Vol. 405 No. 5
9 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if he will outline his views on the allegation that the submission on the extension of disadvantaged areas currently with the EC Commission is unsatisfactory because of its fragmented nature.
45 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if he intends placing a submission before the EC Commission advocating that 100 per cent of Ireland be classified as disadvantaged.
I propose taking Questions Nos. 9 and 45 together.
The criteria for designating areas as disadvantaged would not allow for the submission of a proposal to have the whole country classified as disadvantaged.
I presume the allegation the Deputy refers to is that of MEP Joe McCartin, subsequently referred to by Deputy Deasy in this House as "Reports from Brussels". The allegations are totally false and are calculated to undermine the application for extension and reclassification which will benefit an additional 18,000 farmers. I also want to reject as false the linked allegation that I withdrew an application for extension which had been lodged by my predecessor. The plain fact is no such application was ever made.
I regret the fact that these groundless allegations have not been publicly withdrawn.
I am confident of a very satisfactory and early outcome to the application which I have submitted.
Methinks the Minister doth protest too much. The Minister seems to spend his time denying things. Has he anything to tell us? This application went in last June, eight months ago, and why has it not been passed or rejected by the Commission? All we heard were leaks to the Fianna Fáil Deputies in the months of July and August, but when the information was kicked around and people learned that they were not included in the submission they ran for cover. Why has the submission taken so long and why did the Minister leak the whole matter to his own backbenchers? The Minister and Commissioner MacSharry are becoming, respectively, Minister and Commissioner for Leaks at this stage and not for Agriculture and Food.
A question, please.
Why has it taken eight months without us having any news from Brussels on the submission?
The only reason that I as a Deputy can spend my time denying things is that I think I owe it to the public and to the farmers, particularly if colleagues of the Deputy and the Deputy himself give credence to totally unfounded statements — which, incidentally, I asked the Deputy to withdraw but he did not have the good grace or standard to do so — to assert the fact that they are groundless allegations. Otherwise lies become the fashion and that cannot be accepted.
Why has it taken eight months?
As to the delay, I am glad to tell the Deputy that the Commission, who have spent a considerable time examining this very major extension, which would bring in about two million extra acres by way of extension and 255,000 acres by way of reclassification——
When?
Within a matter of weeks, I understand the Commission will finalise it and then propose it to the Council. The Deputy will be glad to know that I expect that it will all be finally through Council and otherwise within the next couple of months and that we will have payments this year.
Will the Minister give a guaranteed undertaking to the House that these proposals will be implemented in Ireland in 1991? Will the extended headage and other extensions of the schemes be implemented in the 1991 livestock subsidy schemes? Is it yes or no?
I am absolutely confident that they will. But the Deputy should know that the Council of Ministers have a decision in this matter and when the Deputy asked me to say yes or no, may I ask him to recognise the fact that I have to recognise the competence of my colleagues on Council. Having said that, I am equally confident that when it gets to the table of the Council I can enjoy their support for an immediate positive decision.
I am glad to hear the Minister confirming that the original submission is the submission being considered because an MEP was able to inform me——
A question, please.
Will the Minister confirm that 90 per cent of the submission was acceptable to Brussels initially and that the other 10 per cent was being negotiated? Will the Minister also verify whether the original submission is the one being adhered to or whether any townlands have been added or taken out of that submission since then?
I think that when the Deputy sees what will eventually emerge he will see that, almost uniquely, about 98 per cent plus of what was submitted will be accepted. Again, I am not responsible for the false report that the Deputy heard.
I am only quoting Commissioner MacSharry.
I am only dealing with facts. As to the 2 per cent which was rejected — and that is perhaps a measure of the fact that we put in as much as possible — I am glad to tell the Deputy that for the 2 per cent which they refused to accept we got another 2 per cent in in its place.
Arising from the Minister's reply, I am glad to hear that at least some progress has been made, and about time. Having had 98 per cent of what was submitted accepted, would the Minister agree that a number of areas that were deemed to be within the criteria were not included in the submission? Will he agree to set up an appeal system to enable such groups or individuals to appeal the decision?
I am glad to be able to confirm to the Deputy that I will, of course, set up an appeals tribunal, which will not have a representative from my own Department because I think it should be seen to be an independent tribunal. The tribunal will be available around the country as soon as the Commission announce their conclusions and before the matter comes to Council. It is essential that those who feel their area should have been included in the submission and was not will have an opportunity of having their case determined by the appeals tribunal.
Will the Minister confirm that when this submission is resolved satisfactorily and returned to him in its finalised form the payments in respect of this will be retrospective to the first of this year?
The Minister refused to answer that question already.
