It was disappointing to see, yet again, the government refuse to take action to protect the nation's food security.
Yesterday's (3 November) Westminster Hall Debate on the use of agricultural land for solar panels, brought by Esther McVey MP, saw a number of MPs question the amount of high-quality agricultural land being used for solar farms.
Prior to the debate, the Countryside Alliance briefed parliamentarians on its position regarding the issue.
The Countryside Alliance supports net zero carbon emissions for the UK as an environmental and economic policy objective. We are conscious, however, that achieving this aim will require the maintenance of public support, including from rural communities. Accepting that the drive to net zero involves costs as well as benefits, rural Britain must not be required to bear burdens that are impractical and disproportionate. Other important objectives, principally food security, must not be sacrificed.
A number of MPs highlighted that planning permission for solar farms is continuing to be sought on high-grade agricultural land, with Ms McVey, Jim Shannon, Graham Stuart, Helen Whately and Sarah Bool all pointing to ongoing cases in their constituencies.
Ms McVey noted that, in 2025, research showed that 59% of England's largest solar farms are located on productive farmland, with almost a third occupying the very best agricultural land. She highlighted the fact that, despite making overtures about protecting productive agricultural land, the government has done little to ensure that such protection actually happens, saying:
"Ministers repeatedly state that lower-quality land should be used, but in reality that is not the case. There is a growing gap between policy and practice."
Frustratingly, the Land Use Framework for England (March 2026), despite acknowledging the importance of food security in principle, gave little clarity as to how the government will prevent further loss of agricultural land to other uses such as large-scale energy infrastructure. Instead, the Framework states that 9% of England's farmland will need to be taken out of production for climate goals.
The fact that the government has taken no substantive action to accompany its "sympathy" toward prioritising solar installations on rooftops and brownfield sites, was something that Ms McVey highlighted, asking the Minister:
"Solar planning guidance says that planning authorities should encourage the development of solar farms on non-agricultural land, but that is clearly not strong enough, as it is not working. What does the Minister propose to do to save our vital agricultural land."
The Minister for Energy, Michael Shanks, did not provide any real answer to this question.
He pointed out that the latest figures (from September 2024) show that the land devoted to solar farms represents 0.1% of the UK's total land, stated that he could not comment on the positives or negatives of individual planning applications, spoke of the need "to back British farmers and agriculture", and reaffirmed his agreement that there should be more rooftop solar.
But on the issue of prime agricultural land being used for solar installations, his response was merely that "the planning system already steers developers to use brownfield sites wherever possible, and that the development of agricultural land can take place only where it is absolutely necessary, and even then, lower-grade land should be used first." The fact that this guidance is clearly not working, as various MPs pointed out, was not something the Minister addressed.
Government priorities, including the drive towards net zero carbon emissions, can only be sustained as long as there is food on the shelves. The interests of food security require that food production must continue to be the primary use for productive farmland. Serious concerns remain as to whether this government, despite its warm words, will take any action to ensure that this happens.