7 Streamlining of funding schemes
84. Currently, there are over 100 separate funding
schemes for rural programmes. The Secretary of State told us that,
in implementing Lord Haskins's review, the "absolute top
priority" had to be "a revision of the rural funding
programmes", not least because this could be done without
primary legislation.[157]
She said:
We are now working to deliver three rural funding
streams in place of the previous ones and I have been absolutely
determined and adamant with the department that I was not expecting
to see three headlines over a continuing 75 schemes; I was expecting
to see three sets of schemes.[158]
85. The reduction from 100-plus schemes to just three
streams is claimed by Defra as a major benefit of the reforms,
and separate from the establishment of the new bodies.[159]
However, CRE argue that it is not entirely clear from the Strategy
whether there are to be three funding streams or four.[160]
On page 48, in the summary of delivery reforms, it is proposed
that Defra will reduce the current 100 or so rural funding streams
to three major programmes: Rural Regeneration; Agriculture and
Food Industry Regeneration; and Natural Resource Protection.[161]
However, on page 32, the strategy also discusses bringing social
and community programmes together into a single funding programme,
which will be administered through the Government Offices.[162]
86. Lord Haskins also made the point that it might
not be that easy to simplify the present structure: "I do
not think it is quite three schemes. It is three categories of
scheme".[163]
He told us:
It sounds very logical and easy and absolutely right
but everybody has got their own little pet scheme and whenever
you touch one pet scheme, either a minister or an official or
a recipient says no, and you do not dare touch that. They are
all politically sensitive. In a way that is going to be the hardest
job of all but we have got to try and do it.[164]
87. In written evidence on the draft NERC Bill, Defra
made clear there would be three new "funds". The three
funds, and the relevant funding bodies, are set out in Table 1.
Table 1: Funding framework from 2007
| Fund | Agriculture and Food Industry Development
| Sustainable Rural Communities
| Natural Resource Protection
|
| Funding body/bodies
| Defra
(national funding)
RDAs (regional funding)
| RDAs
Government Offices (regional community support)
Defra (national community support)
| Integrated Agency
National Parks
Forestry Commission
|
| Key customer groups
| Farmers
Rural Businesses
Food industry
Intermediaries
| Rural businesses
Rural communities
| Land managers
Farmers
Intermediaries
|
Source: Defra, Appendix 26b, Section C, Figure
1
88. The Director of Defra's Modernising Rural Delivery
programme explained that the intention behind the simplification
of the funding streams was to move away from the current situation,
"where there are a lot of small schemes each with their own
set of rules, each with their own process that needs to be serviced",
as servicing a great many separate processes takes up staff time
and therefore costs. Simplification of funding streams in this
way would provide "more bang for your buck".[165]
89. We welcome,
in principle, the proposal to reduce the number of funding streams,
and to establish three major funding programmes, as this should
aid administration. However, the real test will be whether the
process of application and qualifying for funding is simplified
for the eventual recipient. We remain to be convinced by Defra's
claim to be streamlining over one hundred rural funding schemes.
The three major funding programmes with which Defra proposes to
replace them may still involve many specific funding schemes.
We recommend that, in its response to our Report, Defra sets out
in detail precisely how many new funding streams—as opposed
to programmes—will be established under the new arrangements.
In reducing the number of streams it will be necessary to avoid
a 'beauty contest' where schemes are retained as a result of political
sensitivities, rather than on more objective criteria.
157 Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee,
Minutes of Evidence and Memoranda, Wednesday 9 February 2005,
The Work of Defra, HC 330-i, Q 80 Back
158
Ibid. Back
159
Q 574 Back
160
Ev 3 Back
161
See also Ev 120. Back
162
Rural Strategy 2004, pp 48, 32 Back
163
Q 150 Back
164
Ibid. Back
165
Qq 573-74 Back
|
