Lochhead tells of facing ‘impossible situation’

RICHARD LOCHHEAD has admitted he had faced an “impossible situation” regarding transfer of funds from Pillar One (farm support) to Pillar Two (rural development) in Scotland’s CAP budget, writes Ewan Pate.

In a Holyrood debate on CAP implementation the Rural Affairs Minister said: “I was reluctant even to consider this.

“Pillar One payments are so important I’d have preferred to leave them untouched, but our Pillar Two budget is so poor that, without a transfer, we would have been unable to meet our rural development commitments,” he told fellow MSPs.

Some of these were regulatory commitments, and he also had to protect Less Favoured Area payments.

He had decided limiting the transfer to 9.5% struck the right balance between damaging Pillar One while allowing a reasonable Pillar Two programme.

Mr Lochhead stressed the need to see an end to ‘ slipper farming’, and repeated his pride that the new CAP included the socalled Scottish clause which would mean that only active farmers were rewarded.

“It’s fair to say we were disappointed with the Commission’s first draft of the implementing rules.

“They didn’t accommodate the Scottish clause in the way we’d envisaged. If this rendered the Scottish clause toothless, then payments to slipper farmers might continue, and everyone else’s payments would be diluted as well,” he said.

“But I am pleased to say the Government believes such fears are unfounded. We have proposals which will make the Scottish clause effective, and these will be discussed with our CAP stakeholder group next week,” he said.

While refuting many of the arguments made by the beef farming lobby, he said he could see why some were attracted by the so-called Irish Tunnel model, which would maintain historically-based elements from the Single Farm Payment and ensure higher payments for longer.

Mr Lochhead said: “There’s a dilemma here. Using the tunnel, farms would get payments in 2019 or 2020, based on their activity in 2000, and it would protect payments to farmers who used to be very active, but now aren’t.

“In one example, a farmer said his payments could be halved. But when I investigated, his activity level had also halved.

“The tunnel approach could also prolong the disadvantage suffered by new entrants. A new entrant who started in, say, 2000, aged 35, might not get a fully level playing field until 2025 — by which time he’d be 60!”

Mr Lochhead also answered critics who had suggested the Scottish Government’s implementation proposals had more to do with the convenience of the computer system than the good of the farming industry

“I suspect no one seriously believes that, especially the stakeholders who have spent the last three years working with us.

“But there is a serious point: the worst thing we could do would be to ignore issues of deliverability.

“We saw, in England, what happens when insufficient attention is paid to delivery,” he said.