Some farmers may be choking on their cornflakes when they read in the Daily Telegraph that Lord Mandelson is their most powerful ally in their campaign to avoid being required to replace the environmental benefits of set-aside. Lord Mandelson's Business Department is against almost any form of new regulation on any industry - phew! it's a good job that we've already decided that sending kids up chimneys is a bad idea, otherwise Lord Mandelson would presumably be against making that illegal.
Times were when other government departments quaked in fear of The Treasury - after all they have the cash - but now it seems that kingmaker Mandelson holds most clout. But it is odd that The Treasury haven't intervened to point out that at a time when public money is tight, the option of requiring farmers to replace some of the wildlife benefits of set-aside seems quite a good one compared with paying £30m for the same benefit. Well, maybe £30m of our money isn't worth bothering about.
I have been told so many times that no decision has been made that I definitely don't believe it! It seems that the otherwise utterly admirable Hilary Benn is about to do the wildlife that he cares about a great disservice. If so, then you have to wonder whether Defra has reverted to MAFF - a government department that did what its clients, farmers, wanted rather than pursue the public interest.
For Defra to go back on the advice of its expert committee, to choose a 'voluntary' option put forward by the NFU which volunteers nothing except to suck up more taxpayers' money, to choose the industry vested interest rather than the public interest, to choose the union view rather than government's own statutory advisor's view, to choose the more expensive option, to choose the more uncertain option is such a poor decision that it makes one weep.
However, we seem to be heading for the option that will appease the NFU and stop its officers throwing their toys out of their pram rather than the one which delivers the best value for the public.
Although such an outcome is difficult to accept it seems we will have to. And we will. Because the plight of farmland birds is so dire that the RSPB can't sulk on the sidelines but will have to find as many ways as possible of working positively with Defra and the NFU in order to limit the damage to wildlife. We can do that - we must. Sometimes being a voice for nature means biting your tongue!