UK Government 'out of touch' with Scottish rural life after backing meat and dairy advice
The target is in line with official advice but has prompted concern among the farming community
UK ministers have been accused of losing touch with rural life after endorsing recommendations to curb meat and dairy consumption as part of the drive towards net zero.
Earlier this week, the Energy Secretary, Ed Miliband, unveiled the Government’s proposed seventh Carbon Budget for the period 2038 to 2042, setting a pathway towards an 87 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2040 compared with 1990 levels.
Mr Miliband said the target, which he described as being “backed by the science”, had the support of both the Environmental Audit Committee and the Climate Change Committee (CCC).
The UK Government argues that failing to act would leave the country's food and water security increasingly vulnerable and expose households to greater economic hardship through continued dependence on volatile fossil fuel markets amid growing global instability.
However, adherence to the Carbon Budget could place further pressure on agriculture. In its latest report, the CCC recommended reducing meat consumption by 25 per cent by 2040 and by 35 per cent by 2050, including a 40 per cent reduction in beef and lamb consumption. It also called for dairy consumption to fall by 20 per cent by 2035.
The advice sits alongside wider plans to accelerate the rollout of heat pumps, electric vehicles and renewable energy technologies, which ministers say will reduce household bills while improving living standards.
Finlay Carson, the Scottish Conservatives’ rural affairs and environment spokesman, said: “Labour’s latest proposals to cut meat and dairy consumption confirm how out of touch they are with rural Scotland and the realities of how people live their lives.
“Everyone wants to tackle climate change, but the idea that you do that by telling people what they can and cannot eat, while undermining one of Scotland’s most important industries, is wrong.
“Proposals to slash livestock numbers or reduce meat and dairy consumption are not only misguided but risk doing real and lasting harm to rural Scotland.”
A spokesman for the UK Government insisted the CCC’s recommendations were advisory and had not been adopted as policy.
Beef herds and sheep flocks in Scotland have been declining for some time.
Official figures show the total beef breeding herd has fallen by 12 per cent over the past decade. There were 6.54 million sheep in Scotland in 2025, a 2.2 per cent decrease compared with the five-year average, while the breeding flock stood at just under 2.5 million animals — a decline that has raised concerns within the sector.
Greenhouse gas statistics show agricultural emissions in Scotland have fallen by 13.6 per cent since 1990.
Despite the reduction in livestock numbers, cattle are increasingly being reintroduced to nature reserves and other areas designated for nature recovery by landowners and conservation organisations, including National Trust for Scotland, the RSPB and public bodies such as NatureScot and Forestry and Land Scotland.
Described as ecological powerhouses, native breeds including Highland cattle, Belted Galloways and Luing cattle are used for conservation grazing. The animals trample dense bracken, break up thick grass mats and create muddy microhabitats that can support a greater diversity of plants, insects and birds.
Earlier this year, a major study spanning the length of the UK — from Dartmoor to Aberdeenshire — suggested that removing sheep from upland areas altogether could reduce the most stable and climate-resilient form of soil carbon.
The research, led by the University of Manchester and published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that while ungrazed land often stores more visible carbon in vegetation and plant litter, it can lose a more stable and significant form of carbon stored underground.
Mr Carson said farmers were already taking practical steps to reduce emissions through improved breeding, feed efficiency and farm management without reducing production.
“What Labour is proposing ignores that entirely,” he said.
“Instead of working with the sector, they are effectively signalling a 25 per cent cut in meat consumption and a reduction in dairy consumption — changes that would hit demand for Scottish produce and place further pressure on the family farms that underpin our rural economy.
“What follows from that is fewer livestock, lower domestic production and greater reliance on imports. That is not climate leadership; it is carbon leakage, exporting emissions overseas while weakening our own food security.”
Mr Carson said farmers and rural communities “must be part of the solution, not treated as the problem”.
“Too often, we see governments ploughing ahead regardless and failing to listen to the people and industries their policies will affect,” he added.
Earlier this year, the former rural affairs secretary, Mairi Gougeon, told a conference hosted by Quality Meat Scotland: “Let me be crystal clear — there is no policy to reduce livestock numbers, there will be no policy to reduce livestock numbers.
“Our iconic livestock sector is central to the very identity of Scottish agriculture. That is why we continue to invest strategically in areas such as animal health to protect your herds and flocks.”
A UK Government spokesman said: “It is categorically untrue that this is government policy.
“We value the Climate Change Committee’s independent advice, but that does not mean we have to replicate its pathway.
“We are clear that we will meet our targets without telling people how to live and behave.”
The Government’s commitment to the seventh Carbon Budget target for the period 2038 to 2042 comes amid growing political divisions over climate policy, with Reform UK and the Conservatives pledging to abandon net zero measures and expand support for domestic oil and gas production.
Energy Secretary Mr Miliband said the drive for clean homegrown power was the “only way” to protect family and business finances as he accused opponents of sticking their heads in the sand about climate breakdown and its impact on future generations.
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.