interests for there to be a cliff-edge for business or a threat to stability”, saying the government would like “to have reached an agreement about our future partnership” by the end of the Article 50 process. And, in specific reference to agriculture, the Brexit White Paper suggests that “leaving the EU offers the UK a significant opportunity to design new, better and more efficient policies for delivering sustainable and productive farming.” So far so good. However, more than eight months after the Brexit referen- dum vote, a lack of clarity prevails. Despite the warm words con- tained in the White Paper, assurances repeatedly sought from ministers on key issues such as the principles of future farm support, access to migrant labour, or even the broad direction of agricultural policy, have not been forthcoming. Indeed signs of any political importance attached to agri- culture are not encouraging. A recent freedom of information request lodged by the farming magazine Farmers Guardian revealed that of the 234 meetings held with industry by the Department for International Trade (DIT) in the first three months following the EU referendum, not a single one involved a farming organisation, the majority taking place with companies in the defence, aerospace, automotive and banking industries. At the time of writing, the National Farmers Union (NFU) has still not met with any ministers or officials at DIT. The concern here is not of some malevolent political force working against agriculture, but rather that – in the face of such a mammoth and unprecedented process of negotiation and transi- tion – the strategic significance of a thriving agricultural industry (and its associated supply sectors) may simply be overlooked. For plant breeders, the need for clarity and reassurance on the critical issue of IP protection post-Brexit is urgent and real. The breeding industry is completely dependent on its ability to protect its intellectual property in the form of plant varieties. In the UK, Plant Variety Rights (PVR) are used almost univer- sally to protect varieties and generate income through the col- lection of seed royalties and farm-saved seed payments. For most of the major agricultural crops, royalties are the only source of income keeping plant breeders in business. BSPB’s legal advice suggests that Brexit presents a specific and potentially devastating threat to the future of intellectual property (IP) protection for UK plant breeders, resulting from the fact that nearly all crop varieties currently on the market are pro- tected by EU PVR. It has been standard practice since the introduction of EU PVR for breeders to make a single PVR application, which provides protection across the EU. It is much more efficient and less costly than making multiple applications in different Member States. However, from the exact moment that the UK leaves the EU none of these varieties will have IP protection unless the UK gov- ernment enacts legislation transferring all EU-protected varieties to a UK PVR register with the same name, scope of protection, registration date and term as the equivalent EU PVR. Again, BSPB’s legal advice indicates that this is an issue which does not require negotiation with the rest of the EU, and that the UK government can act unilaterally to ensure a smooth transition from EU to UK PVR. To date, however, BSPB has received no direct assurances that the government will address this issue in time, creating significant uncertainty and anxiety within the industry. While the UK plant breeding industry is fortunate in having a government which recognises the importance of plant breed- ing and the underpinning R&D needed to unlock advances in our genetic knowledge, such support counts for very little without the promise of a functioning system to protect and derive income from the resulting products and innovation. BSPB has warned ministers that the lack of clarity on this issue could start to affect investment decisions, and has already led to increased costs for breeding companies who have sought to mitigate potential losses by submitting new varieties for UK PVR ahead of EU PVR in order to be certain that those varieties will be protected in the UK post-Brexit. But the immediate urgency is to secure the position for varieties currently on the market with EU PVR. In a worst-case situation, all these varieties would overnight become free for mul- tiplication and sale in the UK with no protection against copying and plagiarism. Breeders would be unable to prevent anyone from using or exploiting the results of years of research and develop- ment, and would be left without any return on their investment. It seems inconceivable that the UK government will not take action on this issue, since the result is likely to be the complete withdrawal of the plant breeding industry from the UK market, including the closure of R&D facilities, business premises and job losses. More far-reaching, UK farmers, growers, processors, retail- ers and consumers would be denied access to the latest genetic advances. This would apply not only to the sale of seed but also to imports of some harvested produce, mainly an issue in the vegetable sector where many companies have a clear policy not to allow their genetics into territories where they have no IP protection whether as propagating or harvested material. In short, without an assurance on the status of EU-protected varieties in the UK post-Brexit, the situation could be irretrievable. Plant breeding is a long-term business and breeding programmes cannot easily be switched back on once they have been stopped. The greatest challenge for our industry lies in managing this uncertainty. Only the UK government can know the reason why a cast-iron guarantee cannot be given without delay on this very specific issue. Again, the underlying concern is not of any hidden political agenda, but simply the scale of the undertaking facing the UK in converting the body of existing EU legislation into domestic law, and the risk that this could lead to unintended, but nevertheless devastating, consequences for particular businesses. For its part, BSPB will continue to engage proactively with the UK government and enlist the support of other industry organisations to raise the profile of this issue and seek the ear- liest possible assurance of a seamless transfer from EU to UK Plant Variety Rights for all-EU protected varieties. More than ever, it is vital that policy-makers – and particu- larly those responsible for setting and negotiating the conditions of Brexit – understand the value and importance of supporting a vibrant, local-based plant breeding industry, not only for the sus- tainability of our food and farming industries but also for the wider economy, for our health and quality of life, and for the environment. — Dr. Penny Maplestone is chief executive of the British Society of Plant Breeders http://www.bspb.co.uk/ 12 I EUROPEAN SEED I EUROPEAN-SEED.COM