Cuts to ELMS - and impact on NFM projects in constituency
-
19 May 2025
Dear Minister Zeichner,
Earlier this month, I met with many farmers in my constituency, all of whom were extremely concerned about
the abrupt removal of the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI) to new entrants. Despite the recent
announcement of the scheme’s return – which no doubt offered some hope to those committed to its principles
– questions remain, and damage has already been done. For farmers to plan effectively and have confidence
in the scheme’s future, clarity and consistency are essential.
Farmers whose applications were arbitrarily rejected due to the sudden cessation of the scheme’s application
process – and those unable to guarantee eligibility criteria – now face renewed uncertainty. This is especially
damaging given that farmers must plan crops and land use years in advance. Decisions made in previous
seasons – often based on assumptions of continued support – determine what is possible now. They cannot
simply react to abrupt subsidy changes. Financial support must enable and reward long-term planning, not
undermine it. The fact that the NFU was only informed of the scheme’s withdrawal half an hour in advance
(42 days short of the promised notice period) reinforces the impression that decision-makers fail to understand
the economic pressures and instability facing many in our farming community. Farmers must be able to plan
their financial future with greater certainty, and access to public funding must be fair and transparent.
The SFI scheme is not perfect. However, it offered a meaningful replacement for the EU’s CAP payments and
pointed to a future in which farmers could invest in the natural capital of their land. It allowed time, labour and
money to be directed toward restoring hedgerows, improving water quality, reducing flood risk, and providing
vital wildlife habitats – all through natural solutions. The Government stated that record numbers of farmers
had enrolled for the final round. This demand should be lauded as a sign of a new era of nature-friendly
farming, repairing the environmental harm caused by decades of industrial, intensive practices.
In one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world, this work is essential to reversing catastrophic
biodiversity decline. Without this incentive, farmers tell me they will be forced to maximise productive land
just to preserve modest gains. That might even include uprooting hedgerows or ploughing parcels of land
previously returned to nature under earlier schemes.
Last week’s statement pledging a replacement scheme offers little reassurance, with key decisions about its
scope and scale left until after the Chancellor’s Spending Review. This raises serious concerns that the
scheme’s future will be shaped by short-term Treasury pressures rather than the long-term needs of farming,
climate adaptation, food security and nature recovery.
I put to you some important questions. Will you confirm when the new eligibility criteria will be published?
What steps are you taking to prioritise farmers affected by the abrupt closure? What reassurance can you give
to those already in the SFI that they will be able to reapply in good time for future phases? And finally, can
you guarantee that the full £2.4 billion annual farming budget will be protected through and beyond the
Spending Review, so that Environmental Land Management schemes deliver on their promises for nature,
food security, and rural livelihoods?
I look forward to your response.
