Examination of witness (Questions 340
- 359)
WEDNESDAY 21 JUNE 2000
RT HON
JOYCE QUIN,
MP
Chairman
340. You had better move quickly.
(Ms Quin) I am not saying that forms could be submitted
via that route, although that could be considered, but in terms
of an initial contact, or an initial advice point, that would
be quite an interesting network to develop. There is a range of
possibilities. I know that you have heard in earlier evidence
that the NFU and other organisations are also interested in providing
advice. I believe that there are a lot of possibilities there.
I am keen to try to convey the view that we are not about trying
to create a MAFF that is more remote from the customer; we are
trying to create a MAFF that is actually closer to the customer,
but in a variety of ways, some of which have not been tried before.
Mr Opik
341. That is interesting because it answers
another question which is how you would staff it. It is probably
not helpful to pursue the details of the post offices idea now,
but it is an interesting one. Presumably you would have to train
people, for example, post office staff. Is it realistic to think
that without a call centre, we would have any effect in dealing
with the number of errors in forms?
(Ms Quin) One of the aims of the system is to try
to minimise the number of errors. In terms of the electronic forms,
the pilot in Cambridge is an interesting one. It has not been
without any problems, but in terms of helping farmers who are
IT aware, the results have been quite encouraging, particularly
the fact that the electronic form prompts the customers into navigating
their way through the system and if a question has not been answered,
or if more information is required, it flags up that fact. It
is also capable of saying, "Yes, this information has now
been logged in and it has been received". Presumably, the
farmer can print that off and have an actual printed record, as
well as a record in the system, that the form has been properly
received and that the various questions have been answered.
342. Farmers will be able to carry on handing
in their forms on paper, if they want to, indefinitely, will they?
(Ms Quin) They will, yes. We certainly have not put
any kind of time-limit on that or thought up any date beyond which
they would not be allowed to hand in a paper version. Although
we want to encourage people to use IT and submit their forms electronically,
they will not be compelled to do it. For the foreseeable future
they will be able to submit their forms in paper form.
Chairman: We have all been struck by the extent
to which farmers have the desire to hand the form in, signed and
sealed. I have been on farms of 5,000 acres where the farm manager
still takes in the form because he wants the reassurance that
it has been stamped and that the job has been done. That may be
irrational, but we have all been astonished by how important that
mentality is, of wanting to put it through the door themselves.
Mr Mitchell
343. And they get someone to look at the form
with them. This new system will be a more impersonal system, will
it not?
(Ms Quin) I do not accept that it will be more impersonal.
344. It must be if they cannot do what David
has just talked about.
(Ms Quin) In this sense, firstly, the transition period
will be important in terms of advice to farmers. Secondly, it
depends on the quality of staff who are involved, particularly
in the call centre, but also in the regional offices, in the mobile
units and so on. I do not accept that it must be a more impersonal
system. It is a matter of whether you think the electronic submission
of forms is capable of dealing with these issues. I happen to
think that it is, and that it will actually increase levels of
satisfaction with the system in the longer term.
345. In a perfect world, we will all be e-systemised,
but you have to allow for the Grundys. You listen to the "Archers",
so do not look at me in that blank fashion.
(Ms Quin) I am not looking at you in a blank fashion.
I am well aware of the plight of the Grundys.
346. The e-interface will not be of any use
at all to the Grundys.
(Ms Quin) You make it sound as though the Grundys
are, by their nature, incapable of change. I do not actually accept
that. I do accept that for the foreseeable future many people
will want to submit their forms on paper and have some reassurance,
from whatever source of advice, that their form has been completed
correctly and so forth. A minute ago the Chairman talked about
a large farm where they were keen on a paper-based system and
handing in the form. I have also come across farmers on a small
scale who, none the less, are capable and enthusiastic in using
IT. I do not believe that one should categorise farmers too generally
in this respect.
347. It means that you will have two systems
running parallel for a long time, which will be expensive. It
means that when a farmer wants personal contact, there will not
be the facility in the Regional Centre or the people qualified
to give him that advice and support.
