Tag Archives: labour

Housing Policy Under Labour: One Year On

Twelve months ago, the Labour government was elected on a manifesto with housing policy at its heart. It pledged to improve the lives of renters, as well as make housing more affordable by accelerating housebuilding and reforming planning policy, which in turn placed housing policy at the centre of the government’s ‘growth mission’.

One year on from this government taking office, what have been the major trends in housing policy under Labour, and how much progress is it making against the commitments it set out before the election? In this blog, our consultants Sam Tankard, Will Blackman and Joshua Owolabi look at the biggest housing policy initiatives from the government and what to expect next.

Planning and Housebuilding

The root of many troubles facing UK construction and housebuilding lies in the planning system which, in its promise of reform back in 2023, Labour committed to “back the builders not the blockers”. This move was seen as necessary if Labour had any hopes of meeting its manifesto promise to build 1.5 million homes over the course of this parliament. This was always a tall order given the UK has averaged 150,000 new homes between 2013 – 2023, despite targets often still sitting at around 300,000 a year.

The government’s Planning and Infrastructure Bill was introduced earlier this year as one of its flagship pieces of legislation, designed to speed up the delivery of new homes, increase capacity of local planning authorities with new planning officers, unlock land through compulsory purchase orders, and introduce a Nature Restoration Fund to offset environmental impacts.

This was welcomed by developers, investors and pro-housing campaigners as a sign that the government was finally putting in the policy requirements to unlock the level of growth needed to hit their targets, especially as housebuilding ‘starts’ since the beginning of this parliament are sitting at 186,000 – some way off the government’s target.

However, those same supportive voices now feel disappointed that the government has already started to water down the bill, even after removing the whip from an MP for leading a rebellion against it. In its original form, the bill was not considered hugely radical: criticised in part for only making tweaks rather than wholesale change. It does not, for example, even deal with the wider issues hindering development such as zoning and the value of available land, the labour skills shortages in construction, or the rising cost of materials that are pushing up the cost of housebuilding.

Now in the Lords, the government has introduced amendments that would make Environmental Delivery Plans harder and more complicated, as developers will now have to demonstrate how it will contribute positively to nature, and giving Natural England a potential veto on the delivery of new homes.

This significant concession signals the bill could be weakened further still, making it neither effective in delivering the housing at scale, nor enshrining the environmental protections that campaigners want to see. Housing Secretary, Angela Rayner, will need to use her political heft in the Cabinet to demonstrate the government remains on track and isn’t just compromising on a damp squib. After all, as a former prime minister once said, “standing in the middle of the road is very dangerous, you get knocked by the traffic from both sides”.

Rental Reform

One of the most significant areas of housing policy reform over the last 12-months was in fact originated under the last Conservative government. The Renters’ Rights Bill, which is currently coming towards the end of its passage through Parliament, has been a long time in the making.

It was the Theresa May government in 2019 that first consulted on reforms to rebalance the rights and responsibilities of landlord and tenants, which included ending the ability of landlords to issue Section 21 notices, or ‘no-fault’ evictions. This change continues to be the centrepiece of the bill and is intended to give greater stability and security of tenure to tenants. The bill also provides landlords with reformed and expanded grounds for seeking possession of their properties under Section 8 of the Housing Act 1988. This includes cases where the landlord wishes to sell or to move into the property themselves. Other measures include stricter requirements around rent increases, the creation of a new ombudsman, new requirements on landlords to remedy mould and damp problems, and a new right for tenants to request a pet.

The Conservative government’s version of this legislation – then called the Renters’ Reform Bill – fell away following the dissolution of the last parliament. Labour’s version of the legislation includes some significant differences to its predecessor, including increased notice and grace periods, and a three-month requirement of rent arrears before a landlord can seek possession, up from the two months proposed by the Conservatives. Almost all of the changes put forward by Labour are to the benefit of tenants rather than landlords.

