Supplementary written evidence from the
Tenant Farmers Association
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Tenant Farmers Association (TFA) provided
written evidence to the Select Committee for its Inquiry into
Farming in the Uplands on 7 October 2010 and subsequently appeared
before the Select Committee to provide it with oral evidence on
10 November 2010. The Select Committee then wrote to the TFA on
17 November 2010 to ask for clarification on a number of points
discussed during the oral evidence session. This Supplementary
Evidence provides the Select Committee with clarification on the
points raised in its 17 November 2010 letter.
2. Could you circulate information to the Committee
on REEDnet, and also provide us with more detail on the sort of
financial backing from Defra that you are looking for the Harper
Adams uplands training scheme?
2.1 From the work carried out by Mike Keeble
in the northern counties of England for the Red Meat Industry
Forum (RMIF) established following the Curry Commission on Farming
and Food, it became quite clear that balanced production of red
meat had to be revitalised and made more sustainable if upland
farming, the landscape and the ecology were to remain intact.
Current environmental and farm support policies are not working
and there has been no significant research or development targeted
at improving livestock genetics, pastoral improvement and management
practice.
2.2 Concurrently with the above work Mike Keeble
also became involved in looking at the needs of young people in
the uplands in terms of education and opportunity with the latter
being of particular concern to the TFA bearing in mind the high
proportion of upland holdings which are tenanted. The potential
ending of the Single Payment Scheme (SPS) in the future is a red
light for upland farmers as very few will survive without it and
with the probability that future support will be increasingly
based on public goods and not food production the need for a rethinking
of production management has to be a high priority.
2.3 There are a few upland farmers who are profitable
without consideration of the SPS. They are using different genetics
from traditional practice, carrying out basic pasture improvement
and maximising upland output by working with low ground farmers
who provide winter keep and accommodation for breeding cows allowing
hill stocking to be increased. The rewards for this are much lower
costs of production on the upland farm and increased access to
natural fertility for the arable farm in the face of rising fertiliser
costs. Added to this there is a consequent rise in ground nesting
birds in the hills as a result of stopping grass conservation.
2.4 So from this it can be seen that we have
some cutting edge farmers who can demonstrate their farming methods,
we have a resource of well educated young people from upland communities
who, on leaving college, do not return to the hills and in 2014
we potentially face a new financial situation. Since the outbreak
of Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) in 2001 a number of training schemes
have been set up in upland areas which concentrate on skills such
as stone walls, tractor driving, shearing and so on. The outcome
is that there are a good number of skilled young people available
to work on livestock farms who need employment that will keep
them there.
2.5 Unlike some options, upland farming requires
a lot of capital invested in an enterprise with a very slow turnover
and low return on capital making it difficult for most young people
to farm on their own in the hills. It is almost certain however
that upland farm size will increase and that management will change
creating enterprises that need a properly rewarded labour force.
The weakness in this situation is the lack of qualified young
people entering upland farming and land management with the enthusiasm,
determination and ability to undertake this dramatic change.
2.6 Working with farm colleges and universities
ReedNet Uplands will identify young people who meet this specification
and who are approaching the end of their general agricultural
course and qualification. These students will join a group that
will work on leading edge upland farming units around which they
will move over a period and while doing so will identify problems
and opportunities, in discussion with the farmers, needing to
be researched or developed. Examples are genetics, pastoral improvement,
new approaches to the use of grass, arable co-operation and the
maintenance of the ecology. Other things can be added to this
list such as energy and timber production and the improvement
of wildlife.
2.7 Part of the ReedNet approach is to bring
the links in the food chain together and this will be integral
to the plan. The participants will meet auctioneers, processors,
wholesalers and retailers involved in the red meat industry and
as a result it is hoped new links and co-operation will increase.
The "students" will also all meet up from time to time
to compare notes and meet specialists in such things as animal
breeding, veterinary care and grassland management. It is hoped
that the participating farmers within the group will undertake
basic research, problem solving and opening new opportunities.
2.8 ReedNet has limited resources and its
work currently is with sectors comprised of large production units
which can easily absorb additional training staff, but that is
not the case in upland farming. However there are farms where
a labour force of three or four does exist and where additional
help is required from time to time. To work properly, however,
ReedNet will require further resources to ensure the "students"
are properly paid. Some of this may come from the individual farmer,
some from commercial sponsorship and, we hope, some from a government
source. However the financing of the project has to be arranged
by Harper Adams and the Royal Agricultural College who have joint
responsibility for the management of the project. From a government
point of view the outcome of much needed research and development
coming as part of commercial farming activities and supported
by a group of young farmers has to be good return on investment.
3. Would you be able to provide any additional
figures to support your statement that the number of tenancies
has reduced and the number of people wanting to take them on has
increased?
3.1 The table below contains figures derived
from reports from the Central Association of Agricultural Valuers
from its Annual Tenanted Land Survey. These figures are not specific
to upland areas. However, they do show that over a 10-year period
opportunities to let land both in terms of area and the number
of those opportunities has declined.
