As the UK seeks a closer relationship with the European Union, it must not sacrifice advances in gene editing that could shape the future competitiveness of British agriculture, the NFU has warned MPs.
NFU chairman Tom Bradshaw said a closer trading relationship with the EU would benefit farmers and producers, but only if it did not undermine the UK’s more progressive approach to agricultural innovation.
Mr Bradshaw was giving evidence to MPs as part of a debate over the Government’s proposed reset in its relationship with the EU.
He said the NFU highlighted full access for British lamb to the Indian market and welcomed progress in opening up new markets, but expressed concern about the impact of recent trade deals on the domestic sector, including dairy.
Turning to EU trade, Bradshaw said exports have been hit hard by increased border tensions since Brexit.
He told MPs that trade volumes with the EU had fallen by 37.4% since 2019, with demand for British goods falling as a result of delays and additional costs at the border.
Mr Bradshaw said this was having a direct impact on farm operations, particularly those dependent on European markets, noting beef exports had fallen by 24% and dairy exports had fallen by 16%.
Mr Bradshaw said there was a clear opportunity to rebuild trade with the EU, but warned that regulatory adjustments could come at a cost.
He highlighted gene editing and plant protection products as key areas where the UK is not fully aligned with EU rules, giving UK agriculture a potential competitive advantage.
Mr Bradshaw said the UK needed to “seize” the opportunity to become a world leader in these areas and warned against sacrificing its status in pursuit of a deal.
“If we can achieve a gene editing carve-out, we can lead the world,” the NFU president told MPs.
The NFU is lobbying the government to secure an explicit exemption from gene editing laws in the future UK-EU sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) agreement.
Mr Bradshaw acknowledged that reducing friction at the border would be in the interests of both parties, particularly for horticulture businesses that struggle to import plant material due to border delays and high compliance costs.
But he warned that dynamic alignment with EU rules could limit the UK’s ability to innovate.
“There are some very difficult problems that need solutions,” he said. “I don’t think it’s as simple as saying, ‘If we just give in a little bit, we’ll end up in a better position.'”
Mr Bradshaw warned that without a carve-out, the EU itself could miss out on advances in gene editing, as it would lose access to UK research if it continued to restrict the technology.
He said this should be a key focus area in negotiations to protect UK producers, alongside the EU’s plant protection product approval system.
Since leaving the EU, the UK has operated an independent SPS regime within the UK, but Northern Ireland remains subject to EU rules under the Windsor Framework.
Routine inspections now apply to much agri-food traveling between the UK and the EU, increasing cost and complexity for agricultural and food businesses.
The government is seeking an SPS agreement that would reduce these checks in line with EU rules in certain areas.
Bradshaw warned lawmakers that if a carve-out cannot be secured in the early stages of negotiations, it is less likely to be achieved in subsequent negotiations.
He also highlighted the importance of influence, saying it was “paramount” that the UK had the necessary expertise and access to shape EU decision-making if collaboration was to be pursued.
While negotiations are still at an early stage, the NFU said decisions made now will shape farmers’ access to markets, technology and innovation for years to come.