Taken together, these reforms are the most significant changes to the regulation of the private rented sector for over 35 years. The residential landlord sector has been careful not to be seen to oppose the legislation outright given the unhelpful optics around this. However, many individual landlords are concerned that the balance has tipped too far away from them, potentially leaving many unable to take back possession of their properties in reasonable circumstances. Court backlogs have provided an additional layer of concern, with delays in processing evictions claims already persisting in many parts of England, and many landlords calling for significant improvements in order to allay their concerns.

Some industry leaders such as Propertymark and the National Residential Landlords Association have warned that the proposed provisions could lead to landlords withdrawing from the sector, in turn limiting supply and driving up rents. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government’s own impact assessment does not predict an exodus of landlords from the sector. Indeed, landlords have been subject to a raft of regulatory and tax changes since 2015, but these have not resulted in significant divestment from the private rental market, which many had predicted at the time. There is no question that these reforms are significant, but the longer-term impact of them may not be seen for many years to come.

Leasehold Reform

The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 (LAFRA 2024) was passed by the previous Conservative government to strengthen leaseholders’ rights. However, its implementation has become the responsibility of the Starmer government as many of the reforms within the act require secondary legislation before they come into effect. This is a significant task given the high number and complexity of the provisions within the act.

In March 2025, the government implemented measures set out in LAFRA 2024 strengthening Right to Manage (RTM) provisions. Prior to March, landlords had been able to recover the costs of dealing with the RTM claim from the RTM company at the end of the process. Now, in a non-contentious claim, the landlord cannot recover any of its costs from the RTM company or the participating leaseholders.

The government is also consulting on the charges leaseholders – and homeowners on freehold estates – pay and the services they receive. One of the most significant challenges for leaseholders under the previous system was the inconsistent format of service charge demands. Once implemented, the new format will require landlords and managing agents to ensure that all demands on leaseholders are consistent, clear, and easy to understand. Any deviation from this prescribed format will render non-payment or late payment provisions in the lease unenforceable, providing a powerful incentive for landlords to comply.

While measures in the LAFRA 2024 will reduce excessive fees for leaseholders, many leaseholders may not fully understand their new rights under the reforms given the complexity of the act. Property agents will need to stay up-to-date with the regulations to guide tenants effectively, especially when it comes to disputes or questions about lease terms. Agents who manage leasehold properties will also need to maintain clear communication with freeholders, ensuring that lease terms comply with the new rules.

Despite the work already undertaken, the government intends to introduce further reforms. The Minister for Housing and Planning, Matthew Pennycook, has long favoured moving away from the leasehold system. As a result, the government has proposed a Leasehold and Commonhold Reform Bill, which will be introduced to parliament before the end of 2025. The bill would aim to make commonhold the default tenure for new flats and allow individual properties within a building or larger development to be owned on a freehold basis.

High quality property managing agents are likely to benefit from the proposed measures. Pennycook has made it clear that agents already play a key role in managing multi-occupancy buildings and freehold estates, and their importance will only increase with the proposed commonhold reforms.

Under the proposed model, agents would be employed by commonhold associations to assist in the day-to-day management of a building, and it is anticipated that almost all new commonhold developments, especially larger or more complex buildings, will be established with a managing agent to help run the site on their behalf. This could drive demand for agents with a strong track record of block management. The government is also considering whether it should be mandatory for a managing agent with appropriate expertise to look after high-risk buildings. Furthermore, the government is consulting on proposals for mandatory qualifications for agents and is highly likely to include measures regulating training and standards for agents in the proposed commonhold bill.

So far, the government made significant progress in enacting its leasehold reform agenda. Despite legal challenges to LAFRA 2024 and opposition from landlords to reforms, Matthew Pennycook and Angela Rayner seem determined to press ahead. Therefore, we can expect major changes to leasehold, commonhold and freehold regulation over the course of this parliament that will present new obstacles and opportunities for the housing sector.

