§ Matthew GreenTo ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs why the sheep annual premium scheme application forms were changed between 2001 and 2002; how many farmers have made mistakes as a result of these changes; and whether farmers have been able to appeal against decisions based on incorrectly completed forms. [33000]
§ Mr. MorleyThe Sheep Annual Premium Scheme (SAPS) application forms are reviewed annually to take account of any regulatory changes, and to take account of comments from producers and to see if there is any way they can be simplified. There have been no major changes from the 2001, to the 2002 forms (such as the addition or deletion of questions), however minor amendments were made to the format and wording of some questions, to assist the industry. For the 2001 scheme there were approximately 30,000 SAPS claimants, each received a questionnaire in the literature pack and was invited to comment on the scheme literature. Around 20 per cent. of applicants took the opportunity to comment, and we used these comments when drafting the 2002 scheme literature, before sending the drafts out for industry consultation over the summer. As in the past the exercise will be repeated this year, although the 2003 scheme literature should change considerably, following the reform of the Sheepmeat regime, agreed in Brussels in December 2001. The reforms have simplified the scheme, and will give us the opportunity to thoroughly review the scheme literature (which has changed only gradually since 1992).
The application window for the 2002 scheme has just closed, as a result we will not know for some time (until the claims are processed in spring) how many producers have made errors on their application forms. Staff undertake an initial check of the application forms on receipt, and any obvious errors are brought to the attention of claimants, who then have the opportunity to amend their forms, until the extended deadline for the receipt of claims on 1 March 2002. In the case of errors discovered after 1 March, while the Commission recognise the concept of 'obvious errors' in relation to the completion of application forms, it does so in a very restrictive manner. Thus, while we can accept simple cases of clerical error (eg transcription of numbers; omission and inconsistencies) we cannot extend this approach to cover errors of substance.
Producers who make an error on their claim form which subsequently affects their payment are able to appeal to the office handling their claim. They may also write to the Rural Payments Agency's Customers Relations Manager, and are of course free to write to their MP, who in turn may refer their case to the relevant Minister, or the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration.