Home / Sources / Select Committees / Environment, Food and Rural A… / Departmental Annual Report 2012-13
Select committee inquiry

Departmental Annual Report 2012-13

Closed

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee · Opened 14 October 2013 · Closed 14 May 2014

5 recommendations · 13 conclusions
Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗

What the inquiry looked at

“The Committee held two evidence sessions on Defra's Departmental Annual Report and Accounts (PDF 2 MB) . Links to the transcripts are at the foot of this page. The first evidence session, with the Permanent Secretary and officials, provided an opportunity for the Committee to ask about the administration and operation of the Department. Parliament TV: EFRA, Tuesday 22 October 2013 The second evidence session, with the Secretary of State, focused on Departmental Priorities and topical issues including the badger cull, climate change and GM foods. Parliament TV: EFRA, Tuesday 29 October 2013”

The committee's words, from the inquiry page on parliament.uk ↗.

What it found

In the committee's words, from the summary of 9th Report - Departmental Annual Report 2012–13 (Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report) ↗

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) is one of the smallest of Government Departments but it has faced among the most substantial budget cuts, which are set to continue up to 2016. The Department spent just under £2.5 billion in 2012–13. Its budget has been cut by £500 million since the 2010 Spending Review and it will face another reduction of £300 million in the years up to 2015–16. This raises some concerns—in the last year Defra has had to respond to floods, horsemeat contamination, and ash dieback. Its ability to respond to emergencies such as these must be protected. Clarity is required from the Secretary of State about precisely which policies and programmes will face significant budget reductions in the next two financial years.

Defra, to an unusual degree, delivers policy through a network of 28 arms-length delivery agencies, and once again clarity is required about the future funding and extent of those agencies and their programmes, including the Rural Payments Agency, Fera and the Environment Agency.

Among the most significant challenges facing the Department in the next 12 months is implementation of the new Common Agricultural Policy, and it must take care to learn the lessons from implementation of the last new system in 2008, particularly as regards the simultaneous change of system and the introduction of a new IT system. Farmers who are unable to access online systems, particularly in areas not yet adequately covered by the Government’s own Rural Broadband Programme, must be able to continue to access payments via paper-based systems.

The results of the Defra staff survey reveal an increased lack of confidence in the management and leadership of the Department. Defra scores below the Civil Service average in these areas. Although efforts are being made to address a number of areas, there needs to be a greater sense of urgency about addressing these issues, especially as the Department is about to enter a period of further budget cuts. Senior officials in the Department must take steps to manage the changes arising from the savings so that staff morale and engagement improves.

Further challenges facing Defra in the coming year include policy relating to bovine TB and badger culling, its proposals on biodiversity offsetting, the introduction of plastic bag charging, partnership funding for flood defences and examining the role and potential of GM technology in food production.

We recommend that the proposal for biodiversity offsetting—to replace biodiversity loss resulting from developments—should not be taken further until the results of the pilots have been independently assessed.

We are pleased that the Department has finally agreed to impose a charge for single-use plastic bags in supermarkets and larger food retailers but disappointed that the charge will not come into effect in England until 2015, despite evidence of its success in reducing plastic carrier bag usage in other parts of the UK. We recommend it be implemented sooner.

What the government said

The government responded on 14 May 2014.

Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response.

Defra's further response sets out its approach to the Committee's recommendations on budgets, CAP administration, bovine TB, biodiversity offsetting, flood funding and plastic bags, accepting some points and declining others.

  • On biodiversity offsetting, the government says it "recognises and agrees" the issues are important and has decided to "wait until the pilots have been assessed before making any policy decisions"; it will "consider" the recommendation on geographical spread.
  • On plastic bags, it will bring into force a 5p charge on single-use plastic carrier bags in England in October 2015, explaining the delay by the time needed for secondary legislation, exemption details and retailer preparation.
  • On CAP administration, it "has not ruled out paper guidance in year one" and is "planning assisted digital support for users who really need it".
  • On bonuses, it says Cabinet Office does not allow transfer of funding from the Senior Civil Service performance pay pot to staff below that level, and that it "will draw the Committee's concerns to the attention of the Cabinet Office".

Read the government's response ↗ Read the report ↗ Report an error

How the inquiry ran

Each dot is a dated item listed on this page, from the inquiry's opening on 14 October 2013 to its close on 14 May 2014.

