Written evidence submitted by the Tenant
Farmers Association
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Tenant Farmers Association (TFA)
welcomes the opportunity of providing evidence to the Select Committee
as part of its inquiry into Farming in the Uplands and specifically
the conclusions of the "High ground, high potential"
report from the Commission for Rural Communities (CRC).
2. TFA VISION
FOR UPLAND
AGRICULTURE
2.1 In the TFA's 2020 Vision for Agriculture
published in August the TFA argued that by 2020 there should be
a new framework for ensuring sustainable development of upland
areas with support focused on re-establishing ruminant livestock
production as the cornerstone of land management for these fragile
areas.
2.2 We view the work carried out by CRC
which culminated in its report "High Ground, High Potential"
as a significant contribution to seeing this vision become a reality.
However, it is our great concern that with the abolition of the
CRC the important recommendations contained within its report
will be lost and this must not be allowed to happen.
2.3 There is much within the CRC report
which chimes with the concerns of the TFA. We attach, as an annex
to our evidence, the section of our 2020 Vision report issued
in August 2010 which deals with upland agriculture as we believe
the Select Committee will find this helpful in coming to its own
conclusions about how to take the CRC work forward.
2.4 Given the comprehensive nature of the
CRC report it covers areas which are beyond the TFA's remit. However,
we set out below our comments on some of the most important recommendations
from the perspective of the tenanted sector in agriculture. In
view of the constraints on the length of evidence required by
the Select Committee we keep our comments as brief as possible.
3. A NEW INTEGRATED
STRATEGY FOR
THE UPLANDS
3.1 The TFA supports the recommendation
that the Government should develop a comprehensive and integrated
strategy for England's uplands. There are many agencies, public
bodies and other organisations with an interest in the uplands
each of which emphasise particular aspects of the uplands without
seeing the whole picture. A more integrated approach could deal
more effectively with competing demands and create a more sustainable
basis for the way ahead.
4. STRENGTHENING
LEADERSHIP AND
MOMENTUM
4.1 As stated in the introduction, the TFA
is gravely concerned in light of the demise of the CRC that there
will not be a sufficient advocate for the uplands and the for
recommendations made in the CRC's report in the future. It is
vital that someone or some agency is given responsibility to take
this work forward.
5. A NEW APPROACH
TO FUNDING
5.1 The TFA agrees wholeheartedly with the
conclusion that we need a new approach to rewarding farmers for
managing the uplands. We believe that it was wrong to move support
away from breeding animals which are integral to the management
of the upland environment.
5.2 The TFA has long argued that it is important
that people are rewarded for their work according to the full
costs the farmer has to pay and the risk which he takes. However,
it is also important to ensure that mechanisms are put in place
to prevent the benefit being siphoned off in higher land values
or higher rents.
6. SECURING THE
FUTURE FOR
HILL FARMING
6.1 The TFA has been very critical of the
decision to move to the Upland Entry Level Scheme (UELS) particularly
in view of the number of upland tenants who are disenfranchised
from the scheme due either to short lengths of term or their landlords
being the UELS applicants. Whilst Defra figures show that Upland
Entry Level Scheme applications are increasing there are still
some 70 to 80% of farmers who had previously received HFA who
have not yet been able to get into UELS. The income gap on these
farms will be significant.
6.2 The CRC report calls upon the NFU, TFA
and CLA to work with the Government to develop proposals and to
facilitate good practice in ensuring succession of upland farms.
The TFA stands ready and willing to be involved in this work but
has not yet been approached by Defra to take this forward.
6.3 R&D is vital to any business and
with the tight margins in upland, ruminant livestock it is difficult
for such R&D to be funded by the farming community. Given
the wider benefits to rural communities and the upland environment
associated with ruminant livestock the TFA believes that it is
legitimate for the public purse to pick up at least some of the
cost of applied research and development to improve breeding and
techniques in upland areas. It would also be beneficial to approach
the Agricultural and Horticultural Development Board to encourage
it to prioritise upland agriculture through its EBLEX research
budget.
6.4 The TFA would also support the identification
of a specific agricultural college which could take an uplands
specialism. This would highlight the importance of the sector
and help to coordinate training and learning appropriate to the
skills needed for upland farming.
7. CONCLUSION
7.1 This evidence has touched on only a
few of the recommendations of the many which are contained within
the CRC report. The TFA believes that the work conducted by the
CRC is the most significant piece of work on the uplands for a
generation. Whilst the uplands have been the focus of attention
from a number of bodies in the past this is the first piece of
work which genuinely takes an integrated approach to the issues
being faced by upland communities. The TFA believes that the report
sets out an important blueprint for public policy on the uplands
and the opportunity for making real, long-term and sustainable
change for upland communities must not be squandered.
