Born in 1946 and brought up in Cupar, Fife, I was educated at the local school - 
THE political pundits are in general agreement that the outcome of the Holyrood elections in May is too close to call. However, it is clear that the animosity between the Scottish National Party and the Liberal Democrats is mounting almost on a daily basis.
Both parties have strong rural connections and it is becoming obvious that the countryside vote could be crucial in determining which party forms the next administration and who any subsequent coalition might involve.
Farmers are watching developments on the political front with increasing fascination, and many are likely to vote tactically. Bureaucracy is a hot issue.
Last week Andrew Arbuckle MSP, the deputy rural affairs spokesman for the Lib Dems, proposed a new monitoring body to scrutinise many of the organisations farmers have to deal with.
He said: "It may seem strange to propose setting up another body to ensure proper implementation of regulation, but this would be composed of practical people who would be required to go out into the fields and into the farm offices to hear at first hand of problems facing the farming industry."
That has gone down like the proverbial lead balloon with Stewart Stevenson MSP, who represents the SNP in Banff and Buchan.
He said: "When I became an MSP, the issue of paperwork was raised at the first farm I visited. I asked the farmer to show me the paperwork relating to one beast - it took up most of his kitchen floor.
"That is why this latest proposal from the Lib Dems cannot be taken seriously. For the past eight years they have been one of the parties of government in Scotland and one of their MSPs [Ross Finnie] has been the minister for rural development through all of that time.
"They cannot have it both ways. They are part of the administration which has done nothing to curb the rapacious expansion of SEPA [the Scottish environmental protection agency], the near doubling of its staff and an explosion of regulations. If they were truly serious about tackling regulation, they have had eight years when they could have done something."
Arbuckle responded: "Scotland would not be the first country in the EU taking a step to set up a monitoring organisation. Most of the legislation affecting agriculture originates in Brussels, but other member states appear to cope with it better than we do.
"My proposal does not mean that farmers can duck out of their responsibilities, but it will ensure that they are not squeezed out of business by duplication of paperwork, or gold-plated regulation."
As the war of words moved on, Stevenson asked Ross Finnie in a written question why nearly 700 farmers and crofters had lost out to the tune of more than £1.25 million in their entitlements to the new single farm payment scheme over the past two years.
The total surrendered was modest in the context of the £450m paid out each year, but it is important to the losers, said Stevenson. He said: "These penalties were, in the vast majority of cases, incurred as a result of innocent errors rather than fraud."
Finnie, in a written answer, said: "If any business feels that decisions by SEERAD on issues affecting subsidies are wrong, they have recourse to an appeal procedure without an initial cost. But the ultimate arbiter will be the Scottish Land Court."
to read the original story click on The Scotsman
