The Scottish Government is confident that its rural payment plans do not break either EU or World Trade Organisation rules.

Last month the Agriculture Reform Implementation Oversight Board, which is tasked with setting out the principles of future rural support, stated in its minutes a desire for a ‘flat rate payment system’ and ‘being aware of geographical difference’. Whilst this is not official government policy, it is a recommendation from a committee which the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and Islands, Mairi Gougeon, and NFUS president Martin Kennedy jointly chair.

This marks a sharp turn around from the last rural reform when a single region was thrown out for BPS payments in 2014. The criticism back then was that a single payment region would result in some farms being over compensated whilst others under rewarded. Policy discussions at the time looked at stricter requirements for claimants to keep livestock or grow crops to trigger payments but these were deemed against WTO and EU rules, which do not want the bulk of rural support to be paid on agricultural production. This ultimately failed, as highlighted by The Scottish Farmer's coverage of slipper farmers continuing to get public cash despite having no animals or crops.

Nearly ten years later, the UK is now outside the EU and has much more freedom to write farm support rules. South of the border, rural payment plans are heading in a direction never imagined under CAP. However, here in Scotland the government has stated it wants to align rules with the EU wherever possible. One place it may be forced to start will be to replace the LFASS scheme with the EU’s preference for Areas of natural or other specific constraints (ANC).

To prevent over and under compensation through a single payment region there will need to be some tweaks. It is likely this will include some capping of payments, which in Ireland is set at €150,000 excluding greening. Plus, front loading payments is another option which could help smaller farmers and crofters. Nevertheless, a mechanism to assess farm activity would also most likely be needed with the options available falling into two camps.

Read more: Scottish farm payments brought forward by a month as cost crisis bites

Firstly, the union’s policy of ‘active hectares’ where crops or livestock units would be declared by the farmer and would trigger the amount of area which could be claimed. Secondly the government could use the definition of farm labour units, which is again based on the activities of the business. Both these measures have failed to be acceptable to Brussels in past reforms. Further, the WTO expressly mentions that livestock units can not be a basis for payments within their ‘green box’ rules.

When The Scottish Farmer asked the government on the challenges of maintaining alignment with the EU whilst developing plans which look markedly different from the direction of travel in Brussels, a spokesperson said: “We remain wholly committed to maintaining strong links with the EU. As set out in our vision for agriculture, this includes staying aligned with new EU measures and policy developments where practicable.

“As we continue to develop future Scottish agricultural policy and associated support schemes, our proposals will be measured against these EU developments as well as our obligations under the WTO.”