Press Release - Confusing and contradictory SFP land eligibility rules need complete overhaul

Confusing and contradictory SFP land eligibility rules need complete overhaul.

 

Senior administrators in Brussels have taken such a contradictory position on environmental advancement, and the payment of SFP on land at farm margins, that the current system of deciding the eligibility of land on SFP claims must be completely overhauled, says the National Beef Association.

And it would help everyone if the environmental value of field fringes, or land on farms that is not under direct agricultural management, was made clear to the auditors and inspectors charged with deciding which land on a farm’s SFP map should not be eligible for payment.

“We have a classic case of one group of EU policy makers, who fight hard for their targets, creating a tug-of-war situation with a similar group that are pulling just as hard in the opposite direction with another set of aims,” explained NBA chairman, Oisin Murnion.

“Environmentalists are absolutely certain that the greatest bio-diversity occurs on field boundaries and areas where land under management meets land that is not managed - and that these relatively small, un-farmed areas, yield enormous benefits because they encourage a greater variety of plant and wildlife than is seen in any other part of a farm.”

“In contrast the EU’s auditors are doing their best to crank up the rules on land eligible for SFP so that anything, no matter how thin the strip or how awkward the location of a bank of fern or copse of scrub trees, that is not actively farmed is stripped from the area calculation for SFP.”

“This means the farmers in charge not only receive less support – but also risk hefty fines if any of this environmentally rich ground is discovered in their SFP claim.”

According to the NBA this has created an unacceptable situation which has left many farmers extremely confused.

“In an effort to widen the range of flora and fauna on their land many businesses are encouraged to enter expensive, EU-approved, environmental schemes which pay out more money on each hectare managed,” said Mr Murnion.

“But at the same time the European Commission’s SFP enforcement specialists are waging a war in which farmers are encouraged to obliterate small stands of non-agricultural vegetation which confuse their SFP claims. They are also asked to make their field boundaries as narrow as possible and the risk of being fined for falsely claiming SFP unless this so-called ineligible land is minimised.”

“Confusing is not a strong enough word. Farmers can be fined elsewhere in CAP regulation for failing to meet cross-compliance demands which are specifically aimed at raising environmental standards and increasing bio-diversity.”

“Yet at the same time another group of officials are imposing fines because land that is recognised by specialists as being the most environmentally rich on their holdings has been included in their SFP farm map.”

“The NBA is certain that the penalties associated with any SFP eligibility breach, no matter how small, are not only disproportionate but also undermine the EU’s central aim of producing as much food as possible while at the same time maintaining the most environmentally diverse land management standards that are possible.” 

“It is abundantly clear that the rules governing SFP disallowance must very quickly be given a complete overhaul.”

For more information contact:

Oisin Murnion. NBA chairman.  Tel: 07739 632048