Support for Farmers

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Wednesday 21st October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

Farmers should be able to make a decent living producing excellent food while being properly rewarded for stewarding the land on which we all depend, and those things should not be in competition with one another.

Farming sits at the heart of our rural economy, our national security and Britain’s identity. Farmers put in incredibly long hours, often with no respite. They carry considerable financial risk and take decisions that can affect their families’ livelihoods for generations. This has been an exceptionally hard year given the drought, and the driving up of fertiliser and fuel costs by the war in Iran has compounded that. The Government have offered some respite through flexibilities in ELMS agreements, £15 million for on-farm reservoirs, a cut in duty on red diesel and an extra £70 million for this year’s sustainable farming incentive. The SFI supports farming in harmony with nature, from enriching soils to one of my loves: supporting our wonderful farmland birds.

I want to share a hopeful, positive story from my constituency. The Oak Tree Farm smallholding, started a few years ago by Sarah and Jay Taylor just outside Slitting Mill near Rugeley, secured funding in the first SFI26 window. They are excited new entrants, and plan to plant fruit trees and establish new hedgerows. I had the chance to visit them recently, and their love of their animals and the brilliant relationships that they have with their loyal customers was so uplifting. We should remember that that first window did succeed in allowing farms like Sarah’s and Jay’s to get in for the first time. There are, however, many lessons to learn. After closing within six hours, the second £233 million SFI26 window demonstrates the sheer level of demand from farmers wanting to participate, but also—let us be frank—desperately needing Government support to tide them over after a series of torrid growing seasons. The window opened at 10 am. For many farmers, that is well into the working day. Many will have been tending livestock or out in the fields, so the timing and the IT system were, in fact, unnecessary barriers.

I welcome the Government’s commitment to reopen the SFI as early as possible in 2027, and to scrap the first come, first served approach. I hope that Ministers will consider assessing applications on clear criteria, including environmental benefits, value for money and fair access. As the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for public sector efficiency, I would be keen to be involved in those discussions—alongside, of course, the sector itself, which needs to be heard first and foremost.

[Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire) (Lab)]

Does my hon. Friend agree that the Government could make the SFI system more accessible to farmers by publishing a timetable of when those windows will open well in advance, and circulating it so that farmers could be ready to apply when the next round arrived?

--- Later in debate ---

[Josh Newbury]

I do agree with my hon. Friend. I wonder whether there was a hesitancy about creating too much demand on the pretty inadequate IT system in one go, but that will always be the case, as long as people know the date. I think that we should have much earlier notice and that the system should take account of the realities of farming, which I am afraid this year’s scheme did not.

A farmer should not have to be the quickest with a keyboard and mouse to secure vital cash for margins or pastures. Let us not throw the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to the SFI, but we also must not shy away from asking fundamental questions about its structure and communication.

[Calum Miller (Bicester and Woodstock) (LD)]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[Josh Newbury]

In the interests of time, I am afraid I will not, because I know that many Liberal Democrat colleagues want to get in.

I also want to raise the wider contribution that farmers make to rural communities. During severe weather, they are often the first to spring into action. I admire the example set by the last Welsh Labour Government in financially recognising what farmers do for our communities, particularly during heavy snow, fires or other emergencies. As we set out to improve the SFI, I hope we will place greater emphasis on measures that promote resilience to extreme weather, and perhaps even flag those to farmers in badly affected parts of the country. The Government could also take measures to support farms of all shapes and sizes ahead of SFI27, such as the Treasury-backed loans that the National Farmers Union is calling for in next week’s Budget. I hope that the DEFRA team are making the case for rapid, flexible assistance, given the myriad pressures that have come this year.

I am optimistic about the future of British farming because of the ingenuity, determination and passion of the people who work in it, whom I will continue to listen to and champion. We will have our differences in this place, but I believe there is a consensus in the House on much of what needs to happen to support our brilliant British farmers. I hope we can bear that in mind in the months ahead, because they are getting on with their job and it is time for us to find common ground so that we can get on with ours.

Sustainable Farming Incentive

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Thursday 15th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Morgan]

I thank the Chair of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee for his measured intervention, and look forward to being before his Committee later this month. We obviously anticipated that there would be high demand for the scheme this year, which is why we had two windows and increased funding for the overall pot to £310 million—I have already mentioned the window 2 process. DEFRA expected strong initial demand, and made it clear before the window opened that its duration would depend on the rate of applications. Ministers obviously allocated the £50 million, and then the additional £20 million. We are really keen to learn from all in the sector what we can do to improve the scheme going forward, and I look forward to the right hon. Gentleman’s contributions in due course.

