The Countryside Agency has published its "rural proofing" report.

It found that Whitehall policy makers took important steps to "think rural" during the last year but greater efforts are needed if rural proofing is to reach its potential and achieve real results.

Forum Response: Countryside Agency

Sir Ewan Cameron, chairman of the Countryside Agency, said: "Last year we were critical of the slow start that government departments had made with 'rural proofing' mainstream national policies and programme delivery. That tough line has paid off. Rural proofing has progressed, albeit unevenly, but greater efforts are needed in many departments to have a significant rural impact.

"This does not mean they need to develop specific policies for rural areas or rural people. It does mean ensuring that mainstream policies are designed to meet the needs of those who live and work in the countryside. With more and more policy making and policy delivery taking place regionally, I am encouraged by the efforts made by regional government offices this year.

"Credit is also due to the Treasury for ensuring that rural concerns were properly reflected in the outcome of their Comprehensive Spending Review last July. Unfortunately departments did not go on to ensure that the Public Service Agreements emerging from that review were set in a way that guaranteed rural delivery.

"Most central government policy targets were set, on issues like crime, healthcare, housing, education and transport, through simple numerical targets which can be met all too easily by focusing policies on towns and cities, with their larger populations. There is a real risk that scattered rural communities could lose out on essential services, if those targets are not revised or delivered more carefully.

"A further worry is that few Whitehall policy makers have available the relevant data for the proper development of policies geared to rural circumstances - and, more importantly, to allow them to monitor the impact of their policies in the countryside. For example, on vital services, from childcare to small business support, departments have no means of knowing how effective they are in delivering to rural people."

Forum Response: Country Land and Business Association

A spokesman for the CLA told ePolitix.com: "The Country Land and Business Association welcomes the Countryside Agency's work on rural proofing across Whitehall.

"It is one of the most important functions that the Agency has, as we emphasised to the Haskins Review of DEFRA and its agencies.

"Having the special position being both inside government yet at the same time able to offer independent criticism is a benefit to rural businesses and communities who may otherwise be ignored.

"The CLA has been calling for rural businesses to be able to piggy-back onto the public infrastructure. Following our lobbying, the DTI has made a start through its commitment to piggy-backing. But it is still the case that all government departments are affected by the failure of rural communities to access broadband. Without that access, many businesses will simply re-locate to the cities, to the detriment of the rural economy.

"We welcome the Agency's recognition that planning policies need to change if rural areas are to have sufficient levels of affordable housing. Money matters, but it is not the only issue. If the countryside is to continue to be the place we all want it to be, there needs to be enough variety of accommodation to provide for all those who live and work there. This will not happen unless planning policies enable sustainable development of rural communities."

Forum Response: Countryside Alliance

Richard Burge, chief executive of the Countryside Alliance, said: "We need a step change, but the best way to achieve this is to remove the 'self-proofing' responsibilities from the ambit and control of the individual Departments. A massive shake-up is needed if the government is to foster more coherent and constructive rural policy-making."

"The rural proofing role should be carried out by a team of independent, specialist 'rural policy' scrutineers, seconded to each department but outside the departmental reporting hierarchy. The Countryside Agency at present only has the remit to 'proof the proofers' - but those proofers are responsible only to their own departments.

"We believe that the Agency should probably have a more direct role and greater clout in ensuring departmental policy advances rural interests - or if they don't, some other entity should be given the power to ensure compliance of departments with good rural policy.

"This is too important a function to be left to each department's own routine processes, especially since by definition internal appointees from within a general government department will have no specialist knowledge of the issues and challenges facing rural communities. How are 'rural proofers' chosen, what do they know about the countryside and how are they best qualified to assess the impact on rural communities of a department's whole policy output?

"The Agency has identified affordable housing and broadband as huge areas of concern to rural people right now, which is indeed the case. Now we need the assurance that rural proofing will be pivotal in bringing broadband and affordable housing - as well as a satisfactory proofing structure - to the rural community".