THE UK Government has been accused of “misappropriating” hundreds of millions of pounds of European farming subsidies destined for Scotland.
Fergus Ewing, the Scottish Government’s Rural Economy Secretary, has demanded that £160 million of funding is returned north of the Border, arguing it was only awarded by the EU to address lower payment rates for farmers in Scotland.
The long-running dispute over the subsidies began in 2013, when the European Commission allocated the UK an extra £190 million of funding over six years for direct farm payments. The money – known as convergence uplift – was aimed at addressing the low area payments received by Scottish farmers under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).
However, the UK Government decided all four home nations would receive the same proportion of the CAP budget as they did previously, meaning Scotland has only been allocated £30 million of the extra cash.
In a statement at Holyrood, Ewing told MSPs: “The EU clearly intended this extra convergence money to go to those farmers who received the least, but this purpose was subverted by the UK Government who held on to the money simply because they had the power to do so.
“Now, I don’t need to tell you that wrongly holding on to someone else’s property is well recognised in criminal law. In this case, the withholding of funds could be done simply because the UK, as member state, receives the money and has complete control of how it is allocated.”
Ewing continued: “The EU clearly intended this money to go to the farmers who receive the least amount of support, yet the UK has simply pocketed the money. Frankly, the money should be returned.
“This demand is not against farmers in other parts of the UK. It is about setting a baseline for future agricultural funding with the UK.
“Unless the UK Government returns the money, how can we rely on them to treat our farmers fairly in Brexit negotiations and future funding discussions?”
The call came amid reports that UK Environment Secretary Michael Gove is poised to review the allocation of the cash.
Opposition parties at Holyrood, including the Tories, also called for the money to come to Scottish farmers. Tory MSP Peter Chapman said: “We on the Conservative benches are still supportive of the fact that this money should have come to Scotland, and I have personally raised the issue with [Scottish Secretary] David Mundell, [Rural Affairs Minister]George Eustice and Michael Gove over the last 18 months or so.”
He said Tory MPs had written to Gove asking him to review the issue, with the request being “well received” by the Minister. “I am now very hopeful of a successful outcome to this question,” Chapman said.
Scottish Labour’s Rhoda Grant said: “He [Ewing] is right in saying this money was received by the UK to deal with the low average payment rate received by Scottish farmers.”
A Defra spokeswoman said: “We have received the letter from Alister Jack MP [the Tory MP for Dumfries and Galloway] and will respond in due course.”
Earlier this year fears emerged that Scots farmers could lose out on €2 billion of funding if EU subsidies are replaced by a single UK-wide scheme post Brexit.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel