Opinion: Is an interim support scheme the right way to go?

Anthony Weston is a farm and environment consultant with land and property management firm CLM in East Sussex. He discusses the plans for new support schemes for farmers and whether the government is getting it right.

A lot of farmers were taken by surprise by news of the government’s proposed new support scheme, the Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI).

According to Farmers Weekly’s informative coverage, it will be a “stepping stone” for English farmers, bridging the 2022-24 gap ahead of the introduction of the Environmental Land Management (ELM) scheme.

See also: Eustice unveils details of ‘stepping stone’ subsidy scheme

Having worked with clients to help them make up the cash shortfall they’re facing as a result of the phasing out of BPS, this is, on first impression, good news.

Anything that fills this “hungry gap” has to be welcome.

But one can’t help question the logic of introducing yet another new scheme, especially for such a short period.

Let’s face it, Defra’s record on launching and running new schemes is hardly exemplary.

Plus, the Countryside Stewardship (CS) scheme, which is already up and running, could easily be adjusted to attract a wider take-up ahead of a full-scale ELM launch.

Farmers are incredibly innovative, but they can’t be expected to provide “public goods” such as clean water and flood alleviation, as well as putting food on the nation’s tables, if they’re losing money.

Rather than reinventing the wheel, why not tweak CS to enable more existing and new options to be added to current agreements, such as offering payments for carbon storage?

This would bring additional environmental benefits, and get more cash to farmers. Win-win.

The difficulty at present is that Higher Level Stewardship (HLS) agreements expire partway through the year and CS starts on 1 January, so there is a break in funding.

Also, farmers already in CS are not able to add options to their current schemes.

Simply permitting additions to existing agreements, and transfers from HLS to CS would solve these problems, though.

After all, CS has many measures that fit well with modern farming (such as herbal leys and legume fallows), and Defra has provided several ways to engage with it, through mid-tier, higher tier and wildlife offers.

Those looking to apply next year will have a broad range of options to help them make up the BPS shortfall, as well as derive environmental and agronomic benefit on the ground.

The removal of greening – meaning the end of the three-crop rule and environmental focus areas – really opens the door for a much more imaginative CS scheme. 

Farmers are incredibly innovative, but they can’t be expected to provide “public goods” such as clean water and flood alleviation, as well as putting food on the nation’s tables, if they’re losing money.

The government land use policy has to recognise that a commercially viable farming sector is the backbone of a complex, interconnected rural socioeconomic “ecosystem”.

We’re helping clients fill the cash shortfall presented by the disappearance of BPS in all manner of ways – everything from introducing new agricultural enterprises and diversifications to accessing new grants and implementing cost-cutting measures. But support between 2022 and 2024 is much-needed.

Whether or not the SFI ultimately ends up as an evolution of existing schemes or something brand new, Defra needs to learn from previous mistakes.

Any stepping-stone scheme has to be light on bureaucracy, simple to understand and easy to join if there is to be a decent uptake.

It’s also vital that it transitions well into whatever follows with ELM.