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

Avid readers of The Sun may have already seen some of my comments on the situation with SFI. I could ask many questions, but I will limit myself to just one. Many would-be applicants once again experienced technical issues, and those who phoned the Rural Payments Agency reported hours’ long wait times—I hope the Minister’s team are looking into that. The Department has said that there will be a further, very limited window for those who had technical issues, but could the Minister tell the House whether that includes only those who were able to speak to someone and report such issues, or whether it will also include those who, frankly, gave up when they knew that they would have to wait hours to speak to an RPA agent?

[Stephen Morgan]

I thank my hon. Friend for the way he has engaged with me on thinking through the design for the scheme next year. He is right to say that some farmers reported technical issues with the application service, which prevented them from applying. It is normal to receive such reports after the application windows close. Some of the applications will be valid, and the RPA is currently working through them as we speak. If my hon. Friend has any particular examples that he wants to share with me, I can certainly take them away and raise questions with the relevant officials in my Department.

Water Sector: Public Ownership

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Monday 14th September 2026 Westminster Hall

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to speak with you in the Chair, Sir Jeremy.

Since being elected, I have heard repeatedly from constituents about flooding, sewage discharges and failures of basic water infrastructure. My constituency is served by Severn Trent Water and South Staffordshire Water—double the problem, some might say. Recently, I met South Staffs Water after concerns about the installation of meters without what many customers felt was adequate notice. The crux is that customers feel that they have zero influence over the decisions affecting them, and that companies do not seem to explain clearly why decisions are taken.

I heard from constituents in Chadsmoor, for example, who have had to put up with water leaking out at incredible rates all around their properties and dangerously high water pressure for 11 months following the installation of meters. Whatever the ultimate cause, however, the refusal of the water companies to take responsibility for finding fixes is just another example of why their customers have lost trust.

On the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, as my hon. Friend the Member for Mid and South Pembrokeshire (Henry Tufnell) said, we grilled the chief executives of nine water companies and looked at many issues. Crucially, however, the corporate culture that has taken hold in the sector is so divorced from the lives of customers that it is really to blame for a lot of what we are discussing. Despite already knowing that public confidence was in tatters and that the sector was up sewage creek without a paddle, we were shocked by what we heard.

For me, questions of governance are as important as ownership. Who has control? Who carries risk? How is investment financed? What voice do customers have? The Government have recognised that the broken status quo cannot continue. Powers have been strengthened and Ofwat is to be replaced with a new unified regulator, but given the mammoth issues in the sector, we should ask, as so many have today, whether that is enough.

We cannot assume that public ownership would resolve all the issues. We should remember that some pre-privatisation water boards were failing their customers too. That is why, as a member of the Co-operative party, I hope that the Minister will look further at empowering customers and introducing mutual structures and co-operative principles. Our constituents rightly demand greater control over something so fundamental to their lives. Water is different from almost any other service, because we cannot take our money elsewhere. The test of the Government reforms should be simple: when people turn on their tap, look at their bill or walk by their local river, do they feel that the system is working in their interests? If the answer is no, we should have the courage to change it.

[Sir Jeremy Wright (in the Chair)]

I call Becky Gittins. [Interruption.] Sorry, I have the wrong name on my list. I call Sarah Hall.

Bluetongue Virus in Livestock

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Thursday 3rd September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Morgan]

I thank the Chair of the Select Committee for his contribution. He is absolutely right that this is a serious issue that needs serious consideration. I mentioned that DEFRA has tried and tested approaches to dealing with outbreaks. There are always lessons that we can learn. I will certainly look very closely at what the report tells us and I will listen very closely to what the Select Committee may say on these issues in due course.

On communication, there is always more that we can do. We have had popular webinars and have been putting information on the gov.uk website. There has been information from the APHA as well. I also want to praise the contribution the National Farmers’ Union has made to ensure that farmers are engaged on these issues and are getting the right support at the right time.

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

Bluetongue is causing misery in my county of Staffordshire, which has seen the biggest growth in cases in our region. The more vociferous spread and longer season due to the heat this summer underlines the urgent need for disease outbreak preparedness to be a key plank of Britain’s adaptation to climate change. Is the Minister confident that the increased uptake we will hopefully see can be fulfilled? Is he willing to meet livestock farmers in my constituency to discuss the many challenges they have faced this summer?

