Farming in the Uplands - ARCHIVE: Defra

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 37
17 November 2010 James Paice MP, Jeremy Eppel and Dan Osgood
Mr Paice: Yes, we do. My colleague Richard Benyon
leads on the wider rural issues in the Department, but
we work obviously very closely together, and one of
the reasons, as I’m sure the Secretary of State has
already explained to you, why we decided we didn’t
need the Commission for Rural Communities any
more is because there is a great wealth of knowledge
within the ministerial team, for a start, but also within
the Department and on the Government benches in the
House of Commons—indeed, much of it in this room
this afternoon. We feel that the understanding of the
problems of rural areas is there already. Yes, we’re
determined to take forward the rural agenda and I
know that Richard Benyon is in close conversation
with other Departments.
Q167 Chair: On the actual proposal that the
Commission for Rural Communities gave in oral
evidence to the Committee, they would be quite keen
to have a Cabinet-level post coordinating rural
communities that they thought would be best placed
in the Cabinet Office. Do you think that would be a
useful addition or identification in Government?
Mr Paice: Obviously the structure of Government is
not for me to comment on; it’s a matter for the Prime
Minister. As I said, we believe that we have the
competence within the Department to do that.
Q168 Chair: As regards absorbing the staff of the
Commission for Rural Communities into the
Department, how is that being undertaken and do you
believe that it might dilute the work that they’ve been
doing on rural communities, which has been so
welcome?
Mr Paice: I certainly don’t believe that it will, to use
your word, dilute the work that has already taken
place. I can give you the precise situation as far as the
absorption of the staff, etc. We announced, as you
know, the intention on 29 June. Part of the reasoning
behind it is the fact there is already a Rural
Communities Policy Unit within Defra, as well as the
CRC. That Rural Communities Policy Unit will be
expanded and shared with staff from the CRC. We’re
not able to absorb all the staff from the CRC; we never
expected that to be the case. The new Unit will have
a total of 33 members of staff, as well as another three
members who are operating the RDPE National
Network, who will transfer from the CRC. We have
about 17, in fact a bit more because of some vacancies
that are already there, so 17-plus posts vacant that will
be open to members of the CRC, and they will be
interviewed in the normal, conventional way. That’s
the latest situation, as far as that process is concerned.
Q169 Neil Parish: Good afternoon, Minister. The
CRC recommended the development of a national
integrated strategy for the uplands. In February, do
you intend to produce a rural strategy, an uplands
strategy, a hill farming strategy or all three?
Mr Paice: Uplands.
Q170 Neil Parish: Uplands, okay. The Defra
memorandum stated the issues facing hill farmers
were common to all grazing livestock enterprises. Do
you think then that hill farmers are deserving of
extra support?
Mr Paice: Yes, I do, and I made that clear in
Opposition and remain of the view. Hill farming is
particularly challenging. Obviously the climatic
conditions can be pretty severe, with some very high
levels of rainfall, and that impacts on the direct
economics, because you tend to be using breeds of
sheep and cattle that are hardier but slower growing
and perhaps less suitable for their meat, hence the
origin of the uplands being a source of breeding stock
for the lowlands. Of course, they’re often far more
remote areas than other grazing livestock sectors, so
there are a series of challenges there that make it a
particularly unique thing. Then there’s also the issue
of actual farm structures. There are still a lot of
basically very small single-person units in the
uplands, which again provides challenges. One other
factor I would add is that not all uplands are the same.
The uplands in the north of England are very different,
for example, from those in your part of the world. I
was on Dartmoor last week.
Q171 Neil Parish: Being blunt with you, where do
you see that money coming from?
Mr Paice: It’s going to have to come out of existing
resources, if we find any more. The precursor to that
is to find the channel by which you can get the
resources into the uplands. My original proposition
was that we would try to put more money into the
issue that I’m sure you’ll want to talk about—the
Uplands Entry Level Stewardship scheme. In fact,
because that stewardship scheme is required by
European regulations to be based on the concept of
income forgone, it actually makes it very difficult to
put any more money in, because it would be doing
more than income forgone. Obviously post-2013 CAP
reform, the picture may change but, in the short term,
we’re stuck with that. Assuming that we can find the
right vehicle, it will have to come out of the Rural
Development Programme money and, yes, that means
something else will be cut. Ask me what; I’m afraid I
can’t tell you at this stage, but I do believe that it is
deserving of more support, if we can find it.
Neil Parish: There is a special case.
Mr Paice: I believe there’s a special case, if we can
find a fair mechanism to do it, which doesn’t
contravene either UK or, more likely, European
regulations.
EMBARGOED ADVANCE COPY:
Not to be published in full, or part, in any form before
00.01am GMT Wednesday 16 February 2011
Q172 Chair: Which aspects does income forgone
include? I understand in other European countries you
can have opportunities granted within the income
forgone.
Mr Paice: Opportunities?
Chair: Yes, opportunity costs.
Mr Paice: Opportunity costs, yes. Certainly extra
costs involved can be incorporated. The methodology
of calculating income forgone is quite challenging.
Maybe Dan can add a little bit to this in a second,
with your consent, but the fundamental point is that,
because the economics of upland farming are pretty
thin anyway, the income forgone tends to be very thin.
Indeed, some calculations have actually shown the
reverse because, if the farmer, as some do, is making