Select Committee on Agriculture Minutes of Evidence


Memorandum submitted by The National Farmers' Union of England and Wales (E9)

  INTRODUCTION

The NFU represents some 55,000 farmers in England. We are conscious that MAFF regional service centres provide a first contact point for farmers into MAFF over a wide range of issues. However, for most farmers it is the RSC's role in operating CAP schemes which represents by far the most important of these contacts. Successful submission of claim forms is crucial not just because of the size of the support payments but because flawed applications can lead to very substantial disallowances of claims or even their total exclusion.

  We are aware that MAFF is considering a major reorganisation of RSC's and of the administration of CAP claims and payments and have made our comments in the light of the impact of these changes on the farming community.

THE ROLE OF REGIONAL SERVICE CENTRES

  RSCs provide a key interface between farmers and MAFF. Farmers direct most of their queries over MAFF's operations to RSCs. They visit them and use the RSC as the point to submit claim forms such as IACS and the related livestock applications. They seek information over the interpretation of difficult points as they complete their forms. Moreover, for the many who submit their forms in person, RSC staff not only give a receipt for the safe application of forms but give a preliminary check which can allow them to correct obvious omissions and errors on the spot. The service provides an important source of re-assurance to farmers who take the threat of loss of their claims very seriously indeed.

  Once the forms are being processed, RSC staff provides a point of contact over the progression of claims. Farmers will naturally be very concerned that there are no delays in the payment of their claims.

  The role of RSCs in managing claims is of key importance to most farmers. The present system does meet most of their concerns over the efficient management and payment of their claims. In short the current system has a high degree of "customer satisfaction".

CHANGED REGIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

  The NFU's priority in considering any change in MAFF's RSCs is that the new arrangements should engender at least an equally high degree of satisfaction amongst farmers and that any changeover should be made with the minimum of disruption.

  We have recommended to senior MAFF staff that they should ensure that any new system maintains the best features of the old. A key element in achieving this will be to retain local sites at which farmers can present their IACS, sheep and suckler cow claim forms, receive an initial check and know that their forms have entered the processing chain. Moreover, if telephone contact with a RSC is to be replaced with communication through a national call centre then farmers will wish to see arrangements which ensure that they receive the current levels of information and assistance.

  Even if RSCs in their present form are closed MAFF will maintain staff and offices throughout England in order to carry out tasks such as farm inspections and the management of the Rural Development Programme. We believe that as many as possible of these sites should be used as collection and initial check points for farmer applications to CAP and other schemes. Moreover, as the need for this service reaches a few peaks through the year, MAFF should consider using temporary or mobile premises in addition. Coverage on specific days at local auction markets or at other centres remote from continuing permanent offices would very considerably assist farmers in adapting to a new system.

  We recommend that MAFF must now consult locally to design a cost-effective network of claim reception facilities before it closes existing regional offices.

  We also see some advantages, if a major change is to be made, in MAFF redesignating its regional boundaries to coincide with those of other Government departments. However, great weight should be given to the ease of access from rural areas when determining the location of any new MAFF offices.

ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION

  The NFU is adamant that any farmer must retain the right to submit a claim through the existing paper-based routes in any new arrangements. But, a substantial upheaval in MAFF's existing regional structure will only lead to an effective service to all farmers if those farmers who wish to use electronic communication of their claims are able to do so. Moreover the greater the assistance MAFF provides for the training of farmers to use electronic submission the greater the uptake will be from the farming community.

  We welcome this year's trial for the electronic submission of IACS forms which MAFF has organised out of its Cambridge RSC and look forward to considering its outcome with MAFF staff. However, we also attach considerable significance to the Kington project in which the scope for encouraging farmers to use the internet for other business purposes as well as submitting claims to MAFF is being assessed.

  Provided MAFF designs its electronic forms carefully, many of the services which farmers now receive from the RSC can be provided automatically as they submit claims. Moreover data handling by MAFF becomes easier and we believe that it should be possible to speed up payments, not just to those farmers submitting electronically but to others as well. The current failure of MAFF to make payments under CAP schemes as fast as some other member states are able to disadvantages our farmers.

TRANSITION TO ANY NEW ARRANGEMENTS

  The NFU cannot over-emphasise the importance to farmers of MAFF successfully managing the CAP schemes and delivering the Rural Development Programme. Moving towards electronic form submission, at least partial closure of RSCs, and the development of national date-handling, a call centre and a single payment agency which brings together MAFF and Intervention Board functions is a very considerable challenge.

  Any changes must be properly funded and tested before moving on line. Adequate fall backs must be available if there are unforeseen problems in any changeover. MAFF should ensure farmers have access to clear information about how any change in its regional structure will affect their businesses. Moreover, MAFF should consult widely on local implications, including the provision of sites and offices for the submission of time-limited applications such as IACS, SAPS and the suckler cow premium.

INFORMATION TO FARMERS

  We are concerned that there is currently a very substantial lack of information to farmers over possible changes in services which are vital to them and their farm businesses. We recommend that at the earliest possible date the Minister informs the farming community of the strategy behind his department's plans for change and opens a discussion on the details. Even if change is to be made over a three-year transition period there is an urgent need to meet farmers' very legitimate concerns over the future of Regional Service Centres and of the services that the RSCs provide them.

5 May 2000


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2000
Prepared 6 July 2000