Oral Answers to Questions

John Cooper Excerpts

Thursday 22nd October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)]

4. What assessment she has made of the potential impact of the UK-EU sanitary and phytosanitary agreement on the farming sector.

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

6. What assessment she has made of the potential impact of the UK–EU sanitary and phytosanitary agreement on the farming sector.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Stephen Morgan)]

The Government are in the final stages of negotiating a sanitary and phytosanitary agreement with the EU to make agrifood trade with our biggest market cheaper and easier by removing trade barriers for British producers. An SPS agreement could increase the volume of UK exports of major primary agricultural commodities to the EU by around 16%. A regulatory impact assessment will be prepared as part of the normal process. Details are subject to ongoing negotiations, and we will not be providing a running commentary.

[Stephen Morgan]

I am committed to the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Act 2023. Details of the agreement are subject to negotiation, and the EU-UK “Common Understanding” sets out the agreement, which will include a short list of exceptions. I can confirm that the UK has been clear about the importance of being able to support the use of new and innovative technologies.

[John Cooper]

CropLife UK warns that the heedless rush to align with the EU could cost British farming £810 million. That is £810 million off bottom lines, which are already very marginal. Further, it could also hit production in this country, so we cannot export what we are not even growing. What assessment is the Government making of CropLife UK’s report that says this EU alignment could be dangerous for farming?

[Stephen Morgan]

The CropLife UK report is clear that the numbers presented are a worst-case scenario. We are building a new pragmatic relationship with the EU, markedly different to what has gone before, which will bring clear benefits with closer alignment. Negotiations are in their final stages, and the Government will set out further details as they conclude.

Support for Farmers

John Cooper Excerpts

Wednesday 21st October 2026 Commons Chamber

[John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)]

I am pleased to be able to speak in this important debate. For many parts of my constituency in the Scottish Borders, farming is not just part of the local economy; it is the backbone of the community. Across the Scottish Borders, farming families produce the food we eat, look after the countryside and keep our towns going. Today, they are being squeezed from both ends by a Labour Government here at Westminster and an SNP Government in Edinburgh.

Let me be clear from the outset that the sustainable farming incentive applies only to England. Farm support is devolved, and farmers in my constituency could not apply for the SFI, but how a Government treat farmers in one part of the country reveals a great deal about how they regard farmers everywhere. With the two issues that hit every farm in the United Kingdom—the family farm tax and the fertiliser tax—Borders farmers are being hit just as hard as farmers here in England.

On the SFI, the facts speak for themselves. In March 2025, Ministers shut the scheme overnight without warning. Then, after more than a year of uncertainty, the new application window opened at 10 o’clock on 22 September. By 4 o’clock that afternoon, the entire budget—around a quarter of a billion pounds—was gone. Thousands of farmers lost out, including around 12,500 who already had agreements in place. Months of preparation, advisers’ fees and business plans were wasted in just under six hours. Farmers cannot run their businesses around a Government lottery. Decisions on cropping, stocking and investment are taken years in advance, not between 10 in the morning and 4 in the afternoon.

This Labour Government’s record on farming has been appalling. They created one of the biggest threats facing family farms in recent years with the family farm tax. Even after last December’s partial climbdown, which raised the threshold to £2.5 million, farms above that level, including many in my constituency, still face an effective 20% inheritance tax bill. Farmers are asset-rich and cash-poor. The value of their land does not pay a tax bill; selling the land does. Families in my constituency are still asking whether they will be able to hand the family farm on to the next generation. A Conservative Government will restore agricultural property relief and business property relief in full.

Farmers in Scotland are being let down by the SNP, too. Just last week, NFU Scotland warned that the agricultural support budget of around £677 million a year has lost some 20% of its purchasing power since 2014. The union is calling for an increase of around £183 million in the next Scottish budget, and NFU Scotland has also made it clear that a budget being eaten away by inflation is simply not good enough. Farmers in the Borders are sick of consultations and complicated new frameworks being dished out by Holyrood. They need a properly funded scheme that backs food production, encourages investment and lets their businesses make a profit.

That brings me to Labour’s fertiliser tax. From January, the carbon border adjustment mechanism, known as CBAM, will impose a new charge on imported fertiliser. Some have suggested during this debate that the carbon border mechanism was first proposed under a Conservative Government. Its purpose was to stop the British industry being undercut by high carbon imports, but there is no British ammonia industry left to protect.

