asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if he proposes to seek permission from the EEC to amend the farm modernisation scheme in order to remove the prohibition on farmers with land let on the 11-months system.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Farm Modernisation Scheme.
27.
An essential feature of the farm modernisation scheme is the emphasis it places on planned development of the farm over a period particularly for development farmers. It is not possible to draw up reliable plans where land taken on the 11-months system may not be available to the farmer even in the following year. For the purposes of the scheme, therefore, it is necessary to relate farm plans to land which the farmer has some firm entitlement to, at least for the duration of the plan and preferably for the minimum 12-year leasing period envisaged under the farmer retirement scheme.
Does the Minister not accept that many farmers who had farmed for the greater part of their lives suffer greatly under this regulation? They may have farmed actively up to five years ago when they had to retire and let their land.
I accept that may be so but the Deputy must accept the logic of the situation that where you must have a planned development over a period of at least six years, you must have the land available for no less a period than that, and, having completed the development, there should be a further period for the enjoyment of the extra benefits arising from the development.
Is the Minister aware that many farmers who have had their land let have applied and have been turned down under the farm modernisation scheme and so, if a good deal more land is going on the market for active farmers, could provision be made in this scheme so that they would be allowed to apply and would be accepted?
I do not understand the Deputy when he says that people who let their land on the 11-months system are denied grants for the development of their land. That is not so.
They are denied the opportunity to avail of the farm retirement scheme.
That is so and I know that is a defect. I am not personally involved in this but I know that my colleague is seeing what he can do about it.
Would the Minister not become actively involved as it is a definite hardship on some of our people?