| Allan Wilson:
I, too, congratulate
Murdo Fraser on securing the debate on a topic that I know to be important
to the Scottish farming community, the wider beef industry in Scotland
and, clearly, to his constituents. I happily assure Murdo Fraser that,
if he shares his dossier of complaints with us, we will be pleased to examine
it and see what we can do to help his constituents.
It might be
helpful if I start by setting out the legal context for the cross-checking
of subsidy claims against the BCMS database. Executive officials undertake
cross-checks because there is a clear requirement to do so under European
law. That law, as with most European laws, has substantial teeth. We would
incur a considerable financial penalty from the European Commission if
we did not undertake those cross-checks.
I realise that
times are difficult for Scottish farmers and that, as Alex Fergusson said,
delays in payment can cause hardship. However, the check is a key control,
which is required by the Commission. If we did not carry it out, we could
incur penalties of many millions of pounds.
Stewart Stevenson:
I am sure that all members and farmers would
wish those checks to be made, and it is entirely proper that they are made.
However, does the minister accept that the key difficulty is that, when
errors are found, the finger is invariably pointed at the farmer when the
anecdotal evidence is very clear that the majority of mistakes are made
within the bureaucratic system in the data entry and data management?
Allan Wilson:
I will come to the statistics that I have
at my disposal when I deal with the points that Richard Lochhead made.
I am told that the SEERAD officials responsible implement the scheme sensitively,
and I will be interested in examples that members give me that might contradict
that.
Murdo Fraser
raised concerns about the quality of the information in the BCMS database.
That is important not only for farmers receiving their subsidy payments;
from our point of view, it is important that we have an effective system
of animal traceability. For the Scottish beef industry to keep and improve
its reputation for health and quality, everybody should have confidence
in that system.
Any system that
involves the processing of large amounts of complex data will obviously
be open to error. Every year, the BCMS processes over 10 million cattle
movement notifications, 3 million birth registrations and 3 million death
notifications. However, we must acknowledge that many of the errors come
from the industry. The BCMS reports that 20 per cent to 25 per cent of
birth registrations contain an error and that 20 per cent of movement notifications
are incomplete or contradictory. A consistent theme of European auditors
in recent years is that the quality of livestock farmers' record keeping
needs to improve.
Richard Lochhead:
I welcome the minister's point that such a
complex system is bound to lead to errors. That is exactly the farmers'
point. The system seems to demand 100 per cent accuracy; without that,
it penalises the farmers. Does the minister appreciate that that is the
farmers' view?
Allan Wilson:
Yes—and I am told that the system is administered
with sensitivity precisely because of that. The rules are laid down by
Europe for us to follow, and there is very little flexibility in that regard.
Alex Fergusson:
The minister has just stated that the system
is administered with the greatest possible sensitivity, yet almost every
speaker has pointed out the lack of sensitivity in the system. Will the
minister please respond to that?
Allan Wilson:
I am, with respect, responding to that. I have committed to take on board
Murdo Fraser's dossier of complaint and to address the issues that have
been raised. The complaint that Alex Fergusson referred to will be investigated.
I assure Alex Fergusson that I would wish the system to be administered
with sensitivity. Where he has concrete examples of that not being the
case, I assure him that we will have those instances investigated and introduce
a degree of sensitivity to the process.
Alex Johnstone
(North-East Scotland) (Con): Before we leave
this subject, I would like to introduce a slight variation. This point
relates to something that Alex Fergusson said and to the nature of the
penalties that are applied when mistakes are made.
In this case,
I am talking about mistakes that are made, by the farmers themselves, in
the specific circumstances that we have described and in other schemes
and the contravention of other regulations. Simple errors are resulting
in enormously draconian penalties, amounting to losses of up to 100 per
cent of income in the case of one scheme in one particular year. Will the
minister explain whether the extent of the penalties that have been applied
is required by SEERAD under European regulation, or whether decisions on
the extent to which the penalties should be exerted are made by SEERAD?
Allan Wilson:
I cannot do so now, but I undertake to find
out the answer to that question and to revert to Alex Johnstone and other
members on what flexibility, if any, exists with respect to the application
of the European rules in the Scottish context. If that is possible, and
if things can be done more sensitively, I give Alex Johnstone the assurance
that we will take steps to investigate the prospect of applying such flexibility.
Steps are being
taken to improve the operation of the BCMS and to cleanse the anomalous
data that are currently held. Stewart Stevenson will be pleased to learn
that additional staff have been made available for dealing with calls and
correspondence following an upsurge in demand in November. After some problems,
responses are now back to normal levels. I am particularly pleased that,
in Scotland, farmers, markets and abattoirs are working with the Executive
to put in place a co-ordinated programme of improvements in cattle data
transmission. Scotland championed the development of the cattle-tracing
system—CTS—online, which has greatly improved the service to farmers. I
accept the need for improvement, and everyone has a part to play in that.
I wish to work with the industry to ensure that there is improvement in
the system. It is of course not just an issue for the BCMS.
The Executive
is fully aware of the need to make subsidy payments to farmers as quickly
as possible within the legal requirements that are set by the European
Union. That process involves cross-checking the animals that are identified
on subsidy claims against an extract of data taken from the BCMS database
at Workington. Since the process for the 2002 schemes started in November,
more than 1 million Scottish animals have successfully passed cross-checks
and the relevant claims have been passed for payment. This year we are
paying advances at the higher rate of 80 per cent, a concession that we
successfully sought from the Commission because of the bad weather last
summer. That should be of some benefit to farmers.
Advance payments
started well before Christmas for all the cattle schemes and are running
well. As of 27 January, we have paid £53 million under the suckler
cow premium scheme, which is about 90 per cent of what we expect to pay
out in advance. That is similar to the position last year, when we did
not cross-check at this stage. The situation in Scotland is substantially
better than the situation for farmers anywhere else in Great Britain.
Some refinements
need to be made to the software before officials can give farmers information
on failing animals and the reasons for the problems. Farmers have been
kept up to date on the position. We cannot pay subsidies to farmers who
have clearly breached their responsibility to notify the BCMS of animal
movements or when, according to the CTS, an animal did not meet a requirement
of the scheme. When farmers believe that animals have been deducted unfairly,
they will have an opportunity to provide proof of their case and to seek
a review.
We need a high-quality
database that serves the needs of Scottish farmers and our wider beef industry.
The environment and rural development department must continue to implement
European law and to minimise the risk of incurring financial penalties.
John Scott:
Will the minister say something about the
impending problem with sheep?
Allan Wilson:
With the Presiding Officer's permission, I
will do so.
We must continue
to encourage improvement in record keeping by farmers and improved data
transmission by farmers, markets and slaughterhouses, as well as improvements
to the processes and operation of the BCMS.
I agree that
European proposals on sheep identification are very worrying and I confirm
that we will work energetically to have those proposals altered to suit
circumstances in Scotland. My officials will continue to work to ensure
that the BCMS, too, meets Scotland's needs. I promise members that we are
committed to ensuring that farmers receive their subsidies as quickly as
possible, while implementing—as we must—European law.
To
read this debate in full, click here
|
