Introduction
|
| 1. |
This submission deals
with my rural development portfolio. Agriculture,
food, fisheries, forestry and rural development
powers are largely devolved. Accordingly, the Assembly
has the competence to exercise a significant range
of secondary legislation under the Minister's portfolio.
In 2001, under the Rural Affairs portfolio some
81 Orders (35% of the total) were
made by the National Assembly. |
European dimension
|
| 2. |
To a very large extent,
policy on agriculture and fisheries is driven by
European Union (EU) policy, law and finance. The
Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and the Common
Fisheries Policy (CFP) apply through directly applicable
Regulations across the EU and consequently, instruments
such as direct payments, price support and marketing
rules generally apply across all Member States,
including the United Kingdom and Wales. Generally
there is little scope for a Member State or part
of a Member State to act independently. |
| 3. |
My department also has
responsibility for significant areas of EU environmental,
animal health and plant health matters which are
given effect through EU Directives. Directives require
Members States to achieve the same results, but
leaves the method of implementation up to National
Authorities. The extent to which National Authorities
can act differently depends on the specific terms
of the Directive, but there is the scope for differential
implementation in some cases, subject to general
Community law principles such as equal treatment.
Directives in these fields often require member
States to establish "competent authorities"
to operate particular EU wide regimes such as deliberate
release of genetically modified organisms. The Assembly
often acts as the competent authority in such cases.
|
| 4. |
Although the scope for
separate policy making is not extensive, recent
developments within the EU indicate that there is
growing recognition of the need to permit diversity
within Member States. One example is the Rural Development
Regulation where Member States operating within
a broad EU framework have a fairly wide degree of
discretion. This has allowed full responsibility
for rural development programmes to be devolved.
Two years ago, Wales negotiated its own Rural Development
Plan direct with the Commission, including measures
for forestry support. As a result, the Assembly
Government has been able to develop distinctive
Welsh policies eg Tir Gofal, Tir Mynydd, Farming
Connect, the Agri-Food Strategy, etc. More recently,
Member States have been given authority to exercise
discretion on a sub Member State basis under some
of the direct support measures e.g the EU Sheepmeat
Regime. This has allowed Wales to determine how
it will use the funds allocated for the national
envelope to further help the sheep sector. Elsewhere,
in support of programmes to eliminate scrapie from
the sheepflock and thereby reduce the theoretical
risk to public health of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy
(BSE) in sheep, Wales has pioneered programmes to
increase the pace of building genetic resistance
in the flock. This is within the framework of the
Great Britain National Scrapie Plan but focused
solely on Wales and with additional funding provided
by the Assembly Government. |
| 5. |
Monthly meetings take
place between the four UK Agriculture Ministers
chaired by the Secretary of State for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs. The purpose of these meetings
is to discuss and agree a common line for the monthly
European Council of Agriculture Ministers meeting
and other matters of importance affecting farming.
At official level there is regular contact with
officials not just in Whitehall but also in Scotland
and Northern Ireland; and there is also a regular
flow of correspondence and exchange of information
between all four administrations. In addition to
the monthly Ministerial meetings, there are occasional
meetings of Forestry Ministers for Wales, Scotland
and England and officials from the Forestry Commission.
I have informal contact with other Ministers across
the UK and we are able to discuss issues that arise
as and when need arises. I and my officials regularly
attend formal meetings in Brussels as part of the
UK delegation and are able to discuss directly at
Commission level any issue of specific interest
to Wales. Equally important are our informal links
with Commission officials which allow us to network
effectively during emerging policy considerations.
To this end, a full time official of the Assembly
Government’s Agriculture and Rural Affairs
Department (ARAD) has since autumn 2001 been permanently
based in Brussels. |
| 6. |
On the whole, these arrangements
have worked well and we have been able to put forward
the Welsh view and influence policy making and legislation
coming out of Europe; and generally kept in touch
with key developments. This is not to say that everything
over the past four years has gone smoothly and inevitably
some tensions with regard to the devolution settlement
have been exposed. Some of these are discussed below
but the robustness of the working arrangements has
ensured that differences have not spilled over to
serious conflict. |
| 7. |
My response to the specific
questions posed by the Commission are as follows:
|
| Please
describe the range of issues covered within your
Ministerial portfolio and include in that a summary
description of the powers that you have available
to implement new policies. |
| 8. |
A list of the main powers
which have been delegated to me is at the Annex. |
| 9. |
Briefly, I have responsibility
for agriculture, fisheries, food , forestry and
rural development matters in Wales. This includes
matters concerning the CAP, including the support
payment to farmers under this Policy; CFP and inland
fisheries matters; direction of forestry policy
through the Forestry Commission; development and
promotion of the agri-food industry in Wales; food
marketing issues; agri-environmental matters; organic
farming; plant health and pesticides; issues in
Wales concerning GM crops; and rural development
and regeneration generally. Powers to make secondary
legislation in all of these areas has in the main
been transferred to the National Assembly. |
| 10. |
The Secretary of State
for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, retains
responsibility for control of most animal diseases
in Wales, including Foot and Mouth Disease as evidenced
during the 2001outbreak of the disease. However,
the National Assembly has devolved responsibility
for control of three animal diseases: bovine TB,
Brucellosis and the Warble Fly . On some other animal
health and welfare matters, the Secretary of State
and the National Assembly are required to act jointly
eg the making of legislation under the Animal Health
Act. Aside from this, I also share joint responsibility
with other UK Agriculture Ministers on matters concerning
certain cross border sector bodies eg the Meat and
Livestock Commission, Home Grown Cereals Authority
and development councils for milk, potatoes and
horticulture. Responsibility for selecting the Welsh
member of such bodies rests with me. |
| 11. |
The Forestry Commission,
which has primary responsibility for forestry policy
and practice, is a cross border public body whose
remit covers England, Scotland and Wales. Scientific
research, plant health and international policy
matters are not devolved. However, the Forest Enterprise
arm of the Forestry Commission reports to the National
Assembly and also to the Forestry Commission. In
effect therefore forestry policy in Wales is my
responsibility. From April 2003, these arrangements
will be put on a proper footing by the recent decision
of Forestry Ministers to establish Forest Enterprise
Wales as an independent body reporting through the
Forestry Commission National Office for Wales to
the National Assembly. |
| 12. |
I also have a wider role
in terms of promoting rural development and regeneration.
This includes use of structural funds under programmes
such as Objective 1 and the LEADER+ and measures
under the Rural Development Plan. In addition, much
of the work I carry out in this area can be taken
forward under existing UK legislation which is delegated
to me as part of my portfolio. For example, the
new measures I am introducing to promote rural community
action, to support rural retail services and to
develop the rural agenda in Wales can be carried
out under the Agriculture Acts and under the Development
of Rural Wales Act. The powers to implement secondary
legislation where necessary to give effect to support
schemes in this area has been transferred to the
National Assembly and delegated to my portfolio. |
| 13. |
In some cases, the Assembly
has powers to develop its own distinct policies
for Wales. These are powers mainly under the EU
rural development regulation. Some examples are
mentioned at paragraphs 23-32 below. |
| 14. |
The main domestic legislative
provision relating to plant health and biotechnology
issues are as follows (it should be noted that each
of the Acts noted below will also have related subordinate
legislation which contain Assembly functions) : |
| |
|
|
Part VI of the
Environmental Protection Act 1990 – this
part of the Act and regulations made under
it, forms the statutory regime for the control
of genetically modified organisms. |
|
| |
|
|
Section 2(2) of
the European Communities Act 1972. The Assembly
is designated to make regulations under section
2(2) that apply to Wales in relation to the
common agricultural policy of the European
Community, but must act jointly with UK Ministers
where the matters relate to the placing on
the market or use of plant protection products,
and in relation to maximum levels for pesticide
residues in or on cereals and other foodstuffs
(SI 1999/2788). The Assembly is also designated
for the control and regulations of genetically
modified organisms, in so far as concerns
human health or environmental protection (SI
2001/3495)) |
|
| |
|
|
The Assembly also
has functions conferred upon it by Regulations
made under section 2(2) of the ECA 1972 such
as the Seeds (National List of Varieties)
Regulations 2001 (confers joint functions
on the Assembly with other UK authorities
in respect of the UK list of approved seed
varieties)) |
|
| |
|
|
Plant Varieties
Act 1997 - the Assembly now exercises the
functions originally conferred upon the Secretary
of State for Wales in respect of plant variety
rights and the Plant Varieties and Seeds Tribunal |
|
| |
|
|
Plant Health Act
1967 – the Assembly now exercises all
Minister of the Crown functions in Wales (except
the Treasury consent requirements in section
4 and 4A) in respect of the control of pests
and diseases injurious to agricultural or
horticultural crops, or to trees or bushes |
|
| |
|
|
Plant Varieties
and Seeds Act 1964 - includes power to regulate
transactions in seeds and seed potatoes |
|
| |
|
|
Weeds Act 1959
– powers to prevent the spread of injurious
weeds |
|
| |
|
|
Hill Farming Act
1946 – section 20 power to regulate heather
and grass burning |
|
| 15. |
There is EU competence
for all matters of seed approvals and certification;
plant health; pesticides, including maximum residue
levels; and deliberate release and contained use
of genetically modified organisms, including traceability
and labelling of food and feed and a liability regime.
Thus, member states and competent authorities, like
the Assembly, are obliged by EU law to work within
a framework agreed by the European Council and Parliament
and within the regulatory regime established at
EU level. |
| 16. |
On Genetically modified
Organisms (GMOs) the Assembly has a specific policy
which explicitly recognises these constraints to
implementation: |
| 17. |
"We will continue
to press for a moratorium on all GM crop trials
in Wales in line with the Assembly’s desire
to operate the most restrictive policy possible
within the context of existing EU legislation, on
future commercial GM crop development within Wales."
|
| 18. |
Given the EU competence,
the distribution of domestic powers is of less relevance
in determining the Assembly’s scope for action.
Both primary and secondary legislation can only
be used in accordance with the EU legislative framework.
|
| 19. |
In some ways the particular
form of devolution for Wales has had advantages
over the Scottish position for example. The Assembly
made the Seeds (National List of Varieties) Regulations
2001 jointly with UK Minister. Scottish devolution
provided no mechanism by which this measure, which
was necessary for the implementation of an EU requirement,
could be made jointly with Minister of the Scottish
Executive. These Regulations conferred joint functions
on Scottish Ministers and the National Assembly
along with the two other relevant UK authorities,
but only the Assembly among the devolved administrations
was empowered to formally make the regulations with
UK Minister. |
| 20. |
Relations between the
UK Government and the Assembly on plant health and
biotechnology are governed by a series of formal
agreements, including the Memorandum of Understanding
between the United Kingdom Government and the four
devolved administrations, and the supplementary
agreement, the Concordat on Co-ordination of European
Union policy issues; and the Memorandum of Understanding
between DEFRA and the National Assembly for Wales.
The latter establishes a Joint Regulatory Authority
comprising the four competent authorities within
the UK, which, together with the statutory advisory
bodies, provide the framework for the implementation
of the EU regulatory regimes in respect of GMOs. |
| 21. |
Under the Concordat on
Co-ordination of European Union policy issues, the
Assembly is consulted on the negotiating positions,
which the UK will adopt in Council meetings in Brussels.
The Assembly has argued forcefully for its restrictive
approach to be reflected in UK lines. However, the
final determination of the UK position, under the
arrangements set out in the Concordat, lies with
UK Ministers collectively. The Assembly is bound
by the terms of the Concordat to adherence to the
UK line agreed in this way. |
| 22. |
The Welsh Assembly Government
is using its powers to make Regulations to implement
EU Directives in as restrictive a manner as is possible
and has, for example, in its recent proposals to
transpose the Deliberate Release Directive 2001/18EC
included stronger requirements in respect of public
consultation than are proposed elsewhere in the
UK. |
| Can you
give examples of policy development using these
powers in the Assembly’s first term. |
| 23. |
Rural Development
Plan for Wales
This plan provides an overall framework
for the development of the whole of rural Wales.
The plan was prepared and negotiated with the European
Commission by the Assembly Government. We were the
first part of the UK to submit the plan and the
first to receive Commission approval. The plan contains
distinct measures to help develop agriculture and
the rural economy. For example, the agri-food strategy
, Farming Connect, support for hill farmers under
the Tir Mynydd scheme and the all Wales agri-environmental
scheme (Tir Gofal) - the first scheme to fully link
agricultural and woodland management policies- are
just some of the measures where the Assembly has
developed "made in Wales" policies. |
| 24. |
Abolition of
dairy hygiene charges
The National Assembly’s Agriculture
and Rural Development Committee recommended that
dairy hygiene inspection charges worth £94 per farm
inspection should be removed due to difficulties
faced by the industry. This was agreed by the Cabinet
and money was set aside to fund the removal. The
Assembly had the necessary powers to make this change
but in order to ensure that the proposal cleared
the EU state aid hurdle on the grounds that it was
not discriminatory against farmers in England (farmers
in Scotland and Northern Ireland were not subject
to the same charges), we persuaded the Ministry
for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food or MAFF (as
it was then) to join the Assembly Government in
lifting the charges ,which they agreed. This secured
EU support and the lifting of dairy hygiene inspection
charges across England and Wales was announced on
30 March 2000. This is a useful illustration of
how, although state aid rules made it difficult
to lift charges unilaterally in Wales, the Assembly
succeeded in persuading MAFF to follow our lead.
|
| 25. |
Meat Hygiene
Service Inspection Charges
Following hard lobbying by the Assembly
Government, the UK Government announced in September
1999 it would establish a working group under the
chairmanship of Colin Maclean to look at the regulatory
burdens on slaughterhouses. The Assembly’s
main interest was to reduce the burden on small
to medium sized abattoirs. These have an important
part in delivering our agri-food strategy and underpinning
the economic viability of the rural economy. As
a result of the work of the task force and its recommendation
to minimise costs on small abattoirs, the Assembly
agreed that £609,000 would be transferred to the
Food Standards Agency (FSA) to implement the Maclean
report. The Assembly introduced the Meat Inspection
Charges (Wales) Regulations 2001 on the advice of
the FSA, implementing Maclean, on 2 April 2001 which
reduced the burden of meat hygiene charges from
small abattoirs. This is another good example of
how the Assembly, although unable to act unilaterally,
nevertheless played a leading role in influencing
policy development to address the particular needs
of the Welsh meat industry. |
| 26. |
Agri Food Strategy
The Welsh Agri-Food Strategy is another
"made in Wales" policy. Action Plans were
developed in 1999 for the Lamb and Beef, Dairy and
Organic Sectors and the Welsh Development Agency
(WDA) is working to help the industry implement
the plans, under the direction of the Agri-Food
Partnership. The Action Plans use both structural
funds and resources allocated by the Assembly to
provide support for the sectors. Similar strategies
are now being developed for the following sectors:
woodland; farm woodland and biomass; horticulture;
and fisheries. |
| 27. |
Tir Mynydd
As part of the Agenda 2000 CAP reforms,
EU Agriculture Ministers agreed in 1999 that compensatory
allowances for farming in Less Favoured Areas (LFA)
should change from headage to area based payments,
with a greater emphasis on environmental considerations.
Tir Mynydd, an area based payment, was introduced
in 2001 to support hill farmers. It replaced the
Hill Livestock Compensatory Allowance scheme. Tir
Mynydd consists of two elements. Element 1 comprises
a hectareage payment; and element 2 provides for
payment of enhancements for confirmed environmental
practice. The discretion available to the Assembly
enabled us to tailor the design of the scheme to
reflect Welsh circumstances and also offer a more
generous payment under element 2 compared to England. |
| 28. |
Free School Milk
School Milk (Wales) Regulations came into force
on 1 February 2002. The regulations allow pupils
at key stage 1 (5-7 year olds) to receive free school
milk from that date. The Assembly used powers and
resources available to fund the scheme supplementing
the EU subsidy scheme. |
| 29. |
Independent Appeals
Panel
This appeals process was implemented last
autumn. For the first time farmers now have legal
rights to seek a review of decisions made by officials
in relation to the main CAP subsidy schemes and
livestock quota controls. Although similar schemes
operate elsewhere in the UK, the powers available
to the Assembly mean that we have been able to devise
a scheme specific to the needs of the industry in
Wales. |
| 30. |
Cydcoed and Shelterwoods
These schemes, creating new public access
facilities in woodlands and integrated shelter woodland
on farms are based on the Woodland Grant Scheme
run by the Forestry Commission. These schemes have
been developed specifically to meet Wales’
needs and are not available through the Forestry
Commission in England or Scotland. |
| 31. |
Prohibition of
GM Crops
Using its devolved powers under the Environmental
Protection Act 1990, the Welsh Assembly Government
took action to enforce statutory separation distances
between GM and non-GM maize. This action triggered
a notification by the UK as member state to the
EC and other member states under Article 16 of 90/220EC,
raising the issues of the incompatibility of the
EU GM and organic regimes in particular, and of
the co-existence of GM and conventional and organic
crops more generally for European policy consideration.
This was recognised by Commissioner Fischler, speaking
to the Informal Agriculture Council of the European
Union in November 2001 when he stated that "
maintenance of the viability of both conventional
and organic farming as one of the main challenges
posed in the GMO context". |
| 32. |
Rural Development
– Community Projects
As I have already referred, in addition
to LEADER+ and the Rural Development Plan, I am
introducing new measures to promote rural community
action and in support of rural retail services.
These schemes have been specifically developed to
meet the needs of rural communities in Wales. |
| Can you
give examples of policy aspirations where either
the breadth or the depth of the Assembly’s
powers have been a constraint? |
| 33. |
Plant Health
and Biotechnology
The ability to make primary legislation
in the area of plant health and biotechnology would
be a useful step forward for the Assembly despite
the example noted above in paragraph 19. Statutory
regimes rarely pass throughout the ages without
the need for amendment, consolidation or wholesale
change. The Assembly is unable at present to recast
the relevant legal frameworks in primary legislation
that apply to plant health and biotechnology matters,
unless such change is required by European Law and
the Assembly has a relevant designation for the
purposes of section 2(2) of the European Communities
Act (ECA) 1972. The Assembly has limited powers
to amend primary legislation under section 2(2)
of the ECA 1972, but this limited power is further
limited by the fact that each relevant designation
must be agreed with UK Ministers.
There are situations where the Assembly must
either accept that Parliament or UK Ministers
(where they have appropriate powers) amend primary
legislation for England and Wales, or (where the
Assembly has the relevant power) apply its own
amendments to primary legislation to lie alongside
amendments made for England. This latter option
can make the statute look unnecessarily complicated.
Matters could be more transparent if the Assembly
were entirely responsible for the relevant law,
both primary and secondary. However, the one disadvantage
Scottish Ministers are currently subject to (referred
to in paragraph 19) should be resolved by provisions
to allow the Assembly to act jointly with UK Ministers,
and other devolved authorities where this is thought
appropriate or necessary as a result of any EU
requirement for uniform action across the UK.
|
| 34. |
Calf Processing
Aid Scheme
This case illustrates that the EU legal
framework pertaining to agriculture limits scope
for unilateral action. The situation arose in summer
1999 following the UK Government’s decision
to terminate the calf processing aid scheme. Under
EU rules the scheme would have had to come to an
end before the end of December in any event. However,
Welsh farmers, in common with those elsewhere in
the UK , were faced with a problem of what to do
with new-born male calves with little or no market
value. A proposal to extend the calf processing
aid scheme at a reduced rate in Wales until the
December deadline, at a cost of £750,000, was approved
by the Assembly. However the proposal could not
be implemented due to the fact that other parts
of the UK did not propose to take the same action,
and the legal issues relating to equality of treatment
between producers throughout a member state. |
| 35. |
Foot and Mouth
Disease (FMD)
Animal disease control is not generally
a devolved function and consequently throughout
last year’s Foot and Mouth outbreak, the Assembly
acted as agents for DEFRA. This created difficulties
in terms of our ability to influence policy development
and our ability to manage the outbreak in Wales
effectively. We did not have the opportunity to
take decisions as quickly as we would have liked.
For example, we did not have the power to introduce
movement licences or discretion to shape our own
eradication policies. The Assembly Government has
since publicly resolved that we should have the
powers to deal with any future outbreaks, ie the
same powers as in Scotland and Northern Ireland.
The central disease control functions are set
out in the Animal Health Act 1981. The Animal
Health Bill currently before Parliament provides
for amendment to the 1981 Act. The Assembly is
presently unable to recast the provisions in primary
legislation to meet new needs or its own priorities,
and this would continue to be the case if further
functions under the Act are transferred by Order
in Council under section 22 of the Government
of Wales Act 1998. It has to rely entirely on
the UK Government’s allocation of Parliamentary
time and even where opportunities for Welsh provision
in a bill arise, instructions to Parliamentary
Counsel must be agreed with Whitehall.
|
| 36. |
General Fisheries
Matters
Most UK fisheries primary legislation covers the
sea area out to 200 miles from the UK coast .The
Government of Wales Act 1998 however defines Wales
as including "the sea adjacent to Wales out
as far as the seaward boundary of the territorial
sea" i.e. 12 miles. At the time of Devolution
the powers to control the activities of Welsh vessels
outside the 12-mile limit were retained by the Secretary
of State for Wales. Those powers were subsequently
transferred to the now Secretary of State, Department
for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)
. Effectively this means that the Assembly has to
rely on DEFRA to control the activities of Welsh
fleet outside the 12 mile limit, using England and
Wales statutory instruments. |
| 37. |
Influencing GM
Policy Development
As outlined above, the Assembly has to
operate within the constraints arising from EU competence
in this area, and also within the constraints arising
from the arrangements set out in the Concordats
governing the operation of the devolution settlement.
In particular, the determination of EU negotiating
lines by UK Ministers collectively – which
are sometimes at odds with the Assembly’s general
policy and its specific representations – limits
the Assembly’s ability to influence the direction
of EU policy development and law making. This is
not a matter of whether primary or secondary legislative
powers are at the Assembly’s disposal since
all three devolved administrations in the UK are
bound by the same agreements with the UK Government.
|
| 38. |
Rural Development
– Voluntary Bodies
In promoting rural development it is useful
to be able to pursue measures through partner bodies
including voluntary bodies. Whilst Section 41 of
the Government of Wales Act allows the Assembly
to make arrangements with another public body to
carry out specified functions of the Assembly, it
does not extend to voluntary bodies. Although Section
114 of the Act covers relations with voluntary bodies,
it does not allow the Assembly to make arrangements
for voluntary bodies to carry out Assembly functions.
Lack of this power delayed the introduction of the
Rural Stress Scheme under the Rural Recovery Plan.
To extend the power in Section 41 to include voluntary
bodies (broadly defined to include, for example,
those operating as companies limited by guarantee)
would give greater flexibility in policy implementation. |
| 39. |
Hill Farming
Advisory Sub-Committee for Wales
The Hill Farming Advisory Committee for England,
Wales and Northern Ireland and the Hill Farming
Advisory Sub Committee for Wales are statutory bodies
established under s32 of the Hill Farming Act 1946.
Their role is to advise Agriculture Ministers on
matters relating to farming within the Less Favoured
Areas.
Hill Farming is of central importance to rural
Wales. We would wish to move ahead to establish
our own advisory committee with a membership that
reflects the broader interests relating to farming
in the more marginal agricultural area of Wales.
To remove the existing statutory requirement,
and structure, of the Welsh sub-committee is dependent
on primary legislation. Such powers available
to the National Assembly would allow us to move
quickly to put in place arrangements specific
to the needs of Wales.
|
| 40. |
Sea Fisheries
Committees
Sea Fisheries Committees (SFCs) are committees
of local government, created under the Sea Fisheries
Regulation Act 1966 and have permissive powers for
the management and conservation of coastal fisheries
in England and Wales, out to 6 nautical miles. They
regulate fisheries within their districts by means
of bye-laws, which are confirmed by Ministers.
The Welsh Assembly Government has faced insurmountable
problems in resolving a funding difficulty with
one of the 2 SFCs in Wales. These difficulties
would be more easily resolved if the Assembly
had powers to amend the 1966 Act. Such powers
would also give the Assembly the opportunity to
completely review the management of important
Welsh inshore fisheries. Attempts to amend the
1966 Act have been thwarted by a lack of Parliamentary
time.
|
| To what
extent have you been able to promote those policy
aspirations by influencing Westminster? |
| 41. |
In the light of our experience
with the outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease, our
view point publicly is that the animal health powers
contained within the Animal Health Act 1981 should
be devolved to the Assembly. The issue also raises
questions about the future role of the State Veterinary
Service (SVS) on animal health matters in Wales
(for example in the practical implications of implementing
existing devolved powers such as controlling bovine
TB). This would need to take into account the views
of other departments (notably Scotland) and the
UK’s membership of the EU. Any changes which
are agreed will need to recognise UK membership
of the EU, the need to ensure consistent levels
of excellence in the availability of professional
advice on animal health issues and any additional
resources, legal, professional and administrative,
that would be required. Discussions about the transfer
are on-going with DEFRA. It is hoped to agree the
transfer by an Order in Council |
| 42. |
On a number of other
issues, as illustrated above, we have worked closely
with the relevant Whitehall Department to persuade
them to negotiate on our behalf with the EU. |
| 43. |
On GM policy, there have
been no related primary legislative proposals before
Westminster during the Assembly’s first term,
nor has the Welsh Assembly Government sought to
secure any such legislative opportunity. |
| Have
you been able to influence policy on non devolved
matters which are relevant to your portfolio? |
| 44. |
The Assembly has argued
the case strongly and effectively for Welsh farming
and forestry with the UK Government, both on national
and EU agenda issues. The work goes on largely behind
the scenes but some notable successes include: |
| |
Influencing the
UK wide agenda |
| |
|
|
Emergency Aid
packages: by working closely with MAFF and
ensuring that our interests were being taken
into account, the Assembly Government secured
substantial support worth almost £20 million
to Welsh farmers during 2000. |
|
| |
|
|
Modulation and
matched funding: full pound for pound matching
funding was secured from the UK Treasury in
December 1999 for modulation (ie top slicing)
of farm subsidies. The insistence of the devolved
administrations, in particular the Assembly
Government, on matching funding was crucial
in achieving this. MAFF negotiated with the
Treasury but the Assembly Government was involved
in protracted negotiations with MAFF to ensure
that our views were strongly represented. |
|
| |
|
|
Reform of the
Beef regime: The Agenda 2000 CAP reform gave
Member States a number of choices about implementation.
But the choices had to be applied uniformly
throughout the UK. On one issue – the
abolition of the 90 head limit on Beef Special
Premium Scheme (BSPS) claims –an important
concession was secured through hard negotiation
by the Assembly Government. We were able to
persuade MAFF that, given the different structure
of the industry in Wales, there should be
some protection for small farmers. In the
event, were able to carry the other Departments
with us in ensuring that the final agreement
on the scheme exempted claims on less than
30 animals from any scale back provisions. |
|
| |
|
|
Agreement has
just been reached for me to sign off the Forestry
Commission’s research strategy each year,
thus ensuring its relevance to Wales. |
|
| |
Influencing on
EU agenda |
| |
|
|
UK increasingly
presses for regional flexibility e.g on Sheep
Annual Premium regional envelope; in each
case the UK took the lead in asking for regional
flexibility. |
|
| |
|
|
Reform of EU Sheep
regime: The new sheep regime was approved
in December 1999. Very early on, even before
any drafting had begun, Assembly Government
officials held a number of meetings with Commission
officials and with DEFRA to ensure that Welsh
interests (we are the largest sheep producer
in Europe) were taken into account. In addition,
my predecessor also visited Brussels regularly
during negotiations to talk to Commission
officials and Commissioner Fischler. We attended
European conferences, talked to MEPs, met
farmers representatives and also attended
the Agriculture Council. The Assembly Government
thus played a leading role during negotiations
to devise a new scheme. |
|
| |
|
|
Suckler Cow scheme:
This influence also led to UK Government successfully
negotiating a special UK deal protecting UK
suckler beef production from cutbacks in June
2001. |
|
| 45. |
Other example concerns
the impact of the Welsh Assembly Government using
its Devolved Environmental Protection Act powers.
The requirement for the UK as member state to notify
the European Commission of any safeguard action
under the Deliberate Release Directive provided
the opportunity for the Assembly’s concerns
to be aired at European Union policy level. |
| 46. |
At the UK level, the
Assembly’s concerns have highlighted the need
for a policy on the co-existence of GM and other
crops, prior to any further steps towards commercialisation.
This concern has been picked up by the Agriculture
and Environment Biotechnology Commission (AEBC)
in that they have given this topic the highest priority
in their forthcoming work plan |
| 47. |
An indirect effect, which
has been attributed to the Assembly’s firm
stance, is the absence from Wales of any sites in
the ongoing programme of Farm Scale Evaluations
of GM crops. |
| Are
there areas of policy where responsibilities are
divided between the Assembly and Whitehall in ways
which have: |
| 48. |
worked well |
| |
|
|
The official level
meetings prior to the monthly Ministerial
meetings of the UK Agriculture Ministers and
indeed the meeting of the four Ministers provide
a good basis for mutual exchange of information
and in a sense provides a good model of how
business should be conducted. |
|
| |
|
|
Developing the
UK negotiating line in respect of proposals
coming out of Brussels particularly the current
Mid Term Review of the Common Agricultural
Policy. Through close co-operation and consultation
between DEFRA and the devolved administration,
we have been able to keep abreast of development
and put across our view. By arrangement with
DEFRA, I am also able to attend Agriculture
Council meetings in Brussels when matters
of importance to Wales are being discussed
and this has not caused any conflict. This
has worked quite well and enables me to convey
the strength of the Welsh case to DEFRA Ministers
before any decisions are taken. My Ministerial
attendance is supported by Assembly Government
officials attendance at working group meetings
in Brussels relating to CAP reform. |
|
| |
|
|
Policy in respect
of cross border authorities eg Meat and Livestock
Commission. Close and regular contact between
Whitehall and Cardiff has ensured that we
are generally consulted at an early stage
on key developments. |
|
| |
|
|
Close working
relations has continued in fisheries in a
very similar manner to the situation pre-devolution.
|
|
| |
|
|
Occasional meetings
of UK Forestry Ministers allow effective input
into forestry policy and have enabled effective
and quick action on a range of issues including
plant health and international forestry policy. |
|
| |
|
|
The Assembly’s
exercise of its Environmental Protection Act
(EPA) powers in furtherance of its stated
policy is a good example of the use of the
full extent of devolved powers to influence
both UK and European policy. |
|
| |
|
|
The Assembly has
exercised its powers in relation to plant
health and pesticides through the making of
over 22 pieces of subordinate legislation
in the Assembly’s first three years of
existence. |
|
| |
|
|
The Assembly is
actively engaged with the following UK level
advisory bodies: the Advisory Committee on
Pesticides, the Advisory Committee on Releases
to the Environment, the Agriculture and Environment
Biotechnology Commission, the Forum on Seeds
and a Sustainable Environment, the Plant Varieties
and Seeds Committee and the Pesticides Voluntary
Initiative. |
|
| 49. |
presented practical
problems |
| |
|
|
Foot and Mouth
clearly created difficulties as explained
above. |
|
| |
|
|
In respect of
plant health and GMO matters, any practical
difficulties arise from the EU competence
in this area and the resulting obligations
and agreements at member state level, rather
than from the distribution of powers between
the UK Government and devolved administrations,
or between the four UK competent authorities. |
|