[Stephen Morgan]

My hon. Friend is a real champion on farming issues and I look forward to visiting his constituency in due course to understand the challenges and opportunities farmers there are facing. I engage regularly with the livestock sector, and visited the National Sheep Association event in July. I am very happy to hear his views and concerns, and to meet the sector to understand any opportunities and challenges that continue to exist.

Oral Answers to Questions

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Thursday 9th July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Morgan]

The hon. Gentleman invited me to Northern Ireland in a Westminster Hall debate last week, rightly knowing that I am a fan of scampi. I look forward to finding time for that opportunity in due course. I thank him for his invitation to engage in these issues and I am happy to follow up with him.

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

8. What steps she is taking with Cabinet colleagues to support the agri-tech sector.

[The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Emma Reynolds)]

Innovation and productivity go hand in hand, and the Government are backing British agri-tech with real investment. Innovation is central to our farming road map, and I recently announced that we are boosting the farming innovation programme to £123 million this year. We are also working across Government—for example, with the Department for Business and Trade—to open up new export opportunities and drive growth, productivity and jobs across the sector.

[Josh Newbury]

The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee recently had the privilege of visiting New Zealand. We met an Innovate UK delegation promoting incredible British agri-tech innovations like cups that enable substrate-free hydroponics, vegetables that have 40 times the iron content, and AI analysis of drone, satellite and sensor data. Does the Secretary of State agree that agri-tech will be a key growth area for the UK? Will she work with counterparts in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and DBT to accelerate the success of British agri-tech start-ups?

[Emma Reynolds]

My hon. Friend is right to say that the Government absolutely recognise the potential of agri-tech as a high-growth sector. That is why it is included in the Government’s industrial strategy. The UK is already a world leader in agri-tech, but we want to ensure that we maintain that leadership. Under this Government, we will continue to bolster our position and boost global exports, as he suggested. We are supporting British agri-tech innovations, such as automated fruit pickers, which are already being used around the world. We should be proud of our strong research base and our culture of farming innovation.

Environmental Protection

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Monday 6th July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

Cannock Chase knows all too well the impact of waste crime, and especially that of fly-tipping. Residents of Norton Canes and Little Wyrley in particular find that our country lanes, easily accessible from Walsall and Wolverhampton, are blighted by illegal dumps that are often huge and dangerous. I know that the Minister is passionate about tackling these vile crimes, and she is right to say that the current system is simply not fit for purpose. I am glad that she highlighted the case of Beau Vine, the Charolais-cross cow owned by Ann Maidment, the director of CLA South West, which, although humorous, highlighted the stark holes in our current system.

I very much welcome the robust new system, which will be in line with much of the rest of the waste sector. The public have rightly been calling for background and competence checks so we can have confidence in those whom we trust with our waste. In this context, I am always reminded of an elderly constituent who came to me when I was a district councillor in Norton Canes. She had contacted a waste carrier, checked his licence to make sure that—as she saw it—he was legit, and handed over her waste and her money. A few weeks later, she was contacted by the council because her waste had been dumped, along with that of others, not 3 miles away in a rural part of our community. She was distraught, and told me that she would never have been intentionally careless about who she gave her waste to. Thankfully, in the end she was able to help identify the criminal who had exploited her and he was prosecuted, but many of our constituents end up paying the price under the current system.

I pay tribute to the environmental protection team at Cannock Chase district council. As a cabinet member, I saw at first hand the brilliant work that they do. They are more effective than those in many Tory-controlled neighbouring councils. I hope that the new Reform administration continues Labour’s long-standing backing for their work, and that local government reorganisation brings others up to their top-notch standard.

The regulations will give us the structures that we need to root out waste criminals, from sole traders all the way up to organised crime groups, which, as we have heard, are increasingly moving into waste crime as a whole business model. I welcome stronger powers for the Environment Agency, particularly the ability to revoke permits, which I hope will act as a powerful disincentive—something that we lacked before this Government came to office. I am particularly happy to see the requirement for the visibility of permit numbers—on vans, for example.

This weekend, I met business owners who run high street shops in Hednesford and Rugeley to discuss various illegal practices happening on the high street. The Minister will not be surprised to hear that among them was waste crime. One told me of a business that regularly dumps its waste “out the back” in black bags—probably including electrical waste, because the business sells vapes. It is picked up by an unmarked van, and goes who knows where. Meanwhile, the business owners I spoke to have bins that are fully compliant, because they take their responsibilities seriously, and they want to know that others who do not will be hauled over the coals.

