The Rural Payments Agency and the implementation of the Single Payment Scheme PDF Download
Are you looking for read ebook online? Search for your book and save it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Download The Rural Payments Agency and the implementation of the Single Payment Scheme PDF full book. Access full book title The Rural Payments Agency and the implementation of the Single Payment Scheme by Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee. Download full books in PDF and EPUB format.
Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee Publisher: The Stationery Office ISBN: 9780215033383 Category : Business & Economics Languages : en Pages : 74
Book Description
The EU Single Payment Scheme replaced 11 previous subsidies to farmers based on agricultural production with one payment for land management. The European Commission gave some discretion to Member States over how to implement the scheme, and the Rural Payments Agency (RPA), which is responsible for administering the scheme in England, opted for the dynamic hybrid model which incorporates elements of previous entitlement and new regionalised area payments based on a flat rate per hectare. A NAO report (HCP 1631, session 2005-06, ISBN 9780102943399), published in October 2006, found that the RPA underestimated the risks and complexities involved in implementing the hybrid model, and the IT system was never tested as a whole before the scheme was introduced. It failed to adequately pilot land registration, and underestimated the amount of work involved in both mapping the land and processing each claim, having to rely on often inexperienced temporary and agency staff to clear the backlog. The difficulties were not picked up early enough, neither by the RPA nor Defra, for corrective action to be taken in time, resulting in the RPA's failure to meet its own payment targets. Delayed payments have cost farmers money in additional interest and bank charges, and caused distress to a significant minority of farmers, particularly hill farmers. The cost of implementing the scheme was budgeted at £76 million but rose to £122 million by March 2006, with further cost increases likely. Following on from a previous Committee report on the RPA (HCP 840, session 2005-06, ISBN 9780215027115), published in January 2006 and in light of the NAO findings, this report focuses on aspects of policy decision-making and political accountability raised by the problems with the Single Payment Scheme. The Committee concludes the Scheme has been a catastrophe for some farmers and a serious and embarrassing failure for Defra and the RPA, and Defra's fundamental failure to carry out one of its core tasks (that is to pay farmers their financial entitlements on time) differentiates this issue from the myriad of botched Government IT projects. There is a need for greater expertise within government in the delivery of such complex IT projects, and the report also criticises the quality of advice given by the Office of Government Commerce and the IT system designed by Accenture as the principal IT contractor. Defra determined the policies which it required the RPA to implement and Defra leadership was at fault for accepting RPA statements that implementing the complex hybrid model to deadline was "do-able". The Committee argues that responsibility for this failure goes wider than the dismissal of the RPA chief executive, and ministers and senior Defra officials should also be held to account, particularly Margaret Beckett (the then Defra Secretary of State), Sir Brian Bender, (the former Defra Permanent Secretary) and Andy Lebrecht (the Director General for Sustainable Farming, Food and Fisheries). It concludes that a departmental failure as serious as this should result in the removal from office of those responsible for faulty policy design and implementation, and it recommends that new guidance on Ministerial accountability is needed in the event of such serious departmental failure.
Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee Publisher: The Stationery Office ISBN: 9780215033383 Category : Business & Economics Languages : en Pages : 74
Book Description
The EU Single Payment Scheme replaced 11 previous subsidies to farmers based on agricultural production with one payment for land management. The European Commission gave some discretion to Member States over how to implement the scheme, and the Rural Payments Agency (RPA), which is responsible for administering the scheme in England, opted for the dynamic hybrid model which incorporates elements of previous entitlement and new regionalised area payments based on a flat rate per hectare. A NAO report (HCP 1631, session 2005-06, ISBN 9780102943399), published in October 2006, found that the RPA underestimated the risks and complexities involved in implementing the hybrid model, and the IT system was never tested as a whole before the scheme was introduced. It failed to adequately pilot land registration, and underestimated the amount of work involved in both mapping the land and processing each claim, having to rely on often inexperienced temporary and agency staff to clear the backlog. The difficulties were not picked up early enough, neither by the RPA nor Defra, for corrective action to be taken in time, resulting in the RPA's failure to meet its own payment targets. Delayed payments have cost farmers money in additional interest and bank charges, and caused distress to a significant minority of farmers, particularly hill farmers. The cost of implementing the scheme was budgeted at £76 million but rose to £122 million by March 2006, with further cost increases likely. Following on from a previous Committee report on the RPA (HCP 840, session 2005-06, ISBN 9780215027115), published in January 2006 and in light of the NAO findings, this report focuses on aspects of policy decision-making and political accountability raised by the problems with the Single Payment Scheme. The Committee concludes the Scheme has been a catastrophe for some farmers and a serious and embarrassing failure for Defra and the RPA, and Defra's fundamental failure to carry out one of its core tasks (that is to pay farmers their financial entitlements on time) differentiates this issue from the myriad of botched Government IT projects. There is a need for greater expertise within government in the delivery of such complex IT projects, and the report also criticises the quality of advice given by the Office of Government Commerce and the IT system designed by Accenture as the principal IT contractor. Defra determined the policies which it required the RPA to implement and Defra leadership was at fault for accepting RPA statements that implementing the complex hybrid model to deadline was "do-able". The Committee argues that responsibility for this failure goes wider than the dismissal of the RPA chief executive, and ministers and senior Defra officials should also be held to account, particularly Margaret Beckett (the then Defra Secretary of State), Sir Brian Bender, (the former Defra Permanent Secretary) and Andy Lebrecht (the Director General for Sustainable Farming, Food and Fisheries). It concludes that a departmental failure as serious as this should result in the removal from office of those responsible for faulty policy design and implementation, and it recommends that new guidance on Ministerial accountability is needed in the event of such serious departmental failure.
Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Committee of Public Accounts Publisher: The Stationery Office ISBN: 9780215036179 Category : Political Science Languages : en Pages : 70
Book Description
The EU Single Payment Scheme replaced 11 previous subsidies to farmers based on agricultural production with one payment for land management. The European Commission gave some discretion to Member States over how to implement the scheme, and the Rural Payments Agency, which is responsible for administering the scheme in England, opted for the dynamic hybrid model which incorporates elements of previous entitlement and new regionalised area payments based on a flat rate per hectare. The Agency and Defra encountered severe problems in the implementation of the scheme in England, and by the end of March 2006, it had paid farmers only 15 per cent of the £1,515 million due, compared with its target of 96 per cent. This caused significant hardship to farmers and taxpayers will have to pay extra implementation costs. Defra has had to secure an extra £300 million to meet the potential cost of disallowance of expenditure by the European Commission arising on the problems in administering the scheme. Following on from a NAO report on this topic (HCP 1631, session 2005-06; ISBN 9780102943399 published in October 2006, as well as a report from the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee (HCP 107-I, session 2006-07, ISBN 9780215033383) published in March 2007, this report by the Public Accounts Committee examines the impact of the payment delays on the farming sector, why implementation failed, the role of Defra and the changes being put in place to rectify the mistakes made. Lessons highlighted include: the Department made the scheme unnecessarily complex by choosing to adopt the most demanding implementation option; the Rural Payments Agency shed too many experienced staff at a key time; implementation of the project started before the scheme specification was finalised; and the IT system was introduced without adequate testing, a failure often seen with government IT projects.
