Memorandum submitted
by the UK Objective 5b Partnership (H4)
SUMMARY
This paper has been drawn together by local
authorities in Objective 5b areas across England, Scotland and
Wales. It has been prepared by local authorities in their capacity
as strategic policy makers within their affected area and not
as consumers of rural regeneration assistance. Within the UK's
Objective 5b areas there is a clear evidence that the rural economy
is undergoing severe change and that further reform of the CAP
and the Structural Funds, as well as reviews of UK policy and
programmes for rural areas, will compound these changes. A summary
of these concerns was contained in the previous evidence to the
Committee on Agenda 2000.
This submission is made at a critical time for
the future development of rural areas. The changes that are proposed
by the EC in their EAGGF Regulation provide a major opportunity
to develop a new partnership based agenda for rural development.
The individual elements in the draft Regulations are not, in themselves,
new. But they do represent a departure in that nine elements of
rural development have been brought together in one Regulation
rather than being spread across a number of different Regulations
with varying means of delivery.
This bringing together provides an ideal opportunity,
if taken up, to develop a new partnership approach to rural development
that integrates agriculture, currently seen as an industry apart,
back into its rightful place within the wider rural economy and
builds upon the principles of partnership and programming that
have been evident in the current UK Objective 5b programmes. Given
the new approach that is being proposed by the EC it also provides
an opportunity to re-focus attention in rural policy away from
an output based approach towards one that looks at the outcome
of the policy upon the wider rural enconomy. This should provide
the opportunity for local partners to become involved in the design
and delivery of rural development measures in a way that was not
previously possible. The menu approach will also ensure that local
partnerships will have greater flexibility in how they coordinate
investment in the rural economy, community and environment. This
will be in contrast to the existing CAP measures that are largely
revenue based and have discredited the importance of the CAP to
the rural economy.
STRUCTURE OF
MEMORANDUM
This paper has been divided into 2 parts. The
first parts deals with a number of key principles that the Objective
5b Partnership want to see established or developed on the back
of the EAGGF Regulations. The second part is prepared as a grid
that details specific issues or concern in the wording and content
of the EAGGF Regulation that need to be addressed by clarification
and re-wording. Where the Partnership have specific suggestions
on these issues a new form of wording is provided.
PART I: KEY
THEMES WITHIN
THE EAGGF REGULATIONS
1. A new opportunity for integrated rural development
The EAGGF Regulations provide an important contribution
to the development of rural policy within the EU. In the past
there has been a clear divide between support for the farm and
agricultural sector and support for wider rural development. Bringing
together activites that have previously been funded from 5a, 5b
and accompanying measures into one Regulation, provides a new
framework for integrated rural development.
The Objective 5b Partnership welcome this opportunity
for local communities to become more involved in the design and
delivery of local programmes. This will increase the sense of
ownership in the process and assist in developing effective and
efficient programmes to tackle specific local needs. To achieve
this requires that the Government take the opportunity to decentralise
responsibilities to local partnerships.
The UK 5b Partnership also welcomes the new
EAGGF draft regulation as a major new opportunity for developing
an integrated framework for rural development. The new Regulation
provides a welcome shift in focus for rural economies away from
high dependency on farm activities towards rural development that
recognises the changes that have occurred in the rural economy
over the last 20 years.
The UK 5b Partnership believes that the UK Government
should take full advantage of this innovative opportunity, and
that more needs to be done to develop a strategic framework for
rural development that goes beyond production support at a local
level. To achieve this will require changes to the operation of
rural policy within the UK. Such a change could be facilitated
by the constitutional changes in Scotland and Wales and the establishment
of Regional Development Agencies in England. These changes, combined
with the EC Rural Development Regulation, provide an opportunity
to decentralise the development and initiation of Rural Development
policy. This opportunity should be taken.
2. The need to integrate EAGGF activity with the
Structural Funds
The Objective 5b Partnership is, however, concerned
that EAGGF activity has not been defined within the General Regulation
as a "Structural Fund" (Article 2.1 of the 18 March
General Regulation). The objective of the EAGGF Rural Development
Measures as expressed by the preamble to the Regulation is to
achieve "a rural development policy [aimed at] restoring
and enhancing the competitiveness of rural areas". Therefore,
it is little different to the objectives of ERDF and ESF activity.
However, because the EAGGF Guarantee Fund is not defined as a
Structural Fund it is not subject to the same requirements of
the General Regulation on programming, partnership and integration
of activity with other funds. As a result the EAGGF Regulation
repeats much of the detail that appears in the General Regulation.
One of the objectives of the EC reform of Regional
policy is to bring about simplification. By not defining EAGGF
Guarantee Fund's Rural Development activity as a structural fund
the EC have made it necessary for those rural areas defined as
Objective 2 to have an ERDF/ESF plan alongside an EAGGF Rural
Development plan. This will cause confusion and will continue
to divide, rather than integrate, agriculturally related activites
from wider rural development. All EC funding activity in a region
should be integrated into one plan. To achieve this requires changes
to Article 1, paragraph 2 of the EAGGF Regulation as this provides
for integration in Objective 1 areas but not Objective 2.
3. Achieving sustainable rural development
The UK has given high priority to sustainability.
The new Regulations represent an EU wide opportunity to develop
this theme in an important area that will have a major influence
upon the environment across the EU: rural areas. In the coming
years a prominent role should be given to agri-environmental instruments
which sustain the development of rural areas and which respond
to society's demand for environmental services. The draft Regulation
recognises that such investments should be viable and that the
economic benefits of the actions should be available to the wider
rural communities in which they take place and that the actions
individually should be assessed against their contribution to
a sustainable environment.
