🚜 Food Products (Market Regulation and Public Procurement)

Commons Chamber

🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️

Alistair Carmichael introduced a Bill aimed at reforming the food market by enhancing the role of the Groceries Code Adjudicator, ensuring better coordination with the Agricultural Supply Chain Adjudicator, and improving public procurement and labeling of British food products. He highlighted the stark power imbalance between supermarkets and farmers, noting that farmers’ incomes have stagnated over the last 50 years despite their crucial role in national food security. Recent actions by supermarkets, such as sudden contract terminations and price wars, further threaten the viability of farming businesses. The Bill, supported by a broad coalition of MPs and farming organizations across the UK, seeks urgent intervention to protect the future of domestic food production.

Summary

  • Introduction of a New Bill: Mr Alistair Carmichael proposed a new Bill aimed at regulating the food products market and enhancing public procurement of British food products. The Bill also seeks to better coordinate between the Groceries Code Adjudicator (GCA) and the Agricultural Supply Chain Adjudicator.

  • Historical Context: Carmichael highlighted the crucial role of farmers in national food security, referencing a letter from 1917 during World War I to underline historical government recognition of farmers’ importance.

  • Current Challenges for Farmers: The Bill addresses the stagnant incomes of farmers over the past 50 years and the unfair practices within the food supply chain. Carmichael mentioned that younger farmers in his constituency, such as a seventh-generation farmer descended from Charles Paterson, are struggling financially.

  • Market Imbalance: The current market is dominated by large supermarkets, which Carmichael describes as having too much power over farmers. This power leads to practices that disadvantage farmers, who often receive a small share of the profits.

  • Limitations of the Groceries Code Adjudicator: Carmichael criticized the GCA for being understaffed and underfunded, noting that it has never issued a fine and often results in settlements with non-disclosure agreements. This discourages suppliers from lodging complaints due to fear of retaliation from retailers.

  • Real-life Impact: An example was provided of a Brussels sprouts supplier who invested heavily based on supermarket promises but was then dropped without notice, illustrating the risks suppliers face.

  • Supermarket Performance: A recent survey revealed varying behaviors among supermarkets. Some have improved their practices, while others, like Amazon and ASDA, have worsened, impacting suppliers unfairly.

  • Supermarket Price Wars: Concerns were raised about potential price wars between supermarkets, which could further pressure farmers’ profits.

  • Support for the Bill: The Bill has garnered support from MPs across various parties, including Liberal Democrats, Labour, Conservatives, Plaid Cymru, SNP, Greens, and DUP, as well as from numerous farming unions and associations.

  • Legislative Progress: The Bill was granted leave to be introduced and will be read for the second time on 20 June.

  • Additional Legislation: Separate from Carmichael’s Bill, a motion regarding the National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill was agreed upon, setting time limits for consideration of Lords Amendments and further stages.

Divisiveness

The transcript of the session does not exhibit any significant disagreement among the members of the parliament. The primary speaker, Mr Alistair Carmichael, presents his motion for a Bill with clear arguments and examples but there is no interruption or counter-argument presented by other members. The session proceeds smoothly with Mr Carmichael finishing his speech without any challenges to his points. Furthermore, the motion is put to a vote and agreed upon without any recorded dissension or debate. This indicates a lack of opposition to the proposed Bill within the session.

Examples of the lack of disagreement include: - Mr Carmichael’s speech is uninterrupted and he completes it without any rebuttals. - The ‘Question put and agreed to’ statement implies unanimous consent without further discussion or amendments proposed. - The ‘Ordered’ section following Mr Carmichael’s speech lists multiple sponsors from various political parties, indicating broad support rather than disagreement.

The session is therefore rated a 1 out of 5 for disagreement due to the absence of any dissenting voices or debate over the proposed Bill’s content.