Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Jitters over Single Application Form system

Jitters over Single Application Form system

There can be no doubt Scottish farming has ended the week with a good dose of the jitters.

The key to CAP support payments is the Single Application Form (SAF), and without its succesful completion there will be no Basic Payment Scheme money, and real hardship for many.

The SAF window opened online on Monday and although a handful of pioneers have completed the process, others seem to be having problems. Hence the nervousness.

Yesterday a source close to the process claimed in an email sent to a number of newspapers that the system was inherently flawed and not fit for purpose.

The source spoke of £500,000 per month being paid by Scottish Government to computer specialists CGI, with the last payment of eight made only yesterday morning, leaving the relevant department without enough funds to buy pens and paper.

There was a further accusation that the new Rural Payments and Services website was not fit for purpose, incomplete, and had been rushed through to meet the March 15 deadline with the sole aim of avoiding massive EU fines.

However, a Scottish Government spokeswoman responded: “These claims are nonsense.

“The contract for developing Rural Payments and Services was awarded to CGI in March 2013 after a competitive tendering process, in line with established procurement processes, and the Scottish Government has a completely separate budget for this project.

“There is no requirement for Rural Payments and Services to be hosted on a .gov domain, and the site has been thoroughly checked against government IT standards, by experts independent of the programme, prior to its public launch in January.

“The project also remains subject to appropriate scrutiny and oversight by auditors and the Scottish Parliament.

“We know that some customers have been experiencing issues with the Rural Payments and Services system during the first week of the Single Application Form window. We have a team that is constantly monitoring the system, and we are working flat-out to sort any issues that arise.”

Brian Pack, author of the Pack Inquiry into CAP reform and of the Doing Better report into red-tape reduction, last night called for calm.

“We are in a really difficult period at the moment because everything is new and different. Every wee glitch gets blown out of proportion,” he said.

“No new computer system has ever been installed without some problems but, remember, this one has been designed to help farmers.

“This is a really ambitious programme and it will have the capability to deliver many of the recommendations made in my red tape report, and will in time make life easier.”

Scotland is not alone in facing problems.

The Rural Payments Agency in England made the dramatic decision this week to issue paper SAF forms to every farmer. It has effectively abandoned for the moment a system which cost £158 million to create.

Most industry commentators in Scotland believe following suit would be a disaster. The Scottish Government has spent £138m on CAP implementation. If it proves to have been wasted, there is little doubt that government would seek to redeem the situation with farmers ultimately paying the price.

* Experience on the ground seems mixed.

Ian Hope at CKD Galbraith’s Perth office said: “I have not competed a full SAF yet but I have been filling in field data sheets and it seems to be working OK.

“I would rather be working online than on paper. If we have to go back to paper, as they have in England, it will just increase the scope for errors because there would be no automatic checks.

“We have spent the last two months re-registering businesses, and I would hate to think of that effort being wasted.

“Now that we are online we have to keep the momentum going.”

Meanwhile, Mark Mitchell at Bell Ingram in Perth took a different view.

“I have only completed one SAF but found it a bit of a nightmare. I don’t think the system has been properly thought through, and it is often counter-intuitive.

“The inability to print out data sheets to keep a record is a real disadvantage.

“I am disappointed, because the Scottish Government made such a good job of implementing the last CAP.”