top of page

Current Most Read

The Naked Truth About Britain’s Most Exposed Toilet
VoltAero HPU 210: The Future of Hybrid Flight Takes Off
Have We Become Too Reliant on AI?

The End of the Safety Net: Why Slashing Farm Subsidies Could Threaten the UK’s Food Future

  • Writer: Paul Francis
    Paul Francis
  • Apr 16
  • 4 min read

Not only do UK farmers now face the looming threat of inheritance tax reforms that could force centuries-old family farms to be sold off - but they’re also contending with a policy shift that dismantles the very foundation of their economic stability: the withdrawal of direct farm subsidies.


A black-and-white cow grazes on a lush, green field with a dense forest in the background. The scene is peaceful and natural.

In a time of global instability - wars in Europe and the Middle East, disrupted trade routes, volatile commodity markets - the UK government is removing financial safeguards that have underpinned British agriculture for decades. And it’s doing so faster than many in the industry can adapt.


The Basic Payment Scheme (BPS), a direct subsidy paid to farmers under the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), is in its final years. By 2027, it will be completely gone. In its place: a complex, tiered system of environmental schemes under the umbrella of the Environmental Land Management Schemes (ELMS). Worthy in theory, but in practice? A mess of bureaucracy, delays, and shortfalls.


And the timing couldn’t be worse.


A Lifeline Cut-Off Before the Bridge Was Built

The BPS wasn’t perfect, but it provided one essential function - it kept farms afloat. Payments were calculated based on the amount of land farmed, offering predictability and a cashflow buffer that allowed British farms to invest in new equipment, manage seasonal fluctuations, and ride out the weather, both literal and economic.


Now, payments have been rapidly reduced. By 2024, many farmers had already lost 35%–50% of their BPS income. In 2025, a new cap of £7,200 per farm will apply. That’s a fraction of the £20,000 to £50,000 mid-size farms previously received.


The replacement - ELMS - promises payments for "public goods": improving soil health, reducing carbon emissions, boosting biodiversity. Laudable aims. But ask most farmers, and they’ll tell you: they don’t object to sustainability. What they object to is the speed and scale of the transition, and the fact that the new payments often don’t come close to replacing what’s being lost.


Environmental Schemes: Aspirations Without Infrastructure

At the core of ELMS are three tiers:

  1. Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI): Encourages low-level changes such as herbal leys, no-till farming, and reducing fertiliser use.

  2. Local Nature Recovery: Pays for habitat restoration and targeted environmental actions.

  3. Landscape Recovery: Funds large-scale, long-term ecosystem restoration, often in collaboration with multiple landowners.


But uptake has been patchy at best. As of late 2024, fewer than half of eligible farms had enrolled in any ELMS scheme. Why?

  • The schemes are confusing. Farmers must navigate different options, overlapping rules, and constant revisions.

  • The application process is time-consuming and opaque.

  • Payments under SFI are often insufficient, especially for mixed or livestock farms in upland areas where land-use change is more difficult.

  • Crucially, many tenanted farmers - nearly a third of all farms in England - face legal and logistical barriers to taking part.


DEFRA has promised streamlining. But meanwhile, farmers are left in limbo - without clear income streams, but still expected to feed the nation.


The Cost of Poor Policy Timing

Agricultural experts, rural economists, and even major retailers have raised alarm bells. In a scathing 2023 report, the National Audit Office warned that DEFRA had failed to communicate the changes effectively, leaving many in the dark about what the new schemes offer.


The NFU (National Farmers’ Union) has repeatedly called on the government to pause BPS cuts until ELMS is fully functioning, but those calls have largely been ignored. In late 2024, a coalition of MPs from all parties demanded a review, warning that this abrupt withdrawal of support could lead to an exodus from the industry.


And that’s not just a theoretical risk. A nationwide NFU survey found that 11% of farmers were considering leaving farming altogether due to the combined impact of reduced subsidies, labour shortages, and rising costs.


Food Security in an Uncertain World

This isn’t just a farming problem - it’s a national one.


The UK is already heavily reliant on imports for key food items. And with international trade routes threatened by conflict in Ukraine, instability in the Middle East, and shipping disruptions in the Red Sea, supply chains are becoming more fragile by the month.


Should we really be cutting back our domestic food production capacity now?


