At DEFRA, to many of us it has been normal service all summer. In the days immediately following the General Election, political pundits were wondering whether the new department represented a greening of MAFF, or whether MAFF had simply swallowed environment? The answer, to most commentators, was that it was too early to tell exactly how the new department would bed down. Three months into Labour's second term and we are in a far better position to judge. I, for one, am yet to be convinced that anything has significantly changed from the old MAFF set-up. As The Guardian presciently noted in June: "If it looks like a Maff, sounds like a Maff and operates like a Maff, it probably is a Maff." As far as I can see, the evidence points to exactly that conclusion. First, the people who matter in the department are from the MAFF side of things, including the permanent secretary and four out of five ministers, and power in departments crucially stems directly from the ministerial offices. Second, virtually every announcement that has come out of the department since June 8 has been regarding agriculture, even if you discount foot and mouth. Can you think of a single environment initiative that DEFRA has announced? Mind you, that should please NFU president Ben Gill and the rest of the food chain. Finally, the department still appears to be up to its old tricks. The recent announcement of three separate inquiries into the foot and mouth crisis is a case in point, with DEFRA opting for secrecy and expediency over openness and honesty. Now that Margaret Beckett is back from her holidays she has her work cut out to prove that DEFRA is not simply a New Labour rebranding of MAFF. {{NEWS }}