Source · Select Committees · Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 12
12
The NAO found that Department does not have detailed delivery plans for the programme beyond...
Conclusion
The NAO found that Department does not have detailed delivery plans for the programme beyond March 2022, and has not carried out an overall assessment to demonstrate that SFI22 is deliverable.27 The Department told us that its current assessment was that it would be able to deliver to the timeframes it had set out and that farmers would be ready to join the scheme and deliver what was required of them. It accepted that, if either of those were to change it would have to think again, and that it was “pragmatic in that respect”, but that there was nothing in its current assessment that suggested it could not proceed with the timetable as planned.28 We urged the Department to be cautious and to undertake any contingency planning that it could in order to avoid the scheme negatively impacting on farmers as they transition into it, and asked it to let us know as soon as it was aware of any issues.29 26 Qq 56–57, 95, 127 27 C&AG’s Report paras 13, 18 28 Q 95 29 Q 127 14 Environmental Land Management Scheme 2 Engagement with stakeholders
Government Response
Not Addressed
HM Government
Not Addressed
Despite the tight timescales and continuing uncertainty around the launch of SFI22 next year, the stakeholders we heard from were divided on whether a delay to the roll-out and to the reduction in direct payments was necessary. The National Farmers’ Union recommended a delay to ensure that the scheme is ready to work for both farmers and the environment. In its written evidence it said: “The NFU does not believe that a delay of the transition is the solution. A delay would only extend the period of uncertainty, and potentially push the worst impacts of the transition further down the line.” The government wants to deliver a smooth transition for farmers and these views have been fully taken into account.