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

My hon. Friend and I were in the Committee that discussed the carbon border adjustment mechanism. Does he share my surprise that the Government did not seem to realise that it would affect fertiliser? There was much focus on cement and steel, but it seemed to come as a shock to them that it would put as much as £70 or £80 on a tonne of fertiliser.

[John Lamont]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The Labour Minister did not seem to understand the impact that the mechanism would have. I was even more shocked that the Liberal Democrats decided not to vote against the proposal, unlike Opposition Members.

As I was saying, the ammonia that our fertiliser depends on is now just about all imported. For farmers, the fertiliser tax is not about protection, but is simply a further tax on growing food. As the NFU has warned, food grown overseas with exactly the same fertiliser will come into this country with no tax being paid. British farmers will be put at a disadvantage in their own market by their own Government. This tax will hit every farm in the United Kingdom, including the farms on the Scottish Borders that the SFI never reached.

As we have heard, the Conservatives tried to stop the fertiliser tax, but where were the Liberal Democrats? They were sitting on the fence. When I challenged the hon. Member for South Cambridgeshire (Pippa Heylings)—she is not in the Chamber, but she was a member of the Committee that was considering this regulation last week—she accepted that there were concerns about the uncertainty and the additional costs; but when it came to the vote, the Liberal Democrats sat on their hands. They refused to oppose the measure imposing this additional tax on our farmers.

--- Later in debate ---

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

Food security is national security, as the mantra from the Government Benches goes. Yet the reality, I am afraid, is that it is much spun and little done. The family farm tax sent a chill through my rural Dumfries and Galloway constituency and underscored yet again the disconnect between this urban-centric Government and rural Britain.

Now we have the fertiliser tax coming along and again, like the family farm tax, it is deeply flawed. In fact, we had an admission that the family farm tax was deeply flawed from a former Government Minister who pressed its case in this House—incredible! On the price of fuel, there has been much back slapping about the cuts to duty for red diesel. That is certainly helpful, but the reality is that red diesel is up by as much as 60%, and that is an enormous input cost for farmers. It is a big difficulty as well for the fishing sector. I have asked the Fisheries Minister if he will convene a meeting with the fishermen, because British boats are afraid to put to sea when French boats are able to access finance from the French Government to fish in British waters.

Funding in Scotland, as we heard from my hon. Friend the Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont), is devolved for farming and agriculture. However, we have also seen in Scotland the SNP Government exercising sleight of hand with the agricultural budget. Money that was intended for farming— supposedly ringfenced—magically disappeared, only to reappear. That is not good enough. Devolve and forget is the order of the day with this Government. We must have more accuracy about what is going on in Scotland. The block grant and the Barnett consequentials go north. This place should have some say in what goes on there.

The hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) opened this debate with his usual paean to the EU. The EU funding settlement is changing and the envelope under the common agricultural policy is shrinking, such that farmers in Ireland are protesting about it. I can assure the House that the farmers in Dumfries and Galloway are in no hurry at all to return to the EU and the idea of a shrinking common agricultural policy.

Bluetongue Virus in Livestock

John Cooper Excerpts

Thursday 3rd September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Morgan]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question—I know that this issue really matters to him, based on the feedback and concerns he has received from his farmers. It was a real pleasure to be with the Prime Minister last month to announce further measures to support our farming community down in the south-west. On my hon. Friend’s broader points about capacity issues at Pirbright and testing, I will certainly take away the specific questions he has raised, but I can assure him today from the Dispatch Box that there is increased capacity to assist with those issues.

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

The midges that spread bluetongue are no respecters of the border, or of the fact that devolved issues are sent to Holyrood for consideration in Scotland. As we have heard, there are difficulties with cross-border movement—it is a huge issue—and I have also been told that in the initial stages of this outbreak, the Animal and Plant Health Agency reacted in Scotland with all the alacrity of a tranquilised sloth. The Minister has warm words about talking with his equivalent in Scotland, but we need action on the ground; there are real difficulties now, particularly with these sales coming along.

[Stephen Morgan]

There was a very helpful briefing for parliamentarians in August, led by my colleague Baroness Hayman, and we are very happy to replicate that so that we fully understand the cross-border issues. However, I can assure the hon. Member from the Dispatch Box that we continue to work across Governments to ensure our farmers are protected, wherever in the United Kingdom they live.

