---

Lord Irvine of Lairg: My Lords, I am pleased to be the first Labour spokesman on this bright and beautiful morning. We support both instruments. In particular, we welcome the three extensions of ABWOR. I agree with the Government's interpretation of the Benham decision. In principle it must apply to a failure to obey any court order where there is a risk of imprisonment. It is not confined to its own facts--a failure to pay community charge.

We agree also with the other two extensions of ABWOR for the benefit of prisoners who appear before the Parole Board while detained at Her Majesty's pleasure and persons subject of a removal order under Section 47 of the National Assistance Act 1948. ABWOR should plainly extend to the latter because they are often the most vulnerable in society who could lose their liberty as a result of the application for removal.

We also support the second instrument. It is right that means assessment in civil cases transfer from the Benefits Agency to the Legal Aid Board. I specifically welcome the confirmation given by the noble and learned Lord that this transfer will include the Special Investigations Unit. It investigates cases where the resources of applicants are obscure and complex. We must bear down hard on those whose life styles give the lie to the want of resources which they profess, whether the case is a civil or a criminal one.

The sooner the investigations unit is up and running within the board and able to investigate both classes of case, both civil and criminal, the better for the public purse. There are a number of things which can bring legal aid into public discredit, but none greater than the huge fees sometimes paid out for the benefit of those who can well afford to pay for their own lawyers. We therefore welcome both instruments.

The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, I am grateful for this support. We all know, of course, that sunny weather

28 Feb 1997 : Column 1413

for some can change quite quickly into very dark and thunderous clouds. I am sure that the time between now and some other events may be quite sufficient for that purpose.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Legal Aid (Functions) Order 1997

The Lord Chancellor rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 30th January be approved [11th Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I have already explained this order and I have benefited from the support of the noble Lord, Lord Irvine of Lairg. Therefore, I also commend this instrument to the House.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 30th January be approved [11th Report from the Joint Committee].--(The Lord Chancellor.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Farm Woodland Premium Scheme 1997

11.18 a.m.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Scottish Office (The Earl of Lindsay) rose to move, That the draft scheme laid before the House on 12th February be approved [13th Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble Earl said: My Lords, in moving this draft scheme I shall speak to the second scheme standing in my name on the Order Paper. These draft statutory instruments are presented in accordance with Section 2 of the Farm Land and Rural Development Act 1988. They were laid before the House on 12th February and approved by the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments on 25th February. They apply in Great Britain only. Similar but separate arrangements operate in Northern Ireland.

I shall describe the background to the schemes. The farm woodland scheme was introduced in 1988 to counter growing agricultural surpluses and to encourage farmers to develop woodlands on land used for agriculture. The scheme offered payments to farmers over periods of up to 40 years to compensate for the agricultural income foregone when they planted trees on their land. The pilot scheme was reviewed after five years and its successor, the farm woodland premium scheme, was launched in 1992. The main changes introduced into the FWPS were increased payments over a shorter period and a reduction in the minimum eligible area. At the time we undertook to review the scheme and report to Parliament within five years.

The scheme is co-funded under EC Regulation 2080/92 on forestry measures in agriculture and we receive reimbursement of 50 per cent. of eligible expenditure from the CAP budget.

Both schemes have been successful with, to date, over 48,000 hectares approved for planting in the UK.

28 Feb 1997 : Column 1414

We conducted an economic and environmental evaluation of the scheme and sought views from the main farming, forestry and environmental interests. In light of the evaluations and views received, we conducted a detailed policy review of the scheme. A report was laid before Parliament on 24th July last year summarising proposed changes and shortly afterwards a detailed consultation paper was issued. That consultation paper was sent to farming, forestry and environmental interests and placed in the Library of the House.

Following that exercise, our final intentions were announced on 12th December last year and a list of the changes was placed in the Library of the House. The statutory instruments currently before your Lordships would enact those aspects of the proposed changes where legislative amendments are necessary.

Our review concluded that considerable public good derived from woodlands, most notably in the form of landscape and wildlife benefits. These benefits justify continued public support for the scheme.

The objectives of the scheme are being revised to stress the environmental reasons for the public subsidy. The new objectives are:

"To enhance the environment through the planting of farm woodlands, in particular to improve the landscape, provide new habitats and increase biodiversity. In doing this, land managers should be encouraged to realise the productive potential of woodland as a sustainable land use".

A number of detailed changes are being introduced by these statutory instruments. I would like to describe the most important of them.

First, we are seeking to increase payment rates, except on unimproved land where we consider the existing rates adequate. We are also making some changes to the payment structure. This is because the evaluations showed that the agricultural income foregone from planting trees was substantially higher on arable land than on grassland. Therefore, we are introducing a separate, higher rate that will apply to plantings on arable land, defined as land eligible for the arable area payments scheme. The new rates and payment structure will apply to both new and existing participants. Outside the less favoured areas, the new rate will be £300 per hectare for plantings on arable land and £260 per hectare for plantings on improved permanent grassland. It is my view that, bearing in mind the benefits many farmers and their successors will derive from woodland on their land, this will be an attractive proposition for many.

Secondly, we are removing the requirement for participants, once accepted into the scheme, to continue to run an agricultural business. I see this as an important development that will make the scheme considerably more attractive to farmers who are contemplating retirement from active agriculture. The change will also apply to existing participants.

Farmers will still have to be running an agricultural business to be accepted into the scheme, but we are widening eligibility for the scheme by broadening the definition of an agricultural business to include arrangements, such as grazing licences, where landowners retain some control over the management of the land.

28 Feb 1997 : Column 1415

We are also introducing more flexibility into the eligibility requirements by removing the current rule limiting applications to 50 per cent. of the agricultural area of a holding. However, this is a cash-limited scheme and we wish to see a wide range of plantings of varying nature and with different objectives. It would therefore not be desirable if the bulk of the funds went to a small number of businesses, to the exclusion of others. With this in mind, we are introducing a maximum area limit of 200 hectares on the area any one business can receive FWPS payments on. The limit will only apply to plantings ensuing from applications received on or after 1st April 1997.

On the administrative front, we want to make the scheme easier for farmers to apply for. The revised scheme will therefore be more closely integrated with the woodland grant scheme run by the Forestry Commission, with joint application and acceptance procedures. There will effectively be a one-stop shop for the farmer interested in establishing a woodland.

In summary, the intention of these changes is to make the FWPS more attractive and thereby help increase the amount of woodland on agricultural land around our towns and throughout our countryside, not only to our benefit but to the benefit of future generations. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft scheme laid before the House on 12th February be approved [13th Report from the Joint Committee].--(The Earl of Lindsay.)

Lord Carmichael of Kelvingrove: My Lords, I am speaking to this statutory instrument in the absence of my noble friend Lord Carter. I am most grateful to the Minister for his rather long explanation of this complicated scheme. I thank also the Country Landowners' Association for the brief that it has forwarded to me.

I understand that the problem with the old scheme was that farmers were not willing to enter it because of the practical problems encountered when trying to do so. However, from what the Minister said, it looks as though individual farmers or landowners will still need more explanations if they are to be attracted into the scheme.

My general impression from the briefings I have been given is that provided that no hidden snags arise, as happened with the earlier scheme, this scheme is in general acceptable and will help to achieve increased plantings of trees on what was previously farm land or reclaimed land. Therefore, on behalf of this side of the House, I give the scheme a general welcome and only hope that this time we have got it absolutely right.

---