This is not just about fly-tipping at beauty spots in protected landscapes like Cannock Chase and idyllic hamlets like Little Wyrley; it is about fly-tipping in our high streets and town centres. Wherever waste crime occurs, the regulations will be another plank in the Government’s strategy to crack down on this vile criminality, so that our constituents can see the back of these blights on our communities.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Minister to wind up.

Animal Abusers

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Monday 29th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to speak with you in the Chair, Dr Murrison, for what I think is the first time. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Burton and Uttoxeter (Jacob Collier) for, as always, introducing the debate so thoughtfully as a member of the Petitions Committee. I also thank the 386 animal lovers in my constituency who added their names to the petition. Colleagues may have been hoping to have an animal welfare debate without hearing from me, but I am afraid that today is not that day.

The petitions that we debate are not often started by social media influencers, but it is because of the determination of Bea Elton—known to her millions of followers, myself included, as Clean with Bea—that we are able to debate this important issue today. I will forgive hon. Members who have not yet watched Bea’s videos if they are on their phones throughout my speech. Bea offers free home cleaning to people in deep crisis or with severe hoarding tendencies. Sadly, she often comes across animals that have been neglected and have had to live in awful conditions. I am glad that Bea has used her experience and platform to bring the issue to Parliament. I hope that we can focus on the art of the possible, as I know that preventing the needless suffering of animals unites us all, across the political spectrum.

Last autumn, I went on a ride-along with Sophie, an RSPCA inspector, to see what a day looked like for her. My constituency is full of pet owners, and who can blame them—why would anyone who lives somewhere as beautiful as Cannock Chase not get a dog as motivation to explore our stunning scenery together? However, I admit that I do not have a pet, not because I do not love animals, but because I could not give one the time and attention that it deserves—I often joke that I have two young kids and that is enough for now.

This debate comes down to the fundamental fact that owning a pet is not a right; it is a privilege and a responsibility. The time I spent with Sophie reinforced that. Like many people, I assumed that most of an RSPCA inspector’s work involved rescuing animals from awful situations—and of course, they do that, in tandem with the police—but what surprised me was how much of their time is spent trying to stop animals reaching that point in the first place. Inspectors spend hours following up with owners after advising them that a pet needs veterinary treatment, for example, and they work closely with local vets to check whether animals have actually received the care that they need. Most owners do the right thing, but when somebody repeatedly ignores inspectors’ advice and an animal continues to suffer because treatment has been withheld, concerns rightly begin to escalate.

One thing that has stayed with me from that day is that many cases of animal abuse reveal something far deeper. Inspectors told me that they often encounter people whose lives have unravelled. That might be because of relationship breakdown, domestic abuse, as we have heard, physical illness or mental ill health. None of that excuses neglect, but it reminds us that animal welfare is often connected to the wider challenges in somebody’s life.

We also know, as we have heard, that the relationship can work the other way. The Ruby’s law campaign highlighted that perpetrators of domestic abuse may threaten or harm family pets as a means of coercion and control, knowing exactly how much fear and distress that causes. Nine in 10 people experiencing domestic abuse in England and Wales reported that animals were also abused by the perpetrators, so protecting animals is not separate from protecting people; sometimes it is part of the very same task. That is why partnership between organisations is so important. The RSPCA, as we know, does not have the power to seize animals, so it relies on the police following its investigations, and inspectors cannot force entry into a property if access is refused.

The experience left me with one clear thought: our system does a reasonable job of responding once abuse has happened, but I am not convinced that it does enough to stop the next animal becoming a victim. As hon. Members have highlighted, the Government’s response to the petition states that convictions for animal cruelty are already recorded on the police national computer and that courts have the power to disqualify offenders from keeping animals. That is absolutely true, but rescue centres, breeders and pet shops cannot routinely check those records, so somebody who has already been banned from keeping animals can walk into one of those organisations, appear perfectly respectable and walk out with another pet simply because the people rehoming the animal have no way of checking whether that person has been disqualified. That does not mean the law has comprehensively failed; it means there is a gap in the system.

Breaching a disqualification order is an offence, but somebody has to discover that breach first. Given the demands on our police and local authorities, we should not be relying on chance or left hoping that somebody will spot what has happened when another animal is already suffering. Surely it is better to stop the animal being placed there in the first place.