Draft Conservation of Habitats and Species (Offshore Wind) (Amendment etc.) Regulations 2026

John Cooper Excerpts

Monday 27th April 2026 General Committees

[Robbie Moore]

My hon. Friend makes an excellent and valid point. We would absolutely expect the Government not only to open those oil fields, but to make sure that they apply exactly the same criteria when any energy project gets the go-ahead, and it feels that a one-size-fits-all approach is not being adopted in this case.

I want to expand on my concerns about the compensation hierarchy. It seems that the environmental protections are already not adequate to deliver favourable conditions for most sites or network coherence, so my second point to the Minister is to ask for reassurance that tier 3 will not become the norm or a simple way of bypassing the compensation hierarchy. What level of assessment has been given to that issue, and will she explain why no further detail has been published to date on the tier 3 compensation hierarchy? That concern has also been raised by their lordships in the other place.

My third concern, which has not yet been touched on, relates to fisheries and the impact of offshore wind on our fishing communities. The shadow Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Louth and Horncastle (Victoria Atkins), recently visited Peterhead fish market to discuss the issues facing fishermen in Scotland, which include a lack of workers and fuel costs.

The Scottish Government plan to install up to 40 GW of offshore wind capacity by 2040, a target that it has been warned is “far too high” and would cause irreversible damage to our marine environment while displacing the fishing fleet from grounds it has worked for generations. A report carried out for the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation has shown that the surge in offshore wind farm developments will exclude the trawling fleet from approximately 50% of fishing grounds by 2050. I am sure the Minister will agree that the plans put forward by the Scottish Government show complete disregard for Scottish fishermen.

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

Does the shadow Minister share my astonishment that the Scottish Government refuse to talk about so-called spatial squeeze? It is a major issue for the fishing fleet, because it simply cannot trawl in between the wind turbines. The Government appear to deny the existence of the problem, but it is a massive difficulty for the fishing fleet, is it not?

[Robbie Moore]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. It appears that the Scottish Government are not only ignoring the challenges associated with spatial squeeze—

Fish and Chip Sector

John Cooper Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd February 2026 Commons Chamber

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

It is good to see so many right hon. and hon. Members in their plaice as we skate through the choppy waters that are the fish and chip sector. The chips are down for fish suppers. While the word “iconic” is overused, surely fish and chips warrant that label. At Heathrow airport, visitors are greeted with signs extolling the virtues of what is, or was, our national dish. Welcome to Britain: land of drizzle, warm beer, warm welcomes and fabulous fish suppers.

[Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) (Lab)]

Fish and chips is a great British food, but fish and chips first came to Britain with Jewish immigrants from Spain in the 16th century. Cold fried fish was a staple of many Shabbat lunches, including my own grandma’s. The first chippy is credited to Joseph Malin, who added chips in about 1860, in London. What a great idea and what a great immigration story!

[John Cooper]

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention—a fascinating history lesson.

Staying with history, during the war fish and chips were deemed so vital to the nation’s morale that Prime Minister Winston Churchill insisted they be exempt from rationing. If the ingredients were available, fish suppers were on the menu and chip shops got extra cooking fat to keep the home friers burning.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman. I am mindful that the best chips come from Comber spuds and the best fish comes from Portavogie—that is just me talking up my own area. Does he agree that the new fisheries management plans have resulted in reduced total allowable catches, affecting local supply? It means that in Northern Ireland a cod supper, which was £6 or £7, is now £10 to £11.50. Does he agree that, without intervention, the fish and chip shop days will be as few as the fishermen’s days at sea?

[John Cooper]

I thank my near neighbour for his intervention. He presages some of what I am going to touch on now.

Today all is not well. Romano Petrucci, proprietor of the Central Café in my home town of Stranraer, is just one of many business people warning that this staple is fast becoming an unaffordable luxury. Data from the Office for National Statistics indicates that the average price of a portion of takeaway fish and chips was £10.96 in December, up from £9.99 the year before—an increase of 10%. That was higher than average price increases for other takeaway meals or carry-outs, as we call them in Scotland.

