Decision on set-aside 'flanking' measures ignores report recommendations

The decision by the Secretary of State to impose an additional cross-compliance requirement in response to the setting of set-aside at zero per cent does not reflect the recommendations of the High Level Set-Aside Group (HLSAG), the NFU says.

In a public letter to Sir Don Curry, chair of the HLSAG, Hilary Benn argues that although mitigating measures cannot be implemented for the 2008/09 cropping season, they are needed as soon as practicable. He further advises that Defra's aim is to introduce an additional cross-compliance obligation that would require a percentage of arable land not be cropped or to be devoted to winter stubbles.

NFU President Peter Kendall said: "I believe that the statement by the Secretary of State does not reflect the recommendations of the report. A reading of the report makes clear that the evidence-gathering exercise has failed to present a case for action through additional cross-compliance requirements.

"Furthermore, the introduction of measures in 2009/10 threatens to jeopardise the delivery of the Single Payment Scheme and the future of agri-environmental schemes.

"To introduce further constraints on arable production in the absence of evidence is unwise. To do so at a time when the Prime Minister and the Chancellor have publicly expressed concerns about food prices and highlighted the importance of agricultural production is a further flagrant example of the lack of joined up thinking and disregard for the importance of production that characterises Defra."

The NFU believes that any decision should be based on evidence and that any potential localised environmental impact should be addressed through targeted measures such as agri-environmental schemes and should come into effect in 2010 when most of the current agreements are up for renewal.