| |
Remarks by NRCS Chief Bruce I. Knight
to NRCS State Conservationists,
Farm Bill Coordinators, and Other NRCS Leaders
NRCS Farm Bill Conference
Washington, DC
August 21, 2002
Good Morning. Thank you all for being here to discuss some important aspects
of farm bill implementation. We are going to spend a good deal of time over the
next couple of days getting your input and using it to decide on some next
steps.
We are also going to hear from Deputy Secretary Moseley and Deputy Under
Secretary Gray about the Department’s perspective on farm bill implementation.
The fact that both Jim and Mack are here with us today underscores how important
it is for all of us to understand the big picture of farm bill implementation,
and not just the nuts and bolts of what NRCS has to do to implement the
conservation provisions.
I’m sure that many of you have seen some criticism of the farm bill, saying that
it increases commodity subsidies. Much of this criticism has come from the
agriculture industry overseas. The assertion that the U.S. is increasing crop
subsidies is untrue, as Jim will explain. The good news for conservation is that
we can strengthen American agriculture by rewarding good conservation practices
– and stay within our international trade agreements. Mack will point out how
the conservation provisions of the farm bill fit into the big picture.
After we hear from Jim and Mack, we will spend the bulk of our time working on
three areas of farm bill implementation: the EQIP application evaluation
process, the role of the State Technical Committee, and the use of technical
service providers. We’ll be working on these three areas in three different sets
of breakout sessions, so, you will have a chance to discuss these topics in
smaller groups and bring back your recommendations to the entire group. We will
use the input from your groups to write rules in these three areas that will
meet your needs in the field and provide the best possible service to operators
around the country.
I want to stress with you that my expectations today and tomorrow center on
dialog, discussion, and decision. Every week I have a host of groups, entities,
partners and other agencies that cross my threshold and want me to tell you how
to manage your state decisions. I don’t want to do business that way. My goal is
to empower you to make the best, objective, conservation decisions possible.
In that view, there are three priorities I would like you to keep in mind as you
participate in the breakout sessions:
First, How will what you propose streamline our operations? There is so much
work to do implementing the new farm bill, that we simply have to find ways to
work more efficiently and effectively.
Second, How will what you propose contribute to delivering high-quality work?
The farm bill represents a greatly increased commitment to conservation on the
part of Congress and the Administration. With that commitment comes increased
responsibility. We have always been an agency that delivered a quality product,
and we must continue to do so. We must find ways to streamline, while at the
same time maintaining high quality.
And finally, How will what you propose contribute to our on-the-ground
relationship with our customers? You are all familiar with the high customer
satisfaction ratings NRCS got recently. Those ratings are based on a high degree
of confidence and trust. We must continue to cultivate that confidence and
trust, even as we work to meet our increased responsibilities. Streamlining
cannot mean leaving our customers to go it alone. We must maintain the close
one-on-one working relationships that our customers have come to expect.
So, we have three challenges: streamlining operations, maintaining quality, and
maintaining relationships. I know you are already working to meet these
challenges in your states and across state boundaries.
We are also working hard to meet these challenges at the national level. Here
are some examples:
In streamlining, we are trying to keep administration of conservation programs
“Lean and Local.” That means keeping the bureaucracy small and leaving as much
of the decision making as possible to the local people. We are minimizing the
rulemaking process and making the rules as flexible as possible. We are building
our eGovernment infrastructure, including eForms, the farm bill web site, and
now the electronic Field Office Technical Guide. We will continue to deploy
automated tools such as the Customer Service Toolkit and eContracting to
streamline our work. We are also building a smoother functional relationship
between FSA and NRCS. This, of course, includes our recent decision to eliminate
dual concurrences in EQIP and CRP.
In delivering quality work, we are building a technical service provider
infrastructure that will help us deliver increased conservation. There is simply
too much work to be done for us to do it ourselves. We must rely on the
expertise out there in the technical service provider community to get the job
done – and do it well.
As we are writing rules and policies, we are keeping an eye on meeting or
exceeding current technical quality performance standards. We are using
electronic tools, not just to streamline, but also to provide high-quality
service. For the most part, States have brought their Technical Guides up to
date. Getting the Guides on the Internet will give our employees and customers
access to the latest, high-quality technical information. Also, eForms,
eContracting, the Customer Service Toolkit, all are ways of providing higher
quality service, as well as more efficient service.
In maintaining relationships, nationally we are working closely with a large
number of organizations representing our partners. We are doing everything we
can to keep them informed about the farm bill and to enlist their help in the
implementation process. But we must also continue to work at the local level to
maintain and cultivate on-the ground relationships with farmers and ranchers and
local conservation districts. These relationships are really the only way
conservation gets done – one farm and ranch at a time.
A good relationship with a local landowner is a reflection of a unified approach
to conservation. We don’t view a landowner as an EQIP landowner, a WRP
landowner, or some other program’s landowner. Each landowner has a unique set of
conservation challenges and goals. The relationship with NRCS is a way for the
landowner to identify the conservation challenges and marry them up with
conservation solutions. That is why the farm bill offers a whole portfolio of
programs: Not to let the programs drive our service to farmers, but to give us a
range of appropriate service options.
In short, our service to landowners cannot be driven by programs. Our service
has to be driven by the conservation needs -- how we can help the farmer or
rancher meet those needs while maintaining profitability.
I have said many times that we are a service organization – one driven by
service to the land, service to the landowner, and service to the taxpayer. In
every case, this service comes from our conservation ethic. Our programs are the
tools we use to get the job done. As long as we keep that relationship firmly in
mind, we should be all right.
So, as you go into your breakout sessions, keep conservation first in your
minds. Look for ways to streamline our operations, seek ways to deliver quality
work, and explore how we can maintain our on-the-ground relationships with
customers. I will be interested in seeing how the discussion goes and hearing
your recommendations.
| |
|