GK Strategy is pleased to share its guide to effective engagement with policymakers during party conference season.
Insight from the GK team on making the most of party conferences can be accessed here: https://gkstrategy.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Engaging-at-Party-Conference-Season-GK-Strategy-September-2025.pdf
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has launched a new £12.6 million funding package to support agri-tech innovation. It will be a ‘Dragons Den’-style process comprising two competitions. Forming part of the government’s Farming Innovation Programme, these competitions will reward the businesses that can offer the most innovative solutions to systemic challenges in the agricultural sector, such as rising costs and environmental pressures.
This initiative represents a progression of the government’s New Deal for Farmers and is a signal that agri-tech is a core component of its food security and rural growth strategy. Whilst the government has already pledged to allocate £11.8 billion to sustainable farming and food production over the next parliament, this additional funding arrives at a politically sensitive moment for the agricultural industry. The government’s relationship with the agricultural community has been tested during Labour’s first year in office, particularly following widespread backlash against the 2024 autumn budget’s proposed changes to inheritance tax. Against this backdrop, increased funding is not only an economic stimulus to encourage technological development, but also an attempt to reset the government’s political relationship with the agricultural sector. As a visible commitment to supporting innovation-led growth, it indicates that the government is listening to the sector’s demands for long-term solutions rather than short-term fixes.
The funding itself will be delivered through two competitions set to open from mid-September. The Small R&D Partnerships competition, launching on 15 September, will offer up to £7.8 million to support later-stage projects that are near commercial readiness. The strongest bids will be those that are able to demonstrate how their product or service will improve productivity, sustainability, progression, and resilience, as well as having a clear avenue to market upon. The second competition, allocating up to £4.8 million for early-stage ideas, will open on 13 October and is designed to assist developers in scaling up their project. Both competitions will be carried out in partnership with Innovate UK.
This is positive news for businesses in the agri-tech sector. The government is actively seeking to fund scalable, practical technologies that can solve the problems straining today’s agricultural sector. Rather than simply financing projects that are market-ready, the government is willing to fund the development of ideas. It solidifies the role that agri-tech plays in enhancing sustainability and boosting rural productivity via technological innovation.
Ultimately, this announcement acts as a timely reminder that agricultural innovation is recognised by the government as a mechanism for economic growth and as a frontier industry in the UK’s industrial strategy. As the government seeks to establish a balance between regulation, business support, and long-term agricultural resilience, initiatives like these will play a central role in shaping the next generation of British farming.
If you wish to discuss the government’s agri-tech policy or how to access this funding, please reach out to thea@gkstrategy.com.
The Department of Health and Social Care recently unveiled a new set of voluntary guidelines aiming to enhance the nutritional quality of commercial baby foods. These set new expectations for manufacturers, retailers, trade associations and non-governmental healthcare organisations to reduce the sugar and salt content of baby food and address misleading labelling within the next 18 months.
This initiative is the latest intervention as part of the government’s ‘Plan for Change’ and its broader 10-year plan for health. Building upon previous HFSS measures, such as the ban on junk food advertisements restrictions on fast-food outlets near schools, it indicates a growing appetite to intervene to improve the nation’s dietary health. Childhood obesity rates have doubled since the 1990s and obesity currently costs the NHS £11.4 billion per year; this is expected to increase as obese children reach adulthood. In order to shape healthy eating habits as much as possible, policymakers are turning their focus to the formative stages of children’s diets. The rationale is straightforward: if a child’s very first diet is contributing to lifelong health problems, then meaningful change must begin from the highchair.
The evidence underpinning these guidelines is clear. Researchers from the University of Leeds have found that baby foods from market leaders lack nutritional value and market their products in a misleading way. All too often, these products are sugary, watery, and breed consumer confusion with misleading slogans like ‘contains no nasties’. The guidance also advises manufacturers not to market products aimed at children under twelve months of age as ‘snacks’, with NHS guidance for parents contending that children this young do not need to eat snacks.
For manufacturers and retailers alike, the challenge will be to reformulate at pace. With the use of sweeteners prohibited for all foods aimed at children aged three and under, and a market that values both taste and convenience, they will need to find new ways to meet nutritional needs whilst maintaining trust with parental consumers.
