It’s absurd that Britain prioritises foreign food over what we can (and do) grow on our own soil. Britain has some of the best farmland in Europe. We produce excellent wheat, potatoes, dairy, beef, lamb, apples, berries, brassicas and more. Our climate and soil are perfectly suited to a huge range of high-quality produce. Yet year after year, supermarket shelves and government trade policy tilt toward imports — often at the direct expense of British farmers. Cheap Spanish tomatoes, Dutch peppers, Polish chicken, New Zealand lamb and out-of-season fruit flown halfway around the world routinely undercut local growers. Why? Lower production costs abroad, weaker environmental and animal-welfare standards in some cases, and a retail system that chases the lowest unit price above everything else. The result: British producers face razor-thin margins, rising energy and labour costs, and the constant threat of being replaced by imports that would never meet the same rules if grown here. This is not free trade in any meaningful sense. It’s a one-way preference for distance over quality, seasonality and national resilience. Food security is treated as an afterthought until a supply shock hits. Carbon footprints from long-haul transport are waved away while British growers are lectured about sustainability. And rural communities that keep the countryside working are told to compete with subsidized or lower-standard overseas production while absorbing every new regulation. Supporting what is grown here does not mean autarky or higher prices for everything. It means fair competition: applying the same standards to imports that we demand of our own farmers, prioritising seasonal British produce in public procurement and retail, and recognising that a country that cannot feed itself is strategically weak. Preferring the imported option simply because it is slightly cheaper on the day is short-sighted policy dressed up as consumer choice.