Annex 1
LETTER DATED 30 AUGUST 2006, FROM THE NATIONAL
FARMERS' UNION TO THE DEPARTMENT FOR ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL
AFFAIRS
NITRATES DIRECTIVE
ISSUES
The NFU has concerns about the way Defra is
implementing the Directive, both in respect of the new designation
methodology and the Action Programme.
REVIEW OF
DESIGNATIONS
Last year, Defra invited stakeholders to attend
the Nitrates Assessment Technical Group and the Steering Group
overseeing the review of designations. The NFU had serious concerns
about the shortcomings of the previous methodology and the way
it was operated, and it welcomed the invitation. I attended all
the meetings and played an active role. Some of those shortcomings
have been addressed. But some issues of concern to the NFU emerged
in the Groups' final stages. These are as follows:
— De-designation not discussed:
I had raised de-designation at the Technical Group and it
was agreed that this would be referred to the Steering Group.
This never happened.
— Designation of entire upstream
catchments: The early recommendations from the Technical Group
to the Steering Group meeting of 24 January provided for not automatically
designating entire upstream catchments. This possibility was effectively
removed from the final designation options because the EA informed
the meeting that it had not had time to develop the option of
which this was part, adding that there was "no appetite"
for pursuing this. The NFU has always considered the policy of
designating the whole upstream catchment introduced at the 2002
review, as an important issue. We had earlier been assured by
Defra that this was up for discussion.
— New principle used for GW designation
without discussion: A new principle for defining boundaries
based on direction of flow within groundwater bodies emerged during
the course of my questioning during the final meeting. This had
not been disclosed or discussed with the Technical Group previously,
and results in a significant expansion of boundaries in many cases.
Stakeholders and peer reviewers had clearly been excluded from
the decision to use this technique.
— Short-comings in the Groundwater
database: It emerged—again as a result of my questioning—that
the database still includes monitoring sites which are no longer
active. This is despite my having been previously assured that
all inactive sites had been removed. This means that any improvements
in nitrate levels at such locations will not be taken into account
in the designation process.
— Operation of the methodology:
Development of the practical outputs has been a closed process.
The EA was willing for the NFU to observe example area workshops
dealing with this, but Defra over-ruled the EA and would not let
the NFU attend. One of the NFU's biggest concerns about the previous
round of designations was shortcomings in the way the methodology
was operated. Defra's decision to maintain a closed process has
not helped in rebuilding the NFU's confidence in the way the methodology
is applied.
Given these concerns, the NFU would be unable
to support the new methodology proposed.
I am conscious that the Steering Group provides
recommendations, and that Defra itself takes the final decisions.
I would therefore welcome a final opportunity to address these
concerns and to understand fully how Defra has decided to proceed.
I will then be able to advise the NFU on an appropriate reaction.
ACTION PROGRAMME
REVIEW
You are aware that the NFU has concerns regarding
the AP measures Defra has put forward. I will not rehearse these
again, but feel I do need to register the NFU's disappointment
at the way in which Defra has carried out its consultation with
farmer organisations.
Pre-consultation with the industry by Defra
is welcome, but the NFU does not feel that it has been genuinely
consulted. Little of what the NFU, or indeed the other farming
organisations, have said appears to have been taken on board or
made any impact. Regrettably, the impression the NFU is left with
is that Defra has used the process to "soften up" the
industry in respect of the much harsher measures likely to be
introduced.
M R Payne
| 