Over the same period, the average price of a Chinese takeaway main course increased by 4% and an Indian takeaway main course by 3%, while a takeaway pizza increased by just 2%. That £10 barrier is hugely significant, for customers generally have a ceiling on what they regard as reasonable—perhaps £6 for a coffee or £7 for a pint of beer. Above that, sales dip, and no wonder at £40 or more for a fish dinner for a family of four, and so, sadly, it has proved: the ONS says that sales of fish and chips fell by 21% in 2024 compared with the previous year.

[Lola McEvoy (Darlington) (Lab)]

If the hon. Member is paying £6 for a coffee, he should come to Darlington where it definitely is not £6. We also have the best places for fish and chips, with Yarm Road Fish and Chips and Cockerton Fisheries both winning awards. Please do consider a visit to Darlington to try some really pukka fish and chips.

[John Cooper]

I certainly would not pay £6 myself for a coffee. If I can find a pint cheaper than £7, I think I will be there.

[Dawn Butler (Brent East) (Lab)]

As we are talking about the best chips, the first fish and chip shop was actually in east London, where I was born. I have a chip shop challenge; I am going around London trying chips—any excuse. Chip shops are an important part of London’s economy, so the hon. Gentleman’s debate is vital. This week, my chip shop challenge went viral because I got some abuse—but it was absolute pollocks!

[John Cooper]

I thank the hon. Lady for her interesting intervention. Her chip challenge sounds like a lot of fun, and I defer to Madam Deputy Speaker about the question of proper parliamentary language—I am sure what she said is perfectly acceptable.

Fish and chip shops accounted for 60% of the fall in sales, with 36 million fewer portions of fish and chips sold in fish and chip shops in 2024 compared with 2023. Something has gone drastically wrong. Worse, it is not just one thing but a series of issues. I have some sympathy with the Minister because the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is not directly responsible for all these matters, but of all Departments, it should realise that government must not work in silos and instead should work across Whitehall.

[James Asser (West Ham and Beckton) (Lab)]

Will the hon. Member give way?

[John Cooper]

I feel like I am swimming upstream here, but I am happy to give way.

[James Asser]

I recently had a conversation with a chip shop in my constituency. One of the issues it raised was getting younger people interested in going into the business because there are other opportunities elsewhere. Indeed, the person I spoke to—it was a family business—had moved on to other opportunities. The hon. Member is coming on to the many issues that face the sector. Does he agree that we need to look at opportunities for education in catering colleges to encourage people that fish and chip shops still present a viable business opportunity? Like many other long-standing businesses, if interest is lost, that is how they die out. That is one issue we need to look at.

[John Cooper]

The hon. Gentleman makes a good point, and I will touch on the question of skills in a few moments.

A key reason for prices leaping like a salmon is an increase in the price of fish itself. Incredibly for an island nation, we are a net importer of fish. Previously, a high proportion of fish used in the UK was imported from Russia, though in March 2022 the Government rightly imposed a 35% tariff on Russian seafood imports following the illegal invasion of Ukraine. That invasion also hit the price of flour and sunflower oil—both major Ukrainian exports. There was also a reduction in the North sea cod quota, mentioned by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), who is no longer in his place.

[Melanie Onn (Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes) (Lab)]

The hon. Gentleman is setting out really well the challenges that fish and chip shops are facing in this difficult international climate, but there are domestic issues too. North East Lincolnshire council, in my constituency, plans to pedestrianise Cleethorpes marketplace, which the famous Steels Cornerhouse fish and chip restaurant says could amount to a £150,000 loss in click-and-collect orders alone. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that local authorities should be doing all that they can to support our favourite fish and chip shops?

[John Cooper]

The hon. Lady makes an important point. We should of course support businesses of all kinds, and pedestrianisation can be a double-edged sword. One of the difficulties is the weather in this country, and there is nothing better than pulling up right outside the shop that you want to go to, so decisions have to be balanced.

The reduction in the North sea cod quota for 2025 reduced supply, and, of course, increased prices. I am more a haddock man myself, but cod is one of the top five imported and consumed species in the UK. Labour’s failed “mackerel for missiles” deal gave the EU further rights in our waters, but did not give us access to Europe’s multibillion-pound Security Action for Europe defence fund. The EU now takes seven times more fish, by value, from our waters than we take from its waters.