I understand the Government’s concerns about privacy when it comes to a public register, but there could be a sensible middle ground, as hon. Members have already outlined. If a register was available to verified rescue organisations, breeders and licensed pet sellers, it would allow them to check whether somebody is currently subject to a disqualification order before an animal is handed over. It would not be to name and shame, or to publish personal information, but to answer one simple question: can this person legally keep and care for an animal?

[Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend is making such a powerful speech that I did not want to interrupt, but I spoke to volunteers at the East Ardsley RSPCA in my constituency the other week. They told me that they have to endure abuse from people who accuse them of not taking care of animals, because people have reported cruelty to them, but the volunteers do not necessarily have the powers to act. If the RSPCA and other organisations had access to a database, that would solve that problem. Will my hon. Friend also take the opportunity to commend the RSPCA in my constituency for all of its outstanding work?

[Josh Newbury]

I will never miss an opportunity to thank the RSPCA, including in Leeds South West and Morley and the East Ardsley centre. My hon. Friend is right that RSPCA staff and volunteers often face abuse themselves because many people are rightly passionate about protecting animals, but it is important to remember that their powers are far more limited than perhaps many of us realise. They are as determined as anybody to do the right thing by animals, so we need to make sure that they are given as many powers as are appropriate and that we support them in doing their important work. The enemy are the people who commit the abuse, not the people who try to help.

The Government are right that judges should retain discretion over the terms of disqualification orders. Every case is different, and rehabilitation should always remain possible where appropriate, but once someone has been convicted of egregious animal abuse, a ban should be automatic and should have a practical effect. The petition is not asking us to reinvent the wheel. The convictions already exist and the courts already have the powers. All we are asking is to close one obvious gap in the system so that trusted organisations have the information they need to stop known offenders acquiring another vulnerable animal. I say to the Minister that if that change could prevent even a handful of animals suffering, it would be a step well worth taking.

Farming: Financial Sustainability

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Wednesday 24th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) for securing the debate. I have been applying for a debate on this subject for many months, so it is great that we are having one. I warmly welcome the new farming Minister to his place, too.

I recently had a catch-up with farmers in Cannock Chase and heard about various challenges that they are facing. We are living in highly uncertain times. The new series of “Clarkson’s Farm” is shining a light on how financially tough farming can be, but also on the many ways that technology can improve that picture environmentally and financially. The Government’s investment of £123 million to help farmers boost their productivity is therefore very welcome.

I am also very pleased that the farming road map is now out. As chair of the APPG on UK food security, I was particularly pleased to see the restated commitment to maintaining our food production at at least current levels. I am also keen on making sure that supply chains are fair for our farmers—something that we often could not have said in recent years. Over the last couple of weeks, the EFRA Committee has had the privilege of visiting New Zealand, where I was struck by the prevalence and power of agricultural co-operatives and the power that they give Kiwi farmers. I would love to see more of that here, because it would go a long way to redressing the imbalance that we all too often see in our supply chains here in Britain. I look forward to working with the Minister on that and many other issues that colleagues have raised, but in the interests of time I will leave it there.

Farming Road Map and Profitability Review

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Wednesday 24th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Emma Reynolds]

That is very kind of the hon. Gentleman. I thank him for his best wishes, which were a little different in tone from the comments from the Opposition Front Bench. I reassure the hon. Gentleman that we have a separate document that responds to Baroness Batters’ review. Profitability is absolutely at the heart of the road map. There is a lovely diagram on page 18 of the road map—perhaps the words in it were not picked up in his search—showing what we are trying to do, which is to work towards a profitable, productive, sustainable and resilient farming sector. I absolutely agree with him that we need a more profitable sector, and that is the focus of this document.

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

The road map is a very welcome step forward that will give our farmers certainty for the future. I particularly welcome what the Secretary of State had to say on co-operatives, which could go a long way to redressing the current power imbalance in our food system. I hope we can begin that work at pace. We hear consistently from farmers that they feel that the planning system—made so much worse by the Conservatives—is stacked against them. Broiler chicken farmers, for instance, are expected to lower stocking densities but cannot get permission to expand their sheds to compensate, while farms in water-stressed areas are having to go through years of bureaucracy to build reservoirs. Does the Secretary of State agree that reforming the planning system will be key to freeing up trapped investment and getting us to the sustainable, prosperous future for British farming that this road map sets out?

[Emma Reynolds]

The short answer is yes—I could not agree with my hon. Friend more. That is why I am working closely with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government on planning reform to ensure that those planning barriers are not holding back investment into the farming sector.

