Rural Estates Newsletter February 2023 - Flipbook - Page 6
2 – Three to watch in 2023
1. Land Use Framework: fact or fiction?
As an island nation, we have long been aware of the limits of our land and the competing
uses for it. Competing offerings from developers, off-site biodiversity net gain, flood
defences, public access and food production (to name a few) are leading to an increasingly
fractured picture of what options there are and what they mean for landowners.
The House of Lords Land Use Committee published its recommendations for a Land Use
Framework on 13 December 2022. The Committee’s recommendations included:
James Maxwell
View web profile
1.
creating a Land Use Commission, tasked with producing a Land Use Framework,
2.
government to provide immediate clarity on ELMs, ending “the uncertainty which is
causing serious problems for effective land use”, and
3.
reforms for more effective use of Green Belt land, “strengthening” of the planning
system and a “multifunctional approach” to land use.
At the Food, Farming and Countryside Commission’s (whose 2019 report “Our Future in
Land” informed the House of Lords’ paper) recent session at Oxford, it was repeatedly
stressed that they do not want to tell people what to do on their land. However, firstly,
this already exists under the guise of Sites of Specific Scientific Interest (SSSIs), planning
control and similar, and secondly, surely an element of coercion is implicit in the concept
of such a framework? Whilst the aims are laudable, the question is whether this is really
possible, practical or sensible. And if so, how will it be done, by whom and to what end?
Professor Sir Charles Godfray put forward a worked example of what such a framework
could look like. Rather than talking about “sharing” or “sparing” land, which can be divisive,
he instead preferred viewing land use as a continuum, falling under three headings: land
chiefly managed for sustainable food outputs; land managed for multiple outputs, and
thirdly, land chiefly managed for non-food outputs. He continued that where land is used
for food production, there should be limited or no payment for public goods, but it should
be farmed uncompromisingly to achieve maximum, sustainable food production, using
state-of-the-art technology to achieve this (but without the need also to worry about having
to supply ecological benefits). Where land is managed for the second outcome (multiple
outputs), we must be honest about trade-offs: loss in production and profit caused by
farming for ecological benefit should be made up for by payments to farmers under ELMs
and other schemes. Land in the third category (non-food outputs) such as woodland,
peatland, and wetland, should be managed by farmers (not just bought out by corporates),
he suggests, who should be retained on it and paid a proper return, to manage it for the
public good. Of interest here is his clarity of thought regarding how money available under
previous subsidy schemes should be repurposed and fitted into a new system, giving
ELMs the coherence and purpose it is currently lacking. It is a radical vision.
2. A Fairer Private Rented Sector
The government’s white paper on a Fairer Private Rented Sector was published last
summer. In November, Michael Gove reaffirmed the intention to introduce legislation
in 2023. The headline remains the proposed abolition of section 21 notices, which
for decades have allowed landlords to regain possession of dwellings let on assured
shorthold tenancies (ASTs) on “no fault” grounds. The proposal has cross-party support
and would have radical implications for the private rented sector in England. Landlords
need to start thinking about what it means for them now.
6
Rural Estates Newsletter
February 2023