Recommendations 4
4 accepted. 3 implemented.
Response: Accepted
· Delivery: no longer relevant (confirmed by the NAO)
Addressed to Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs · Page 11, paragraph 21, point a
Recommendation (the NAO's words)
Defra should:
a) get in place a plan with realistic timescales, that is based on a full understanding of interdependencies, and that has sufficient flexibility to allow changes to be made as more is learned about how farmers react to the new framework;
Response: Accepted
· Delivery: implemented, Q4 2021-22 (confirmed by the NAO)
Addressed to Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs · Page 11, paragraph 21, point b
Recommendation (the NAO's words)
b) ensure that its decisions on which outcomes the government wishes to prioritise, and the associated payment mechanisms, are taken in good time for the pilot starting in 2021, so it has a solid basis for preparing the digital infrastructure and farmers have enough time to adapt their businesses and develop their plans;
Response: Accepted
· Delivery: implemented, Q4 2024-25 (confirmed by the NAO)
Addressed to Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs · Page 11, paragraph 21, point c
Recommendation (the NAO's words)
c) extend participation in the tests and trials to include a wider range of farmers and other land managers, to test the willingness and ability of individual farmers to participate in ELMS and so provide more confidence that a reasonable level of take-up will be achieved; and
Response: Accepted
· Delivery: implemented, Q4 2021-22 (confirmed by the NAO)
Addressed to Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs · Page 11, paragraph 21, point d
Recommendation (the NAO's words)
d) determine the level of ELMS take-up it needs to justify its investment in the design and development of ELMS and consider what alternative arrangements are needed if this is not achieved.