Examination of Witnesses (Questions 712-719)
LORD WHITTY
AND LORD
BACH
23 OCTOBER 2006
Q712 Chairman: Good afternoon, ladies
and gentlemen, and welcome to this further evidence session on
the EFRA Sub-Committee's inquiry into the Rural Payments Agency.
Can I say at the outset there is always the possibility that our
proceedings might be disrupted by votes so if you hear any bells,
do not worry. You will see us run, and we will get back as quickly
as we can. Can I particularly welcome our two witnesses this afternoon,
Lord Whitty of Camberwell and Lord Bach of Lutterworth, both former
Under-Secretaries in the Department of Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs. I am most grateful to you, gentlemen, for agreeing to
come before the Committee, although you no longer hold ministerial
responsibility. I am pleased that you understood the Committee's
wish to learn more about the decision-making processes that led
up to some of the problems which the Rural Payments Agency had.
I think it would be quite helpful for the Committee if we could
start, Lord Whitty, with you, to sketch in so that we can understand
with absolute accuracy, in the process of introducing the Single
Farm Payment and perhaps the departmental change programme which
was an integral part of some of the work which the Rural Payments
Agency was doing, what specific responsibilities you had. When
you have been kind enough to respond to that question, Lord Bach
might make certain that we have also understood what his role
in this matter was.
Lord Whitty: I was responsible
to the Secretary of State for all matters relating to CAP policy,
including the EU negotiations and policy decisions and, with the
Secretary of State, took the key decisions, although other Ministers
were also involved, on the option that we adopted in relation
to moving to an area payment. Obviously, the Secretary of State
took some such decisions but I was very much involved in those
decisions. As far as oversight of the RPA is concerned, however,
although I did briefly in 2001 have direct responsibility for
the RPA, at no point during this process was I responsible for
the overall programme for the RPA or for the IT programme, which
was the responsibility of one of my colleagues.
Q713 Chairman: Just for the record,
who was that?
Lord Whitty: At the risk of extending
your witness list, Mr Alun Michael. Having said that, I do take
responsibility for looking at the implications of any decisions
on the CAP policy for the RPA itself.
Q714 Chairman: Just before we move
on to Lord Bach, you said that you had been involved in CAP, CAP
reform policy. Were you directly involved in the negotiations
that led up to the adoption of the Council decision to move to
a Single Farm Payment?
Lord Whitty: I was present at
some of those negotiations. There were several such negotiations
over the year or 18 months beforehand. I was present at some of
them on my own, sometimes with the Secretary of State, but the
final negotiations were actually conducted by the Secretary of
State herself.
Q715 Chairman: Did you, when you
were dealing with the evolution of that policy, recognising that
the Council regulation opened the potential for more than the
then existing group of recipients of CAP reform to make claims,
get any indication at that stage about the volume of farmers who
might be able to claim under the revised arrangements?
Lord Whitty: At that stage, it
would be wrong to say, because the discussion which at a relatively
late stage of the negotiations opened up the possibility of area
payments then led to us considering that option and then consulting
on that option. At a fairly early stage in that process, which
was after the political agreement in June 2003, we looked at what
the effect of going for an area payment would have been and sought
advice from the Department as to how much additional land would
be brought in as a result of that.
Q716 Chairman: Did that advice contain
any details, not so much of the hectarage but of the number of
holdings that might be involved?
Lord Whitty: I am clearer on the
recollection of the estimated increase in hectarage, which throughout
was put at 9%. I will qualify that by saying that was almost entirely
based on new applicants and probably did not take full account
of people having infill in their existing registered land. On
the number of new applicants, the figure of 26,000 was one which
was mentioned at the time, which I think related largely to horticulture
and potato growers of any size coming into the scheme. So we were
thinking there might be 26,000 more than were currently in the
pre-existing schemes, though obviously it turned out to be somewhat
more than that but not dramatically more.
Q717 Chairman: Would I be right in
saying that that would take the number of holdings, on that analysis,
to just over 100,000?
Lord Whitty: Yes.
Q718 Chairman: Lord Bach, could you
just give us an answer to the same question: what were you responsible
for?
Lord Bach: I was responsible under
the Secretary of State for the Common Agricultural Policy and
also for the Rural Payments Agency, among numerous other parts
of what was a very extensive portfolio.
Q719 Chairman: When you took over,
when you came into your post, was Alun Michael the Minister who
handed you the poison chalice of the RPA?
Lord Bach: If Alun Michael was
running the RPA before the election of 2005 and I was running
the RPA after the election of 2005, the answer is yes.
| 
