By Ewan Pate, farming editor

AT LAST, the figure for voluntary modulation of single farm payments has been made public.

Speaking in his first rural affairs debate since becoming Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment, Richard Lochhead revealed that the rate will rise steadily to a top level of 9%.

Including the base level of 5% compulsory modulation, that means that by 2010 single farm payments will have a total of 14% “top sliced” to help pay for environmental and other rural development programmes.

Mr Lochhead told the Scottish Parliament yesterday morning that the process would be gradual.

In the current year voluntary modulation would be 5%, in 2008 it would rise to 8%, in 2009 it would be 8.5% and thereafter until the end of the current EU programme in 2012 it would be 9%.

The modulation money will be used to partly fund the Rural Development Programme (RDP).

Mr Lochhead announced that the total programme over seven years will involve expenditure of £1.59 billion, of which £211 million (13%) will be raised by voluntary modulation.

A further £227 (14%) comes from the EU agricultural fund and £47 million (3%) from “carried forward resources” from the SEERAD coffers.

However, the lion’s share at £1113 million (70%) comes from the Scottish Government.

This is an increase from the 67% indicated in earlier budgets.

Mr Lochhead said, “I am well aware that some stakeholders have asked for significantly higher rates of voluntary modulation.

“However, I have been able to address their concerns without recourse to higher modulation.

“To do that, I propose to allocate a further £10 million each year, £70 million in total, to support the programme.”

However, this only served to further infuriate MSP Rhona Brankin, leading for the Labour opposition, who insisted that yesterday’s deal was “an abject failure” and that at least £173 million extra would be needed, not £70 million.

Her real point of contention, however, was the manner of the announcement.

“I am absolutely disgusted that there has been no opportunity for a vote,” she said. “It is arrant hypocrisy for the SNP to speak about consensus here and it is an insult to the stakeholders’ group.”

Lib Dems and Conservative speakers also condemned the use of what should have been a general debate to make a ministerial announcement.

In truth, it could well be the way in which a minority government will have to work at Holyrood.

Mr Lochhead had only until June 12 to meet the EU deadline for submitting the Scottish RDP.

Much of the work had, in fact, been completed by SEERAD officials under the previous Labour and Lib Dem coalition and his room for manoeuvre was limited.

Mr Lochhead did, however, bring something new.

The SNP had pledged to make £10 million available to aid new entrants to farming and this was part of yesterday’s package.

It is, however, part of the additional £70 million of funding to the RDP.

Speaking exclusively to The Courier after the debate, Mr Lochhead said, “Details of how we allocate the new entrant fund will have to wait until after I have spoken to interested parties, including the Tenant Farming Forum.

“It may be a package of measures but I have noted the scheme in Northern Ireland, which includes loan interest relief for new entrants.”

There will also be a change in terminology.

Land Management Contracts (LMCs) have been the mechanism for delivering parts of the old RDP since 2005.

“In order to better reflect our wider goals we propose that the central delivery vehicle should be Rural Development Contracts,” said Mr Lochhead.

“I believe that will mean what it says on the tin—that it delivers rural development in Scotland.”

Dr Ingrid Clayden of SEERAD, one of the architects of the new RDP, was watching the debate closely and commented later, “Basically, the new system will operate on a tier two and tier three system as before (tier one is the single farm payment) but all measures will be encompassed in Rural Development Contracts.”

Tier two is non-competitive but the more advanced environmental measures in tier three are competitive and previously the rate of acceptance has been as low as 22% for Rural Stewardship Schemes.

Dr Clayden said, “I know many applicants for RSS and organic schemes have been disappointed.

“They have paid advisers to draw up plans and have come away with nothing.

“Tier three will still be competitive but we plan to encourage applicants to lodge a statement of intent first which project officers from SEERAD or SNH will look at.

“It should give applicants a better understanding of what they might expect.

“They will be able to at least give red and amber lights but not green ones, at this earlier stage.”

Representative bodies including NFUS, SRPBA and the Scottish Tenant Farmers’ Association broadly welcomed Mr Lochhead’s parliamentary statement.

Modulation levels at 14% are in line with realistic expectations and below those proposed for England, where 19% of single farm payments could be deducted.

The main dissenting voice came from the RSPB, whose spokesman said, “It is likely to place the Executive’s own environmental targets at a very real risk of failure.

“What’s more, it will do nothing to improve the status quo, where Scotland’s farmers and crofters receive nowhere near the amount of agri-environment funding that their UK and European counterparts do.

“Scotland’s agri-environment programme is the worst funded, in relation to the area of farmed land, of the entire EU.”