Common Agricultural Policy Single Payment and Support Schemes (Cross-compliance) (England) Regulations 2005

rose to move, That an Humble Address be presented to Her Majesty praying that the regulations, laid before the House on 19 December 2005, be annulled (S.I. 2005/3459) [20th Report from the Merits Committee]. The noble Baroness said: My Lords, for the convenience of the House, in moving this Motion, I will speak also to the Motion on the Common Agricultural Policy Single Payment Scheme (Set-aside) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2005. The Merits Committee has again drawn the attention of the House to these two statutory instruments. The first is the cross-compliance instrument, SI 2005/3459; the second is the set-aside instrument, SI 2005/3460. The regulations change the arrangements for cross-compliance and for the set-aside management conditions that were put in place about a year ago in the context of the single farm payment. When the instruments were first introduced, they were viewed with dismay by the farming community, which felt that they were a real threat. There is still a feeling that the UK Government have engaged in a massive gold-plating exercise. The annexe to the EU regulation defining good agricultural and environmental condition contained a mere 13 lines. By the time the regulation had been put into British law, that had become 700 lines. We are trying to get less regulation; this is ridiculous. The cross-compliance instrument, number SI 2005/3459, consolidates two previous regulations. The purpose of the new statutory instrument is to refine the original provisions and introduce additional flexibility for farmers. That must be a welcome move, but we still have, on paragraph 3 of page 7, detailed prescriptions on waterlogged soil and strict definitions of when one can, or cannot, carry out a mechanical field operation. Indeed, in some circumstances, the Secretary of State’s approval must be sought. With ever-changing climate conditions of drought or heavy rain, farmers often have to make clear judgments in snap circumstances. I hope that the Minister will reassure us that careful consideration will be given in such circumstances. Who will do the inspecting? Will it be someone from Natural England, or is it the Environment Agency’s role? How will somebody be able to apply to the Secretary of State in exceptional circumstances? Have other EU countries put such detailed statutory instruments in their regulations? Nearer to home, what is the position in Wales and Scotland? Do they have an equally rigid regime? The Minister’s announcement that the bulk of single farm payments would be paid in February—by the end of March at the latest—was welcomed by all. In the past, many farmers received payments throughout the year. With the change to a single farm payment, however, those same farmers find themselves in dire financial difficulties. Will the Minister agree to keep a close watch on the progress of the outstanding applications, one of which I mentioned earlier? Many farmers are still unable to get their applications agreed. Statutory Instrument 2005/3460 indicates that set-aside management conditions have been reviewed in the light of the first year of operation of the single farm payment. They are intended to provide greater legal certainty and provide legislative force for a number of exemptions to the set-aside rules. The Merits Committee on page 12 of its report, paragraph 43, states:"““However, we would welcome comment that the instrument demonstrates the complexity of the arrangements””—" standards, conditions and rules—"““which apply in these areas and that they underline the importance of providing clear and effective guidance to farmers who are required to comply with them””." The Explanatory Memorandum to the statutory instrument, at paragraph 7.4, deals with the use of pesticides and herbicides on set-aside land, and it mentions green cover. It indicates that minor relaxations are provided, allowing partial organic farmers to cultivate them for controlling weeds from 1 May each year rather than 1 July. They are welcome. I am pleased to have had the opportunity to ask a couple of questions of the Minister. I hope that the department and the Government will continue to review the way in which cross-compliance is beginning to work in England. I understand that it is different in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. I beg to move. Moved, That an Humble Address be presented to Her Majesty praying that the Regulations, laid before the House on 19 December 2005, be annulled (S.I. 2005/3459). [20th Report from the Merits Committee].—(Baroness Byford.)