Year | Net Change in area of let land (ha)
| Number of Fresh lettings |
| 1999 | 61,439 | 664
|
| 2000 | 38,510 | 518
|
| 2001 | 34,246 | 426
|
| 2002 | 25,889 | 348
|
| 2003 | 6,020 | 216
|
| 2004 | (3,049) | 100
|
| 2005 | (6,222) | 184
|
| 2006 | 5,501 | 157
|
| 2007 | 6,594 | 150
|
| 2008 | 2,617 | 134
|
| |
|
3.2 Unfortunately, the number of individuals looking
to secure an agricultural tenancy is not collected on any consistent
basis. However, the TFA is aware that for every tenancy opportunity
offered in the marketplace there are always multiple applications.
The TFA is also finding that there is an increasing interest in
entering the farming industry and in its work with the National
Federation of Young Farmers Clubs there is clearly a keen desire
amongst young people to be trained for seeking out those opportunities.
4. Would you be able to provide further information on this
point?
"I have always thought the issue of over-grazing was overstated.
If you look at the cases—I do not have the figures to hand—where
individuals were taken to task under the regulations for over-grazing,
they were vanishingly small".
4.1 In 2003 DEFRA conducted a consultation exercise on the
Review of the Overgrazing and Unsuitable Supplementary Feeding
Cross Compliance Controls in England. In a statistical annex to
the consultation document DEFRA set out information about the
number of overgrazing incidents dealt with by the authorities.
4.2 It recorded that between 1989 and 1996 there were 113
complaints received about overgrazing (14 a year) and in the period
1997 to 2002 there were 86 complaints (12 a year). It also recorded
that over half of these issues had been dealt with either because
there was no case to address or where relatively small changes
in management were introduced. In only 20 cases over the full
period, 1989 to 2003, were prescriptions deemed necessary—just
over one case each year on average.
4.3 The TFA believes that this fits with the evidence it
provided to the Select Committee that the concerns about overgrazing
in the uplands, whilst important in individual cases have been
overstated.
5. You mentioned an idea to re-introduce headage payments
with environmental criteria, can you expand on the type of environmental
criteria?
5.1 The TFA believes that grazing livestock is a basic requirement
for the sustainable management of the upland environment and that
it is only through the reintroduction of some form of headage
payment that sufficient numbers of grazing livestock, particularly
breeding cattle, will be employed on upland farms. In terms of
environmental criteria, we would see that operating either through
stocking rate limits or by using ceilings on payments which are
in keeping with the carrying capacity of the land concerned.
6. You said, regarding Article 68: "Certainly, the
criteria within which Article 68 operates need careful thought
before we allow any Government to run riot through that particular
piece of legislation". Could you expand on the criteria required?
6.1 "Article 68" allows Member States to make deductions
from direct payments under the Single Payment Scheme to fund other
activities. The worry is that the money deducted does not have
to be match funded by Member States whereas with modulation of
SPS which goes to fund Pillar II activities, match funding is
a requirement. There is also a worry that some of the money deducted
under Article 68 will be spent on administration and therefore
the benefit to the sector concerned would be reduced in comparison
to leaving the money in the SPS. The TFA would want to be assured
that any scheme developed for the uplands under the auspices of
Article 68 is clearly in the interests of the livestock sector
in the uplands, is a benefit directly to active farmers, as administered
as cost effectively as possible and does not undermine the furtherance
of productive, sustainable livestock production in upland areas.
7. Do you have any views or concerns on the European Commission's
proposal for changes to LFA designations that you would like to
share with the Committee?
7.1 The TFA believes that there is no justification for any
alteration to the current designation of Less Favoured areas in
England and Wales.
8. Do you think that the TRIG guidance is sufficient to
resolve disputes between tenants and landlords when they arise?
8.1 The guidance issued by TRIG in February 2010 covering
the introduction of Uplands ELS is indeed very valuable. However,
it suffers from a number of drawbacks.
8.2 The first drawback is that there is no means of enforcing
the guidance. Whilst it sets out good practice in context of the
current legislative environment for uplands ELS, it is not legally
binding and can therefore be ignored in situations where landlords
wish to capitalise on Uplands ELS.
8.3 Secondly, the guidance is written in the context
of landlords been able to claim that they have management control
for the purposes of entry into a agri-environment schemes. As
articulated in the earlier evidence provided by the TFA to the
Select Committee, the TFA believes that the definition of management
control should be altered to prevent landlords claiming that they
are in management control when they are not in day-to-day management
of the holdings or taking the business/entrepreneurial risk.
8.4 Thirdly, the guidance suffered from the fact that
DEFRA was not proactive in ensuring that it was circulated to
all potential Uplands ELS applicants which TRIG advised should
be the case. It is a shame that given the extent of work that
went into the production of the guidance that copies of it still
remain on shelves in DEFRA unopened. The TFA did its best to circulate
the guidance to its members but it would have been better if all
potential applicants had received it from a central register.
November 2010
| 