Government ambitions to rewild 10% of farmland, promote biodiversity, and shift toward carbon sequestration may look good on a whiteboard in Whitehall. But on the ground, it’s leading to reduced livestock numbers, lower domestic output, and a growing dependence on foreign markets that may not be as reliable as once assumed.


A Dangerous Gamble

To many farmers, this feels like an ideological experiment being conducted in real-time -with their livelihoods and our food supply on the line. And as supermarket CEOs and farming groups increasingly speak out, it’s clear this isn’t just grumbling from the shires. It’s a cry of alarm from the foundation of the UK’s food system.


Environmental ambition is important. Climate change is real. But so is hunger.

We can pursue sustainability - but not by pulling the rug out from under those who feed us. The government’s subsidy reform may have noble aims, but its execution is flawed, its timeline reckless, and its consequences potentially devastating.


If we want a resilient, secure food future, we must support the people who make it possible - not push them to the brink.

The Naked Truth About Britain’s Most Exposed Toilet

The Naked Truth About Britain’s Most Exposed Toilet

18 June 2025

Paul Francis

Want your article or story on our site? Contact us here

In a sleepy corner of Shropshire, a perfectly ordinary-looking terraced house has become an internet sensation. Why? Because it hides a feature so bizarre, so completely without shame, that it has left property watchers everywhere rubbing their eyes in disbelief.

illustration of Toilet at the top of a set of stairs with pink toilet, rainbow walls, wooden floor, and abstract art. Bright, playful vibe with framed pictures.
Illustration of the Shropshire Landing Toilet

At first glance, the house on Birch Road in Ellesmere looks like your typical modest two-bed. Smart little brickwork. Modest garden. Standard price tag of £124,000. But click through the Rightmove listing, and there it is, staring you in the face from the top of the stairs.

A fully exposed toilet.


No walls. No door. No screen. Just a loo. Positioned proudly on the landing like a misunderstood modern art installation. As if the architect simply gave up halfway through a renovation and thought, “That’ll do.”


A New Low for “Open Plan”?

The property listing describes the house as “characterful” and “quirky” which, let’s be honest, is estate agent-speak for “deeply unwise but we’re trying our best here.” The toilet in question sits directly outside one of the bedrooms, visible from the landing, the stairs and likely from the kitchen if the door’s open.


It raises more than hygiene concerns. It raises the question of whether we’ve collectively lost the plot when it comes to property expectations in Britain.

Red brick house with white doors and windows, two satellite dishes, and visible street number 22. Overcast sky in the background.
Check out all the photos on the Sun Article

Are We Laughing or Crying?

On social media, the jokes came quickly. “Open plan’s gone too far,” one Reddit user quipped. “I genuinely have nightmares like this,” said another. But behind the humour is a growing frustration with a housing market that has become surreal. In a country where the average house price is creeping past affordability for most young people, this six-figure absurdity feels like a bad punchline.


A toilet without walls might seem like a once-in-a-lifetime oddity, but it’s part of a wider pattern. We are being asked to lower our standards more and more. Walk-in wardrobes are replaced by just wardrobes. Gardens become courtyards. Kitchens shrink. And now bathrooms? Apparently optional.


The Estate Agent Gloss

What makes this all the more galling is that the estate agent has tried to pass the whole thing off with cheerful language. The photos don’t shy away from it. The loo is shown proudly, as if it’s some kind of premium feature. No apology. No explanation. Just the British stiff upper lip in bathroom form.


And someone, somewhere, is likely to buy it.

Because in today’s property market, your choices are shrinking. If you want affordability, you might have to compromise on little things. Like privacy. Or plumbing logic.


The Big Picture

This toilet, ludicrous as it is, tells a serious story. One about how buyers are being forced to accept things that were once laughable. It also says a lot about the culture of estate agents and how the focus has shifted from function and livability to marketing gymnastics.


It’s not just about a weird toilet. It’s about what we’ve come to expect from homes and the lengths sellers and agents will go to spin those expectations into a sale.


If you’re in the market for a bathroom that’s also a hallway, you might have just found your dream home. For everyone else, it’s a stark reminder of just how unrecognisable the property ladder has become.


And no, we still don’t recommend installing a toilet next to your staircase. No matter how “quirky” it sounds.

bottom of page