Author: Great Britain. Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman Publisher: The Stationery Office ISBN: 9780102962765 Category : Political Science Languages : en Pages : 164
Book Description
This report sets out the results of investigation into complaints, using two representative case studies, about the administration of the 2005 Single Payment Scheme in England, including the Rural Land Register. The Ombudsman made five general findings of maladministration: the Rural Payments Agency did not meet the legal obligation to determine entitlements by 31 December 2005; Defra & RPA failed to heed the warning information of their own systems and from the Office of Government Commerce; RPA's and Defra's public statements in early 2006 failed to recognise the internal concerns they had; on 30 January 2006 Defra officials and Ministers considered RPA's position - the best case scenario was 70% of payments to be made by the end of March 2006 and they decided to tell Parliament that RPA would make the 'bulk' of payments by the end of March 2006; RPA was the only body ina position to estimate how much more digital mapping work it would have and its planning for the mapping process fell far short of getting it right. In short the Ombudman's principles of getting it right, being open and accountable and being customer focussed were not adhered to
Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Committee of Public Accounts Publisher: The Stationery Office ISBN: 9780215521842 Category : Technology & Engineering Languages : en Pages : 44
Book Description
The Single Payment Scheme replaced previous European Union production-based agricultural subsidy schemes from 2005. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, through the Rural Payments Agency, had chosen to implement the most complex option for reform in the shortest possible timescale, and the Agency had badly underestimated the scale of the task. This led to delays in making payments to farmers, erroneous payments and additional project and administrative costs, as reported in the Committee's earlier report (55th report session 2006-07, HC 893, ISBN 9780215036179). The Agency has estimated that there were £20 million of overpayments for the 2005 Scheme, and £17.4 million for the 2006 Scheme. The Agency has taken little action to recover the identified overpayments, with the risk that farmers may have unknowingly spent the money in the interim. Of 19 overpayments in excess of £50,000 paid in August 2006, the Agency had started the recovery process with only two of the farmers affected. Major changes made to the Agency's IT systems have enabled most farmers to receive payments earlier under the 2006 Scheme than for the 2005 Scheme. There has been a substantial impact on the costs of the business change programme to improve the Agency's efficiency, and the total project cost is now likely to exceed £300 million. In mid 2007, staff numbers in the Agency peaked at 4,600 and are not expected to reduce to 3,500 until 2010. The Agency is still not able to offer adequate advice to farmers on the progress of their claim. It was reluctant to specify targets by when such information would be available and when payments would be made under the 2008 Scheme.
Author: Great Britain: National Audit Office Publisher: The Stationery Office ISBN: 9780102951578 Category : Business & Economics Languages : en Pages : 42
Book Description
There was a report in October 2006 (HC 1631 2005-06) which looked at the problems in administering the 2005 single payments scheme in England. This report follows up by examining the progress made in resolving outstanding problems from 2005 and processing 2006 payments. It concludes that the new management team has instilled a clearer sense of direction and virtually all the outstanding 2005 payments were made by the end of December 2006. However the Agency has identified 34,499 cases where there might be errors in the original calculations and the review of most of these cases will be completed by the end of 2007. In the interim errors in payments in the first year were likely to have been repeated in the second year and the Agency was not able to administer the 2006 single payments scheme in a fully cost-effective manner.
Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee Publisher: The Stationery Office ISBN: 9780215038241 Category : Political Science Languages : en Pages : 130
Book Description
Work of the Committee In 2007 : Third report of session 2007-08, report, together with formal Minutes
Author: Richard Bacon Publisher: Biteback Publishing ISBN: 1849546169 Category : History Languages : en Pages : 244
Book Description
Government failure is affecting everyone. The single mum worried sick by a tax credit demand from HMRC to 'repay' thousands of pounds she never received; the family whose holiday was ruined because the Passport Office couldn't issue passports in time; the school that couldn't open at the start of term because CRB checks were being carried out by an organisation in meltdown; the farmers led to bankruptcy and even suicide by a Kafkaesque system for administering farm payments; and rail operators facing an uncertain future because the Department for Transport inadvertently landed the whole rail franchising system in chaos. Why is government getting it so wrong? Richard Bacon and Christopher Hope delve into the astonishing world of cock-ups and catastrophes and ponder why those at the top continue to fall short.
Author: Mark Elliott Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA ISBN: 0199237107 Category : Law Languages : en Pages : 902
Book Description
Public Law is a high quality introductory textbook that comprehensively covers the key topics found on undergraduate public law courses. Three key themes that permeate all of the content allow students to approach the content in a structured and easy to understand way and questions posed throughout the chapters give students the opportunity to provide answers that show how their knowledge has increased as the chapter progresses. The key themes are: -The significance of executive power in the contemporary constitution and the challenge of ensuring that those who wield it are held to account -The shift in recent times from a more political to a more legal constitution and the implications of this change -The increasingly 'multi-layered' character of the British constitution Online Resource Centre Public Law is accompanied by a free, open-access Online Resource Centre (www.oxfordtextbooks.co.uk/orc/elliott_thomas) which offers the following resources to support students: - Figures from the book reproduced online - A list of useful websites for students - Regularly posted legal and political updates for the book - A testbank of questions for tutors to assess students' progress This book has been highly endorsed by lecturers for level of coverage, accuracy, and the manner in which the three themes provide an excellent backdrop to the book's content. 'I think it will be a very welcome addition to the range of text books available and I suspect that it will become my personal favourite.' - Barbara Mauthe; Lancaster University 'I found the book impressive and likely to be of interest and use to a great many. It is written in a style that is pitched about the right level. It was easy to understand and provides - for me - a good blend of black letter law and socio-political context' - David Mead; University of East Anglia Written by two experienced teachers of the subject, Public Law is an essential new text that focuses on what students need to engage with and understand this challenging subject.
Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee Publisher: The Stationery Office ISBN: 9780215064721 Category : Technology & Engineering Languages : en Pages : 166
Book Description
Against a background where farm incomes are falling, the Government needs to recognise that cutting payments to England's farmers will reduce their ability to compete in the marketplace, will leave farmers less able to invest in vital infrastructure and may make them more vulnerable to shocks such as poor weather, higher input costs and price variations. The Committee also warns against plans to transfer more money away from direct payments to farmers by shifting it towards environmental schemes. It recommends that the Government maintains the current 9% rate of transfer away from the direct payment budget. This rate of transfer should rise to 15% in 2017 only if it can demonstrate that additional funds are required and that this change will deliver a clear benefit. Money should also only go to people who actually farm the land and meet an 'active farmer test'. From 2015, 30% of the direct payment will be conditional on farmers achieving basic environmental measures. A National Certification Scheme approach to 'greening' does not offer the flexibility to avoid the Commission's impractical crop diversification rule so the Government is right to dismiss this approach. A new, single IT system is being developed, and the Government want access to CAP funding to be 'digital by default', meaning farmers will have to apply online. A lot went wrong in the last round of changes, and these problems gave rise to £580 million in penalties. Does it make sense to introduce a new computer system at the same time as complex new payment rules?
Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Public Accounts Committee Publisher: The Stationery Office ISBN: 9780215542588 Category : Technology & Engineering Languages : en Pages : 48
Book Description
This is the third report in 3 years on the subject of administration in England of the £1.6 billion Single Payment Scheme by the Rural Payments Agency and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (HCP 98, session 2009-10, ISBN 9780215542588), and follows an NAO report (HCP 880, session 2008-09, ISBN 9780102963182). The Committee states that oversight of the Single Payment Scheme is a singular example of comprehensively poor administration on a grand scale. With a paucity of good management information in the Agency and the complacent oversight by the Department having acted to obscure the true situation. A focus over the last two and a half years in bringing forward payments to farmers has enabled the Agency to bring its deadline forward by nearly seven weeks, but this is still six weeks off the deadline it had planned and a long way short of the standards set in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Also there has been a negligible attention to the protection of tax payers' interests. The Rural Payments Agency has spent £350 million on a cumbersome IT system that can only be supported at huge cost and which is increasingly at risk of becoming obsolete, with the data held in the system remaining riddled with errors and efforts to recover overpayments having been slow, disorganised and haphazard. The Committee identifies poor leadership within the Agency and a lack of attention by the Department. Each claim costs over six times more to process in England than in Scotland. Further the Department was not able to demonstrate an adequate grasp of the costs of administering the scheme. The Committee states that responsibility rests with the Accounting Officers to resolve this misadministration.
Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee
Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee
Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Committee of Public Accounts
Author: Great Britain. Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Committee of Public Accounts
Author: Great Britain: National Audit Office
Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee
Author: Richard Bacon
Author: Mark Elliott
Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee
Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Public Accounts Committee