Commons Bill [HL]

For the benefit of the Committee, I re-emphasise my interest as a farmer—someone who, in a manner of speaking, has relied on an income from farming for a great many years. I sympathise in many ways with the amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Livsey. At the same time, we need an idea of how we define ““non-agricultural””. I should be very interested to know how the noble Lord would do so. Who says what non-agricultural includes and what it excludes? Definitions aside, I should be interested to hear how the so-called favourable impact assessment would be carried out. Surely there would be a need to employ an agricultural expert to carry out the tests, and that would require access to funding by the commons association or the designated body which was asked to find out. Furthermore, how will agricultural sustainability be accurately assessed? Will there be another resort to the ever-present regulations? I suppose the simple test is whether the land provides grazing—that is usually the main way of looking at agriculture. Economic viability is up in the air at present because, if you divide off the single farm payment, the actual viability of the livestock is quite difficult to determine. So long as there is grazing, that is at least one element. The sentiment of the amendment—to encourage sustainable production and support agriculture—is a good one but its lack of clarity means that it will defer again to subjective interpretation.