| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Earl Ferrers: My Lords, will the noble Baroness do her best to simplify the forms? At the moment the forms are the size of a book, the questions are intrusive and incomprehensible and the whole procedure is frightening.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, we have reduced the pages of the attendance allowance form, which is for older people, from 38 to about 19.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: Yes, my Lords. The forms are in big print. One page is simply for identifying the applicant's family; the second page is for a person who is filling in the form for someone else, as is the third page; the fourth page asks for illnesses and disabilities; the fifth page asks about the treatment being received; and the next page asks why the claim is being made. These are high-value benefits and people are asked to fill in a space such as this on these rather big-print forms. It is not surprising that the information is needed. We need to be able to determine that up to £100 a week properly goes to those who need it. We are also seeking to simplify the forms for the disability living allowance.
We have to ensure that people not only claim the money, but that the right people receive it. These are high-value benefits. We also have helplines for people; leaflets in eight or 10 ethnic minority languages; and forms that are prepopulated in the sense that they can be completed over the telephone and signed afterwards. We are genuinely seeking to ensure that people who are entitled to the money claim it and receive it. However, we cannot simply say, "We feel sorry for you; have some money". There has to be a proper audit trail for the money. It is a high-value benefit.
Lord Higgins: My Lords, I think that reply will be at least 19 pages in Hansard. In view of the widespread computer problem in the Department for Work and Pensions, will the computer dealing with disability benefit claims and payments be satisfactory? What steps are being taken to ensure that the system will be adequate after the passage of the Disability Discrimination Bill?
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, I do not understand the connection with the second question. On the first question, the computer is certainly adequate for purpose and has not been affected. The
1 Dec 2004 : Column 465
Disability Discrimination Bill does not have anything to do with benefit claims, so I do not see the point of the noble Lord's second question.
Lord Addington: My Lords, will the Minister give the House some inkling of the Government's research into the low take-up of benefit? Will that enable claimants to access anything else available to them in other sections of society, which I am afraid does bring us back to the new Bill and the previous legislation?
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, is the noble Lord suggesting that what matters is that the benefit is the passport to other benefits? Is that the push of his question?
Lord Addington: My Lords, it is the access of benefits to the whole of society.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, I am probably being slow today but I do not understand the import of that question. It is clear that if somebody has DLA they are more likely successfully to hold down a job by virtue of the extra support and so on. Access to benefits is independent of civil rights. The noble Lord's question is more appropriately associated with questions on civil rights, which will be reflected in the Bill that we shall discuss on Monday.
Farming
Baroness Byford asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether the draft European Union regulations on the circumstances in which farmers may or may not perform mechanical operations will be enforced on a national, regional or local basis.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Whitty): My Lords, from 2005, farmers must keep their land in good agricultural and environmental condition (GAEC) if they claim a subsidy under CAP direct payment schemes, including the single payment.
Under EU framework rules, GAEC must cover standards to protect soils, including to maintain soil structure. In England, this measure restricts unnecessary mechanical field operations on waterlogged soil. Agriculture is a devolved matter within the UK, so, within that framework, the regulations are decided separately by each country.
Baroness Byford: My Lords, does not the Minister agree that the proposals in these draft regulations in regard to waterlogged soil are total madness—that the Secretary of State will be the one to decide when a farmer can or cannot work on his crops? My Question asked whether decisions will be made on a national or regional basis. Even in one field on a farm the quality of the soil and its waterloggedness can vary. Will the
1 Dec 2004 : Column 466
Minister tell the House whether—and, if so, why—the Government are going to support this completely mad suggestion?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I regret that the noble Baroness regards this provision as mad. We are concerned about the quality of the soil. If "good agricultural and environmental condition" means anything, it must mean respect for the soil and how we manage it. This regulation does not come out of the blue; it is a condition for getting a very large payment from the taxpayer via the European Union. The system will replace a lot of the bureaucracy which pre-existed it under 11 different schemes for claiming EU payments. The question of whether you should use heavy machinery in a waterlogged field is clearly a part of how you treat the soil. Therefore, there should be some restriction on so doing.
Lord Dixon-Smith: My Lords, is the Minister aware that a single farm can have some soil where you can start work with no difficulty the morning after a day's heavy rain, and other soil where you cannot work for a week after a day's heavy rain? There are times when you have to do so when the soil is waterlogged or lose the whole crop.
I think that these regulations from Brussels put the Minister's right honourable friend at risk of being invited to play God.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the specific English interpretation of the regulations from Brussels—there are similar arrangements in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland—is to protect the soil. There are exemptions in relation to bringing in heavy mechanical equipment if by failing to so do, even in a waterlogged situation, you lose the crop or you breach contractual arrangements.
Another exemption, to which I assume the noble Lord, Lord Dixon-Smith, refers, is that if there has been particularly heavy rain and there is no ability to do anything about it, we are prepared to have an additional exemption in England which is determined by the department and, ultimately, by the Secretary of State. That is not playing God; that is being sensible in interpreting how effective and how restrictive we should be. The basic point of the regulations is that we do not want heavy machinery used unnecessarily in waterlogged conditions.
Lord Livsey of Talgarth: My Lords, does not the Minister agree that this refers to good husbandry, which is very important in establishing an efficient agricultural system? Can he assure me that Defra will avoid excessively gold-plating this particular regulation? Otherwise, we could end up, as usual, following the rules of cricket with the rest of Europe following the rules of baseball, perhaps.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, of course to some extent cricket also suffers from waterlogging. As far as I know, Brussels has not made any rules about it. The noble Lord is quite right that this is elementary
1 Dec 2004 : Column 467
husbandry for ensuring that land is kept in good agricultural condition. It must be applied sensibly. This is part of the minimum standard for looking after soil. It will be applied sensibly, in terms of the exemptions to which I have referred and the sensitivity of the enforcement.
Lord Northbourne: My Lords, will the noble Lord assure the House that, in applying these rules sensibly, the people making the decisions will have experience in agriculture and in soil management?
Lord Northbourne: My Lords, it seems that we have some disagreement from the opposition Benches. These people should also have experience in the cultivation and working of soil.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the enforcers of these regulations in general will be the officials of the Rural Payments Agency, who of course are very experienced in all aspects of agriculture.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |