Detailed proposals for Scotland’s new £1.3 billion Rural Development Programme could drive too much direct support away from Scottish farmers.
Meeting the new seven-year vision for 2015, as laid out by Rural Affairs Secretary Richard Lochhead, with scepticism NFU Scotland leader Nigel Miller said too much funding stands to be transferred towards rural development measures and to support “all that the SDRP hopes to achieve”.
Paving the way for the multi-million-pound plans which he wants to see protect ‘vital’ rural development support for farmers and increase the level of funding for agri-environmental schemes between 2015 to 2020, Mr Lochhead said the “ambitious programme” would deliver “sustainable economic growth, environmental sustainability and vibrant rural communities”.
Declaring the proposals formally open for consultation, Mr Lochhead said despite the “bitter blow” dealt by the UK Government to Scotland in terms of budget settlement, leaving it with the lowest rural development allocation per hectare in the European Union, he remained “determined” that there will still be opportunities to support Scotland’s rural communities and economy, and further utilise the country’s natural environment and heritage.
“Thriving agricultural businesses are at the heart of my vision and with that in mind I am committed to continuing vital funding at current levels for our Less Favoured Areas Support Scheme (LFASS),” said Mr Lochhead.
“This provides support for 85% of Scotland’s agricultural land and provides crucial support for farming and crofting businesses in our most fragile and remote areas.
“I am also committed to addressing other areas of vital importance to our farmers, crofters and the Scottish economy, including supporting Scotland’s livestock sector, new entrants, crofters and small farms; and the need to modernise and improve working practices,” he said.
Pointing to the wider role of the SRDP, he added: “Of course the SRDP does more than support farming.
“We must continue developing and sustaining vibrant rural communities which is why funding for Leader will also be maintained.
“We must also continue to protect and improve our natural environment, and Scotland has ambitious targets for adapting to and mitigating the impact of climate change, along with biodiversity targets.
“I am minded to increase funding for the new environmental schemes which will be more effectively targeted to ensure we deliver the right actions, in the right place at the right time.
“This will be complemented by a new fund to facilitate co-operative action at a landscape or ecosystem scale.”
But reacting to the proposals, Mr Miller said first and foremost NFUS has “reservations” about the amount of money that will be driven away from direct support: “Given tighter budgets all round we want as much funding as possible to remain to directly support Scottish farmers and drive our ambitions in producing food and drink while still delivering on the environment and rural economy.
“Regardless of the scale of the Pillar 1 to Pillar 2 transfer agreed, money will be tight, so measures and options in the new SRDP have to be more targeted and prioritised than last time round,” added Mr Miller.
“The mechanics of delivery have to function so much better than in the recent past so that this new programme is accessible and manageable.”
Welcoming the continued support to maintain LFASS funding, Mr Miller said the scheme will give producers in vulnerable areas a “reliable anchor of support” at a time when the shape of the new CAP remains uncertain.
But he stressed spending priorities look crucial: “If we are to see an increase in agri-environment spend at a time when agricultural support is being heavily cut, it must be designed to deliver multiple objectives.
“Environmental wins can be secured through management programmes which also support real-farm activity.”