‘End of Term’ Reflections for Labour

The highs and lows of the first parliamentary year

In its first year since winning the 2024 general election, Starmer’s government has shown intent to implement its manifesto pledges, but whether this has translated into successful policy delivery remains a subject of debate. Ministers have pursued ambitious reforms in areas like trade, education, health, and energy, but they have also faced political turbulence and criticism over policy missteps, particularly around tax, grooming gangs and welfare reform.

Crucially, the government seems to be unable to unlock that elusive growth on which so much of its spending plans depend. Much of Labour’s policy programme is still in its early stages, with a strong emphasis on structural reform in Whitehall and long-term planning which should be commended. However, this emphasis leaves the government with few immediate wins to show the public and, with key reforms still light on detail and outcomes, questions are already mounting about the government’s effectiveness.

On the international stage, however, the Prime Minister has emerged as a confident statesman. His handling of the Trump presidency, securing of trade deals with the US, EU and India, and continuation of the UK’s support for Ukraine have won praise both at home and abroad. This has helped to re-establish Britain’s role as a serious global actor – although notably absent of any meaningful involvement from foreign secretary David Lammy.

Domestically, there has been modest progress on housing and NHS waiting times, but delivery has been hampered by fiscal constraints. But domestic policy also reveals some of the sharpest criticism. The removal of the Winter Fuel Payment from millions of pensioners, presented as a necessary fiscal decision, sparked major backlash and a messy U-turn. The electorate does not expect these sorts of economic decisions from a Labour government, which has resulted in widespread reputational damage from a policy that seems to contradict Labour’s core identity. The increase in employer National Insurance contributions (NICs) has also been poorly received, with concerns over its impact on jobs and wages. On immigration, growing public unease and the government’s mixed messaging has opened space for Nigel Farage’s Reform UK to gain traction and control the narrative.

Overall, the government has had a mixed first year. There was no political honeymoon, with downbeat messaging on the economy, the early ‘freebies scandal’ and unpopular welfare cuts undermining any prospect of ministers picking up some early momentum. Coupled with a challenging economic backdrop, rising support for Reform UK and the geopolitical volatility exacerbated by Trump’s return to power, the need for a recalibration of political and policy strategy is becoming clear. The government’s commitment to its manifesto is not in doubt, but turning that commitment into visible, meaningful results is the test that now lies ahead.

Labour and the business & investor community: a genuine partnership for growth?

Courting investors and businesses was a key part of Labour’s pre-election pitch. The Prime Minister and Chancellor were keen to demonstrate the party’s credibility on the economy and support investment into the UK as part of its wider growth ‘mission’. However, in government, Rachel Reeves used her first fiscal event – the 2024 autumn budget – to increase employer NICs by 1.2%, representing a £25 billion tax hike on businesses. This came alongside increases to Capital Gains Tax and the National Living Wage. The latter measure has been particularly costly for businesses with a large proportion of low paid workers on their payroll.

While the government argued this was necessary to address the fiscal ‘black hole’ it inherited from the outgoing Conservatives and to boost support for low-paid workers, it has done little to inspire confidence in the business and investment community. Indeed, GK Strategic Advisers and former ministers David Laws and Rob Halfon both warn that the employer NICs rise has been particularly damaging to the government. This is despite early positive decisions on infrastructure and commitments to speed up planning processes. Since last year’s budget, ministers have been playing catch up in their efforts to restore confidence amongst businesses and stimulate private investment at a time when geopolitical uncertainty is threatening to wreak havoc on the global economy.

President Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ announcement on 2 April, which saw his administration unveil sweeping global tariffs, was a watershed moment and one which Starmer deftly navigated. The US-UK Economic Prosperity Deal sees the UK sidestep many of the Trump’s tariffs and, amongst other provisions, allows UK car manufacturers to sell vehicles to the US at a 10% tariff rate and cuts tariffs on UK aerospace exports to zero.

