Current Most Read

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

The Rising Crime Rate in the UK: A Crisis in the Criminal Justice System

How to prepare for concert ticket presales and sales on Ticketmaster

The Future of UK Nightlife: Is it Dying or Evolving?

Gregory Devine
Feb 5, 2024
3 min read

Person waiting outside a pub in manchester — Photo by Tak-Kei Wong on Unsplash

With nightclub chain PRYZM closing down most of its venues, is this the beginning of the end for the UK’s night scene or is this simply a new era?

Last year I genuinely believed that UK Nightlife for most UK cities was close to dying and there was certainly some truth to that. Many venues were either downsizing or closing down completely due to high rent, lack of income and lack of staff. Whilst this is still the case, I’ve noticed a trend of many new venues opening up and being successful in addition to smaller clubs expanding.

The lockdowns were brutal for nightclubs up and down the country. There was no way for these places to generate income but there was still expensive rent to pay. These clubs are in prime city centre locations and tend to be large plots too so understandably the rent isn’t cheap. Many larger venues were forced to close down and whilst some have returned many haven’t. Take one of Sheffield’s largest clubs CODE. It used to be packed out most nights but after not making money for a prolonged period they had no choice but to close. Whilst they’ve returned on the odd night for Halloween or freshers there’s been no sign of a permanent return.

I don’t believe this is due to a lack of customers. If anything I’ve noticed nights out becoming busier than previously, I believe that those going on a night out are looking for something different than the previous generation may have enjoyed. The big clubs playing cheesy pop hits just aren’t appealing to people anymore. People don’t tend to enjoy staying in one venue, they want to “crawl” between different smaller venues, each with their charms and quirks for a collective night out. I’ve noticed a lot of these smaller venues having started opening more nights of the week and many have even expanded. The smaller clubs also allow for promoters to rent the club out to put on their nights making the promotion the main event rather than the venue. It means the clubs don’t have to cater to a specific genre, they can just focus on creating a nice venue and then rent the club out to promote the theme of the night accordingly.

A busy London Pub — Photo by Gonzalo Sanchez on Unsplash

A great example of this is one of Newcastle’s most popular clubs TupTup Palace. It's by no means the biggest club in the city by size but probably is by popularity. The club opens every night apart from Mondays, every event is busy including Sundays. With each night being slightly different you’ll find some people will prefer a Wednesday to a Tuesday. This is perfect for TupTup as whilst they won’t have the same people attending each night they will have the same weekly visitors. Having that loyal customer base who will most likely attend their favourite night every week means the club is constantly getting heads through the door, selling tickets and drinks which leads to the most important thing; turning a profit.

Does this mean large clubs can’t exist anymore? Far from it, they’ve just had to evolve. There must now be a greater selling point than a “large club that plays pop music”. This is where raves come in. I don’t mean raves like in the 90s. These are organised nights where a lineup of popular DJs will each perform a set. The draw for the customer comes in a similar way to how a concert works. This is one of a few chances you will get to see your favourite artist so lots of people will want tickets to this one chance they have to see their favourite DJ in the city.

The Warehouse Project in Manchester is a great example of this. They use the huge old train shed at Depot Mayfield to create events with incredibly popular DJs. The line-ups will be different every weekend with different genres catered to. One night may be Drum and Bass with the next being Techno. Both are incredibly popular but don’t tend to be liked by the same people. When compared to how large clubs would have used an unknown DJ to play cheesy pop, these are well-renowned DJs with massive followings of fans desperate to see their sets. This gets people through the door, buying tickets and drinks which of course leads to profit.

Whilst many clubs have sadly closed their doors this, at least in my opinion, is due to them not evolving with the times. The UK night scene is still very much alive and active just not in the way it once was.

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

All Articles

16 April 2025

Paul Francis

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

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:

Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI): Encourages low-level changes such as herbal leys, no-till farming, and reducing fertiliser use.
Local Nature Recovery: Pays for habitat restoration and targeted environmental actions.
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.