Yesterday was a day for reflection on Wednesday afternoon’s CAP statement at Holyrood.
Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs Richard Lochhead has faced an unenviable task in recent months as he tried to assemble a workable CAP with limited resources.
Judging by reactions so far he seems to have managed not to displease any one sector more than another, which is probably as much as he could expect.
NFUS president Nigel Miller summed up the situation, saying: “This is a matter of facing reality. There will be no widespread celebrations but we are pretty pleased.
“Tensions on the speed of transition from the historic base to the area base have been eased and, overall, we now have a platform to work on. I am delighted with that.”
He admitted that the last couple of weeks had been “pretty brutal”, but there had been a lot at stake.
“Hopefully we now have some balance and divisions can heal. It is rough justice for some but at least there is some new money.”
He was referring to the £45 million of Scottish Government funding for a three-year beef improvement scheme.
Quality Meat Scotland chairman Jim McLaren welcomed the boost which this would give to the Beef 2020 cross-industry group which he is leading.
“It will support more efficient beef production and underpin the long-term quality of the Scotch Beef brand,” he said.
He also welcomed the confirmation of an increased budget for the Scottish Beef Calf Scheme, pointing out that this would help those with larger herds facing a loss of a high proportion of their historic payments.
Mark Mitchell of Perth-based land agents Bell Ingram in his reaction paper estimated that someone with a 100-cow beef herd would receive 50% more in coupled payments compared to the current scheme.
He also pointed to the proposed new entrant package funded under Pillar Two which will provide start-up grants of up to 70,000 euros plus capital grants.
Colin Stewart of CKD Galbraith warned of the “devil in the detail” of Mr Lochhead’s announcement.
“The detail of what constitutes minimum agricultural activity was sadly missing,” he noted.
David Johnstone, chairman of Scottish Land & Estates (SL&E), said: “In particular, SL&E is fully supportive of efforts to ensure that the support goes to active farmers.
“Our members tell us that they don’t want to see large amounts of money that is meant to support farming going to people who are not farming, so we are strongly supportive of the Government in its efforts to prevent another slipper farmer issue.
“The proposal to split the rough grazing region is something that we support and have called for because it is a way of ensuring that large amounts of public money is not transferred to the poorest land.
“On the proposal to put ‘sporting estates’ on the negative list, thereby excluding them from support, Scottish Land & Estates will be seeking clarification about what the Government is actually suggesting.
“We support the idea that those people who are not farming should not receive support, but many estates are actually integrated businesses running farming and sporting enterprises in parallel, and it will be very important to avoid excluding legitimate farming activity from support simply because it is associated with wider sporting activity.”
Mr Johnstone welcomed Mr Lochhead’s decision to split the rough grazing region in two, as did Christopher Nicholson of the Scottish Tenant Farmers Association.
“This, along with rewarding farming activity through the use of coupled payments, will not only avoid over-funding the more extensive and lightly stocked areas but it may also retain and encourage tenant farming on extensive hill farms,” he said.