Advances in gene editing that could shape the future competitiveness of British farming must not be traded away as the UK seeks closer ties with the European Union, the NFU has warned MPs.
NFU president Tom Bradshaw said a closer trading relationship with the EU would benefit farmers and growers, but only if it does not undermine the UK’s more progressive approach to agricultural innovation.
Bradshaw was giving evidence to MPs as part of discussions around the government’s proposed reset in relations with the EU.
He said the NFU welcomed progress on opening new markets, highlighting full access to the Indian market for British lamb, but raised concerns about the impact of recent trade agreements on domestic sectors, including dairy.
Turning to EU trade, Bradshaw said exports had been hit hard since Brexit due to increased border friction.
He told MPs that the volume of trade with the EU had fallen by 37.4% since 2019, with demand for British products declining as a result of delays and added costs at the border.
Bradshaw said this had directly affected farm businesses, particularly those reliant on European markets, pointing to beef exports being down 24% and dairy exports falling by 16%.
While he said there was clear opportunity to rebuild trade with the EU, Bradshaw warned that regulatory alignment could come at a cost.
He highlighted gene editing and plant protection products as key areas where the UK is no longer fully aligned with EU rules, giving British agriculture a potential competitive advantage.
Bradshaw said the UK must “seize” the opportunity to become a world leader in these areas and warned against sacrificing that position in pursuit of a deal.
“We can be world-leading if we get a carve-out for gene editing,” the NFU president told MPs.
The NFU is lobbying the government to secure an explicit exemption for gene editing legislation in any future UK-EU sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) agreement.
Bradshaw acknowledged that reducing friction at the border would be in the interests of both sides, particularly for horticultural businesses struggling to import plant material due to border delays and high compliance costs.
However, he cautioned that dynamic alignment with EU rules could restrict the UK’s ability to innovate.
“There are some really difficult issues that need solutions to them,” he said. “I don’t think it is as simple as saying ‘there’s a bit of give and you’ll end up in a better position’.”
Bradshaw warned that without a carve-out, the EU itself could miss out on advances in gene editing, as it would lose access to British research if it continued to restrict the technology.
He said this, alongside the EU’s system for approving plant protection products, should be key focus areas in negotiations to protect British producers.
Since leaving the EU, the UK has operated an independent SPS regime in Great Britain, while Northern Ireland remains aligned with EU rules under the Windsor Framework.
Routine checks now apply to many agri-food products moving between Great Britain and the EU, adding cost and complexity for farming and food businesses.
The government is seeking an SPS agreement to reduce those checks by aligning with EU rules in certain areas.
Bradshaw warned MPs that failing to secure carve-outs during early negotiations would make it unlikely they could be achieved later.
He also stressed the importance of influence, saying it was “paramount” that the UK had the expertise and access needed to shape EU decision-making if alignment is pursued.
With talks still at an early stage, the NFU said decisions taken now would shape farmers’ access to markets, technology and innovation for years to come.
