The Tenant Farmers Association (TFA) has reiterated its demand for urgent government intervention in response to the increasing number of solar energy developments displacing tenant farmers — often with little or no compensation.
In a formal letter addressed to Farming Minister Daniel Zeichner and Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook, the TFA expressed serious concern over what it regards as a broken promise by the prime minister.
The association highlighted that, since the Labour government’s general election victory in July 2024, key commitments made to protect tenant farmers from large-scale solar developments have not been honoured.
“You will all be aware that the TFA has been a vocal critic of solar energy schemes promoted on tenanted agricultural land which result in tenant farmers being displaced from the land with little compensation,” the association stated.
The issue has gained urgency following a series of solar scheme approvals, whether through local planning processes or appeals — including projects designated as Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs).
According to the TFA, such approvals almost invariably result in the eviction of tenant farmers, often without fair or sufficient compensation for the loss of their homes, businesses and livelihoods.
The association referenced remarks made by Sir Keir Starmer at the NFU conference in February 2023, during his time as Leader of the Opposition.
“Tenant farmers need a fair deal. They need to know their futures are secure... We can’t do it by taking advantage of tenant farmers, farmers producing good British food on carefully maintained, fertile land," Sir Keir said.
The TFA criticised the government’s post-election planning decisions as being at odds with this pledge, citing examples where local authority refusals — based in part on the impact on tenant farmers — were overturned at appeal or by ministers.
The association also drew upon legal precedent to reinforce its position. It cited Lord Scarman’s ruling in Great Portland Estates v the Mayor and City of Westminster (1984).
He stated: “Personal circumstances of an occupier, personal hardship, the difficulties of businesses which are of value to the character of a community are not to be ignored in the administration of planning control.”
Further support came from R v Vale of Glamorgan District Council (2000), where Mr Justice Richards ruled that the planning authority had wrongly dismissed the tenant’s circumstances as insufficient grounds for refusal, thereby adopting an overly narrow interpretation of planning policy.
Against this backdrop, the TFA welcomed a commitment outlined in the government’s recently published Solar Roadmap, which stated that compensation for displaced tenant farmers should be “adequate and fair”.
The association described this as “a very important step forward” in fulfilling the Prime Minister’s earlier promises — but warned that effective implementation would be key.
To that end, the TFA outlined a series of proposals for delivering on the government’s pledge. Firstly, it recommended that statutory advice be provided to local planning authorities to ensure that tenant farmers receive “adequate and fair” compensation when displaced by solar developments.
Secondly, it called for formal guidance to be issued to planning inspectors to ensure tenant farmers' rights are properly considered during appeal processes.
Thirdly, the TFA urged that ministers be required to assess the adequacy of compensation before granting approval for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs).
Finally, it proposed reforms to agricultural tenancy legislation to explicitly define compensation in a way that fully reflects the loss of a tenant’s home, business, and livelihood.
In its letter, the TFA called on ministers to confirm the timeline for implementing these provisions and to consider whether the fair compensation principle could be applied to planning decisions already taken.
The association argued that doing so would not be truly retrospective, as the government’s position had been articulated publicly prior to the election.
“The TFA view is that [‘adequate and fair’] must equate to the compensation necessary to cover the actual loss of the tenant farmer to their business, their home and their livelihood,” the organisation stated.
The association concluded by reaffirming its commitment to ensuring tenant farmers are not left behind as the UK accelerates its transition to renewable energy.
