil-litigation routes to secure redress; and ongoing questions about the potential merger with ASCA, with the GCA’s witness arguing that merging would not be straightforward due to differing powers and staffing models. The new DEFRA sponsorship arrangement for the GCA was acknowledged, with intent to maintain an effective relationship with DEFRA. In Panel 2, the witnesses highlighted the Iran conflict’s impact on fertiliser and energy costs, transparency needs, and policy asks: cash-flow support for farmers, urgent clarity on UK CBAM for fertilisers/ammonia, data/databases for fertiliser stocks, and clarity on Russian-owned fertiliser assets in Europe. The AHDB called for market transparency tools; the fertiliser industry stressed long-term resilience, planning, energy costs (including red diesel), planning permission and energy policy, and labour/energy inputs. Overall, the government-facing commitments revolve around maintaining and improving regulatory teeth through the GCA/ASCA framework, clarifying regulatory tools and remedies, and addressing energy/CBAM/data transparency to bolster farm viability and food security amid geopolitical shocks.

The EFRA Committee scrutinised South East Water’s response to outages in late 2025/early 2026, the governance and culture of the company, and the adequacy of regulator interventions and funding. Witnesses described a transformation programme and short-term resilience measures, while regulators and inspectors highlighted gaps in monitoring, root-cause analysis, and consumer protection. Key policy signals include moves to empower regulators (and potentially remove bottlenecks) through legislation and reforms, continued CMA-backed resilience funding, and an overarching shift toward an integrated, stronger regulatory framework for England (and Wales). There were clear disagreements between the company and regulators on root-cause analysis, timing of responses, and the quality of communications with customers and stakeholders. The session also surfaced concrete commitments from SEW (resilience plan, leadership review, compensation processes) and regulator-led expectations (enhanced powers, better governance, and improved customer protection).

Two EFRA evidence sessions examined DEFRA’s approach to waste, circular economy, and land use/nature policy. Central government commitments and positions include: renaming and reframing circular economy activity as part of a resilience/growth agenda and pursuing a more materials-resilient economy; ongoing engagement with industry (including major producers) and expansion of governance structures (e.g., UK Packaging PRO) alongside protections for local authorities; rapid delivery of packaging reforms (EPR, DRS, simpler recycling) with significant funding to support local authorities and households; a commitment to open data and better data in non-household waste; substantial farming/nature funding (Farming Innovation Programme up to 2030) and steps to crowd in small farmers; and a foundational, open land-use framework intended to guide multi-agency spatial planning, land-use decisions, and LNRS alignment, while acknowledging implementation challenges and the need for continued engagement with upland communities and tenant farmers. The land-use framework is treated as a foundation document designed to balance farming with nature recovery, climate targets, housing, and energy, with future farming roadmaps to reflect these priorities. Finally, there is a clear policy emphasis on peatland restoration, peat bans in horticulture, and the use of nature-based investment to improve resilience and food security while managing cross-border considerations with devolved governments.

The EFRA Committee scrutinised the future of the veterinary profession, focusing on workforce sustainability, education and admissions, international recruitment, regulatory reform (notably the Veterinary Surgeons Act), animal welfare delivery, and veterinary medicines governance. Witnesses from SRUC, Harper Adams, the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS), and the British Veterinary Association (BVA) highlighted: the need for a flexible regulatory framework that widens entry pathways to include allied veterinary professions; a shift toward holistic admissions to select students who will thrive in rural practice; improved workforce planning and mental-health/retention support; challenges and opportunities in international recruitment post-Brexit and visa reforms; a proposed CMA-led reform landscape including transparency in ownership, pricing, and medicine supply; and the role of the VMD in medicines access and environmental considerations. The Government’s stance is signposted through DEFRA’s veterinary-surgeons-act reform consultation and ongoing CMA engagement, with calls for timely reform to align regulation, veterinary workforce needs, animal welfare objectives, and supply chains across England and Northern Ireland.