Despite Starmer’s success on the international stage, challenges lie ahead for the government in its relationship with businesses and investors. The Employment Rights Bill is due to complete its passage through Parliament in the autumn. The legislation introduces a new package of workers’ rights, including day one employment rights, ending the use of certain zero hours contracts and improving access to flexible working arrangements. Many of the measures contained in the bill will be subject to further consultation with businesses over the coming months. It is vital that the government gets the eventual implementation of these reforms right to avoid any further damage to its relationship with the business and investment community.

As parliament rises for summer recess and we take stock of the government’s first full parliamentary year, it is fair to say that the public-private partnership for growth that Labour first envisaged when it came to power has not yet materialised. As put by GK Strategic Adviser and former Health Minister Steve Brine: “The growth mission, which sits at heart of the government’s plan to get re-elected, has been hampered by uncertainty from the shifting taxation landscape and the many reviews and consultations that are yet to translate into firm policy direction.”

Starmer will need to translate the success he has found on the international stage to his domestic agenda if he hopes to bring businesses and investors back on side and enable them to deliver the economic growth upon which so much of his government’s policy agenda relies.

The ‘ones to watch’

Westminster has been speculating for several months as to whether the Prime Minister will instigate a cabinet reshuffle before the end of 2025. Though it may seem like a distant prospect, many are already keeping an eye on some Labour MPs who could be next in line for promotion.

Peter Kyle MP: With experience as a former Special Adviser in the last Labour government, Kyle is a slightly more seasoned voice in the Labour ranks than other rising stars. Described by Steve Brine as “hugely gifted”, the Science and Tech Secretary has consistently impressed, particularly in his initiative to coordinate a unified cross-government approach to data, digital and AI, and as a talented and dependable ‘Minister for the Morning Round’.

Torsten Bell MP: Formerly the chief executive of the Resolution Foundation and a Labour party aide during the 2008 financial crisis, Bell knows the ins and outs of policy, economics and politics. Though a fresh-faced Labour MP, part of the 2024 intake, he is already holding ministerial positions across both HM Treasury and the Department for Work and Pensions, and is expected to continue to rise through the ranks.

Miatta Fahnbulleh MP: Taking over the seat Harriet Harman represented since 1982 was no small feat, but Fahnbulleh has not disappointed. Like Bell, Fahnbulleh was elected in July 2024 and was immediately appointed to a junior ministerial role. A former Cabinet Office official and CEO of the New Economics Foundation, her experience has made her a capable MP and minister. Her reputation for going above and beyond has not gone unnoticed, with David Laws remarking she is “a bright junior minister who has already impressed her colleagues”.

Josh MacAlister MP: Otherwise known as education and social care’s ‘golden child’, MacAlister entered parliament with a reputation that precedes him. MacAlister was chosen by the Conservative government to conduct an eponymous review of children’s social care in 2021. Now serving as the parliamentary private secretary to Pat McFadden – one of the government’s most instrumental figures – MacAllister has been carefully watching the recommendations of his review being implemented through the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. He is certainly proving himself to be successful campaigner and capable MP.

The next 12 months, and beyond…

For David Laws, the priority for the next 12 months is “growth”. The Chancellor faces the daunting task of stabilising the public finances while avoiding tax rises in the autumn. However, recent briefings suggest that tax rises, particularly on higher earners, seem inevitable unless economic performance improves. Her Mansion House Speech set out Reeves’ plans to unlock growth in the financial services sector, while trade deals struck signal an important first step towards a more outward-facing agenda. A more pragmatic approach to Europe, while politically fraught, remains a low-cost, pro-business lever available to the government to recover some of the growth lost post-Brexit.

Another priority is the ‘retail offer’ that helped Labour win in 2024: NHS reform. Steve Brine argues that meeting the 18-week waiting time target for NHS elective care would be seen as a real mark of success. Elsewhere, there are the structural reforms underway for planning and devolution that were fundamental to the “decade of national renewal” promised during the election campaign. Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, empowered and ambitious within the government, is quietly progressing with this agenda with little sign of slowing down.

