Monthly Archives: December 2017



Rory Stewart MP is urging small food and drink businesses in Penrith and The Border to apply for the chance to win a share of £50,000 funding in the first competition aimed at pushing the boundaries in food business innovation to kick-start the next generation of food production.

The scheme has been launched by Defra, through its Food Innovation Network (FIN), which connects food and drink producers with world-class facilities such as test-kitchens, laboratories and the expertise to help them create new and innovative products and production methods. The grant funding will be distributed in the form of ‘Innovation Vouchers’ which can then be used to support innovative new ideas and business opportunities.

Global demand for food is projected to grow 60% by 2050 – the Government is committed to making sure Britain, with its scientific know-how and flair for innovation and quality, is in a superb position to take advantage of this.

Micro, small and medium sized food and drink businesses will be able to compete for one of 10 £5,000 FIN vouchers – with matched funding from industry – by pitching their innovative projects to a ‘dragons den’ panel of industry and technical experts.

The winners will be those who demonstrate their ideas are novel, achievable and support business growth. The money will allow food producers to invest in a wide range of innovative projects, such as reducing the use of water in growing vegetables, and creating new business opportunities.

Food Minister George Eustice said: “Our thriving food and drink industry needs to be innovative in order to be resilient and globally competitive. Some of our most innovative food businesses are smaller companies and each has unique challenges, from prolonging the shelf life of their products to developing new sources of protein. This new fund is aimed at helping support small businesses with a bright idea to develop their concepts in partnership with researchers or academic institutions.”

The competition, run on behalf of Defra by the Knowledge Transfer Network (KTN), will support projects of three to six months.

Applicants will need to submit an initial two-minute video pitch and a short description setting out their innovative business opportunity.

All ideas will need to demonstrate the need for research and development, innovation in the proposed solution, path to commercial application(s), nature of market opportunity and value for money.

Rory Stewart said: “I am very proud that we have a wealth of small businesses in Penrith and The Border who have been incredibly successful at producing high quality food and drink. Many of the people behind these businesses still have some great ideas, and a lot of ambition, and this new scheme could provide a fantastic opportunity to realise some more of that potential. I urge every eligible small food and drink business in the constituency to apply.”

Further details on how to apply can be found at

Rory PR 2

Politics: A Dozen Small Things

Article first published in the Cumberland & Westmorland Herald on 1 December 2017

When I lived outside Britain, I felt that the greatest problem in Britain was injustice. Once I became a ‘parliamentary candidate’ I began to feel that the problem was that government was completely out of touch with reality on the ground, and that the solution was ‘deregulation’ and ‘devolution’ – to give more power to local communities who “knew more, cared more, and could do more than distant officials”. But when I became an MP, I found myself focused on the details of broadband and flooding.

Superfast broadband and mobile coverage could clearly transform the fortunes of small business, help health and education provision, and improve tens of thousands of lives in Cumbria. There were many members of parliament insisting that broadband was ‘the fourth utility’ and a ‘human right.’ But I had not expected it to be so hard to deliver. I learned that it was not enough to introduce a motion in parliament, or to secure forty million pounds of investment for broadband in Cumbria. I found that even if we had had fifteen billion pounds of extra funding for broadband, for example – and we did not – it would still not have been enough to deliver superfast broadband to every house. And that was before I studied the costs of way-leaves, the way that EU state-aid regulations prevented certain kinds of subsidy, the licensing of spectrum, the rights to network rail fibre, the costs of point-to-point microwave links, and latency in satellite coverage.

Again, I was able – as Flooding Minister – to make the government put more soldiers, civilians, ministers, and money into the Cumbrian floods of 2015, than into any previous flood. I secured 72 million pounds of extra flood money from the Treasury. Hundreds of flooding experts contributed to the surveys, the analysis and the design of new ‘flood prevention measures’. And because I still believed in the wisdom of communities, I pushed the Environment Agency to share more and more details of their plans, encouraged the public to challenge them line by line, and set up dozens of consultations meetings, so we could debate every scheme. I hoped that by involving communities, everyone would ultimately come to understand the technical and financial challenges, and agree on the best solutions.  But my community consultations did not seem to work in that way. However, much consulting or talking we did, many intelligent well-informed people still disagreed very strongly with each other – and felt the government was letting them down.

Meanwhile, I was still looking for ‘bigger’ projects and ideas. So I walked for two months back and forth across the constituency, staying in private homes, visiting offices, holding public meetings; and then, two years later, set off on yet another six hundred mile walk, recording three hours of conversations at a time. But no amount of walking seemed to allow me to take a big political idea – injustice, or deregulation, or devolution – and apply it neatly to a particular place or person or problem, within the constituency. I began to wonder whether such words always meant the same things in different contexts.

I had hoped to discover on the walk what ‘the British people’ wanted,’ but there did not seem to be a thing called ‘the British people’. Every household seemed to be defined by different experiences, and very different ideas. People were simultaneously happy, and depressed, flourishing and frustrated.  But many people still implied our problems could be summed up in simple words – like ‘poverty’, ‘austerity’, or ‘inequality’; that there were a simple set of villains – such as bankers –  responsible for the mess; and that we could be saved by a hero with big ideas. And I began to see how politicians played to these expectations through ‘big projects’ – from the millennium dome to Hinkley Point – and with big ideas: ‘Big Society’, ‘Renationalisation,’ ‘America First’. Some of these ideas were unworkable, few addressed the fundamental problems, and some meant nothing at all. But the demand for big projects and the big ideas seemed insatiable.

Meanwhile, the real solutions, for real problems seemed to rely on a thousand detailed and complicated initiatives, which never made it into a headline or a manifesto. While politicians produced the phrases for flooding – ‘no more cuts’, ‘this must never happen again’ – the real progress required reforms on hydrological modelling, weather reporting, water company reservoirs, dredging, soil absorption, tree-planting, bridge design, pumping, insurance, resilience measures, and the division of responsibilities between the Environment Agency, and the County Council. I began to feel that in public life – as in our own families, and jobs – there are very few big ideas and simple solutions. I felt that politics at its best is a practical activity, not an ideology – a continual exercise of compassion, and grip, and competence, trying as best as you can to do a dozen small things for each problem in turn.

Yet every democracy in the world votes for people who promise so much more.