Post-Brexit agricultural subsidies remain at £2.4 billion, but there is a shift away from the land base, which has always benefited the largest property owners, to payments for conservation and biodiversity activities.
This is far from perfect, but ultimately the system of payments for conservation is a smarter policy than what has come before.
Other industries are not eligible to receive large amounts of taxpayer funds simply for existing. The CAP reduced the productivity of British agriculture, as subsidies dampened incentives to plant the most efficient crops and invest in new technologies. This ultimately made the industry financially unsustainable.
Food prices in Australia and New Zealand are low not only because of their large size, but also because domestic subsidies were abolished in the 1980s. Although farmers protested bitterly about the loss of taxpayer funds, they ultimately shifted to producing more efficient crops, invested in the sector, and became far more efficient in competing on the world stage. Ta.
Efficiency in production means that something like sheep meat imported from New Zealand has a lower carbon footprint, even when transport emissions are taken into account.
In this post-Brexit era, British farmers have a duty to explore global opportunities, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region, where a growing middle class is undoubtedly hungry for British-made products. Cutting yourself off from the rest of the world and reducing your efficiency is not the solution.
In a recent BBC Radio documentary, Welsh farmers suggested they would have to turn down a £46,000 payment for environmental purposes because the requirements were too stringent.
Instead, farmers said they would be forced to expand production by using more sheep. This is a shocking sign that subsidies are doing little to create a safer, more resilient and sustainable UK food industry.
The government can do more to take advantage of Brexit, but a closed-door approach to rejecting trade deals will hurt British consumers and reduce food security, and is far from the right response.
Matthew Lesch is director of public policy and communications at the Institute of Economic Affairs.