October 2010
Annex
SECTION 8 OF THE TFA'S 2020 VISION FOR AGRICULTURE
FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE TENANTED SECTOR OF AGRICULTURE
2020 VISION FOR UPLAND AGRICULTURE
By 2020 there should be a new framework for ensuring
sustainable development of upland areas with support focused on
re-establishing ruminant livestock production as the cornerstone
of land management for these fragile areas.
8.1 The hill areas of England and Wales
are important national assets from a number of perspectives. By
their very nature they are physically, socially and economically
remote. Agriculture continues to be, and should continue to be,
the mainstay of economic and environmental management for these
areas despite the severe natural handicaps encountered by farmers
who operate in hill areas.
8.2 Hill areas are also extremely important
in the wider agricultural industry as they represent the beginning
of the livestock production chain. It is the crop of lambs and
calves from our breeding flocks and herds in hill areas that are
finished further down the hill on lowland units before entering
livestock markets and abattoirs on their way to supermarket shelves.
This system of integrated production has operated in the UK for
centuries and the impact of the loss of breeding flocks and herds
in hill areas experienced over recent years should not be underestimated
in terms of the impact on the wider economy, rural social structures
and the rural environment.
8.3 Farming in hill areas provides the most
reliable and coherent basis upon which the management of our most
beautiful and yet fragile landscapes and ecology will be achieved.
The knowledge contained within the farming community in hill areas
is invaluable and must be the primary source for new policy development.
It is not overstating the case to say that the skills of livestock
and moor management are bred into hill people and just as the
sheep are hefted so are the people. Without the hill community
in the uplands making money from ruminant production, the landscape
will change out of all recognition in a short period of time.
Once it has gone it will be nearly impossible to get back.
8.4 Given the harsh and fragile conditions
experienced by farmers in the hills, land management is both costly
and difficult. Without public support many of these farms would
find it impossible to break even.
8.5 Hill areas have been badly affected
by a number of major shifts in policy and in reward structures
over the past 10 years. The TFA would argue that the most significant
of these negative impacts was the introduction of the Single Payment
Scheme in 2005. It provided a specific, major blow to farming
in the Severely Disadvantaged Areas (SDA) and had wider ramifications
through the ending of payments on breeding livestock rendering
those enterprises relying upon breeding stock in difficulty and
now in decline.
8.6 The Suckler Cow Premium and Ewe Premium
(and their LFA supplements) provided an essential base line level
of support to cattle and sheep breeders in hill areas. The rationale
for removing them was that the breeder should look to the market
place for his return. However, the reality of the situation is
that no extra return has been gleaned from the market place following
the removal of the breeding premiums which has led to the contraction
of cattle and sheep numbers in the hills which has in turn led
to inevitable implications for the natural environment including
the incursion of bracken and other evidences of under grazing.
The TFA's view is that renewed consideration should be given to
how upland livestock production should be supported for the food,
environmental and social benefits it brings.
8.7 The move, in England, from hill livestock
compensatory allowances (HLCA) to hill farm allowance (HFA) also
caused major disruption as it moved payments from land occupiers
to land owners either directly or indirectly through rents. This
has been exacerbated by the previous Government's later decision
to move from HFA to an Uplands Entry Level Stewardship Scheme
(UELS). Aside from some general difficulties with the scheme this
will add further problems specific to the tenanted sector.
8.8 Firstly, since the UELS requires participants
to sign up for a five-year term, there will be many tenants either
on short term agreements for less than five years, or on longer
agreements which now have less than five years to run, who will
not be able to access the scheme without their landlord's consent.
In a significant number of cases, landlord's consent will not
be easy to obtain. The TFA is gravely concerned that these individuals
will be disenfranchised from the new scheme and will therefore
experience a significant drop in their income in comparison to
what they were able to achieve under HFA or HLCA.
8.9 Secondly, we are also concerned about
those situations where the ELS agreement has been taken out by
someone other than the farm tenant. For example, many landlords
in upland areas have applied for and been accepted into ELS. In
these cases it will be up to the landowner concerned to decide
whether or not to take part in UELS to the exclusion of the tenant.
8.10 UELS has many drawbacks which will
impact negatively upon its ability to meet its stated objectives.
Along side the problems for the tenanted sector identified, at
its core, it fails to address the real need of finding a mechanism
which will sustain ruminant grazing in upland areas for the wide
range of benefits that such management brings.
8.11 The TFA believes that we need a fundamental
review of the decision which led to the abandonment of payments
for breeding livestock and the development of a new scheme for
the long-term which will deliver an integrated upland environmental
land management reward package with stock rearing at its core.
| 