David Laws suspects that we will also see those more talented ministers begin to demonstrate progress in exciting vanguard sectors like technology, AI and clean energy: areas which are vital to enhancing the UK’s economic position.

Measurement of success in May

The real test of success will be the elections in major cities and, significantly, in the Welsh and Scottish parliaments in May 2026. While midterm elections are often tricky for incumbent governments, Labour would not have been expecting to weather such dissatisfaction so soon, and a poor performance at the May 2025 local elections was an early warning sign of this.

The traditional dividing lines of left and right, class and geography, are no longer accurate measures of voter sentiment. Rather, the electorate is split into groups defined less by ideology, and more by attitudes to institutions, cultural, social and economic issues. Steve Brine emphasises that support for the two main parties has always been fluid. However, in 2024, Labour and Conservatives collectively won just 54% of the vote – a post-war low. Recent polling showing double digit support for smaller parties like the Greens suggests fertile ground for insurgent parties that are attracting support from new parts of the electorate that they wouldn’t normally have.

Technocrats vs. Populism

GK Strategic Adviser and former Care Minister Phil Hope warns that the rise in populism is the “biggest threat to our democratic institutions”. For No.10, the immediate concern is Reform UK. The Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff, Morgan McSweeney – who is often characterised as the architect of Starmer’s premiership – believes that right-wing populism must be defeated by showcasing competent government. In practical terms, this means delivering real improvements to the way people interact with public services, and being tougher on immigration, to reassure disenfranchised, Reform-leaning voters that their economic and cultural concerns are being addressed.

While Reform grabs the headlines, Labour also faces mounting dissent from the left. Disillusioned, younger voters are drifting towards alternatives that they believe are more convincing and radical on climate, equality and security issues. While 6% of Labour’s 2024 voters have moved to Reform, three times as many have shifted to parties of the left. Recent polling gains for the Green Party and a new party led by Jeremy Corbyn underscore this trend. It is worth remembering that Corbyn secured 40% of the vote in 2017 compared to Starmer’s just 33.7% in 2024. For a Labour leadership that has worked hard to marginalise the hard left, this insurgent left-wing movement could expose vulnerabilities in Labour’s emerging strategy of wooing Reform voters on issues such as immigration and the so-called ‘culture wars’.

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right

Labour now finds itself squeezed on both its political flanks, while struggling to articulate a unifying strategy for the broad, fragile coalition it assembled in 2024. Without a coherent narrative, it risks alienating voters whose priorities and values increasingly diverge.

In political terms, there is still a long way to go until the next election. But in the absence of a compelling narrative or delivery on issues such as immigration, Downing Street faces a difficult task to work out who its voter base is and what it wants. As GK’s strategic advisers all note, an economic upturn would relieve much of this pressure. But with that unlikely in the next 12 months, the consequences will be felt at the ballot box in May 2026 – where Labour’s already narrow share of the vote could be eroded further.

Scott Dodsworth // Senior Partner & Managing Director // scott@gkstrategy.com

The £0.5bn revenue raiser, incurring the wrath of farmers

GK Senior Adviser James Allan visited the farmers protest in Westminster and assesses the likelihood of a government u-turn and its agriculture policy plans.

On 19 November, farmers were out in force and took to the streets of Westminster for a heartfelt protest for a sector that feeds the nation. At the autumn budget, the Chancellor Rachel Reeves introduced a cap of £1m for assets eligible for Agriculture Property Relief and Business Property Relief. Estimated to raise £0.5bn a year by 2029/30 for spending on public services, the measure has been dubbed a ‘family farm tax’ for farmers that “don’t do it for the money because there is none”.

The extent to which the Chancellor’s action equates to a “death knell” for the family run farm is somewhat contested. While the Country Land and Business Association estimates 70,000 farms will be impacted by the change, various policy wonks and tax specialists argue that this does not consider other reliefs and is based on the quantity of farms, rather than ownership structures. Disputed figures aside, it risks fueling a shift public opinion against the government and one of the shortest-lived honeymoon periods for a new Prime Minster. A survey carried out by JL Partners found that 53% of respondents felt the autumn budget was unsuccessful, so the farming community are not alone.

