GOVERNMENT
APPG on
Forestry
Carolyne Locher reports from Westminster
16 MAY 2018 FORESTRYJOURNAL.CO.UK
A
TTENDEES at the first All Party
Parliamentary Group on Forestry
meeting of 2018 gather in the narrow
corridor outside Committee Room
19 at the Houses of Parliament. The
corridor is rammed with visitors attending
meetings on all manner of subjects, including
Chinese Human Rights, and the meetings are
running late.
Without preamble, Group Chair Chris
Davies MP (Brecon and Radnorshire) invites
Confor’s Chief Executive Stuart Goodall to
summarise news from around the UK.
Of England, Stuart says, “At the last APPG,
a breakfast meeting, Owen Paterson outlined
two possible post-Brexit rural policies and
the role of forestry within these. Highlighting
Switzerland (government subsidises) and
New Zealand (government steps back), he
recommended a mix of both. During the
Westminster Conference, Dr Thérèse Coffey
addressed a packed house and we had a
political panel discussion.
“The first planting (of a total of 660,
trees over three seasons) has taken place
at Doddington, a modern forest of mixed
plantings (productive softwood, native trees,
open ground, and access opportunities for
the local community, schools and horse-riding
groups). Local schoolchildren (from Glendale
Middle School in Wooler) planted these
trees. The trees will mature alongside those
children. This happened shortly after Lowther
(near Penrith, Cumbria). Both schemes give
the sector confidence that more trees are
being planted.”
Of Scotland, “There is approval for the
Forest and Land Management Bill. Scotland
taking full control of its own decision-making
heralds the final devolution of forestry
policy and governance across the three
countries of Britain. Where the Forestry
Commission used to operate
in all three countries, Wales
then established Natural
Resources Wales and this
new legislation completes
the legislative process.”
Chris Davies
covers parliamentary
updates. “Following
the Westminster Hall
Debate on Forestry, we
are planning more as the
parliamentary year proceeds.
In the next issue of Confor’s
magazine, we are issuing a notice
asking parliamentarians, in whose
areas there is tree planting and sawmills
employing thousands of people, to get
involved [in the APPGF]. A written campaign,
‘Save Mortimer Forest’, regarding the
development of prime Forestry Commission
woodland sites for log cabins, has come in.
Some people do not appreciate this. Perhaps
today we will hear a response.”
Today’s discussion, ‘The opportunities
for forestry in Michael Gove’s Green Brexit,’
begins with Guy Horsington of Defra’s
Future Farming Directorate outlining Defra’s
England-centric post-CAP consultation
document, ‘Health and Harmony: consulting
on the future of food, farming and the
environment in a Green Brexit,’ and posing
many questions.
Guy states, “Leaving the CAP, we can reset
agricultural policy, how we produce food and
use our land. Using the principle that public
money should be spent on public goods,
where do we concentrate government support,
what is the correct role for industry and the
correct role for the public in understanding
what we do?
“Leaving the EU in March 2019 will be
followed by a two-year implementation period.
At some point, we will move away from CAP
rules under an Agricultural Transition, likely
to last longer than two years, beginning with
agriculture and then the environment.”
Direct payments will start to be phased out
and a new domestic policy brought in. “People
need time to adjust and new productivity
measures will be funded, most likely starting
between 2020 and 2022.”
The public goods expected
are environmental goods.
“New environmental land
management schemes and
animal welfare schemes
will be piloted (devolved
administrations will have
flexibility to target their
own support), offering a
better return for money
spent on support.
“One definition of a
public good is benefits that
markets do not of themselves
reward. We want to support food
production but public goods are often
less tangible: clean air; clean water;
carbon sequestration; the landscape that we
treasure. What are the priorities for public
money during an ‘Agricultural Transition’ and
in future state policy?”
Environmental land managers and agri-
environment schemes currently operate
under restrictive and inflexible CountrysideStewardship and CAP rules. Elements of a
new future state policy include: ‘Farming
excellence, profitability and resilience’;
a new ‘Environmental Land Management
(ELM) scheme’; ‘Reducing Direct Payments
in an agricultural transition’; ‘Tree health’;
‘simplifying the Countryside Stewardship’.
The centrepiece to any new policy, an
Environmental Land Management Scheme
could include: multi-annual agreements
with a user-friendly focus; use of innovative
mechanisms (reverse auctions and
conservation covenants); capital grants
(straight-forward or more challenging varieties
in return for higher payments); funding
for collaborative projects between land
managers, farmers and environmentalists
who work together to build pioneering agri-
environment schemes.
Underpinned by Natural Capital values
and compatible with WTO rules, any
scheme should involve less administration,
be understandable and simpler to apply for.
Rolling monthly start dates and payments
could help, as could rewarding individual
benefits such as soil health.
Reducing Direct Area Payments during the
Agricultural Transition will fund these new
schemes. “What conditions should be imposed
on payments, how long should the transition
last and what factors should be considered
when profiling reductions?”
There are currently three options:
progressive reductions; applying a cap to the
largest payments and reducing payments
progressively, income tax band style; or
applying a different cap or reduction to a
higher or lower number of payments.
For ‘Farming excellence, profitability and
resilience’, productivity gains are achievable
through targeted investments, focusing on
skills and knowledge exchange, a skilled
workforce (with increasing domestic workers
and ensuring access for migrant labour),
using new technology (and investing in
agri-technology and research) to increase
resource efficiency and sustainable growth
(and making better use of data in all). “Is
it for industry to support or is it a role for
government during the transition period?”
For ‘Tree health’, Defra wants rapid and
effective (collaborative) responses to pest and“FORESTRY IS NOT A
DERELICT PART OF THE
ECONOMY. IT NEEDS TO BE
LOOKED AT AND A THOUGHT
TRANSITION NEEDS TO
TAKE PLACE”