Memorandum submitted by NFU Cymru (RPA
Sub 06)
1. Thank you for your letter of 3 April
2006 inviting NFU Cymru to submit evidence to the extended inquiry
into the Rural Payments Agency, which is being conducted by EFRA.
The implementation of CAP Reform and the execution of Single Farm
Payments has been implemented on a devolved basis and as a consequence
SPS payments to farmers in Wales have very largely been made by
Rural Payments Wales. Generally, farmers in Wales have been shielded
from the shortcomings of the RPA's handling of the SPS with the
exception of those farmers who straddle the Wales/England Border.
At the beginning of this month (April 2006) 95 border farmers
had not received payment because of the RPA's failure to validate
the "English" element of their SPS claim. EC Regulations
dictate that there may be only one paying agency and the RPA's
failure to validate these claims means that Rural Payments Wales—a
division of the Welsh Assembly Government—is unable to authorise
payment pending clearance from the RPA. Whilst the number of claimants
is relatively small compared to those awaiting payment in England,
the delay for those concerned is causing equal and significant
financial hardship.
2. NFU Cymru's understanding is that a number
of offices in England are dealing with cross-border farmers rather
than a single dedicated office with the result that it is difficult
for Rural Payments Wales to make contact with the particular RPA
office dealing with the claim. Presumably, the call centre is
having a similar communication problem which could be addressed
by the establishment of a centre for dealing with cross-border
cases and to which the call centre could also make referrals.
This approach would ensure that there were staff both in England
and Wales dedicated to resolving any queries/clearing for payment
those cross border cases currently outstanding and which appear
currently to be in the vacuum of "no man's land"!
3. Our English NFU colleagues who will be
providing EFRA with further written and oral evidence are better
placed to describe the circumstances, which lie behind this fiasco.
April 2006
| 
