Our ducks in a row.....

I finally got a response to the letter I sent on 31st October, and from seemingly the most elusive person in the Civil Service, the Head of Single Payment Scheme Policy Team. Maybe the follow up from Peter Ainsworth MP's office triggered it? Who cares we have movement again. I have been asking for this person’s name right from the beginning. I wonder how many civil service hours and budget could have been saved if he wasn’t such a closely guarded secret? But I digress, we should definitely be pleased with this break through though, we now have a expressly stated rational from the person who decides policy. At last we have some ducks in a row!!

In the letter; Defra basically clarifies their position and fleshes out the principles why they have adopted their current position. Basically when making their decision they first have to pass the rules of “Land Eligibility” which governs the classification that an activity is allocated. The guides “…are based around the extent to which non-agricultural use impedes or is inconsistent with normal farming activities.” Which is why, he explains, without any research or consultation why the RPA have grouped the sport in Group B. This of course is NOT new to us, and not what we are asking. He goes on to state that this is analogous to other categories in that category as because the land will be “….unavailable to some extent for agricultural use whilst the activity (and preparation of the land where that occurs) is taking place. Which of course also is not the case. He goes on to state that he believes that this is “a balanced outcome”. He accepts that the letter from Marian Fischer-Boel is correct about the GAEC element but that does not overrule the for the test of land eligibility which we know is incorrect. I have put a link to a scanned copy of the full document at the base of the blog section so you can read it for yourselves. Please feel free to make comments on this post or ask questions. I have added a link to the letter at the bottom of the posts, and also added a poll to see if you are interested in seeing all the other letters from this process.

This letter though on the face of it, is a little patronising and just restates a position that is known and well understood. But when you read between the lines it does form the basis for a reasoned and ongoing discussion. It does not say that they are inflexible or intractable on this decision. So I am hoping that with the BKFA and their approach from the CCPR, the campaign’s ongoing mail requests for a due diligence process to enable us to enlighten their understanding, supported by the current petition and the next one I will establish and all of your amazing support, we will turn the tide of understanding in our favour. We should pat ourselves on the back, we have achieved a solid result and have a position from which we can move forward, and we are now talking to the right person!! Obviously I will be writing to their head of policy to start the education process.

Whilst on the subject of the petition when I checked this morning we had broken into the top 100 most signed petitions, which again is a real bonus. We could really jump up the list if the 20 of the 32 people who signed up at Atmosphere08 and would validate their signups. If you did sign up at the event and haven’t received and email from 10 Downing Street then please sign up yourself, by following the link on this page or drop me an email at freethefields@googlemail.com and I’ll add it again.
Keep the Faith