Proceeding contribution from David Leslie Taylor (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 9 July 2007. It occurred during Estimates day on Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs..
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
I agree. Accenture’s role in the matter has been underestimated, and it should be held responsible in a more substantial way than it has been so far. In our report, we examined the Hunter review, which began with a study by Corven Consulting at a cost of more than £500,000. Paragraph 143 criticised that. The example is emblematic of the use of consultants. The contract was almost open-ended, the objectives were unclear and the potential for making substantial profits for delivering little was there throughout the process of using Corven Consulting. We need to get a grip on that in phase 2 of the Labour Government as they enter their next 10 or 12 years in office. The Hunter review stated that no structural changes should be made to the RPA that would jeopardise the target of achieving a stable SPS by the 2008 scheme year. It urged the RPA to focus on that target. I hope that that will happen. The process was to take seven years, with only 10 per cent. linked to the flat rate in the first year. It was always possible for that first year—2005—to have a 0 per cent. flat rate and to move to a 100 per cent. flat rate over a five-year period, thus leading to full implementation of the system by 2010 rather than 2012. If that had happened, disaster would not have been visited on the rural community. The Hunter review said that in the slightly longer term, beyond 2008, the RPA should commit itself to making the SPS application process by e-channel— effectively online—and that it would not be credible to make a commitment until the SPS was stable. We must expect delay until we have stability. Let us be a bit more positive. The RPA is in recovery mode. The National Farmers Union has supplied detailed and regular briefings on the topic, which are balanced, fair and helpful. It says that there is a long way to go but that performance in 2006 has been much better than in 2005. A flood of money was distributed in February and March this year, and the target of making 96 per cent. of payments by the end of June was met.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 462 c1263-4
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Agriculture Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs EU budget Farmers Prices Common agricultural policy Rural areas Rural Payments Agency Subsidies
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-11-24 11:01:35 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_409158
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_409158
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_409158