Fish and chip shops have also faced challenges from increased electricity prices due to the use of energy-intensive cooking appliances. Increased energy costs have also contributed to higher potato prices, with more to come as the carbon border adjustment mechanism is effectively a fertiliser tax, adding perhaps an extra £100 per tonne. Even changes to reliefs on double-cab pick-ups—the farmers’ workhorse—have increased potato prices.

Let us hear no nonsense about the people behind the counter being low-skilled; today’s fish-frier could be tomorrow’s FTSE 100 chief executive officer, or the founder of a €1 billion unicorn start-up. They work with cash and high-value stock, and, crucially, learn communication skills through dealing with the public.

Increases to the minimum wage, which is paid not by the Government—although Labour likes to pretend that it is—but by hard-pressed businesses, are also an issue. Add the increase in employer national insurance, which puts a bounty of about £900 on the head of each employee: no wonder youth unemployment is rising.

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

The hon. Gentleman is outlining some of the economic challenges that the sector is facing. One of my constituents is heavily involved in the National Federation of Fish Friers. He told me that he often feels that the Government are very good at listening to UK hospitality and other big sectors, but they do not necessarily understand the specific local issues of this sector. Does he agree that we would welcome more communication and better collaboration between them?

[John Cooper]

The hon. Member makes a very good point. Many industries are not actually treated as an industry. For example, agriculture is treated as a series of small individual businesses, and its totality is not taken into account. That is a very fair point.

The truth is that Labour’s Employment Rights Act 2025 is about the clipboard class—the trade union apparatchiks —and not really about actual hard-working people. What is the point of workers’ rights if that all-important first job eludes people?

Will the fish supper go the way of the red telephone box—much loved, but a relic of the past? Will the Labour party’s indifference turn a British staple into a luxury for the elite? Whether you call it a fish supper, a one-and-one, or just regular fish and chips, this Government risk frittering away a classic.

[The Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs (Dame Angela Eagle)]

I am yet again condemned to talk a lot about food while kept from tea, dinner, or whatever we want to call it. I also responded to a Backbench Business debate on farming and fishing, and did not get to have lunch, while everyone happily talked about food. It is a sort of torture from being in this particular job, but perhaps it will do well for my diet.

I congratulate the hon. Member for Dumfries and Galloway (John Cooper) on raising this issue. I think this has been one of the more popular Adjournment debates, given the interventions that we have heard from both sides of the House. That demonstrates what a place heart fish and chip suppers hold in everybody’s heart. I congratulate him on securing this Adjournment debate, which I am happy to answer. He is right to point out that not all the issues he has raised are directly for DEFRA, but I will do my best to answer some of them.

I know the hon. Gentleman raised this issue in January, when he asked my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House whether the fish supper had had its chips—something that he has done again today. I note the various puns that people have come up with, and the somewhat dubious use of fish species to give the impression that other, unparliamentary words may have been said. Perhaps it is worth noting that the pollock fishery is doing quite well and has recently been reopened to commercial fishing after some good measures were taken, which have managed to revive that fishery, but I will not go into detail.

[John Cooper]

So we have a load of pollocks, yes?

[Dame Angela Eagle]

We agree about the revival of pollock fishing. Obviously, I hope Hansard is listening extremely carefully—otherwise, we are all going to get into serious trouble.

The sector was left to cope with rising costs and global shocks on its own for years, but this Government are taking a different approach. We understand that if we want these businesses to survive and thrive, we have to get involved. We need to support the fishers who land the catch, the farmers who grow the potatoes, and the high street traders who keep their doors open and deliver the final product millions upon millions of times every year, so maintaining a secure and affordable supply of fish is of key importance.

Fishing Industry

John Cooper Excerpts

Thursday 22nd January 2026 Commons Chamber

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

The hon. Member for St Ives (Andrew George) raised the question of the correct method of dispatch for lobster. May I counsel him against the method that I tried, which was to pop them in the freezer? By the time I opened the door, they had eaten all my ice cream and three of my Fab lollies.

Even as we speak, chic Parisians are enjoying langoustines and coquille Saint-Jacques, perhaps with a crisp glass of Chablis—lucky them. That seafood almost certainly comes from the pristine waters of Scotland, but one of the difficulties we face in getting that seafood into France via Boulogne is red tape, and this is where the Government should step in. That red tape is blamed on Brexit. In fact, it comes from the far side of the short strait. This is a difficulty created by the French—perhaps because of protectionist ideas, who knows?—but it should not take an entire renegotiation of the SPS agreement to get this sorted out. We could have this changed and changed quickly.

The other danger with the renegotiation of an SPS deal is that it may have an impact on the free trade agreements we are doing around the world. We have recently signed one with India, for instance. The comprehensive and progressive agreement for trans-Pacific partnership, the CPTPP—which is easy for me to say; we need a better name for this—could be imperilled by effectively reducing ourselves to rule-takers rather than rule-makers with a new SPS deal.

The other issue that many of our fragile coastal communities face is that they have full employment. Going to sea is not forever. I speak as the son of a marine engineer—I, meanwhile, get seasick in the bath, so I would certainly not want to go aboard a fishing boat. As we have heard, it is an exceptionally dangerous occupation and, even at the best of times, is difficult and hard work. The Home Office has a role here because it is exceptionally difficult to fulfil the requirements to bring in from elsewhere the workers who are crucial to this industry. I wonder if the Minister might touch on this—I appreciate it is a different Department—because we need some simplification of the rules and a realisation that they are making things exceptionally difficult for sometimes long-established businesses that should have a great future.

Again, touching on that red tape issue, one of the seafood producers in my constituency, West Coast Sea Products from Kirkcudbright, is facing difficulty even now with getting scallops into France—not because the quality of its product is anything less than exemplary, but, again, because of the rules and the difficulties being placed in its way, not by Brexit, as I say, but by the French themselves. Perhaps we could hear something on that, and perhaps we might be able to unblock this logjam.

--- Later in debate ---

[Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)]

I thank the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) for applying for today’s very important debate. I would like to start by paying tribute to the fishermen and women of Bridlington and Hornsea in my constituency and to the RNLI and inshore rescue teams who keep our fishermen safe right across the UK.

The House will be well aware that Bridlington is the lobster capital of Europe, landing over 300 tonnes every year, and the largest shellfish landing port in the UK. I hope that next time the Minister is back in Brid, she has the opportunity to sample some of our fine fresh seafood at Salt on the Harbour or the Old Lifeboat Station opposite the Spa.

I welcome the fishing and coastal growth fund, but I caution that it is £360 million over 12 years, which is £30 million a year. In a harbour like Bridlington, the cost of a major upgrade, or in fact just normal maintenance to harbour walls, often runs into millions of pounds. I fear that we could quickly run out of money for major capital projects, but I hope that those capital projects can apply to this fund and that Bridlington will be able to benefit from it. I also hope that we will be able to address the skills issues, which are key for the fishing industry. We need to attract school leavers into the industry and ensure we have the next generation of people out there at sea; this is a real problem up and down the country at the moment.

Another issue I would like to talk about is spatial squeeze. The Government are consulting on a land use framework, which is welcome, but we need something similar for the marine environment. We have heard from Members today about the challenges of juggling space for renewable energy, and there are very large offshore wind farms in Hornsea.

[John Cooper]

Is my hon. Friend surprised to hear that the SNP denies the existence of spatial squeeze, and advisers told senior figures in the Government not to talk about spatial squeeze? Spatial squeeze is real. I return to his point about Bridlington being the lobster capital of Europe. We do not have to divide on this, but I think he will find that it is, in fact, Port William.

[Charlie Dewhirst]

On that second point, we will have to agree to disagree, but my hon. Friend is right in terms of spatial squeeze. If it is not an issue, I do not understand why it takes up so much of the briefing from the National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations; they, I suspect, are the real experts in this area.

I turn to the EU deal and the frustration that our fishing industry has been sold out for the next 12 years in return for an SPS deal that has yet to be negotiated. I fear that things have got worse since that announcement was made. In fact, the National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations has contacted MPs to say:

“In last year’s annual negotiations between the UK and the EU that concluded last December, something new happened that has deeply alarmed UK fishermen. As well as deciding fish quotas for 2026 as expected, the two sides also agreed new technical fisheries management rules for their respective national waters. We are told that the EU proposed these measures and that the UK negotiating team was blindsided by their inclusion in the talks. Nevertheless, they agreed to them. Rules that govern how British fishermen can work in British waters were changed, at short notice and without consultation, at the request of the EU. This is unprecedented.”