Woodland Creation

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Wednesday 11th February 2026 Westminster Hall

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to speak in today’s debate with you in the Chair, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes North (Chris Curtis) for securing this debate. He set out perfectly the value of woodlands to both nature and people, and his city is clearly a living example of that.

I appreciate that hon. Members might wonder why, as the Member of Parliament for Cannock Chase—a constituency famed and named for its forest—I might want to speak in a debate on creating new woodlands, but my answer is this: “You can’t have too much of a good thing”. Woodland creation is central to building a greener, fairer Britain, and the Government have set ambitious targets, aiming to increase woodland cover in England to 16.5% by 2050. Our current woodland cover remains significantly lower than many of our European neighbours at 13.5%, compared with an EU average of around 38%.

In Britain, describing somewhere as “leafy” usually is shorthand for “wealthy”, which says a lot about how access to nature reflects inequality on multiple levels. The Woodland Trust’s tree equity score clearly demonstrates that the many benefits provided by trees are disproportionately enjoyed by wealthier communities. Even in my constituency, that disparity is evident. Chadsmoor is one of the most deprived areas of Cannock Chase and is also among the most nature deprived. By contrast, more affluent areas like New Penkridge Road in Cannock benefit from significant tree cover despite being less than two miles away. That contrast shows that the communities that stand to gain the most from access to green space are too often those with the least access to it.

Planting trees is often the easy part, but explaining to residents why an unmanaged woodland has suddenly appeared at the end of their road is considerably harder. In Hednesford, an urban woodland was established on Bradbury Lane with positive intentions, but insufficient maintenance generated understandable complaints from residents—an important reminder that successful woodland creation requires sustained stewardship and community involvement.

I welcome the Government’s commitment to funding not just planting, but long-term management and skills development. However, on the flip side, I have heard concerns about newly planted trees on housing and commercial developments not being properly cared for and subsequently dying, or even not being planted in the first place. Although the national planning policy framework makes it clear that planning decisions should require aftercare, councils need to ensure that those conditions are attached and enforced.

Alongside expanding woodland cover, it is equally important that we improve the quality and resilience of the woodland that we already have. In December, I visited Birches Valley in my constituency, where I met the Forestry Commission’s agroforestry woodland officer to discuss the restoration of ancient woodland. Plantations on ancient woodland sites—often referred to as PAWS—account for around 17% of the nation’s forests. Forestry England has set an important ambition to restore those sites to resilient native woodland, but achieving that will require a doubling of the rate of restoration.

The work is ecologically vital. Moving woodland from predominantly non-native canopy cover towards native broadleaf species strengthens biodiversity, increases resilience to pests and diseases, and helps to ensure that our woodlands are better able to adapt to climate change. The Climate Change Committee has recommended that two-thirds of new woodland should be broadleaf and one-third conifer, to maximise climate and biodiversity benefits while reducing the risks associated with monoculture planting. However, foresters have highlighted concerns such as the impact of pests such as deer and grey squirrels, and the long-term financial sustainability of restoration. I therefore welcome the Government’s funding for Forestry England’s PAWS restoration programme.

As we expand woodland creation, we must also carefully balance environmental ambitions with the needs of our farming communities. Agroforestry—integrating trees into productive agricultural land—presents significant opportunities, including improved soil health, enhanced biodiversity and increased flood resilience. Here, the Government’s approach recognises the vital role that farmers and rural communities play in environmental recovery. Many farmers are already boosting natural flood management by increasing woodland cover, as well as natural water storage areas.

Concerns have been raised, though, particularly in upland areas, about productive farmland being taken out of use or tenant farmers being displaced in pursuit of woodland creation targets. It is vital that environmental policy retains the confidence and support of our farming sector, particularly the 50% of farmers who are tenants. Schemes such as the sustainable farming incentive present an opportunity to strike that balance by encouraging tree planting on less productive land or areas already identified for nature recovery, or intercropping with arable crops, allowing us to increase woodland cover without undermining food production or rural livelihoods.

In closing, I note that woodland creation and ancient woodland restoration are not competing priorities. They are complementary pillars of a broader strategy to restore nature, improve community wellbeing, strengthen climate resilience and protect our natural heritage. Not only that, but in representing Cannock Chase, I am contractually obliged to be enthusiastic about trees at all times. Thankfully, trees are one of the few policy areas where we can improve air quality, biodiversity, public health and community pride simultaneously, which in policymaking terms is about as close as we can get to a unanimous win.