AMIDST ALL the politics surrounding Brexit there is a real need for a sensible debate over the core issues.

This is not about the case for or against another referendum. There are political realities around that, not least the fact that Scotland and Northern Ireland both voted to remain, or indeed the narrow gap between the leave and remain vote. Those arguments are not going to change things, and the name of the game now is to secure the best deal possible in Brussels and at Westminster.

Key issues need to be raised as part of a grown up debate about the way ahead. One is where the government in London stands on food security. Many people view delivering that as a prime responsibility of government. But in an era of plenty, where we import 40% of our food from people keen to do business with the UK, that issue of security has been largely forgotten. However we live in an uncertain world, and it would not take a lot to tip us from plenty to shortage.

This is why the government must not be allowed to write off farming as an industry whose main end product – food rather than environmental good – is no longer a key national interest. This has traditionally been a view adopted in rich countries. But a report just out confirms that global food security is becoming a bigger problem. In 2017, 124 million people in 51 countries were affected by food insecurity. This was up by 11 million compared to 2016. Their challenges are about increasing domestic food production, via efficiency, or generating more economic activity to allow them to import more food.

For the post-Brexit UK the challenge is simpler. It is whether the government believes its enthusiasm for tariff free imports from countries with which it wants trade deals is the right policy to pursue. Removing the protection farming enjoys within the EU looks an easy option for urban-focussed politicians at Westminster. However the government cannot be allowed to escape fundamental questions about this policy reducing food security.

Its answer may be that this can go hand-in-hand with a reliance on imported food. Oscar Wilde described a Philistine as someone who knew the price of everything and the value of nothing. There is a value in having a secure food supply, and it is about a lot more than price. Acknowledging that has to be part of the big debate on the future shape of the UK after Brexit.

On the theme of food, the UK set a European and indeed probably a global first with the Grocery Code Adjudicator to bring more fairness to the food supply chain. This was a welcome development, although there is some disappointment in agriculture that the role and scope of the adjudicator has not developed since.

The EU is now set to take this further. This will bring new pressure for the government to match what Brussels does, by giving legislation and the adjudicator more teeth. The EU plan is part of its action against so-called unfair trade practices (UTPs) and has long been something the farm commissioner, Phil Hogan, has wanted to deliver. He believes legislation is needed, on the basis that largely voluntary arrangements in individual member states have delivered, at best, patchy results.

What the Commission has published is effectively a draft of a Prohibition of Unfair Practices bill. It has done so despite opposition from the retail lobby and concerns in some member states that this might stifle price competition. While the UK will not be part of the decision, it was one of the member states opposed to this legislation.

In broad terms new rules will outlaw some often criticised practices around retailers forcing suppliers to pay 'golden hello' money, known as marketing contributions, to buy business. Retails will also be forced to meet a 30-day limit to pay bills and will not be allowed to return or charge suppliers for unsold produce. They will also no longer be allowed to cancel a supply contract for perishable products at short notice.

These plans will face challenges as the process from draft to legislation unfolds. But the signs, as we prepare for Brexit, are that we are likely to look with some envy towards farmers and food processors in the EU-27. They seem set to end up with greater protection against the awesome power of the major retailers, who are increasingly pan-European businesses.