Vol. 302 No. 6
asked the Minister for Agriculture if he has submitted the Slieve Felim region on the Tipperary/ Limerick border to the EEC Commission for inclusion in the list of disadvantaged areas; and if he will make a statement on the present position in the matter.
13.
(Cavan-Monaghan) asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will extend the EEC severely handicapped areas to include all of Counties Cavan and Monaghan.
14.
asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will consider having all of County Kerry included in the disadvantaged areas scheme.
15.
asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will include the Templemaley electoral area of County Clare in the disadvantaged areas scheme with a view to payment of cattle headage scheme grants.
16.
asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will agree to the inclusion in the disadvantaged areas scheme of all areas in Blackstair mountain regions that qualified for lamb subsidy in the late sixties and early seventies.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 12 to 16, inclusive, together.
I have arranged that the position of the areas mentioned by the Deputies and of other areas throughout the country will be examined fully in the course of the proposed review of the disadvantaged areas scheme.
Since it has been decided to include this very important question of the Slieve Felim area with a number of other questions, will the Minister admit——
This is a speech.
I am asking a question.
The Chair would be delighted to have a question.
I am asking whether the Minister would agree that, since my question is being grouped with a number of national questions, this attitude is no more constructive than that of the former Minister and is very far removed from the present Minister's guarantee to the people of the Slieve Felim area when he visited them before the general election? Is not this recommendation a very much watered down version of the proposals that emanated from Fianna Fáil before that election?
We cannot have a speech under the guise of a question. I will not allow that.
I have asked three questions.
The Deputy has gone far enough. He must resume his seat.
I have not made a statement. The questions I have asked relate to an important issue for the people of the area concerned.
As the Slieve Felim area——
I did not put the questions to Deputy Smith but to the Minister.
If the Chair and the Parliamentary Secretary are agreeable, I shall reply.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Who is answering the question?
I should be grateful if the Minister were allowed to reply.
As the Slieve Felim area has all the criteria laid down by Brussels for designation as a disadvantaged area—an area of low income farming, a depopulating area and one in which the soil is poor—can the Parliamentary Secretary give a guarantee to the House that the area will be included in the Government's submission to Brussels?
That is a separate question.
I assure both Deputies Ryan and Smith that the Slieve Felim area will be considered in this context. Indeed, it is one of the areas being considered presently. Representations have been made by various bodies to have it included in the disadvantaged areas scheme. I assure the Deputies that it will be submitted to Brussels by the Department and, as the Deputies are aware, the final decision rests with Brussels.
With the permission of the Chair, I wish to ask another question. I have asked the Minister for Agriculture whether, in view of the personal visit he made to the area on behalf of his party, he will admit that what is happening in respect of this area constitutes nothing better and is perhaps weaker than what the former Minister promised? We may have made promises but we did not attempt to con the people.
Obviously, Deputy Ryan wishes to ask a question of me personally and in that case I can confirm that what he says is true, that is, that I visited the area concerned.
On a point of order if the Parliamentary Secretary takes it on himself to answer the main question, is the Minister entitled to answer the supplementaries?
I asked the Minister to answer the question.
The Chair is in control of that. The Deputy asked the Minister specifically to answer the question but I have no control in regard to the Minister agreeing to answer.
(Cavan-Monaghan): I am not objecting to the Minister answering the question, but may I take it that this is a form of oral question which may now be put to the Minister, if he happens to be within the House, without prior notice? That is how the situation appears to me. The question that was put to the Minister for Agriculture by Deputy Ryan is a question separate and distinct from but of the same nature as this question, which is not a written question. I understood that, if a Deputy wished to have a reply to an oral question, he had to give special notice of the question and receive special permission from the Chair. I am anxious to know, in the interest of guidance for the future, whether that situation is being changed.
The Chair has no jurisdiction in a situation in which a Minister wishes to reply to a supplementary that has been put to him in respect of his Department.
It seems to me to be an admission of the concern I have expressed that the Minister, although he was present, chose to allow the Parliamentary Secretary to answer the question.
That is not a question. The Minister answered the question.
Nobody has heard the answer so perhaps the Minister would repeat it.
If the Deputy wishes I shall repeat the answer I gave to the personal question that Deputy Ryan put to me.
I am calling the next question.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Is it not the position——
The Chair has decided that there will be no more supplementaries on these questions.
(Cavan-Monaghan): On a point of order.
I will listen to a point of order.
(Cavan-Monaghan): The Parliamentary Secretary has answered six questions together and one of these questions, Question No. 13, was put down by me. I was awaiting an opportunity to put a supplementary question arising from a reply to Question No. 13 and I now seek permission to put that. I do not think that is unreasonable.
I have asked questions and I have not been answered.
The Parliamentary Secretary took a number of questions together. There were more than the usual number of supplementaries most of which were barely relevant.
(Cavan-Monaghan): I wish to put a relevant supplementary question arising from No. 13.
I will permit the Deputy to ask one question now.
I got no answers to my questions.
I have no jurisdiction over that.
I hope the people in that area will remember this.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Does the Parliamentary Secretary agree that there are parts of both Cavan and Monaghan which are not included in the handicapped area although they are every bit as severely handicapped as other areas which are included? Will the Parliamentary Secretary take steps to ensure that these areas are included in the revision?
I agree that there are areas both in Cavan and Monaghan that possibly should be included and when the review is carried out I am hopeful that if they comply with the criteria laid down under the directive, some of the areas at least will be included. In relation to the five areas that have been mentioned in the questions put down by the Deputies, the position was carefully examined during the previous review and despite repeated meetings of local interests including county committees of agriculture it was not found possible to alter the areas at that time. As I said in my supplementary reply to Deputy Ryan, the areas are being reviewed at present. Various organisations have made submissions which will be considered by the officials in my Department and the areas recommended for inclusion will be examined. We will then forward our proposals to Brussels, and hopefully some of them will be included.
(Cavan-Monaghan): I understand that the Parliamentary Secretary is satisfied that they measure——
I have called on the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Do I understand the Parliamentary Secretary to say that certain areas in Cavan and Monaghan measure up to the criteria?
Question No. 17.
