Hindsight
Member
- Location
- Lincolnshire
At this stage it could morph into a cracking scheme or descend into abject failure to deliver (either the public goods or the financial support).
I'm very worried about the lack of flexibility of interpretation on farm. I deeply belive it needs to be more of a "framework" allowing each farm to negotiate exactly how the outcomes are delivered in their specific set of circumstances. It should feel like a genuine partnership with DEFRA, not another imposed subsidy scheme.
A Good start would be for each farm to have a named person in DEFRA to liaise with whose role is to find a way to make the broad options on offer work effectively within the constraints of the farm.
There is a gulf of trust between farmers and DEFRA/RPA/EA/NE/ Forestry Commission. Bridging that is essential if ELMS is to be a success.
What you propose will be far to expensive to facilitate. And there will have to be rigour (for which read inflexibility) to allow inspection and policing (yep, you and farmers will say that is last thing needed - but the man from the Treasury will insist - isn't just the EU that need to audit public expenditure.
Hope I am wrong - but I will have a threepenny bit with you I am nearer the mark!!
Best wishes,