Memorandum submitted by the Meat and Livestock
Commission (V01)
1. The Meat and Livestock Commission welcomes
the opportunity to set out its views on the Government's plans
for rural delivery in England which are detailed in Rural Strategy
2004 published on 21 July 2004.
2. The MLC's remit is to work with the British
meat and livestock industry (cattle, sheep and pigs) to improve
its efficiency and competitive position, and to maintain and stimulate
markets for red meat at home and British meat abroad, with due
regard for the consumer. Under its new federal structure, in England
MLC works through the British Pig Executive (BPEX) for pigs and
the English Beef and Lamb Executive (EBLEX) for cattle and sheep.
3. Our comments on rural delivery are made
in the context of the situation and needs of English livestock
producers as they face the significant challenges as well as opportunities
that will arise from CAP reform implementation, ever increasing
global market competition and the prospect of further international
trade liberalisation, the demands of the sustainable development
agenda, and the burdens of high regulatory costs.
4. The principal aims and tasks of livestock
producers are to improve the profitability and efficiency of their
businesses, to meet consumer demand for safe, high quality and
good value food and to increase the British producers' share of
our home market.
5. In turn, our livestock producers need:
— Ready access to relevant business
and technical information and advice to enhance the efficiency
of their farming businesses.
— Efficient regulation by government
in order to reduce administrative costs to and bureaucratic burdens
on the industry.
— Opportunities to participate in rural
development schemes in order to meet the public's environmental
aspirations, provide diversification opportunities and modernise
the industry, for example, through training and technology transfer.
— More efficient planning procedures.
6. And, together with other members of rural
communities, they need:
— Rural social infrastructures which
reduce isolation and enhance the quality of rural life.
THE THRUST
OF RURAL
STRATEGY 2004
7. Rural Strategy 2004 is largely about
priorities, new structures and devolution of decision-making,
and better delivery, rather than about new strategic policy initiatives.
The wider policy vision has already been set out in a range of
policy documents, including the Rural White Paper (2000), the
Strategy for Sustainable Farming and Food (2002), underpinned
by wider government principles of sustainable development and
public service reform.
8. The present structures and channels for
rural delivery are complex and cross-cutting. A range of agencies
and bodies with overlapping responsibilities and accountability
are involved. We therefore welcome the overall thrust of Rural
Strategy 2004 towards customer focus, devolved decision-making,
more effective delivery of business and social support and advice,
and rationalised organisational structures and funding streams.
STREAMLINING RURAL,
AGRICULTURAL AND
ENVIRONMENTAL FUNDING
STREAMS
9. We support moves to streamline existing
funding streams by creating the proposed three major funding programmes.
10. We would welcome greater detail on the
composition of the new Agriculture and Food Industry Regeneration
Programme in particular. Since the Regional Development Agencies
(RDAs) will have primary control over the use of funds under this
Programme, it is very important, therefore, that there is consistent
and enhanced understanding amongst the RDAs of the circumstances
and needs of the farming and food industry.
11. Self evidently, RDAs focus on the circumstances
and needs of rural businesses and communities in their regional
"patch". They may also to some extent compete amongst
themselves for funding. Nevertheless, we would point out that
the needs of and opportunities for livestock businesses are not
necessarily narrowly regionally confined or delineated. We would
therefore urge that an overall national strategic perspective
is borne in mind and that RDAs constructively cooperate with each
other where this is necessary and appropriate and serves a wider
common good.
THE GOVERNMENT'S
RESPONSE TO
LORD HASKINS
RURAL DELIVERY
REVIEW
Separation of Policy and Delivery (Recommendation
2)
12. A key recommendation of Lord Haskins
was the separation of policy and delivery functions. In its response,
the Government states that it agrees. We also agree but with the
qualification that deliverers are closely engaged in the development
of policy in order to ensure that policy objectives and targets
are, in practice, achievable and achieved. In turn, stakeholders
should be involved in the policy development and delivery process.
13. Given this concern, we welcome the Government's
statement in response to Haskins' recommendation 3 on relations
with delivery bodies that it "will agree and publish new
or updated concordats or working agreements with all rural delivery
organisations that include the requirement for policy makers to
involve deliverers in the development of policy and give deliverers
the freedom to design detailed delivery arrangements themselves".
It is very important that this process takes place, and involves
wider stakeholders.
Business Support and Advice (Recommendation 13)
14. The Government agrees with the Haskins
recommendation to give RDAs responsibility for managing the Business
Link network from 1 April 2005.
15. Under the existing strategy and structure
for rural delivery, EBLEX already works with a number of RDAs
as a channel for providing business support and advice to livestock
producers, and in order to identify suitable areas for funding.
We believe that RDAs can have an important role to play in the
transfer of R&D output to producers and in the use of training
on farms.
16. Within the new rural delivery strategy
in England, we believe that levy bodies, such as the MLC together
with BPEX and EBLEX, can play a useful supporting role as a channel
for a wide range of business and technical information and advice
to livestock producers in cooperation with national and regional
government, and would be happy to do so. We would be happy to
explore with Defra how MLC together with BPEX and EBLEX might
assist here in relation to the livestock sector, and have had
initial discussions with Defra officials.
17. We would also note that in response
to Haskins recommendation 8 regarding management information,
Defra states that it will "develop common repositories for
land, livestock, customer, environment and rural information to
enhance the quality and accessibility of information in Defra
and its delivery bodies, improve customer interaction with Defra,
and allow greater control and manipulation of data". The
more efficient collection, collation and analysis of data offer
potential benefits to both government and to the livestock industry.
For example, as the 2001 FMD outbreak highlighted, accurate and
up to date information on the location of holdings would help
with disease prevention and, in the event of a disease outbreak,
with its control. Again, MLC together with BPEX and EBLEX may
be able to play a supporting role.
18. The Red Meat Industry Forum—a
partnership between Defra, the NFU, IGD and MLC to improve performance
and profitability in the meat and livestock industry—might
also play a role in this area.
Whole Farm Approach (Recommendation 27)
19. The Government has already committed
itself to a whole farm approach aimed at re-designing the interface
between farmers and Defra. We strongly support this work in order
to make better use of existing information, improve the efficiency
of regulation and to reduce the bureaucratic burden on producers.
20. There are substantial IT challenges
in achieving the whole farm approach.
Levy Boards (Recommendation 20)
21. In response to Lord Haskins' recommendation
regarding the agricultural horticultural levy bodies, the Government
states that it will continue to work with these organisations
on how to improve co-operation on cross-cutting and strategic
issues in the short to medium term, and that it will also carry
out a fundamental review to report in 2005.
22. MLC will participate constructively
in these activities.
7 September 2004
| 