Is this Reeves’ Cornish pasty tax moment?

When then-Conservative Chancellor George Osborne introduced a 20% tax on hot foods to end VAT anomalies in 2012, few anticipated the political drama of “pastygate” which ensued. The Conservative government was criticised for being out of touch, with some commentators even alleging class war. Then Prime Minister David Cameron was caught out for saying he’d eaten a pasty in Leeds Railway Station when the West Cornwall Pasty Company duly noted that the pasty outlet had closed two years previous. The controversy detracted from Osborne’s budget and ultimately led to a government u-turn and a negative with 49% of people describing the government’s handling of pastygate as a “shambles”. In a similar vein, the political fallout from this protest will be difficult for the Labour government to manage. Whatever Reeves’ next move, pastygate demonstrates that u-turns are not unprecedented when public opinion moves against a pinch point policy issue.

Beyond the political drama

Politics aside, the protests cut to the core of several interrelating policy issues, chief among them food security. Should farmers up the stakes and choose to strike, the government has already confirmed contingency plans to mitigate against likely food shortages. Any disruption to already fragile “just in time” food supply chains, which are a hallmark of the British supermarket industry, would have an immediate knock-on effect for the consumer, and in turn, the voter. This year of global elections has demonstrated that voters do not reward incumbents when food prices rise.

Yet given the 60/40 split of domestic and imported food produce respectively, the issue of food security is both desperately domestic and international. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine not only led to record levels of food inflation, hitting low-income households the hardest, but also a decline in business investment in the UK food and drink sector. Then there’s the issue of climate change. While India and Pakistan account for roughly 46% of UK rice imports, the government acknowledges that India is increasingly a climate vulnerable country. In short, a greater dependence on food imports arising from a possible collapse of domestic farming exposes the UK to yet more unpredictable geo-political and climate risks.

The British farming sector does not operate in isolation; it is critical to the UK’s broader rural economy, supporting industries such as agricultural machinery, agri-tech and innovation, and food processing. More than this, farmers are custodians of the UK countryside, contributing to environmental goals of biodiversity, carbon sequestration and sustainable land management and forestry. Though contentious, the Chancellor’s action prompts a broader conversation about agricultural reforms which align with national priorities and ensures the voice of the farming community is heard. The government has yet to set out substantive details but spoke of a new deal for farmers during the election campaign. Now in government, Defra Secretary Steve Reed has signalled a focus on trade deals undercutting low welfare and low standards; maximising public sector purchasing power to back British produce; and a land-use framework to balance nature recovery and long-term food security.

Whether Reeves doubles down or pivots on the Agriculture Property Relief depends on the government’s willingness to expend political capital to defend its decision. Labour’s instinct will be to fight on but the party finds itself on new ground. Its broad but narrow majority is part contingent on non-traditional Labour voters, many of them in rural areas. The MPs in these constituencies will have their eyes on a 2029 general election. Maintaining the rural vote and positioning Labour as the party of both rural and urban communities will be a challenge for the government. How Starmer and Reeves handle the ‘family farm tax’ could well define this iteration of the Labour Party. For investors and businesses alike, keeping abreast of these political battlegrounds, and preparing for the associated commercial risks and opportunities, will be important in making the case to a government that might well bend to a shift in public opinion.

Labour’s new era for agriculture: Can political stability drive agri-tech innovation?

GK Senior Adviser James Allan analyses the government’s agriculture policy plans and the opportunities that could arise for investors.

With the Labour government now in power, some may wonder if the food, farming and agriculture sectors are about to see a major shift – a shift from being an important constituent of the then Conservative administration of 14 years to lower down the political list of priorities within Labour’s “mission led” government.

