asked the Minister for Agriculture the appointments made by him to his Department since his appointment as a member of Government, the names of those appointed, the nature of each post and salary attached thereto and if such appointments have been made from within the public service or elsewhere.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Departmental Appointments.
25.
Apart from appointments (a) made as a result of competitions conducted by the Civil Service Commissioners (b) arising in the normal course of promotions and (c) made to posts listed as scheduled occupations in the First Schedule to the Civil Service Commissioners Act, 1956, only one such appointment was made by me, namely, Mr. Frank Wall, who has been appointed by me on a temporary basis to a post of special adviser at a fee of £11,000 per year. Mr. Wall was recruited from outside the public service.
Has this officer taken up duty yet?
He took up duty on 25 February.
Questions Nos. 26 and 27 are gone for written reply.
28.
asked the Minister for Agriculture the reason for the reduced provision in the Estimates for the Public Service of 50 per cent in the amount provided for the hardsip fund under the disease eradication schemes.
The amount carried over from the allocation to the fund in 1979, together with the amount being provided in 1980, is expected to be adequate to meet the cost of payments from the fund in 1980.
Why was the money provided in 1979 not spent in view of the serious hardship encountered by many farmers particularly in southern counties as a result of the extension of intensive disease eradication and if he will take steps to ensure that the moneys provided this year, albeit in reduced amount, are fully expended?
Activity in disease eradication was not as great as we would like last year for various reasons and that is one of the main reasons the money was not spent.
Would the Minister not consider that, in spite of that, considerable hardship was encountered and the fact that the money was not spent would suggest that perhaps the criteria being implied in defining hardship for the purposes of the scheme are unrealistically stringent? Would he not agree that it would be appropriate to look at those criteria to ensure that genuine cases of hardship are met? I would remind him of the manifesto in that respect.
The criteria that are there were established on the recommendations of the Animal Health Council. The grant was increased from £40 to £80 for qualified reactors. The qualifying threshold was set at 20 per cent of the herd for both TB and brucellosis. This was done on the recommendation of the Animal Health Council.
Question No. 29 has gone for written reply. Question No. 30 is postponed.