In the light of the recent widely-publicised farmers’ protests against the government’s proposed introduction of inheritance tax (IHT), a report that landed in the inbox of Sussex Bylines this week was particularly interesting, and we publish a summarised version below.
It covers the South of England Agricultural Society’s annual farming conference held on 23 November, entitled “What is Our Land For?” with the question apparently drawing a record in-person and online audience.
Farmers have been swayed by right-wing arguments
Farmers have undoubtedly been buffeted by the constantly changing policies of different governments over the past 50 years, from “grow more food, productivity is king” to “diversify, protect the environment”, and for the most part – for a community that is often stereotyped as change-averse – they have responded gallantly. But the farming community – or at least their leaders – have also shown an unfortunate tendency to aim at the wrong target and to be swayed by the argument of demagogues (they are not alone in that of course); 54% of farmers voted for Brexit, which, overall, has been deeply damaging to the industry.
Many of those demonstrating in London appear to have believed the arguments of the right-wing press and large landowners like James Dyson and Jeremy Clarkson that the introduction of IHT would lead to the demise of the family farm. Almost every reputable fact-checking service refutes this claim. And Richard Murphy, in Funding the Future, poses an interesting question. If IHT leads to tax-avoidance land purchase schemes becoming less attractive to big investors, and to a fall in the value of agricultural land, will that not lead to aspiring young farmers finding it easier to get into the industry?
What farmers need above all is a clear long-term government strategy for land use and food production so that they can plan ahead, and the government should also be challenging the stranglehold that the big supermarket chains and wholesalers have on prices paid to farmers for their produce, which fail to reflect the cost of producing our food. Someone is making a lot of money between the farm gate and the supermarket shelf, and it is very definitely not the average farmer.
A lively debate on the focus of land use
The panel included Paul Christian, Managing Director of Sentry; Tom Heap, journalist and author; Tim Slaney, Interim Chief Executive Officer of the South Downs National Park Authority; and Ben Taylor, Managing Director of Iford Estate.
This ensured a lively debate on this year’s theme, “What is our land for?” with discussion on whether the focus of land use should shift from traditional food production to prioritising environmental and biodiversity goals—or even to accommodate the demands of commercial development.
The report from the SEAS Farm Conference reflects the different directions in which farmers are being pulled, and also offers some useful suggestions to government. We leave it to our readers to decide which should carry the most weight.
Balancing agricultural productivity and environmental responsibility
Tom Heap began the discussion by presenting ideas from his latest book, Land Smart, which explores how land can support both people and nature. He described how UK land can help address numerous issues, such as “absorbing carbon, generating energy and storing floodwater,” alongside providing food and shelter. He also stressed the need to keep the UK’s food footprint within its borders: “Pretty much rule one, if you don’t want to worsen climate change and nature loss, is not to take any more wild land into farming.”
Heap advocated regenerative farming as a model for balancing agricultural productivity with environmental gains, defining it as a system that “leaves land in a better condition year after year”. However, he warned against potential greenwashing, suggesting that regenerative farming requires careful management to ensure it genuinely improves the environment. “The real trick is finding a way of producing the same amount of food without using the same level of chemicals”, he noted, emphasising the need to reduce reliance on synthetic inputs for sustainable productivity. In response to a question from the audience he argued that we should recognise the true cost of food, including paying a decent salary and living wage to the people who work on it as farmers.
The role of food production and economic viability
Paul Christian underscored the importance of sustaining local food production amid the UK’s evolving agricultural policies. He outlined the growing economic pressures, citing the need for clear government objectives as the farming sector navigates subsidy cuts and policy shifts.
Christian was candid about the financial challenges, highlighting how rising operational costs and diminishing subsidies risk undermining the economic viability of UK farming.
Environmental stewardship in protected landscapes
Tim Slaney, CEO of the South Downs National Park, emphasised the unique role that protected landscapes like the South Downs play in balancing conservation with human access. He advocated a “nature permeable” approach to land management that integrates biodiversity and sustainable farming practices, noting that policies focused solely on food production are insufficient for sustainable land management. He suggested that a stronger emphasis on the rural voice would be essential in future policymaking.
Alternative land uses and the growth of nature-focused enterprise
Ben Taylor, manager of the Iford Estate, described how his estate has shifted from traditional farming towards biodiversity and eco-tourism to diversify revenue streams. He described plans to devote around 800 hectares to biodiversity net gain (BNG), a scheme that allows developers to offset their environmental impact by investing in conservation efforts on his land. He also shared his perspective on land’s purpose, emphasising economic resilience and adapting to market needs.
The discussion ended with a broad consensus on the need for a strategic land-use framework that supports both the agricultural economy and environmental goals. Heap summarised this by reiterating the importance of pragmatic, multi-functional land-use strategies that balance productivity with conservation.
Key final resolutions covered:
- Government-led land use framework: the panel agreed on the need for a land-use framework led by the government that balances agriculture, conservation and renewable energy.
- Market stability and fair pricing: Paul Christian and Tom Heap stressed the importance of pricing mechanisms to ensure farmers are compensated fairly.
- Consumer education and public understanding: Tim Slaney suggested introducing a natural history GCSE and investing in programmes to increase public awareness of farming’s true value.
- Supporting biodiversity and climate resilience: the panel highlighted initiatives like biodiversity net gain and carbon sequestration as viable revenue sources and tools for achieving environmental goals.
- Investing in health and wellbeing through nature: panellists advocated for better public access to natural spaces on farms, with Tim Slaney proposing funding initiatives to support such efforts, linking land use directly to societal health benefits.
A full recording of conference proceedings and details of all the speakers are available here: https://www.seas.org.uk/professional-development/farming-conference/
CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO OUR CROWDFUNDER
HELP US BECOME STRONGER SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO DELIVER POWERFUL CITIZEN JOURNALISM!
