As a farmer and president of the NFU, representing 55,000 farming businesses, all I’ve ever wanted is for global Britain to strike trade deals that are fair for farmers and fair to the British public; deals that fulfil the Government’s very strong commitment that our farmers won’t be undermined.

We know how passionate the public is about this. Last year, more than a million people signed one of the biggest petitions the country has seen – demanding that British food standards are protected.

The Mail on Sunday’s Save Our Family Farms campaign has been vital in this fight and led the Government to introduce a legally binding commitment to produce a report on the impacts that trade deals will have on food and farming. There is no other sector that allows MPs to have oversight and ultimately control over free trade agreements.

But the future of rural Britain –our iconic countryside with its patchwork of stone walls, hedges, flower meadows, rolling fields of wheat and barley – is at a crossroads. Its fate – along with farming and food production – lies in political hands and the decisions made by Ministers will have far-reaching and huge consequences for us all.

Minette Batters (left), pictured with former International Trade Secretary Liz Truss (right), wants global Britain to strike trade deals that are fair for farmers and fair to the British public

Minette Batters (left), photographed with Liz Truss, former International Trade Secretary. Minette Batters wants trade deals for global Britain that are fair for British farmers and fair for the British public.

I hear often in Government that farmers don’t have a place in modern politics. They are too small to be relevant.

What such wrong-headed views don’t factor in is that farmers underpin the very fabric of the country and the environment that politicians are so committed to protecting. If farmers are removed, environmental degradation will be inevitable.

Although food security and self-sufficiency are of critical national importance, the Government’s actions indicate a level of questionable economic literacy.

I can only think Ministers are blind to the damage they’ll be presiding over or, even worse, they’re actively pursuing a policy of cold-blooded attrition of the land. I hope my greatest fear isn’t unfounded.

Farmers would be driven from their land if they fail to ensure food self-sufficiency. For it is they who run businesses, food production and who care for the environment – and you can’t have one without the other.

When I hear about setting aside 30% of land for nature, my immediate concern is with the farmers. Who will manage the land and produce our food products?

What do we do when Ministers tell businesses they have to raise costs and adhere to stricter regulations while simultaneously asking us to reduce our costs to be competitive with the most efficient farmers worldwide? These questions are met with a downward glance and remain unanswered.

Partnership working is the key to success for all independent trading countries. New Zealanders and Australians have learned over the years to spread their risk. They have small populations. They can farm on a large scale and are therefore major exporters of agricultural commodities. They have lower production costs and can offer flexible access to workers around the world.

Their governments, too, are heavily invested in the technical expertise for opening up new markets and – interestingly – food prices in both countries are higher than the UK.

These issues are not the only reason the stakes for British farmers seem extremely high.

Our Government is currently introducing new laws to protect the environment, animal welfare, as well as animal sentience.

These are areas that farmers care passionately about. All we ask is that trade deals be made with other countries. However, there is not any evidence that this is happening.

Importantly, British farmers would lose their competitiveness if they were undercut by imported food made in ways that are illegal in this country.

I’m continually asked by Ministers to think positively. This is quite insulting to the farmers that I represent. If you own a business that is at risk of going out of business because you raise standards but your Government allows imports made with lower standards, it is offensive for politicians to tell you to smile more. Our antipodean counterparts played a blinder during negotiations for the trade agreement with Britain last week. New Zealand’s PM patted Boris Johnson on the back and used a rugby analogy to give her verdict on the deal: ‘The All Blacks won!’

Six years ago, the then Australian High Commissioner, Alexander Downer, told me: ‘You screwed us over when you joined the EU. We’ve been through hell and we’re coming back to get you.’

Minette Batters of the National Farmers' Union (left) said she often hears talk in Government that farmers are no longer relevant to modern politics, too small a voice to matter

Minette Batters, National Farmers’ Union (left), said that she hears a lot in Government about farmers being irrelevant to modern politics. She believes they are too small to be relevant.

He was right. The UK has allowed an openly liberalized trade deal that the Australians had never imagined was possible.

I don’t doubt the pain that Australia had previously suffered – and I also don’t doubt the passion Australia had for ensuring its farmers got a great deal with the UK.

What farmers here – and the British public – need is the same willpower and ambition from our government.

Representatives of Australia’s High Commission in this country have been very busy here – hosting parties for Cabinet members and MPs – championing their great country. At the Conservative Party conference, I spoke with one of these Australian representatives and informed them that my members need similar action from our government. They agreed.

I also asked if Australia would soon have an animal sentience/welfare bill. The response was: ‘Never! We need to be globally competitive.’ That conversation vividly underlined to me how high the odds really are stacked against British farming.

Our Government must make vital decisions as we stand at the crossroads for change.

These are the easy choices. Do we want farmers to have a sustainable future? Do we believe we should have a thriving food production industry? Do we want to help our farmers achieve net zero by 2040 or do we want to outsource their production? Or do you want to outsource your food production, leave British farming behind and eat food from any country in the world, regardless what the standards or conditions?

To secure our farmers’ future, requires strong, global leadership. To get Britain on the right track, there are four things I believe Britain needs from its Government.

1. Follow Australia’s lead and establish full-time trade ambassadors or agricultural counsellors to identify new markets and open them up for high-quality food. To underline the trust, traceability, and standards of our food production, farmers should be invited to participate in trade delegations.

2. The Government must use the current food-sufficiency rate of 60% in its legally binding food security report before the end of the year. Our farming industry will be unviable if the food production levels fall too low.

3. Ensure we have a planned approach to accessing a workforce for our farms and food processing industry when they’re needed. We will never again have to face the same problem of killing healthy pigs due to a shortage in abattoir workers.

4. Collaborate with British farmers to become world leaders in climate smart farming. Our farmers want the world to follow their example by adopting new, sustainable farming practices.

The moment has never been more crucial for Britain to demonstrate global leadership in sustainable, high quality food production.

This is an opportunity for the Government to win a global medal at COP26. The alternative is the huge risk that in future years we will look back and realise – to paraphrase Churchill – that never have we lost so much for so little…