asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if it is intended to extend the pilot area to other parts of County Monaghan; and, if so, when this extension will take place.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - County Monaghan Pilot Area.
16.
I do not propose to extend any of the existing pilot areas in the western counties. The future of the pilot area scheme is currently being examined by my Department in the light of the recent decisions of the Council of Ministers of the EEC on farm structure policy and of the recommendations contained in the recently published Report on "Agriculture in the West of Ireland", by Dr. J. J. Scully.
When does the Minister expect that the consideration will be concluded and that he will be able to come to a decision as to the extension or otherwise of the pilot areas?
I do not at the moment foresee any extension of the pilot areas scheme as it stands at present because I anticipate a completely new situation in farming where different attitudes will be taken with regard to small farm development and farm structure in which experimental pilot areas would hardly be the most appropriate way of collecting the necessary information, which was their original purpose.
When does the Minister expect to be in a position to present a plan to the commission to take advantage of the structure reform proposals agreed on 24th March to which he referred?
This question is being examined. Contrary to what was implied in this House in the recent past there is no wild urgency about it but this does not mean that our preparation for the presentation of our ideas on this subject is not proceeding with all possible expedition.
I cannot imagine the Minister having wild urgency about anything.
What does the Minister mean by the phrase "development of farm structure"? Is he talking like Dr. Mansholt?
The meaning of that expression is simple enough. It means that certain farms in order to develop properly will need an augmentation in acreage and where this can be procured it should be procured. That is what I am talking about.
There will not be small farms any longer if there is an augmentation of acreage.
That is a very foolish statement. As a matter of general policy it is recognised that there are holdings that cannot in any circumstance guarantee an acceptable standard of living to the people who depend on those holdings exclusively for a living and in cases such as that the owners of such farms have alternative means of living.
Would the Minister not agree that in the case of farmers who have uneconomic holdings and very poor quality land, perhaps waterlogged land, some further assistance such as was given in the pilot areas should be made available to them in the underdeveloped areas such as Monaghan, Cavan and these counties in which pilot areas existed?
Yes, I would accept the general principle that there are small farmers, especially in areas where there is poorer land, who may require special assistance, and it is likely that this special assistance will be forthcoming.
Can the Minister indicate when the farmers in these areas can look forward to this special assistance?
On our accession to the EEC.
What does the Minister mean by saying there is no wild urgency for preparing a scheme which, under the terms of the EEC directive, must be produced by the Government within 12 months and which, if not produced within something like seven months from now, will mean that we will not get the financial benefits of Community aid? Will the Minister not agree that in view of the extreme complexity of the scheme that has to be devised, its preparation is now a matter of great urgency?
Yes, I accept that.
That is different from what the Minister said.
I am calling Question No. 17.
How can the Minister reconcile saying that there is no wild urgency about the matter and then admitting in response to Deputy FitzGerald that there is.
(Interruptions.)
Does Deputy Donnellan wish to put a final supplementary question?
Will the Deputy allow me to answer the question? Quite recently at Question Time it was suggested that there was a deadline, in the coming June, I think it was, that we had to beat. I pointed out at that time that this was not the case, and that the impression that Deputies on the opposite side seemed to have at that time was a mistaken impression.
Who suggested it? Was it the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister? If so he was wrong again.
In reply to Deputy Fox the Minister indicated that some assistance would be given to take the place of the pilot areas in the west. In what form does the Minister envisage that this assistance will be given?
This supplementary question is totally divorced from the question before the House.
It is a separate question.
I would refer the Deputy to the White Paper on the EEC. In that White Paper he will find an exhaustive list of special assistance that will be directed towards the development of farms of the kind we are talking about.
They will have to be designated as undeveloped areas.
We cannot debate this question all evening.
Can the Minister confirm that the Community aid for the modernisation plan is 25 per cent and not 65 per cent as stated in the communique issued after the meeting on 24th March? This is a very import-and point on which there is confusion. I am trying to clarify it.
I do not understand the Deputy's question because he is making a reference which I do not understand.
The communique issued on 24th March gave details of the system of aids and said that for certain regions like ours 65 per cent would be provided by the Community for the pension plan. It also said that in backward regions, otherwise undefined, it would be 65 per cent for the farm modernisation plan. I found no such reference in the directive when I got a copy in Brussels. I telexed to Brussels and I was told that was incorrect. Can the Minister give an authoritative statement because there is a hell of a difference for this country between 40 per cent——
If the Deputy cares to put down a question on that complex question I shall be glad to reply, but I will not reply off the cuff.
I thought the Minister might have made inquiries in view of its importance and the confusion that has arisen.
Question No. 17.