Though billed as voluntary, these guidelines represent a clear direction of travel for the government. Public health campaigners have already indicated that these recommendations represent a further step rather than the finish line, and the government has left the door open to mandatory regulation should uptake be slow or inconsistent. For businesses, the choice is binary: act now and shape the policy conversation, or risk playing catch-up if it was to become law.
The government’s strong stance on baby food is a clear signal of intent to improve the nutritional content of the nation’s diet. It forms part of a wider push by the government to encourage healthy eating habits, improve transparency between businesses and consumers and reduce the long-term economic burden on the NHS. Whilst this will result in short-term costs to businesses, there remains a real strategic opportunity to engage in the policy conversation. Businesses that position themselves early as genuine leaders in providing nutritional baby food can win the trust of both policymakers and increasingly health-conscious parents.
GK Strategy invites you to a webinar panel discussion on:
The National Food Strategy: the role of agri-tech in strengthening the UK’s food system
Keynote speakers:
Steve Brine
Strategic Adviser at GK Strategy and former health minister and chair of health and social care select committee
Honor May Eldridge
US and UK farming policy expert and former senior legislative advisor at the Food Standards Agency
Wednesday 22 October from 15:00 to 16:00
This event will held on Zoom.
Please RSVP by emailing events@gkstrategy.com for joining details.
Steve Brine is a Strategic Adviser at GK Strategy. He was Member of Parliament for Winchester from 2010-2024 and served in government as a Whip, public health minister and chaired the influential Health and Social Care Select Committee. Steve’s main interests include primary care, public health, NHS leadership and prevention of ill health as well as HIV, health tech and cancer. He also co-hosts the successful ‘Prevention is the new cure’ podcast and lives in Hampshire. He now works in the private sector as a health advisor and speaker and is a charity trustee.
Honor May Eldridge is a policy and advisory expert in food and environment impact, working to advise NGOs and businesses in the agriculture and food retail sectors. Her expertise spans international trade, climate-resilient agriculture, and food system transformation — always with an eye on equity and long-term viability. Honor was previously the Senior Legislative Advisor to the Food Standards Agency, working on how innovation can be delivered through regulation. She is currently working on two books on the future of food. She is also known for her wry appreciation of the avocado, having written her first book on the fruit that has, somewhat unfairly, borne the brunt of intergenerational debate. Once spotlighted as the unlikely culprit behind millennials’ housing woes, the avocado now serves as a symbol of Honor’s approach to food and farming policy: humble, misunderstood, and full of potential.
MPs might be on their summer break but what can you be doing to prepare for the next parliamentary term?
August in Westminster is a quieter time. Government grinds to a halt as MPs return home to continue business back in their elected constituencies. This downtime in the political calendar grants companies a rare breathing space – and the opportunity to turn attentions to resetting government relations plans and preparing for the parliamentary year ahead.
Before parliament returns on 1 September, businesses should be taking the time to think about how to best prepare for the government’s second year in office. Although parliament is in recess, there’s still plenty we can be getting on with to develop an effective strategy and work towards policy objectives. From strengthening stakeholder engagement strategies to assessing regulatory risk, the planning taken now will make the crucial difference between scrambling to adapt to policy announcements and confidently navigating the next wave of policy decisions.
So, what should businesses be thinking about during these summer months?
Engaging with the civil service
While parliament draws to a close over the summer, the civil service remains central to ensuring the smooth operation of public services. Officials continue to work on the implementation of government policies, running consultations, and preparing for the legislative activity that is set to resume in the autumn.
For businesses, the absence of parliamentary activity offers a valuable opportunity to take stock of their existing relationships with civil servants, assess the strength of those channels of communication and identify where they could be expanded. Civil servants tend to be a bit quieter over summer too, so it’s the perfect time to catch up over a coffee in preparation for the year ahead.
Monitoring Parliamentary Committees
Similarly to the civil service, parliamentary committees continue their business while MPs are away. Staff continue to work behind the scenes, launching calls for evidence and meeting businesses in their sectors of interest. In recent weeks, we’ve seen a flurry of committee activity affecting the agri-tech space.
