If we are to be a nation that primarily imports food, we need a back-up plan, says Tim Lang
Food's profile in national politics is currently low.
Some retailers like it that way. While the Middle East still seethes and the UK state is cutting the public sector, blaming it for the banking crisis, such 'big' issues are always likely to grab attention. But the calm is deceptive.
I am not alone in worrying about the continued drift in government over food policy. At a gathering of big food interests last week, when I informally suggested there was drift, I was firmly told by more than one person that it's not drift, but vacuum. Drift analysis suggests policy thinking exists and can surface. Vacuum suggests a void. The difference is important. One implies policy direction that can be resuscitated; for the other we have to assume a blank sheet of paper.
For once, I'm the optimist; industry thinkers are the pessimists. Time will show which analysis is right.
What might change this situation? I mulled this at a seminar I gave to the Treasury last week. Food inflation clearly makes even cool thinkers nervous. Last week, the Office of National Statistics again reported inflation rising. The Consumer Price Index rose to 4.5% in April.
Main culprits were transport and alcohol and tobacco, not food. But looking at the past 12 months as a whole, food was a big factor, up 4.4%. Transport was the biggest, 9.6% higher over the year. We'd expect that with oil prices (a factor in food, too). Alcohol and tobacco's rise reflects taxation.
Food is going through a structural change globally, which is already being felt by consumers. Reactions vary: some eat less, others trade down, some cut elsewhere, if they can. Inflation widens income gaps. It alters expectations.
I'm not a Little Englander, but I think it's folly that we aren't now preparing a serious change of direction for UK food. The commitment to cut carbon by 50% by 2023 last week thankfully signals that the government accepts the Fourth Carbon Budget. That alone means big changes for food. A country that insists on feeding itself increasingly on imported food risks being subjected to extraneous pressures: oil, the pound's value, and the purchasing power of others.
In an era when bankers have proved they rule, politicians serve and people pay, it's a foolish government that doesn't have a plan B. If there is a vacuum in Defra, now's the time for it to be filled.
Food's profile in national politics is currently low.
Some retailers like it that way. While the Middle East still seethes and the UK state is cutting the public sector, blaming it for the banking crisis, such 'big' issues are always likely to grab attention. But the calm is deceptive.
I am not alone in worrying about the continued drift in government over food policy. At a gathering of big food interests last week, when I informally suggested there was drift, I was firmly told by more than one person that it's not drift, but vacuum. Drift analysis suggests policy thinking exists and can surface. Vacuum suggests a void. The difference is important. One implies policy direction that can be resuscitated; for the other we have to assume a blank sheet of paper.
For once, I'm the optimist; industry thinkers are the pessimists. Time will show which analysis is right.
What might change this situation? I mulled this at a seminar I gave to the Treasury last week. Food inflation clearly makes even cool thinkers nervous. Last week, the Office of National Statistics again reported inflation rising. The Consumer Price Index rose to 4.5% in April.
Main culprits were transport and alcohol and tobacco, not food. But looking at the past 12 months as a whole, food was a big factor, up 4.4%. Transport was the biggest, 9.6% higher over the year. We'd expect that with oil prices (a factor in food, too). Alcohol and tobacco's rise reflects taxation.
Food is going through a structural change globally, which is already being felt by consumers. Reactions vary: some eat less, others trade down, some cut elsewhere, if they can. Inflation widens income gaps. It alters expectations.
I'm not a Little Englander, but I think it's folly that we aren't now preparing a serious change of direction for UK food. The commitment to cut carbon by 50% by 2023 last week thankfully signals that the government accepts the Fourth Carbon Budget. That alone means big changes for food. A country that insists on feeding itself increasingly on imported food risks being subjected to extraneous pressures: oil, the pound's value, and the purchasing power of others.
In an era when bankers have proved they rule, politicians serve and people pay, it's a foolish government that doesn't have a plan B. If there is a vacuum in Defra, now's the time for it to be filled.
No comments yet