asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries the action he proposes to take to assist the announced IFA campaign to influence the EEC Commission in its review of the agricultural directives.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Agricultural Directives Review.
25.
Our proposals to the EEC Commission, in the context of the review of the structural directives are designed primarily to bring an appreciably greater number of farmers into the development category. The suggested scheme recently published by the IFA has a broadly similar aim of catering specially for certain farmers not qualifying for development status under the present system. The basic ideas in the IFA document are thus a useful contribution to any reappraisal of the directives and I expect that they will be considered by the Commission on this basis in the course of the review.
When does the Parliamentary Secretary expect to have the result of this review?
I expect it will not be delayed for too long.
Does the Parliamentary Secretary appreciate that it is a matter of urgency that the findings be issued as quickly as possible?
I appreciate that is a matter of urgency. The Department have been dealing with this matter for some time. Undoubtedly it is getting the attention from the Department that such a question deserves.
Could the Parliamentary Secretary give us a time in months or weeks?
No, I cannot give the Deputy a time at this stage.
Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the General Council of County Committees of Agriculture submitted an exactly similar scheme to that now being submitted by the IFA when that directive was first introduced? Nobody seemed to listen to them but it is exactly the same plan. Of course, I am glad to hear that the Minister will give this one serious consideration but it is exactly similar to that submitted by the elected representatives of that general council and, so far, they have heard nothing about it.
I do not think Deputy Callanan is correct in his assertion that nobody was prepared to listen to a recommendation from the general council of committees of agriculture. That is not correct. All recommendations received by the Department are considered on their merits, particularly ones from a body such as the general council of committees of agriculture.
Will the Parliamentary Secretary study the two—because they are exactly similar—when he goes to Europe about them? I am delighted that the IFA have come up with the very same recommendations now.
The recommendations from the general council of committees of agriculture and the IFA, of course, are helpful. But the Department, of their own accord, were dealing with this matter also because they were aware that a review was needed, that it required some amendment. As I have already mentioned, the recommendations from the IFA and the general council of committees of agriculture will be considered in conjunction with reports from Departmental advisers.