(Ms Quin) I have received slightly mixed messages
about how people think that the Regional Service Centres work
in this respect. It is true that you can take your form into a
Regional Service Centre and they will check that the boxes have
been filled in. That is not quite the same as what you seem to
be suggesting, which is someone sitting down and going through
the details and giving you reassurance there and then. As we know,
although there may be the initial receipt of the form, it then
goes on to be processed elsewhere, and sometimes further checks
have to be made subsequently. In a sense, that will not change
with the new system. If something is not correct, the processing
centre will need to contact the farmer to say, "This is not
right".
348. They can say, "Can you check that
the boxes are filled in?". It is pedantic to say that they
cannot provide advice. There is middle ground in which people
can ask questions that puzzle them about what is a fairly big
and complicated form and they can get answers and you want to
eliminate that middle ground.
(Ms Quin) They will be able to do that. If a call
centre system is properly organised that can provide a lot of
that advice instantly without people having to go up to 120 miles
to a regional centre.
349. How much did the PricewaterhouseCoopers'
report cost?
(Ms Quin) I am sure that I have the answer somewhere,
but off the top of my head I do not know.[2]
Chairman: No doubt a note will be put in front
of you before the session has concluded.
Mr Mitchell
350. I hope that the department is converted
to the arguments and structures. The memorandum that you have
submitted, in paragraph 14 sounds quite lyrical about the benefits.
It speaks of "genuine benefits . . . processed more quickly
. . . `intelligent' forms . . . to guide claimants . . . so reducing
bureaucracy . . . specially trained staff . . . to ensure customer
service facilities better than they can be at present". Who
wrote this rubbish?
(Ms Quin) I do not know why you should describe it
as "rubbish".
351. It is a vision of a future that you do
not have, you might not get and in which there are complicated
factors coming along. There are always difficulties in establishing
that systems work properly. That paragraph assumes that it is
all working and tickety-boo and that there are no Grundys.
(Ms Quin) You say that we seem to have accepted this
uncritically. I certainly would not accept that. Earlier I said
that we envisaged a longer time-scale for implementing this than
was envisaged in the original report, precisely because, while
we are happy to sign up to a vision of efficiency and improvement
and indeed better regional presence, which I explained was something
that Ministers felt strongly about, none the less, we also know
that we are responsible for the practical implementation of this.
Therefore, we have to test the assumptions in the report and introduce
them over a longer period of time.
Mr Opik
352. On the post office idea, on the basis of
what you have just said, there may be a way of doing both. If
there is training or some sort of staffing you could use the post
offices or an equivalent network to provide the face-to-face contact
that people want. I hope that some serious thinking takes place
on that. That could be a constructive step forward.
(Ms Quin) Indeed. The aim of this is to provide a
better service overall. It is not to make people feel more remote
from the system than they do now.
353. Especially if they can hand that form in,
in the way in which they hand in a driving licence application.
(Ms Quin) That is a fair comment. The possibilities
there are interesting because that is such a wide-ranging network.
Mr Hurst
354. I shall not follow through on the position
of the Grundys because sometimes I feel that the story line should
be the "Emperor's New Suit". You mentioned the Cambridge
pilot. This matter has been raised with other witnesses who have
appeared before us. In many ways, do you think that the Cambridge
trial may be untypical of other areas of the country? There you
would be dealing with more sophisticated and larger-scale farming
operations than in, say, Montgomeryshire or the West Country?
(Ms Quin) To a certain extent, that is a fair comment.
When we consider the structure of farming in that part of the
country there are large farms with often more resources than some
of the smaller farms in other regions of the country. Cambridge
has a high-tech image anyway. I accept that. However, we also
have the Kington project in Herefordshire, where there is a different
structure to agriculture, precisely in order to look at another
area of the country. My own experience is that farmers' willingness
to adopt IT does not bear a totally strict correlation to the
size of farm. For example, I know that the NFU mentioned the circumstance
of a farmer having a bright son or daughter who is into IT or
other family circumstances. There is a whole host of factors that
is relevant in this context. We are looking at this at the moment
in a study, which is only two or three months old, carried out
by ADAS. That shows that the take-up of IT now among the farming
population has increased quite dramatically from the previous
studies carried out 12 to 18 months earlier. Twelve to 18 months
ago somewhere between 20 to 30 per cent of farmers had access
to a computer and the recent figures, at which we are looking,
are 60 to 70 per cent. That is a considerable increase. I would
not want it to seem as though we were going against a trend that
is happening anyway.