  1. Oral evidence 2 sessions
  2. Report 7 Jan 2014
  3. Government response 14 May 2014

What it recommended 5 recommendations · 13 conclusions

1The Secretary of State needs to be clearer about what substantial cuts in Defra’s budget...
Concluded (the committee's words)
The Secretary of State needs to be clearer about what substantial cuts in Defra’s budget will mean for policy delivery. We understand that how Defra spends its remaining budget will be determined in line with his four priorities, but they are in themselves no clear guide to where the axe will fall. Administrative and efficiency savings will not represent the entire saving. We invite the Secretary of State to set out in detail, in response to this Report, what programmes and policies will be reduced or ended to meet the required budget savings.
2We understand that nearly all Government departments face budget cuts, but savings must not have...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We understand that nearly all Government departments face budget cuts, but savings must not have an adverse impact on the Department’s ability to respond to emergencies. We invite the Department to set out its position in relation to reported reductions in staff at the Environment Agency, the future of Fera and reduced activity in the waste sector.
3Details showing precisely which areas will be covered by the Rural Broadband Programme and when...
Concluded (the committee's words)
Details showing precisely which areas will be covered by the Rural Broadband Programme and when must be published in order to encourage alternative providers to fill in the gaps and provide certainty to those wishing to invest in private solutions such as satellite.
4A paper-based application process must be retained for delivery of the CAP, and those farmers...
Concluded (the committee's words)
A paper-based application process must be retained for delivery of the CAP, and those farmers who take up this option, or who choose to use an agent because they cannot apply online, must not be financially penalised for doing so.
5We recommend that guidance on the new CAP is provided to farmers in paper form...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that guidance on the new CAP is provided to farmers in paper form in the run-up to the start of the new scheme.
6Natural England should also be prepared to offer guidance to farmers whose land is being...
Concluded (the committee's words)
Natural England should also be prepared to offer guidance to farmers whose land is being entered into an agri-environment scheme. Natural England must be able to reassure itself and others that those affected by the agri-environment agreement either by undertaking the work, or through income foregone, receive appropriate payment.
7The Department must find ways to prevent a repeat of these poor staff survey results.
Concluded (the committee's words)
The Department must find ways to prevent a repeat of these poor staff survey results. We invite it to set out specific plans in its response to this Report on how it will address low morale and lack of confidence in the management of the Department.
8We understand that the Government’s pay policy allows for bonuses to provide incentives for good...
Recommended (the committee's words)
We understand that the Government’s pay policy allows for bonuses to provide incentives for good performance; we are surprised, however, by the discrepancy between the amount of bonus paid to senior staff and that paid to more junior staff. Given the savings that the Department must make over the next few years, we recommend that it review its practice on bonuses and consider whether, within Government guidelines, increasing performance-related bonuses for those at the lower end of salary scales, with a consequent reduction for its higher-paid senior staff, might help to improve staff morale. The Department must also monitor closely Departmental Annual Report 2012-13 23 its treatment of the performance of its disabled staff to deflect any suggestion of bias against them by managers.
9The two pilot badger culls set out to assess the humaneness, safety and effectiveness of...
Recommended (the committee's words)
The two pilot badger culls set out to assess the humaneness, safety and effectiveness of using controlled shooting as a method of badger control. Accurate estimates of the local badger population are crucial if the success of a cull is to be accurately judged. Repeated revision of those estimates undermines confidence in the process. As part of its evaluation of the culls, the Government must demonstrate whether there is any evidence of badgers moving from the cull zones into neighbouring areas and thereby risking the spread of bovine TB.
10The Randomised Badger Culling Trial demonstrated that at least 70% of the local population of...
Concluded (the committee's words)
The Randomised Badger Culling Trial demonstrated that at least 70% of the local population of badgers need to be killed in order for a cull to reduce the incidence of TB in cattle. We invite the Government to set out why the first year of the pilots failed to achieve the target figure in the allotted time and what changes are required in order for the planned future culls to be effective. The Committee will continue to monitor developments in this area.
11The Secretary of State told us that he wants to “improve the environment”—to leave it...
Concluded (the committee's words)
The Secretary of State told us that he wants to “improve the environment”—to leave it in a better state than previously—and to safeguard the country from animal and plant disease: all objectives enshrined in his four priorities for the Department. It is hard to disagree with these objectives but it is equally important that policy making is evidenced-based. The Government has initiated six pilot offsetting projects and it is difficult to understand why it does not wish to assess these properly before embarking on a wider rollout.
12The Government must obtain independent evaluation of its pilot schemes before moving to implement the...
Recommended (the committee's words)
The Government must obtain independent evaluation of its pilot schemes before moving to implement the Department’s biodiversity offsetting proposals. Following the evaluation, if the proposals are implemented, the Department must ensure the programme is monitored to ensure the biodiversity benefits are being realised.
13Any offsetting scheme should take account of reduced public access to the biodiversity which is...
Concluded (the committee's words)
Any offsetting scheme should take account of reduced public access to the biodiversity which is lost as a result of the development. If local people’s enjoyment of habitats and wildlife will be directly affected by development, consideration should be taken of this when determining the location of the offset.
14A sufficient geographical spread of offset locations must be maintained to minimise the impact of...
Concluded (the committee's words)
A sufficient geographical spread of offset locations must be maintained to minimise the impact of threats to species and habitats. We invite the Government to set a geographical limit to offsetting, and to set out the specific circumstances under which exception may be made, in any future proposals.
15We invite the Department to confirm the amount of contributions received from external sources under...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We invite the Department to confirm the amount of contributions received from external sources under the Partnership Funding approach to date, and to demonstrate how the Partnership Funding model for flood defences will deliver much greater private sector funding in the future.
16We encourage industry to follow-up on the Secretary of State’s desire to see the development...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We encourage industry to follow-up on the Secretary of State’s desire to see the development of a genuine biodegradable plastic bag which can be used to carry shopping. We are pleased that the Government has finally agreed to impose a charge for single-use plastic carrier bags in supermarkets and larger food retailers. However, we are disappointed that the charge will not come into effect in England until 2015, despite evidence of its success in reducing plastic carrier bag usage in other parts of the UK and Ireland.
17Reducing the number of single-use carrier bags which are given away is a quick win:...
Recommended (the committee's words)
Reducing the number of single-use carrier bags which are given away is a quick win: reducing both waste and environmental pollution with little effort. While we would welcome the development of a fully biodegradable shopping bag to replace existing plastic bags, this should not be a condition for the introduction of the charge. Given the evidence elsewhere, we recommend the early introduction of the charge. When fully degradable plastic bags are available, these should be exempt from any charge.
18We have recently put out a call for evidence for a new inquiry into food...
Concluded (the committee's words)
We have recently put out a call for evidence for a new inquiry into food security. We intend to explore the use of GM and other new technologies in this inquiry.

Evidence

Oral evidence sessions 2