Before we start, I indicate to members that we have time in hand this afternoon and that it is likely that we will go early to the debate after topical question time. I hope, assume and indeed expect that members will be in the chamber for the start of the debate.
Rural Payments and Services System (Support)
To ask the Scottish Government how it is supporting the farming sector to transition to the new rural payments and services system. (S4T-00982)
There can be no doubt that the new common agricultural policy is extremely complex, and we worked alongside the industry to carefully plan its implementation, which is now under way.
We have taken a number of steps to support the transition. We held more than 50 farmer meetings to explain the new policy, and they have reached 6,500 people in the past five months. Our online single application form—SAF—for delivering the new CAP was launched on time, and farmers can book customer support sessions in our 16 area offices. Some 437 farmers have done that so far. Farmers who are without good broadband at home can access our online services in an area office.
We are aware of teething issues, which there are with all new websites, that customers have experienced. We have fixed many of them and are working hard to address the remaining issues quickly. However, it is worth noting that the system has been available for 97 per cent of the time.
The online service has major benefits in helping farmers to avoid errors and penalties with its built-in checks and validation. I therefore encourage all farmers to register and use the service.
I agree that the system is hugely important and I welcome the intentions behind it, but I understand that the online process has been painstakingly slow and deeply frustrating for those who have attempted to use it and that there are particular problems for farmers with dyslexia, given the complexity of the process.
On Friday, it was reported that 150 out of an expected 22,000 farmers and crofters had started the process online. The system is crucial for CAP payments, so it is fundamental that it is fixed, but it appears to be a shambles at the moment. Given the concerns that the National Farmers Union Scotland has raised, when will the system be fixed? What would the implications be if the Scottish Government were to take up Commissioner Hogan’s offer for member states to extend the SAF deadline?
The online system has been open for only one week and one day. Given the complexity of the new policy, we were always aware that the first week—perhaps even the first two weeks—of the new system would throw up issues that would have to be ironed out.
The number of farmers who complete forms online is always very low in the first few weeks of the window being opened—they have until 15 May to do so. We are addressing all the issues as they arise, and it is completely unfair and unreasonable to say that the system is “a shambles”. That will simply talk us into a place that none of us wants to be in, and it will sow seeds of uncertainty across the industry. We recognise that there are issues that have to be ironed out, but I ask members to keep their comments measured. We want people to have confidence that they can apply for the vital payments under the new policy.
Unlike elsewhere on these islands, people in Scotland can apply using paper or apply online. They have that option. If people are having difficulties or challenges, they can visit their local area office and get assistance to complete a form online or a paper form. A variety of support is available across the country to help farmers and crofters to complete the forms, and I urge them to take advantage of the support that is available.
Sarah Boyack mentioned farmers who have dyslexia. I urge anyone who has such challenges to visit their area office, sit with one of the officials and get advice on how to use the online system or complete a paper copy. That assistance is available for people to use.
Finally, on extending the single application form deadline beyond 15 May for one further month, Commissioner Hogan said last week that that is an option that member states can voluntarily take up if they so wish. We are currently considering what the consequences would be of taking up that offer. We are not ruling it out, but we recognise that, if we extended the deadline for applications by one month, that would cut by one month the time that we have for inspections before we make payments. We have to discuss with stakeholders the consequences of doing that, given that farmers and crofters are saying to me that what is really important is getting the payments out as quickly as possible once the window for that opens in December.
Members should rest assured, please, that we are treating these matters very seriously.
I thank the cabinet secretary for the seriousness with which he has addressed the issue that I have raised. I totally agree that we do not want to exacerbate the problem, but can he clarify when the technical problems with the online process will be fixed and people can have confidence in the system?
That is a very important issue. I do not doubt for one second that it will have been extremely frustrating for people who have gone online during the few occasions when the system has been down.
The fixes have been put in place quickly, but some remain. For instance, the industry asked for a printing facility so that, once people have populated data in their forms, they can print the form out and perhaps keep a copy in paper format to refer to. I hope that we will introduce that facility, which is at the request of the industry, within a few days.
To reiterate, this is a very complex system, but we now have a functioning online system available that brings additional benefits compared with completing the form on paper. In other words, the validation process online flags up problems to the applicant immediately, which they can then fix online, unlike with the paper copies. That avoids penalties and problems further down the road. That is an important dynamic in the online system in which we have invested.
I continue to take these issues seriously, and I will ensure that any other issues that arise are fixed as quickly as possible.
I have been listening carefully to what the cabinet secretary has said. I understand his desire to keep the language measured, but we are talking about a system that an increasing number of agents—people who are well versed at filling in such forms, online and on paper—are saying is not fit for purpose.
An agent who I know well and who is used to completing such forms tells me that the SAF system crashed on him 14 times on day 3 and seven times yesterday, too. He finally completed a simple online form for a small farming business this morning. He was given an application receipt number of 53. Does that mean that, at this point in time, only 53 farming businesses have completed the process?
As has already been said, the United Kingdom Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has extended the deadline for submissions, but it has also issued paper forms pre-populated with information to every farmer, to ensure that European deadlines are met.
Will the Scottish Government be prepared to do the same, if necessary? If not, what is its alternative—its plan B—if it has one? If the Government does have one, which I hope it has, when is the cut-off point when that plan B will have to be put into action?
We have contingency plans in Scotland. Indeed, that was referred to in the coverage of what has happened with the English system over the past few days. It was pointed out that, unlike England, Scotland has contingency plans. That of course involves paper copies of the single application form—if required—but they are already available for specific requests. If any farmer wants to use paper, they can do so at the moment. They do not have to apply online.
I do not doubt for a second the frustrations that are caused by those occasions when the system has been shut down over the first week since it was set up. Every effort is being made to fix any issues that come to our attention as quickly as possible. Many of them have been fixed already.
One agent, Ian Hope at CKD Galbraith’s Perth office, said:
“I have not completed a full SAF yet but I have been filling in field data sheets and it seems to be working OK.
I would rather be working online than on paper. If we have to go back to paper, as they have in England, it will just increase the scope for errors because there would be no automatic checks.”
He added:
“Now that we are online we have to keep the momentum going.”
I know that there are other views from other agents. Believe you me—I have heard them, as I have had them communicated to me over the past few days. I appreciate the frustrations being experienced. I hope that, this time next week, we will be in an even better place than we are today.
On the question of those who have completed their forms, it is fair to say that 50-odd farmers have fully completed their forms. Another 500-plus farmers have partly completed their forms. Many of them want to wait until the printing facility is available before they finally submit their online application.
As I have said before, there is a slow uptake of people filling in their single application forms online in the first couple of weeks, as is the case every year. The rate then gets faster as the deadline gets closer.
We will certainly monitor the situation very closely, and we will monitor the wider issues very closely as well. We will take appropriate action as and when required.
The cabinet secretary has referred to the various options that are available to farmers. He will be aware that, in the constituency that I represent, access to broadband is far from universal. Indeed, many farmers are based out in the smaller islands, so even accessing the area office presents a logistical challenge. I welcome any comments that the cabinet secretary has about the specific support that may be available to those farmers.
Much has been made of the information technology problems surrounding SAF. I am getting feedback from my constituents that the complexity of SAF is also a major problem. The cabinet secretary has indicated the need to get it right and to ensure that payments get out in a timely fashion. Would it not be prudent, in this first year, if we only have some 53 out of about 22,000 forms through the system already, to accept that it is pretty much inevitable that we will have to delay by a month, and to get people prepared for that sooner rather than later?
As I said, this is because of the complexity of the new policy. One reason for the complexities in the IT system is that the overall policy is complex.
Every single member state has made strong representations to the new commissioner to simplify the new common agricultural policy, because all Administrations are finding it pretty challenging to implement the new policy. Notwithstanding that, we have a system up and running in Scotland, which many people are using. I am confident that more people will use it as the weeks go by.
We will give serious consideration to extending the deadline by a month. As I said, we would have to take into account other consequences if we were to do that. We are discussing those consequences with the industry and stakeholders because we do not want to be in a position in a few months’ time in which we are getting complaints about the payments being delayed because we extended the deadline for the single application forms. We have to balance all the considerations, but we are giving the matter serious thought.
I declare an interest as a farmer.
The cabinet secretary will be aware of the frustration in the farming industry about the new £100 million rural payments and services computer system’s apparent lack of functionality. He will also be aware of the industry concerns that farmers are required to lodge their application form before 15 May, which is less than two months away, yet 99 per cent of applicants have still to use the new system at what is for many their most stressful time of year.
Given Commissioner Hogan’s reported willingness to accept late applications, will the cabinet secretary tell Parliament if and how such delays would affect the timing of this year’s payments should he need to take up the commissioner’s offer to accept late applications?
Although a lot of the complexity of the system has emanated from Europe, we have introduced some of our own complexity after discussions with the industry to ensure that the policy is appropriate for Scotland’s diverse circumstances. Consequently, we must be careful about how we move forward and ensure that the payments are made in time if that is at all possible.
We have always said to the industry that the policy is complex and will be challenging to implement in Scotland, given some of the decisions that have been taken, and that that could have potential implications for the payments. The industry’s message back was that it did not mind the payments being made a bit later if we got the right policy in place.
Our schedule is still to issue the payments on time in December. If a month’s extension for submitting the claims were granted, that would clearly give us less time to carry out the inspections that must be done before the payments are made. We must balance those challenges, which we are doing. We are also discussing with the Commission whether there would be more leeway over the inspections and the penalty regime if we extended the deadline for applications by a month.
That is where the discussions are. I take seriously many of the members’ concerns. I am receiving daily reports from the IT team and the wider CAP implementation team. I want to ensure that we can fix any issues that come up as quickly as possible, that we implement the new policy as smoothly as possible and that we issue the vital payments to farm businesses across Scotland as soon as possible thereafter.
Previous
Time for Reflection