asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if he is now in a position to designate as a disadvantaged area the mountain regions of North Tipperary and Limerick in respect of which submissions have been made to him by the Disadvantaged Areas Committee of that region.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Disadvantaged Areas Scheme.
1.
The information and data recently submitted by the local committee is being examined in my Department in conjunction with other available data to see if it will be possible to sustain a case for submission to the EEC Commission to have the area in question, or certain parts thereof, designated as disadvantaged within the terms of the directive. I should add that the only areas designated as disadvantaged, apart from certain mountainous areas devoted largely to sheep production, are the western counties, where special aids to agricultural development have traditionally applied. It is doubtful if the EEC Commission would agree to any significant extensions outside the western counties. Moreover, the available data indicates that farm income levels generally in this area of Tipperary and Limerick are not significantly below the national average, and it may not be possible, therefore, for the area to meet the multiple criteria prescribed in the directive.
I think the Minister will agree that the representative committee from this area have, in fact, presented for a considerable time now to the Minister's Department the basis of their claim. They have clearly qualified under the first two criteria—population density and soil fertility.
That is true.
The only matter remaining to be resolved is the question of the income. Could the Minister tell me what are the criteria that determine what the gross income or gross margin of profit will be to enable them qualify because, apparently, they have not been able to get this information from the Minister or from his Department?
The income must be significantly below the national average.
The Minister will appreciate that that is a nice general statement. I am quite sure that this area, on the basis of what they have presented, with a gross average income very much less than £1,000 per annum, would certainly be significantly below the national average.
The information the Deputy has does not coincide with that available to me.
This is what has to be clarified.
I understand that what has been submitted by the committee indicates an income of £1,275 or £1,270. I cannot remember exactly. The only thing they have really given are milk cheques; it is not total income. The officials of my Department have gone back to them on this. They are trying to establish an income position that would be favourable to the case they will submit on their behalf and they are trying to assist them in this work.
The Minister says his officials are trying to assist them and, perhaps, they are. But the view of this committee is very definitely that they have not been able to get from the officials of the Minister's Department the clear criteria which apply to income and that, in fact, they are being held now at arms length for over 12 months.
We must proceed by way of question.
This is very important because we are dealing with——
I have given the Deputy some latitude but we must proceed by way of question rather than statement.
I raised this once before, in May, and the matter has been hanging fire since then.
I presume the Deputy has a copy of the directive and we have not any more information than is contained in the directive.
Quite so, but it is the question of how the directive is applied which the Minister is keeping to himself.
It is not a question of our applying it. It is a question of the EEC accepting it.
It is a question of how the Minister interprets it.
We are trying to present the case as best we can.
But, as yet, the Minister has not put any case to the EEC. He and his Department have delayed about this for some considerable time.
No, we are simply trying to make the best possible case.
Question No. 2. We must make progress.
If I may be allowed one final supplementary: the Minister has said that, apparently, he thinks the EEC would not look with favour on an application from an area outside the west. Surely the Minister cannot stand over that if there are areas outside the west which can clearly establish their right to benefit?
The Deputy is extending the question which deals with North Tipperary and Limerick.
What would assist the EEC in their thinking on this is that we had traditional areas here to which we gave speical support. The Deputy cannot disown responsibility for designation of those areas. The EEC know that we have gone outside those areas to look for pockets here and there. One could get pockets all over the country sufficiently small if one looked for them.
It is not a small pocket when one talks in terms of 1,800 to 2,000 farmers.
We cannot remain unduly long on any one question. There are two other Deputies offering. Deputy Herbert.
I should like to know from the Minister what formula he uses in assessing the income. Is it the gross——
This is a separate question, Deputy.
It is not. It is very relevant and arises from the Minister's reply.
The question deals with North Tipperary and Limerick disadvantaged areas.
Does the Minister use the gross income or the gross margin?
We use the actual income.
Perhaps the Minister would answer the question?
This is not good enough; it is leading to argument.
It is very important because their whole case is dependent upon this very question.
It is worthy of a separate question.
The Deputy has a copy of the directive.
Would the Minister please quote me the article of the directive relating to incomes?
The Deputy has as much information as I have.
If Deputies want information along those lines, they must put down separate questions.
These people in Limerick want an answer to this vital and basic question because their whole case is dependent on this. I want to know from the Minister what formula will be accepted in assessing incomes, is it the gross income or the gross margin?
The people in Limerick are getting the fullest possible co-operation from——
That have not been told.
Order. This is not good enough at Question Time. If Deputies want to debate this issue, they must do so by way of motion. Deputy Callanan.
It is a very serious issue for a very large number of small farmers.
There are a large number of questions on this Order Paper. I have allowed quite a lot of latitude. Is Deputy Callanan offering?
We will raise it on the Adjournment.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
Would the Minister consider £1,000 well below the national average as, according to the Agricultural Institute the national average was £1,500 as far as I can remember? Would the Minister consider £1,000 gross income well below it?
Yes, £1,000 would be well below that.
The reason I am asking is that Deputy O'Kennedy's question referred to designation of disadvantaged areas.
If an income at that level can be established. That is what we are trying to do.
Many of the 12 western counties are not designated for headages which would be well below the £1,000. That is what I want to know from the Minister.
I must call the next question. Question No. 2.
I should like to get a reply to my question. This has been a burning question with everybody. What is the income and is an income of £1,000 well below the national average?
Deputies should accept that it is simply not possible for any Minister to give detailed answers about individual areas all over the country, that he has never seen in some cases.
The Minister has had 12 months to see this one.
I am calling the next question.