Recommendation 31

The Tenant Farmers Association told us that the introduction of the new scheme was a major concern for its members, and that it would be important that the scheme contained options to meet the specific needs of both tenant farmers and of small farms. It emphasised that these were not the same, as there are some large tenant farms, and not all small farms are tenanted.84 We asked the Department what the likely impact of the scheme would be for smaller farms or tenanted farms and whether taking land out of food production would mean these farms would go out of business. The Department told us that the size of the farm “does not of itself inform the efficiency of the farm”.85 David Kennedy, Director-General for Food, Farming and Biodiversity, expanded on this by stating that the Department’s objective was “that every farm can now be viable in the future through the farming transition”,86 and that the Department’s evidence and analysis showed that this was possible. The Department also explained that, although small farms and tenant farmers were more reliant, on average, on direct payments, the scheme would not just take direct payments away, but the focus on improving productivity and resilience would mean that every farm would have an opportunity to prosper in the future. It similarly told us that the uptake of the pilot suggested that the scheme would be attractive to small farms and to tenant farmers.87 80 Q 23 81 Committee of Public Accounts, Achieving Net Zero, Forty-Sixth Report of Session 2019–21, HC 935, 5 March 2021 82 Q 23 83 Qq 23, 61, 134 84 Qq 4–5 85 Qq 59–60 86 Q60 87 Qq 60, 111 22 Environmental Land Management Scheme