However, the Objective 5b Partnership are concerned
that the agri-environmental measures are the only aspect of the
EAGGF Regulation that Member States have to provide for (Article
41). It is important to see the development of rural areas in
a holistic manner that gives due weight and attention to the economy,
community and the environment. Each in themselves will not sustain
the rural areas. Therefore it is important that Member States
are committed to a combination of activity that tackles all three.
The nature of this balance varies between rural areas and discretion
is essential if the right balance is to be struck in each rural
area. Therefore, the Partnership welcome the EC's flexibility
and "menu" approach to allow individual rural areas
to shape the programmes to suit local needs but the Objective
5b Partnership would want the Regulations to place a greater emphasis
in the legal text on Member States implementing a balanced rural
development programme that combines revenue and capital investment
both on and off farm and throughout the wider rural economy. It
is important that, at regional level, partnerships are given the
opportunity to access all parts of the menu, rather than, as currently
takes place, having options removed centrally.
4. Development and delivery of rural development
plans
There is a need to ensure that the Rural Development
Plans drawn up as a result of this Regulation firstly integrate
into any ERDF and ESF plans for the same area (this would require
changes to Article 2.3 of the EAGGF Regulations) and secondly
that they are locally driven and implemented. The Regulation is
ambiguous on this issue. The pre-amble is stronger in its commitment
to "bottom-up" and decentralised delivery than is the
legal text of the Regulation. Therefore the Partnership wish to
see the Regulations strengthened, see proposed changes on attached
grid.
The UK 5b Partnership welcomes the emphasis
within the draft Regulation on local community led input, providing
a framework for partnership input in line with the principles
of subsidiarity and local determination. However the operation
of subsidiarity could be better defined within Articles 1, 2,
35, 39, 41 and 46 of the draft Regulation so that local partnerships
are involved in the development and delivery of rural development
programmes.
5. Administration of rural development in the
UK
How the administration of the rural development
measures are translated in the UK will be critical to its success
or failure. The initial budget that has been allocated to rural
development measures is small. However, the implications of transferring
rural development activities from the Guidance to the Guarantee
Section of EAGGF is that the future budget could significantly
increase over the next 10 years. The agricultural guideline provides
for a greater level of resources to be transferred from CAP measures
to rural development as a result of changes to the CAP which will
reduce the scale of growth and ultimately level it out within
the overall Guarantee budget.
Because of this potential for growth it is important
that the rural development measures are not simply incorporated
into existing activities but new procedures are set up to deliver
rural development. This would be in line with the proposals that
have been made for a new Ministry of rural areas within Whitehall
and wider constitutional changes underway in the UK that will
give greater influence for rural development to devolved or decentralised
bodies. The new rural development measures will allow these new
bodies responsibilities to meet the ethos of the EAGGF Regulation
pre-amble for a decentralised programme delivery.
The various elements of the new EAGGF Regulation
are currently implemented in different ways. For example the HCLAs
are dealt with on a UK basis, ESA's are dealt with at English,
Welsh and Scottish level and Objective 5b regionally. It is important
that the UK Government does not take the option in the Regulation
for a variety of delivery mechanisms. To take this option will
weaken the progress towards putting in place an integrated rural
development strategy. This change will cause administrative upheaval
in the short term. However, if the opportunity given by this new
Regulation is to be realised change is needed to reflect the scope
and objectives of the Regulation itself.
Therefore the UK Objective 5b Partnership would
like to see the model that has been used to deliver the Objective
5b programmes adapted for the new rural development measures.
This model has developed differently across the regions but after
some initial difficulties has worked well and efficiently. This
experience should now be built on as it has shown how partnership
can be developed and common objectives realised at the local/regional
level.
6. Overcoming ambiguity
There is still a high level of ambiguity within
the EAGGF Regulation. This is inevitable given the tight timescale
in its production and changes made at late stages. However, it
is important that these are overcome before agreeing the final
text. The attached grid identifies a number of areas where clarification
is required. In particular it relates to the relationship of the
objectives of the rural development measures in Article 2 and
the detailed implementation of these in Articles 4 to 31 and the
lack of clarity on whether the principal beneficiaries of the
assistance are farm based activities or the wider rural economy.
If the ethos of the pre-amble and the desire to have decentralised
delivery based upon the menu approach in the Regulation are to
be realised it demands that there is an explicit acknowledgement
that the aim of the rural development measures is to develop and
regenerate the rural economy not relating all activities back
to the farm.
6. Rural Development: a positive development
At a general level the move towards rural development
measures within the context of Agenda 2000 and the reform of the
CAP has been portrayed in a negative way. The moves that have
been suggested by the EC are the start of a process that will
modernise the CAP and its delivery and improve the effectiveness
and impact of policies upon the rural economy. The changes are
positive and will enhance the development of rural areas. In a
sense, it stretches the boundaries between regional and agricultural
policy. More does however, need to be done to generally modernise
the CAP and make it more relevant to the changing nature of rural
areas and of the rural economy.
CONCLUSION
Overall the UK 5b Partnership is keen to promote
the opportunities made available by the proposed EAGGF regulations
and welcomes this innovative and comprehensive approach towards
rehabilitating the health of rural economies. However, to realise
the opportunities will require more consultation on the implementation
of the Regulation within the UK.
The Objective 5b process since 1988 has provided
the opportunity for many areas in the UK to become familiar with
a programming approach that involves DTI, DETR, MAFF, or the Scottish
and Welsh Offices and a range of local partners. This experience
and the lessons learnt need to be relayed to the other rural areas
that will now benefit from this new Regulation.
| 
