WrLife still ok?

[Social Media]

 

Labour faces criticism over potential budget cuts to a flagship farming initiative, with opponents warning that this move could breach key manifesto promises. The Government is under pressure not to reduce funding for the Environmental Land Management Scheme (Elms), which encourages farmers to adopt greener practices by rewarding efforts that improve soil health, air quality, and water pollution. 

 

Reports suggest that the Elms fund could be slashed by £100 million in the upcoming Budget, a move that has sparked backlash from senior Conservative MPs and environmentalists. Over 20 Tory MPs and peers have written to Labour’s Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Environment Secretary Steve Reed, urging them to preserve the fund. Critics argue that cutting the scheme would jeopardize Labour’s commitment to British wildlife and its broader environmental goals.

 

The Elms initiative has been heralded as a significant post-Brexit victory, replacing the previous EU-style subsidy system and aligning more closely with national priorities. In its manifesto, Labour promised to ensure that such environmental schemes "work for farmers and nature," while also pledging to meet the goals laid out in the Environment Act, including the protection of natural habitats.

 

However, the Treasury is grappling with a substantial £40 billion funding gap, driven by commitments to public sector pay raises, rising NHS costs, and asylum seeker accommodations. In this context, critics fear that Elms, which plays a “critical role” in preserving Britain’s wildlife, may be sacrificed. Cutting the scheme’s budget, they argue, would undermine the Government’s own environmental promises, particularly its global commitment to the 30x30 initiative, which aims to protect 30 percent of the UK’s land and seas by 2030.

 

A source from the One Nation Group of Conservative MPs emphasized the importance of Elms in achieving these targets, noting that 70 percent of the UK’s land is agricultural. "Farmers will play a critical role in nurturing wildlife and encouraging nature restoration and will require financial support. Elms fills this critical role: by cutting it, the Government risks putting our nature targets in jeopardy," the source said.

 

In a letter coordinated by the Conservative Environment Network, 23 Tory parliamentarians expressed concern over the potential cut, describing it as a “short-sighted act of self-harm.” They highlighted the financial challenges farmers already face due to high costs and extreme weather, warning that reducing the Elms fund would further threaten their livelihoods and harm the UK’s food security. The letter also raised doubts about the Government’s ability to meet its 2030 nature recovery goals, estimating that 239,000 fewer hectares of farmland would benefit from Elms if the budget is reduced.

 

The signatories, which include former ministers Claire Coutinho, Helen Whately, and George Freeman, cautioned that any effort to frame the proposed £100 million reduction as merely an underspend would not be credible. They argued that the previous Tory government had intentionally left room in the budget to accommodate a full uptake of the scheme, making the cut unjustifiable.

 

A source from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs did not deny the possibility of a reduction, citing the difficult financial decisions facing the new Government. "The Conservatives left Britain facing the worst economic inheritance since the Second World War because they refused to make the tough decisions and spent money that didn’t exist," they stated. The Government has since acknowledged that closing the £22 billion gap in public finances will require "difficult decisions," with the Chancellor expected to make a final determination in the Budget. 

 

Nonetheless, critics warn that reducing Elms funding would contradict the Government’s pledges to support both the environment and the agricultural sector, calling into question Labour's broader environmental commitments.

 

Based on a report from the Daily Telegraph 2024-10-22

 

 

 

[jippytum]

Starmer's whole manifesto promises have been bown to bits during his first 100days in office. 

He is a bigger deceiver than Tony Blair. 

[Watawattana]

1 minute ago, jippytum said:

Starmer's whole manifesto promises have been bown to bits during his first 100days in office. 

He is a bigger deceiver than Tony Blair. 

Lies and deception is front and centre of every politicians job description and CV, irrespective of the colour of their tie or dress.  I'm sick of all of them.  Bring back the Monster Raving Looney Party!!!

[JonnyF]

2 hours ago, jippytum said:

Starmer's whole manifesto promises have been bown to bits during his first 100days in office. 

He is a bigger deceiver than Tony Blair. 

 

Starmer is a bare faced liar.

 

Worse thing to happen in the UK since Blair's illegal war based on WMD lies. However, he has 4 years to exceed Blair's level of deceit and I have no doubt that he will. He's certainly hit the ground running when it comes to ruining the UK and I'm sure Blair will be more than willing to provide advice from whatever shadowy hole he currently resides. 

[Chomper Higgot]

Tax payers providing subsidies to farming as a direct result of the damage done by BREXIT to the UK’s farming sector.

 

7 hours ago, Social Media said:

 

In a letter coordinated by the Conservative Environment Network, 23 Tory parliamentarians expressed concern over the potential cut, describing it as a “short-sighted act of self-harm.”

Without an iota of introspection from the Party that inflicted the single biggest act of self harm on the nation.