It went on to say:

“It was startling to learn… that the collaborative, evidence-based process that we all thought we were working within had been set aside in favour of a bargain struck between civil servants over a few days in London and Brussels. More troubling still, the rules will be more lenient in EU waters.”

That says to me, “sell out again”, and it sets a direction of travel as we negotiate an SPS deal with the European Union. It is clear that we are negotiating from a very weak position, and are willing to do whatever the EU pleases to have a deal done by the end of this year. This Government could perhaps learn lessons from the previous one about setting false deadlines for trade negotiations. I am happy to admit that we made mistakes in the early days post Brexit, and I caution against doing the same now.

It would be remiss of me not to touch on bottom-trawling. The issue has become a focus for anti-fishing groups, but if it were to be banned across our marine protected areas, that would destroy the industry overnight and decimate certain coastal communities. Much of the campaign against it misrepresents the industry; it is not as damaging as some organisations say it is. I hope that the Minister will take up the issue with the industry, and will ensure that bottom-trawling is properly represented in any negotiations about the use of that technique.

In conclusion, I am proud to represent such a successful fishing industry. I know that Bridlington is close to the Minister’s heart, and I would love the opportunity to meet her, perhaps even in Bridlington, and local fishermen to discuss the future of the industry, so that we do what we can, together, to support the lobster capital of Europe.

Oral Answers to Questions

John Cooper Excerpts

Thursday 18th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Dame Angela Eagle]

My hon. Friend raises the important point that a third of all farmland in England is managed by tenant farmers, so a fair and sustainable tenant farming sector relies on positive landlord, tenant and adviser relationships. To help deliver that, we have appointed Alan Laidlaw as England’s first commissioner for the tenant farming sector. We will continue to look particularly at how tenant farming agreements are working, to see whether there is any need for reform in the future.

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

Merry Christmas to you, Mr Speaker, and to your tip-top team.

Dumfries and Galloway is the land of milk and slurry. We lack not for grass and dairy cattle, but we do lack for people. We are heavily reliant on immigrants to milk the cattle, so the loss of occupation code 5111 from the immigration salary list is causing huge concern. Can my farmers count on the Secretary of State to speak to the Home Office and head off what appears to be a looming crisis?

[Dame Angela Eagle]

We have a close relationship with the Home Office, and I have old contacts there too. I promise that we keep a close eye on these things and look at what we can do about emerging shortages. Given that we want to reduce the number of people who come into this country and that we want to create job opportunities for people here, it is important that the sector looks at how it can train people locally to do those jobs.

Fishing Quota Negotiations: Impact on UK Fleet

John Cooper Excerpts

Wednesday 26th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. I congratulate the hon. Member for St Ives (Andrew George) on securing this important debate.

I declare a sort of interest: in a previous life, I was a special adviser with the Scotland Office, and I spent the larger part of 2021 working on exports from Scotland to the EU. I have to tell the hon. Gentleman that the EU, far from being our avuncular friends in this matter, were a protectionist bloc. Many of the difficulties we faced, including the transport of live langoustines—he mentioned vivier transport—were to do with problems on the far side of the short strait. It was bloody-mindedness at best and outright protectionism at worst.

But let us talk about chips—not the golden-fried essential component of what we Scots call the fish supper, but bargaining chips, for that is yet again what our fishing crews risk becoming. The statistics are superficially simple: the Office for National Statistics says that fishing accounted for just 0.03% of the UK’s economic output in 2021. However, that does not capture the reality that a great many of our fragile coastal communities, not only in Scotland but across the UK, are entirely dependent on jobs in fishing’s at-sea component and its allied onshore processors.

If fishing were a trifling little homespun affair, why is the EU so interested in it? With the Business and Trade Committee, I travelled to Brussels to discuss this Government’s reset of relations. What Labour expects from this reset is opaque at best, but the EU—good protectionist that it is—has already drawn up an invoice, and top of its list is fishing. Amid warm words about security and co-operation between Britain and the EU, the French are keen to lock us out of the new £150 billion Euro defence fund, only to then show a bit of ankle on negotiations involving—quelle surprise!—fishing.