The Autumn Budget on 30 October will partly address this concern and end the speculation about potential changes to agriculture property relief and Defra’s agricultural budget. But with a Party of a different political hue now occupying the corridors of power, it’s worth considering whether Labour’s pro-growth messaging of “political stability” to attract private sector investment extends to the food, farming and agriculture (FFA) sectors, and if so, to what extent.

Why Labour must harvest more than just political stability

To attract private investment, ‘political stability’ alone is not sufficient – it needs to be backed up by policy substance and public investment, and with long-term strategic thinking. From aquaculture to viticulture, solar farms to biodiversity, food pricing and standards to foods high in fat, salt and sugar, there are many agendas and issues at play. These will all be playing out against a political backdrop with a renewed sense of momentum, a government with a greater willingness to intervene in the name of public health, an entire mission focused on decarbonisation, and a tight fiscal environment impacting the potential for significant public investment.

The first 100 days for the new government have proved that governing isn’t easy. Political pinch points and missteps aside, a common thread in the criticisms levelled against Labour ministers has been the absence of a defining vision for the sector to provide the framework for policy thinking and development; not least for food security which is set to become one of the defining political issues of the parliament. Without this overarching vision for the sector, the ability for businesses to plan their own investment and growth strategies becomes much more difficult and limits the ability of government to ‘crowd in’ private capital to drive growth.

The sowing of early seeds positive for UK investors

There are a few positive and recent developments of note. First, the Farming Minister, Daniel Zeichner, has confirmed the government’s intention to introduce secondary legislation which will bring to reality the regulatory regime of the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Act 2023.[1] This will help to simplify the authorisation process for bringing new products to market from 1o years to an estimated 12 months.[2] Investors should note the government’s familiar caveat of “as soon as parliamentary time allows” which means the introduction of secondary legislation is unlikely to be imminent and will compete with an already packed legislative calendar. Speeding up routes to market will be welcomed by investors backing early-stage or growth-stage companies involved in gene editing, crop efficiency technologies, or those innovating in climate-resistant crop varieties. The streamlined regulatory environment lowers barriers, creating the potential for significant returns more quickly. Zeichner has also confirmed 43,000 Seasonal Worker visas for the horticulture sector and 2,000 for the poultry sector for 2025. Accompanied by a few additional measures to simplify free-range labelling requirements, this signals that the Defra ministerial team is actively listening to the sector and willing to flex policy to meet operational challenges and remove barriers to growth.[3]

Secondly, the government has secured access to the US market for British beetroot farmers, boosting export opportunities and attributed to the efforts of DEFRA’s agri-food attaché in the US.[4] This establishes an interesting precedent for securing market access outside of more formal and comprehensive free trade agreements, and creates attractive investment opportunities in companies that produce export-ready, high-quality British agricultural goods. Crucially, produce by produce access deals averts the political tightrope of negotiating comprehensive trade deals, not least one with the US which has long been the envy of previous Conservative Prime Ministers. For investors and argi-businesses on the lookout for export opportunities, engaging with DEFRA’s eleven attaches located in British embassies and consulates in Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Kenya, The Gulf, India, Japan, China, Thailand and Vietnam will be important to replicate this success.

Thirdly, there is recognition in government of the long and fraught dissatisfaction among farmers concerning the future viability of the agricultural sector.[5] The Labour ministerial team perceives a lack of confidence among farmers as the rationale for needing to optimise Environmental Land Management schemes as part of a wider new deal for farmers. The precise details of this new deal have yet to be clarified but the government has signalled a focus on:

Trade deals undercutting low welfare and low standards
Maximising public sector purchasing power to back British produce
A land-use framework to balance nature recovery and long-term food security

A latter focus on food security will be important for investors seeking opportunities which align with Labour’s aim to make the UK more self-reliant in the food and energy sectors, but especially where technological innovation contributes to more efficient and resilient farming processes and produce. Defending their record in government and playing in safe political territory, this was a focus of a recent opposition day debate in Parliament where several Conservative MPs made the case for greater public investment in new farming technologies to safeguard the nation’s food supply.[6] However, as noted by DEFRA Secretary, Steve Reed, the government’s ability to do so is up for consideration in the upcoming Budget and next year’s Spending Review and therefore competes with other public spending priorities.

