Ministers are rewriting planning rules to make it easier to build intensive livestock farms despite concerns about water pollution, air quality and local opposition.<\/p>\n
Documents obtained by the Guardian under the Freedom of Information Act show that proposed changes to the national planning policy framework (NPPF) were discussed by ministers and officials in response to concerns of the country\u2019s leading chicken producers, who have been lobbying on the issue for at least two years.<\/p>\n
The British Poultry Council (BPC), which represents the sector, told the farming minister Angela Eagle last autumn: \u201cAccess to more growing space is the number one priority for the poultry meat sector.\u201d<\/p>\n
In its submission to the government\u2019s farm profitability review last summer, it said: \u201cThe need for a solution \u2013 either through planning reform or land-use policy \u2013 and the urgency of that need dwarfs all other issues currently facing us.\u201d<\/p>\n
Before a poultry industry roundtable with Eagle in January, the BPC said it needed the government to \u201cdevelop national planning direction and oversight for food production [\u2026] to safeguard the UK\u2019s long-term food security\u201d.<\/p>\n
At the meeting, Eagle said: \u201cWe have also announced proposals to reform the planning system to more quickly unlock food and farming infrastructure. Planning should enable ambition, not stifle it.\u201d<\/p>\n
Her briefing notes directly linked the proposed changes to industry lobbying, describing planning reform as one of the industry\u2019s \u201cbiggest asks\u201d and saying her department and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government had been working to \u201cfind solutions to planning barriers to poultry sheds and other infrastructure necessary for food production\u201d.<\/p>\n
The draft NPPF includes several measures that could make it easier to approve new intensive livestock developments, including a higher bar for refusing applications on environmental grounds, less scope for local authorities to adopt tougher rules, greater weight to \u201cdomestic food production\u201d and a new emphasis on \u201cbetter accommodation for livestock\u201d.<\/p>\n
The industry says it needs more space to house chickens due to voluntary commitments to lower stocking density. Critics say these welfare commitments are voluntary and planning conditions do not guarantee lower stocking densities will be maintained over the long term. Last month, several restaurant chains withdrew from the Better Chicken Commitment over its call to end the use of fast-growing birds.<\/p>\n
Richard Griffiths, the chief executive of the British Poultry Council, said planning reforms were needed to accommodate welfare improvements rather than to expand production.<\/p>\n
\u201cOver the last year or so we have seen the biggest welfare-focused change in the industry in this generation, with a voluntary reduction in stocking density from 38kg to 30kg per square metre,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis requires additional space to simply bring us back \u2013 in bird numbers \u2013 to where we were previously. This discussion is not about expansion of production.\u201d<\/p>\n
He added the sector had to balance welfare with environmental impact and food security, saying that failing to support domestic production could lead to more imports. The BPC has also called for food production to be considered \u201ccritical national infrastructure\u201d.<\/p>\n
But Prof Paul Behrens, an expert in food systems at the University of Oxford, said the food security case for intensive poultry was \u201cillusory\u201d because the sector \u201cdepends on imports for feed and vitamins, while making us more vulnerable to disease outbreaks like avian flu\u201d.<\/p>\n
The poultry sector\u2019s planning difficulties are largely driven by organised opposition, including local people, who often raise concerns over water pollution, air quality and the climate crisis.<\/p>\n
Agriculture is the leading cause of water pollution in the UK. The Environment Agency estimated last year<\/a> that it accounts for 70% of nitrate pollution and 25-30% of phosphorus pollution. Runoff from intensive poultry units is one contributor to that wider pollution burden.<\/p>\n