Just as Labour’s Employment Rights Bill, with its heavy pro-union bias, takes us back to 1979 and the winter of discontent, so fishing is drifting back to 1973. Then, our prized and pristine waters were the quid pro quo for access to what was then the European Economic Community. Today, the dice are loaded in favour of the EU fleet. According to the Scottish Fishermen’s Federation—I note that the hon. Member for St Ives is not a huge fan of it, but I certainly am—the EU catches around seven times more fish by value in UK waters than we land from EU waters. Britain’s status as an independent coastal state was hard won, and we must not allow our fleet to be dragged back into the ambit of the hated common fisheries policy. We cannot allow a linkage between fisheries and access to markets to be established.

British fishing is already under a series of threats. Let us be as clear as the blue ocean about the conservation issue: fishermen are to the fore in this area, for they know that if they clear the seas of fish today, there is no tomorrow for them. Things such as spatial squeeze are real. Our seas are vast but not limitless. Boats cannot fish between floating wind turbines or trawl near those turbines’ subsea infrastructure. To say that boats can simply up nets and go elsewhere is to demonstrate a terrifying lack of knowledge about the sea. Fish and seafood are not evenly suffused; they are in some places and not in others.

Fishing is food security, as we have heard. It is a livelihood for many—not just for those who literally risk life and limb on the storm-tossed seas, but for those onshore. Fish and chips are as emblematic of this country as the bright fishing boats at quaysides from Kirkcudbright to Kirkwall and more. They must not be frittered away at the behest of an avaricious EU.

Farming

John Cooper Excerpts

Thursday 13th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to speak in this debate, and I thank the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) for leading it. I am always so proud to stand up in this place and represent farmers in Strangford and across Northern Ireland, who are nothing but dedicated to their trade. I declare an interest as a member of the Ulster Farmers Union.

Farming is massively important in Northern Ireland, where it contributes £2.5 billion annually to the economy. Furthermore, we are pivotal to the agricultural output of the United Kingdom, accounting for growth of 5.6%, which is more than any other nation that contributes to this great United Kingdom. Northern Ireland exports large amounts of beef, dairy and poultry to GB, the Republic of Ireland and further afield. Lakeland Dairies in my Strangford constituency sends its milk products all over the world. That creates a sense of just how important our farmers are.

To state the obvious, it is no secret that I, my party colleagues and other Members across the House were shocked and saddened by the Chancellor’s decision in November to introduce inheritance tax for family-run farms. The fact is that 65% of farmers cannot and will not survive this. Living on a farm and having great relationships with my neighbours—every one of them spoke to me before this debate—and local farmers in my constituency, I know all too well the impact this will have.

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

I thank the hon. Gentleman, who is in fact my neighbour, for giving way. He talks about the number of farms that will be affected by this. It is far higher than the Treasury tells us. We know that the Scotland Office is compiling its own figures, to push back against the Treasury figures, which will no doubt be trotted out here again today. Is there not a fundamental problem here, as the vast majority of farms will be affected by this?

[Jim Shannon]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right, and he sums up our views.

The decision to introduce the farmers’ inheritance tax will destroy the very essence of what so many farmers have worked hard to achieve. I have called on numerous occasions for the Minister to support us. He is an honourable man. He could be a friend of the farmers—we will see just how much of a friend he is—if he contacted the Chancellor and suggested to her that one solution is to increase the threshold from £1 million to £5 million. If that is done, farms will be saved, as will the future of family farms in Northern Ireland. Does he want to be the farmers’ friend?

Foot and Mouth Disease

John Cooper Excerpts

Wednesday 15th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Daniel Zeichner]

I can assure my hon. Friend that we have an extremely close relationship with the Welsh Government. The Rural Affairs Minister, Huw Irranca-Davies, and I speak frequently—indeed, we spoke to each other only a few days ago, at the Oxford farming conference—and we are in regular contact to discuss issues such as these. In anything that we do, we will be working together on an “entire United Kingdom” basis.

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

With some of the most productive grassland in the UK, Dumfries and Galloway is not worried but terrified by this outbreak. I am reassured to know that we are doing what we can, but it is a very difficult problem to solve. Can the Minister reassure me that the Republic of Ireland will not be the unlocked back door through which this dread disease returns to this country?

[Daniel Zeichner]

I welcome the hon. Gentleman’s appreciation of the complexities that we face, but it is in everyone’s interests to ensure that we stop this, and we are all co-operating closely. The veterinary officials have a very good network, and they are working closely together. No one wants this to extend further.