A wet start for the farming sector

This year’s harvest of the five key crops – wheat, winter and spring barley, oats and oilseed rape – saw a decrease of 15% compared to the 2023 harvest with an estimated loss of £600m in revenue for English farmers due to considerable wet weather.[7] The impact has extended beyond these core crops with a south Devonshire winemaker reporting a 70% decrease in expected volumes compared to 2023 and another winemaker noting heightened disease pressures due to constant rain. For the British viticulture industry, the wet weather year of 2024 follows a boom in capital investment and overseas wine producers buying into the UK as a hedge against climate change. Rural and farming communities might not be this government’s traditional supporter base but neglecting the sector – with its sub-sector growth gems like viticulture – risks undermining long-term food security and economic growth not just farmers but the broader economy and consumers alike.

[1] DEFRA, New legislation to support precision breeding and boost Britain’s food security (Sept-23 link)

[2] DEFRA, Impact Assessment – Impact Assessment – Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Bill (Mar-22 link)

[3] DEFRA, Government provides certainty to horticulture and poultry businesses (Oct-24 link)

[4] DEFRA, British beetroot growers to put down roots in US market (Sept-24 link)

[5] DEFRA, Government to restore stability for farmers as confidence amongst sector low (Aug-24 link)

[6] House of Commons, Opposition day debate on farming and food security (Oct-24 link)

[7] Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit, England has second worst harvest on record with fears mounting for 2025 (Oct-24 link)

Wales says BOGOF to unhealthy food & drink

GK Associate Director Thea Southwell Reeves analyses the Welsh government’s progress on regulating unhealthy food.

This week, the Welsh government took an important step towards tightening the regulatory environment around high fat, sugar and salt (HFSS) food. The measures include prohibiting retailers from offering promotions such as buy-one-get-one-free and three-for-two offers on unhealthy foods; a ban on free drink refills in restaurants; and preventing retailers from placing HFSS food in certain locations in stores. Worth noting, these regulations are also set to apply online so website entry pages, shopping basket and payment pages will all need to comply.

The consultation is open until midnight on 23 September and is seeking views from industry on the draft regulations and their proposed enforcement approach. If the proposals are approved by the Senedd, the legislation is likely to come into force in 2025.

These proposed changes form part of a broad range of approaches, both voluntary and regulatory, that the Welsh government is said to be considering to encourage the food and retail sector to produce, promote, and ultimately sell, healthier food and drink.

The increased regulation of HFSS foods has been on the table for years and is also being explored by Holyrood and Westminster. A consultation on Scotland’s ambitious HFSS regulations closed in May and the King’s Speech included measures to restrict the advertising of junk food to children, along with the sale of high-caffeine energy drinks to children. The cost-of-living crisis has derailed anything more ambitious in Westminster… for now.

Industry has, for the most part, been critical of moves to tighten legislation, arguing that they disproportionately impact the small food and drink producers and make selling food complex and costly. However, for businesses that are nimble, the rules represent an opportunity to gain advantage over non-compliant brands or big brands that are slow to adapt. In a similar vein, producers who can emphasise a healthier product range in marketing and brand positioning are set to attract consumers who are looking to reduce their HFSS intake.

GK Strategy is a political advisory firm. We help investors, business leaders and organisations to engage with policymakers and advise on the political, policy and regulatory aspects of M&A processes.

To discuss what the Welsh government’s consultation may mean for you and how you can engage with policy debates in the year ahead, please reach out to Thea@gkstrategy.com.

GK Strategy – General Election Update

General Election Results Briefing

The GK team reacts to the 2024 General Election results, with GK’s Strategic Advisers sharing their insights on Labour’s historic victory, and the implications for Sir Keir Starmer’s new government.

To read our briefing please click here.