Charles Goadby, 48, began farming aged 11. He spent thousands of hours in his youth working with his family on their farm near Nuneaton, Warwickshire, after school, at weekends and during the holidays. Often unpaid – or for a small amount of pocket money – Goadby gladly did the work, helping the business prosper and building up a wealth of experience alongside his brothers. But decades on, he says, the family farm has been forced to lease land to a renewable energy company just to prop up food production.
Proposals for a solar development are making their way through the planning process, which will take up a significant portion of the business’s agricultural land. It is a decision that leaves the family conflicted. “In principle, I’m dead set against it,” Goadby says. “I think everyone in the family is too. “But we’ve gone ahead with it because it’s just cash flow that we’re desperate for. “Unfortunately, we’ll be making 10 times the amount I would from producing food, which is absolutely ridiculous that we prioritise charging smartphones over being able to feed ourselves as a nation .”
He points to produce that comes in well below the cost of production. Goadby says the family gets paid around 37p a litre for milk despite it costing above 40p to produce. He adds that the cereals barely cover production costs, while the farm makes a massive loss on pigs . “How can food become financially unviable?” Goadby says. “It’s madness. “We’re primary producers. The agri-food industry is the biggest production industry in the country.
“It drives so many jobs and produces the highest quality food. Yet we’re struggling to be financially viable.”
The Telegraph's headline puts in the farmer's mouth a claim that he is turning his farm over to solar panels to survive "Labour's tax grab", but nobody in the article says that. The body gives a different reason in his own words: cash flow, and milk, cereals and pigs that sell at or below what they cost to produce. The headline also inflates a lease on part of the land into the whole farm.
NewsCord staff selected this article for review and pointed the model at passages to examine. Every finding quotes the article.
Headline goes beyond the article
Serious
“to survive Labour’s tax grab”
Why this matters
The headline puts "to survive Labour’s tax grab" inside quotation marks as the farmer's own words and gives a tax as the reason for the solar lease.
The impression it gives
A reader believes the farmer said a Labour tax forced him into solar, and that the tax is why the land is being leased.
The context
The body never mentions any tax, inheritance tax or Labour. Goadby names a different cause: "it's just cash flow that we're desperate for", because milk pays around 37p a litre against a cost above 40p, cereals barely cover costs and pigs make a loss. No one in the article says the quoted words.
How we know
Elsewhere in the article“it’s just cash flow that we’re desperate for”
Elsewhere in the article“paid around 37p a litre for milk despite it costing above 40p to produce”
Checked against the whole articleIt never uses the words “inheritance”.
The headline says the farm is being turned over to solar panels.
The impression it gives
A reader believes the whole farm is leaving food production for solar.
The context
The body says the family will lease land for a development that takes up "a significant portion" of its agricultural land, and that the lease exists "to prop up food production", which continues with milk, cereals and pigs.
How we know
Elsewhere in the article“will take up a significant portion of the business’s agricultural land”
Elsewhere in the article“just to prop up food production”