355. It is not so much going against the trend,
but to be understanding of those who are often in fairly tightened
circumstances at the present time, to whom this would be an extra
burden if they did not willingly embrace it.
(Ms Quin) Indeed, yes.
Mr Jack
356. I want to pursue the line of questioning
about the proposals for e-business in agriculture. For the record,
have you personally read the paper submitted by PCS, as part of
the evidence to the Commission, entitled "Managing Change
in MAFF CAP Scheme Delivery?
(Ms Quin) Yes.
357. Then you will be familiar with the scepticism
that the trade union representatives have about the overall PricewaterhouseCoopers'
report. Their assertion is interesting. It says: "There is
no reason to believe that IT modernisation and the move towards
increasing levels of e-business cannot be achieved within the
current RSC structure". How do you respond to that? Can you
give us a flavour of the type of options that you may be considering?
Their view is that they can improve IT within the existing structure
and there is no need to change the current number of RSCs. On
the other hand, the flavour I received from the evidence of Ms
Brown was that of a different structure, a limited number of centres
with a strong IT base. Which line should I follow?
(Ms Quin) I suppose you yourself should decide which
line you want to follow.
358. You are the one with the options and we
are the ones asking the questions, seeking some indication as
to where the proposal for which you are bidding for funds is going.
We will adjudicate on the outcome, but it would be helpful to
have some signposts as to down which route you are going, if it
differs from your employees' assessment of what can be done.
(Ms Quin) Firstly, I recognise that among employees
there is not a wish to resist IT full stop. That comes through
the PCS evidence. I recognise that and that is also borne out
by my own experience in talking to the trade union side at different
offices. Secondly, it is possible to improve IT within the existing
system. In a sense, that goes back to the question I answered
earlier from the Chairman. However, we believe that in terms of
trying to have a marked improvement in effectiveness, in delivery
of service, in moving forward significantly, much of the proposals
contained in the PwC report have a lot to commend them. We have
a responsibility, particularly in advance of a Comprehensive Spending
Review round, to think boldly and to think as part of the overall
Government commitment to modernisation contained in the PIU report.
Provided that funding is adequate to cover such an approach, we
believe that it is worth pursuing. However, in terms of the PCS
evidence, it seemed to me that there was not enough recognition
of the fact that we are dealing with the whole of the CSR period.
I apologise, but I made this point before. Therefore, I do not
accept that going down in the direction recommended in the PwC
report, has to be as disruptive or as difficult to manage as the
evidence submitted to you by the PCS suggests.
359. Can you help us by telling us whether you
are looking at a model that has one or a limited number of IT
processing centres with a front-end, if you like, approach in
the various ways that we are discussing of providing contact between
the farming community and MAFF?
(Ms Quin) Yes, those are the areas. Obviously, as
Jane Brown indicated, there are different options put forward.
It is possible to think of just having one centre and then having
MAFF in government offices and linking in with some of the buildings
presently occupied by the FRCA and other rural services. On the
other hand, the idea of processing centres dealing with the main
areas of CAP administration also has a lot of attractions. For
example, there are livestock schemes, there are arable schemes,
there are agri-environment schemes, and so on. It makes sense
for there to be a certain amount of specialisation in processing
those particular matters. There are options available from having
one to a number of sites. At the moment I cannot say, because
the Minister is considering these issues, what the final Business
Case will be, but it will certainly link in to a lot of those
things that you have just described to me.
2 Note by Witness: The cost of the PwC Report
was approximately £300,000 excluding VAT and expenses. Back
|
