The 'astonishing' £200m spent by Scottish Government on consultants for farming policy

A £200 million sum used by the Scottish Government to pay for consultants on farm policy has been described “astonishing”.

Official figures show that on average, more than £20m has been paid to external consultants each year to help run a subsidy system for farmers over the past nine years, it has been reported.

The total spend is just over £203m since 2016, with claims the vast majority of which went to three external companies.

More than £200m has been spent by the Scottish government on external consultants to help run a subsidy system for farmers | Katharine Hay

Rural Affairs Secretary Mairi Gougeon is said to have defended the sum, claiming the firms are providing IT services rather than simply consulting on how to run the programmes.

But farmers have repeatedly said the existing system is not fit for purpose and that coming changes to the payments means the IT could become out of date.

Scottish Conservative MSP for Galloway and West Dumfries Finlay Carson said: “This is an astonishing sum of money that the SNP have squandered.

Finlay Carson MSP is convener of the Rural Affairs and Islands Committee (pic: Fraser Bremner)

“Their previous IT system turned out to be a total disaster in terms of delivering payments to farmers and we’ve known for some time that this version simply is not fit for purpose.

“SNP ministers cannot keep farmers and the wider agriculture in the dark over what is happening with how this system is operating. This is a huge drain on the public finances, yet Jim Fairlie as the relevant SNP minister is still pretending everything is fine.

“This is not just about the cost of the system, it is also about future policies to deliver a just transition for farmers being put at risk.”

Farmers have raised concerns that the current system is not fit for purpose and that forthcoming changes to the payments means the IT could become out of date. | Katharine Hay

Failures in the system led to payments to thousands of farmers being delayed, which led to a damning report in 2017 from Audit Scotland, the financial watchdog.

Mr Carson said Scotland was “now well behind the curve” when it comes to addressing the climate change challenges in agriculture. He said ministers needed to “get a grip on these costs and ensure that the money being spent on these consultants is fair for taxpayers”.

Jonnie Hall, director of policy at the National Farmers Union of Scotland, told ITV News: “It’s a staggering amount of money and our members – farmers and crofters across Scotland – will be gobsmacked by such amounts of money going into consultants’ fees to deliver agricultural support payments.

“And yet the impression that we have about that IT system has been that it was very much a flawed system from day one. It has recovered, it has got back on track, but if we’re still paying significant amounts of money to keep it ticking over, then that has got to be a concern for all of us.”

The Holyrood rural affairs and islands committee has heard evidence in recent weeks from the agricultural sector claiming the IT system is not working for them.

At a session on Wednesday, Agriculture Minister Mr Fairlie said that policy was not being driven by the system’s capabilities.

Mr Carson, the committee’s convener, has previously called for the Scottish Government to be “far more transparent” about the costs involved in administering the set up.

Ms Gougeon said: “These payments are for IT services, not consultancy, to deliver ongoing operational delivery, maintenance, modernisation, cybersecurity and development to a range of areas, including vital farming support payments, NatureScot, Forestry, Marine, estates management, plant health, and livestock inspections.

“Expenditure has reduced in recent years, and we have seen consistent improvement in agriculture support payment performance and lower costs as a result of these investments, meaning money is reaching farmers and crofters more quickly. All contracts are subject to Scottish Government procurement procedures to ensure value for money.”