The Science, Innovation and Technology Committee have launched an inquiry into innovation and global food security, actively seeking to hear from agri-tech businesses about how new agricultural practices can catalyse food production. Each Committee’s reports, which are written using the evidence submitted to the inquiry, land directly on ministers’ desks – offering businesses the space to communicate exactly what they need from government to succeed.
Can we also add the health one here? One of the focuses of the health one is healthy food and many of the agri-tech businesses focus on improving nutritional content e.g. precision breeding.
Preparing for Party Conferences
The annual party conferences mark a significant moment in the political calendar. Taking place over September and October, each conference allows parties to set their political agenda and rally support from members and industry. For Labour as the governing party, this means actively listening to and engaging with businesses of all sizes to better understand their priorities, concerns, and capacity to contribute to the party’s core objective of economic growth. With agri-tech flagged as a frontier industry within the government’s industrial strategy, the party conference will provide a useful avenue for businesses within the sector to raise their profile with government.
For opposition parties, conferences are a critical space for developing and refining alternative policies that can challenge the government’s agenda. Without the responsibility of running departments day-to-day, opposition parties can use this time to strategise ideas that could credibly form the backbone of their next election manifesto.
Meeting with MPs
Although MPs are back in their constituencies during recess, they are not on officially out of office. During this time MPs turn their attentions to local priorities, such as meeting constituents, visiting community projects and engaging with businesses in their area. Businesses, and especially those developing cutting edge agricultural technology, should think about inviting MPs to visit their sites to see first-hand innovation in the sector. Demonstrating tangible contributions to local employment, food security, environmental sustainability, or economic growth can help MPs see how your business aligns with their constituents’ interests and supports the government’s wider priorities.
Building and strengthening relations with MPs is at the core of effective political engagement. An MP who understands your business and believes in its potential can be a powerful advocate by championing your work in parliament or connecting you with relevant ministers and officials.
Although the political pace of the parliamentary summer recess might feel slower, this is no time for businesses to wind down. Whether through strengthening relationships with civil servants, preparing for the party conference season, or engaging directly with MPs in their constituencies, the weeks remaining weeks until 1 September grant businesses the time to reassess their political engagement. Using this time productively will enable businesses to position themselves as constructive partners to government, trusted to feed into the conversations that will shape Labour’s next year in office and beyond.
By Erin Caddell, Anchor Advisors LLC – A GK Strategy partner firm
Amidst the mile-a-minute pace of activity in the Trump Administration’s first six months, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)’s April 11th posting of Federal Register document 2025-06316, “Request for Information: Deregulation” did not exactly make for scintillating tabloid reading. Yet the effort initiated by OMB’s memo is likely to spark substantial regulatory activity by a number of federal agencies starting this fall and into the remainder of Trump’s current term that will be highly impactful across a range of industries in the U.S.
OMB’s request for information (RFI) was prepared in response to an Executive Order signed by President Trump on April 9th to repeal “[u]nlawful, unnecessary and onerous regulations”. The order notes that the U.S. Supreme Court has issued a number of rulings in recent years limiting the power of federal agencies, and asks commenters to identify regulations now inconsistent with these decisions.
Companies and their trade associations were only too happy to respond to OMB’s request. The RFI received nearly 8,500 comments during the 30-day window (though some were from individuals calling for caution against moving too quickly to deregulate). OMB and federal agencies will likely begin the process of repealing or amending certain rules cited in the comments starting this fall. Importantly, the executive order notes that agencies may attempt to rescind the rules in question without the traditional notice-and-comment period required for formal rulemaking, which can add months if not years to the process. The order cites a provision in the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) providing a “good cause” exemption to traditional rulemaking requirements if the original rule is “impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest.” Any attempts to circumvent the rulemaking process would be met immediately by legal challenges (interestingly, the Mortgage Bankers Association, an influential trade association, argued that agencies should continue to utilize the notice-and-comment process, as abandoning this function could rob industry with a key means of providing input). But even if ultimately overturned, companies would have to make accommodations to assume a proposed repeal could become effective, particularly if intermediate courts support the Administration.
So what does Corporate America hope to deregulate? Anchor reviewed a representative sample of comment letters submitted by trade associations representing a range of industries. We summarize in the table below recommendations from six of these comments. Taken together, the missives describe their authors’ frustrations with the blizzard of rulemaking under the Biden Administration and cite hundreds of regulations they believe should be repealed or revised in the name of spurring economic growth and reducing the administrative burden.
Select Industry Association Responses to OMB Deregulation Request for Input (RFI)
| Organization | Rule cited | Agency(s) | Year | Commenter’s rationale |
| Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) | Adoption of energy efficiency standards for new construction of HUD- and USDA-financed housing | HUD, USDA | 2024 | Will drive up costs for new single-family and multi-family construction; 30 states still operating under prior standard enacted in 2009; shortage of inspectors trained on new standard. |
| National Multifamily Housing Council/National Apartment Association | Floodplain management and protection of wetlands | HUD | 2024 | Imposes substantial compliance costs on homeowners without robust data on actual risk reduction benefits nationwide. |
| Information Technology and Innovation Foundation | Rule requiring minimum of two crew members on most US freight and passenger train journeys. | Federal Railroad Administration | 2024 | Lacks foundation in safety data; is driven by labor-union pressures; automated braking systems and other technological advances intended to mitigate accidents caused by human error. |
| American Petroleum Institute (API) | National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Particulate Matter | EPA | 2024 | In 2024, EPA mandated a lowering of maximum air particulate matter – a measure of air quality – of no more than 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter vs. 12.0 previously. API argues no new scientific evidence had emerged to warrant such a reduction. API argues the new standard will limit economic growth. The group supports revising, not repealing the rule. |
| Small Business Low Risk Coalition (group of manufacturing/industrial trade associations) | Multi-sector general permit rules for stormwater discharge from industrial facilities | EPA | 2021 | Argues 2021 version of standard was issued in overly hasty fashion relative to the 2015 version, which received lengthy multiagency review. The group argues that the 2021 permit rules added costly, unnecessary analytical monitoring requirements for many industries. |
| American Hospital Association (AHA) | Remove telehealth originating and geographic site restrictions within the Medicare program. | CMS | Various | Currently, Medicare patients in urban or suburban areas do not have the same access to telehealth services covered by Medicare as those in rural areas; in other cases patients must be in a clinical setting to receive telehealth services, which defeats their purpose. |
Source: Regulations.gov
What does this mean for investors and companies? The OMB request for information and its many industry responses are a sign that deregulation – obscured thus far by the trade war, the immigration crackdown and the many controversies that follow the current Administration – will nonetheless be a key theme for Trump’s second term. The fall Unified Regulatory Agenda, a document published by presidential Administrations twice a year that details each federal agency’s priorities for the coming 12 months, will provide clues as to how the Administration has translated OMB’s fact-finding mission into agency priorities.
Given the inclination of Trump, Vought and those around them in the Administration, OMB is likely to push ahead with many of the deregulatory recommendations put forth in the comment letters. Opponents will attempt to counter these efforts through the courts, with their allies in Congress, and by attempting to influence public opinion. But as with many other aspects of the Trump Administration, critics will face the challenge of fighting many battles at once.
History also shows that deregulation can be a double-edged sword for the private sector. The Global Financial Crisis of 2007-08, which followed a long period of loosened of the U.S. financial services industry, is the most striking recent example. But more recent cases like the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank in spring 2023 demonstrate the dangers of lighter-touch regulation. In that case, rule changes reducing capital and liquidity requirements for banks of Silicon Valley’s size encouraged the firm to increase its risk profile, making the firm highly vulnerable to a rise in short-term interest rates. Companies must do more on their own to protect their businesses, customers and employees at times when the pendulum swings toward deregulation. Ethics committees, ombudsmen and similar compliance measures (Anchor and its partners can help with this!) can serve companies well at times like this when animal spirits are running high – on Wall Street as well as in Washington, D.C.