Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 (Variation of Schedule 8) (England) Order 2015 Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateDepartment: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Nick Smith
Main Page: Nick Smith (Labour - Blaenau Gwent)Department Debates - View all Nick Smith's debates with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 (Variation of Schedule 8) (England) Order 2015
Nick Smith Excerpts(8 years, 4 months ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms Buck. I thank the Minister for his speech.
This amendment to the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 looks to widen the range of improvements for which an agricultural tenant can be paid compensation at the end of their tenancy. The order recognises the broader range of animals that can be kept on a farm, such as llamas and alpacas. It also recognises the value of manure and soil improvements applied to the land and provides compensation no matter how the improvements were obtained.
Labour broadly welcomes the order, as it ensures that tenants receive a fairer deal for their efforts on the land. In addition, any measure that encourages stronger stewardship and care in farming at all stages of the tenancy must be welcomed. Importantly, stakeholders have told me that they believe an uplift payment will be an incentive for tenant farmers to prioritise environmentally and socially responsible farming practice.
There has been a worry that, as tenancies wind down, farmland will be left to degrade. The order will help to address that problem. I will, however, note points that I hope the Minister can answer today.
I understand that the consultation on the proposals raised several concerns about the definition of “improvement” and whether that could be too broad a term and open to interpretation. For instance, a landlord may not think that an improvement to the land made by the tenant is an improvement at all, because it would not benefit any new tenants in the future. As arbitration can be an expensive process, can the Minister assure us that the Government will monitor the level of any disputes that arise as a result of the changes and, if there are many disputes about what an “improvement” is, act accordingly?
Finally, how will the Government work with the Tenancy Reform Industry Group—TRIG—to disseminate information about this change across the sector?