asked the Minister for Agriculture if any applications from farmers under the farm rescue package were lost or mislaid and, if so, if he will make a statement on the matter.
17.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Farm Rescue Package.
16.
asked the Minister for Agriculture the number of people who have benefited under the rescue package for farmers in financial trouble; the amount paid to each individual; and if he will make a statement on its operation.
18.
asked the Minister for Agriculture the number of farmers in the country who have been accepted under the rescue package; the type of restructuring that has been arranged for them; the number involved in dairying; the effects that the proposed super-levy would have on them; and if he will make a statement of the matter.
19.
asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will extend the rescue package scheme to cover late applicants; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 16, 17, 18 and 19 together.
The reduced interest scheme for farmers in severe financial difficulty is wholly administered by the associated banks and the ACC and they have informed me that some 4,400 applicants have so far received interest relief of approximately £9 million under the scheme. The amount of benefit conferred on each individual is, of course, confidential. The lending institutions are not aware of any applications being lost or mislaid.
The scheme requires a financial reconstruction programme to be drawn up for each participant. This programme may involve restructuring of loans and modification of farm plans. This is arranged by the lending institutions. I have no information in the matter.
The closing date for receipt of completed application forms by the lending institutions was originally fixed at 15 June 1982 but this was later extended to 30 June 1982. I do not propose to re-open the scheme to applicants who did not make application in time.
I am anxious to see the processing of applications completed as soon as possible. But, in view of the nature and complexity of the scheme, progress is as good as could be expected.
(Limerick West): Is the Minister aware that, in certain instances, the scheme is ineffective? Is he further aware of the amount that the scheme has cost the Exchequer to date?
The present position is that, of the 4,400 applicants that have been given relief under the scheme, the interest relief granted to date amounts to approximately £9 million.
(Limerick West): I asked the Minister the amount it has cost the Exchequer to date. Has he that information?
The scheme is expected to cover borrowings of £190 million. The cost to the State was originally estimated at £37 million but reductions in interest rates have reduced the State's liability to an estimated £30 million.
The Minister has said that he does not propose to reopen the scheme to applicants who did not make application in time. The applicants I had in mind in my part of the question were people who, through lack of co-operation from their bank managers and perhaps also the ACC, failed to meet the deadline. Will he take another look at those cases because there are grounds for so doing? I am not seeking the admission of new applicants. Would the Minister give the names and addresses of those people on the appeals committee to whom people can appeal, if rejected, and have their cases reheard?
I will supply that information. I will look sympathetically at any genuine case.
Can the Minister say whether the banking institutions have authority from the Department to ask participating farmers to sell some of their land as a condition for developing it?
The management of the scheme is entirely in the hands of the lending institutions — it is a matter for them.
Do the lending institutions discuss this with the Department of Agriculture, and what is the attitude of the Department?
As I said in my original reply, the whole administration of the scheme, including the proposition to sell pockets of land when such sales would render a farmer viable, is a matter for the lending institutions. We have had consultations with them.
Is the scheme being monitored by the Department and does the Minister regard this as being a valid procedure? Does he think that before farmers can benefit from the scheme the institutions should insist on the sale of land? Has the Minister a monitoring system on this?
There is a committee involving some people from the Department who are looking at the schemes on a day-to-day basis. There is general agreement on the approach of the lending institutions.
Have the Department a view that benefiting farmers would sell some of the land?
The lending institutions have to look at the options open to individuals. The scheme is limited and the end result of it should be to make farmers viable. If a farmer has a fair number of acres and he has a pocket which he can sell and whose sale would make him viable——
Would the Minister agree that a banking institution is not the best type of body to make decisions in that regard — that the Department and the expertise available to them have a far better interest?
We have an interest. I do not agree with the Deputy in regard to the banking institutions. We must be fair to the lending institutions and, as all Deputies know, we have had a fair bit of dealing with the lending institutions and have found them reasonably sympathetic.
I am not worried about their sympathy. I am worried about the availability of expertise to them.
In view of the reduced interest rates would the Minister consider passing on the savings by way of subsidy to the 4,400 farmers who have been dealt with?
I have no such proposal at the moment.
Would the Minister consider doing it?
It is something we may look at.
The Minister has told us that 4,400 farmers received assistance. Can he tell us how many big farmers are involved in dairying wholetime and what the effect on them would be of the super-levy?
That is an entirely different question. I have not got that information.
That question was specifically asked in No. 18. Is it any use putting down questions?
Did the financial institutions who appointed receivers to family farms discuss the matter beforehand with the Department of Agriculture?
There are continuing discussions between people in the Department and the lending agencies.
Will the Minister assure us that family farmers who are making honest efforts will not be evicted?
The Deputy can take it that I am already doing that.
Will the Minister give us the number of farmers who applied but were not accommodated in this scheme?
There were 9,300 applicants altogether and 4,400 were accommodated.
Am I to understand that 5,000 farmers were qualified who have not been paid?
No. I gather that 5,000 farmers, for one reason or another, were not deemed to be qualified.
Has the scheme been completely finished and am I to take it that no further payments are due?
The scheme is limited to those who applied on or before 30 June 1982.
The Minister has said that 9,000 farmers applied. Is the Minister saying that 5,000 of them will not be paid?
For one reason or another, those 5,000 will not be considered.
In other words, they will not be paid.
No.
Does the Minister agree with the attitude of the banks and the ACC who are forcing farmers to sell land? Does he agree with that attitude which is disastrous to the economy?
We are doing everything we can to help people but there are limits.
Has the Minister any control over the lending institutions?
I have found them fair.
Does he agree they should not force farmers to sell land?
I said that we hope that when land has to be sold it would be only pockets of land which would help to make the farmer concerned viable.
The Minister therefore agrees that the institutions force farmers to sell land.
Will the Minister tell us if the 4,400 farmers who have benefited represent the final figure and that the 5,000 others will be deprived?
For one reason or another they did not qualify.
The State provided £36 million for this scheme. How much money from the Exchequer has been expended?
I have already given that information.
Can the Minister tell us how many farmers applied under the farm rescue package and who were affected by the suspension of the farm modernisation scheme.
I have not got that figure.