Ah - to be clear, my frustration is with both major parties (and I very much doubt Reform would be any better). The Conservatives were careless and bungling in this area too, particularly in the asymmetrical regulation of imported and home grown food but also in their failure to curb the power of the supermarkets. So much policy innovation could also have happened post-Brexit to make farming more sustainable in both economic and environmental terms, and the opportunity was largely squandered. That said, there were some successes, including the SFI scheme. My particular quarrel with the present government is that it appears to have launched an all out attack on farming. It’s not just taxation (although the government’s flat refusal to consider any of the suggested to the removal of APR, even those options that have the endorsement of people like Dan Neidle, who cannot be accused of being a Tory, has been especially appalling) it is also, including but not limited to: the abrupt withdrawal of what remained of subsidies; the premature closure to applicants of environmental support/capital investment schemes (especially compared with the significant incentives offered to the solar companies that buy up farmland and cover it in limited life, non-recyclable, made in China at considerable carbon cost solar panels; and the upcoming bill to make it possible for councils to buy farmland (but not urban land) at significantly below market value. And they are also still engaging in the same practices or omissions I criticised in the Conservatives. James Rebanks, who is not at all a Tory or politically partisan, has been increasingly outspoken on just how bad this government has been for farming. What makes it worse is that Starmer gave that speech prior to the election saying that he understood the challenges faced by farming and the need to protect farming businesses because they face unique challenges, are irreplaceable in ways that most businesses are not, and also have unique non-monetary national value. That, plainly, was a cynical untruth. In criticising the current government on this issue I am not being childishly partisan, I am being rational.
To your other points. It is true that we will are very unlikely ever to grow enough food to be 100% self sustaining again. But we should preserve what food production capacity we still have. Closer links with the EU are a great idea, but they will not protect us in a real food crisis or altogether cushion us against major price shocks. You say yourself that the French are perfectly willing to kick up a stink about fishing rights even at the expense of deepening military cooperation and even at a time when the Russian invasion of Ukraine means that European will to improve military capacity and interdependence has never been greater. Do you really think, then, that aligning on food safety law and trade rules with the EU is going to offer significant help if global competition for food intensifies to critical levels? Because honestly, I don't. Furthermore, given that our geographical positioning and island status is likely to cushion us to a considerable extent from the effects of climate change, the UK is, in the long term, likely to rise in importance as a potential food growing location rather than fall in importance. So no, our economy is not primarily agrarian, but that is not a good reason to adopt a suite of policies that appears designed to run down food production and set back efforts to improve biodiversity and environmental sustainability at the same time.
And yes, it is an urban-rural question in the sense that those who only have experience of urban life, who regularly forget that food does in fact come from fields and orchards and dead animals and not just from Tesco, and who think mostly in terms normal business economics understandably do not have a strong understanding of the realities of farming. I see it all the time in debates like this: 'If a farm is worth £3m then why does it only have profits of £25-30k pa and require two people to work it full time?'. (I assume that's what you mean by your slightly gnomic remarks that 'The UK should not be a land bank for investment in the countryside. It should produce.') That is a perfectly normal question for someone whose day to day experience is that a business should only invest in properties (of whatever sort) that will provide a good return, but it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever when applied to agricultural land and farming, because (a) the value of agricultural land is grossly inflated by Tom, who made his money in finance and now wants 3 acres to walk the dog and keep a pony for his daughter Cressida, and doesn't mind paying £30k per acre for land that realistically is only good for growing pasture and cannot be expected to have an agricultural yield of more than round £100-150 pa; and (b) the price of food in this country is kept artificially low by the supermarkets and government pressure, which has been made sustainable in the past by subsidies, tax relief such as APR, and, frankly, the goodwill and bloody minded determination of farmers the country over to keep their land and their businesses afloat, in spite of the avalanche of disrespect, misunderstanding, and adverse legislation directed at them by successive governments.