HUGH ROBERTSON ATTACKS GOVERNMENT THREAT TO GARDEN OF ENGLAND

Hugh Robertson secured a Parliamentary debate on an issue that has the potential to destroy the future viability of fruit farming in this country.

Hugh secured the debate following the government’s announcement of their intention to abolish the scheme that provides the overwhelming majority as part of a package of reforms to the immigration and asylum system.

These changes are crucial to fruit farmers as their industry currently stands on the brink. Farmers are caught between rising costs and diminishing returns as the supermarkets exert downward pressure on prices. Labour accounts for between 40-60% of a fruit farmer’s cost base so any changes to the system run the risk of making fruit farming unviable.

The overwhelming majority of labour comes through the Seasonal Agricultural Workers Scheme (SAWS). This scheme, which has been running for over 40 years, allows agricultural students from Eastern European countries to come to the UK for up to 6 months to work on our farms before returning home. It benefits farmers and students alike and less than 1% of students ever abscond. At its peak in 2004, 25,000 students visited this country. It is a mark of the success of this scheme that the current Minister of Agriculture in Poland, Tomasz Kowalski, is a former SAWS student.

Hugh said: “The SAWS scheme should not be confused with wider political issues over immigration and asylum. It is a huge success story that has worked well for over 40 years.

“If the government press ahead with their plans to abolish the scheme, fruit farms will lose their supply of labour and will, simply, fold. The government’s argument that the labour will be replaced by nationals from EU Accession countries is simply wrong. They are not restricted to agricultural employment so will look for jobs elsewhere.

“This is a needless threat that could devastate the industry. If fruit farms fold, orchards will be grubbed and the Garden of England will be devastated.

“The government must reject this potentially disastrous reform.”