It will take effect from this year. In the normal course the payments will not apply until the second half of the year. Let me say that the payments will apply to approximately two million extra acres together with a reclassification of 1.3 million acres and about 225,000 acres of coastal strip which I proposed for specific designation and which had never been contemplated heretofore. I look forward to having a very positive and extensive conclusion to this.
A large number of Deputies are offering. When the Chair is commenting on matters please do not interrupt. If the Deputies will assure me they will be brief I will facilitate them.
Will the appeals tribunal concern itself only with the extension of the disadvantaged areas rather than with areas which were not included in the submission for reclassification?
I am glad to convey to the Deputy, because I think there is a certain north Kerry interest in reclassification, that it will also apply to reclassification; but the criteria to succeed will be nonetheless there.
Does the extra £90 million headage money included in the budget cover payments for the extended areas and does it also involve the 65 per cent refund from the EC?
That is the element that will be involved in the total extra payments, let me tell the Deputy, because he belongs to an area that is designated as severely disadvantaged. This is a tripod extension. First, it includes new areas that have never been designated before; second, the reclassification of a whole range of areas from less severely disadvantaged to severely disadvantaged; and finally, increased headage payments in areas such as the Deputy represents that would not otherwise be affected by it.
Would the Minister not agree that a number of EC countries are included in the disadvantaged areas scheme to the degree of 100 per cent? That being the case, why did the Minister state that Ireland cannot be entitled to 100 per cent rate?
As a matter of record, one country has a 100 per cent rate — that is Luxembourg — and the historical reasons for that were introduced before the current regulations were put in place by the Council of Agriculture Ministers in the early seventies. When that decision was made Luxembourg was classified as part of the Benelux countries — Belgium, Luxembourg and Holland — and that explains the anomaly; but the current regulation requires that you must have an average income below a certain amount of the national average and therefore it cannot be 100 per cent in any country.
Will the appeal tribunal be ready to carry out investigations fairly shortly after the EC gives its official approval?
As soon as the Commission decide on the areas they are proposing to the Council, and even before the Council's decision, I will put the appeals procedure in place so that before we get the final confirmation from the Council, which modestly I hope will be a mere formality, we will have the appeals procedure in place immediately on the Commission's decision.
Before the June elections?
It seems to me that Deputies are interested in this question only but there are a large number of other questions.
Progress has been very sluggish today.
Things are so bad in agriculture everybody wants to be included in the reclassification.
I will be calling on Deputy Browne (Carlow-Kilkenny) and Deputy Liam Kavanagh and I can hardly leave out my Tipperary colleagues.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): The disadvantaged areas put us all at a disadvantage here because everybody wants to get involved. When the appeals tribunal is set up will they be at liberty to include all the anomalies or is there a limit on what they can include?
As long as they are bound by the criteria set down by the Council of Ministers. I would like to assure Deputy Browne of Carlow-Kilkenny that so extensive has my application been that included in the categorisation of disadvantage — something which my predecessor never even contemplated — will be a sizeable chunk of Carlow, Wexford and Kilkenny. That is a measure of my success and the Deputy has ignored that fact and never thought of including Carlow.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): It is the portion that is left that I am worried about.
Can we come back to the question put down by my colleague, Deputy Timmins? I would like to ask the Minister a very simple question. Is the list of townlands in the areas for the extension of the disadvantaged areas available to the general public or can it be acquired either by writing to the Minister's office or to the section involved so that we all know exactly what townlands have been submitted and how successful the application has been?
That is not the question Deputy Timmins asked. I should like to assure the Deputy that as soon as the committee make a decision they will be published nationwide.
Deputy Ellis has been offering for some time and I apologise to him.
In view of the worries being expressed here in regard to the extension of the disadvantage areas, would the Minister consider on completion of this work re-examination of the areas which are at present classified as severely handicapped to see if they could have a higher status because the present thinking is that those areas will be in a very disadvantaged position.
I think the Deputy is referring to what might be a category of what might be called "super severely handicapped". We have made major progress on three fronts. Perhaps when we have all that in place we can also consider the point raised by the Deputy. I would like to assure the Deputy and all Deputies from the west — I know they are very concerned — that the increased headage payments which I am putting in place, together with a number of other issues, will demonstrate our concern for the areas already severely handicapped.
The Minister is very forthcoming with information about many constituencies throughout the country. As his colleague from north Tipperary perhaps he would confirm to me that he is aware that a substantial amount of north Tipperary has been included as less severely disadvantaged? Can he confirm that all of the less severely disadvantaged areas has been submitted for redesignation as severely disadvantaged?
No, and even speaking of north Tipperary I will invite the Deputy to come on a tour with me when we have it all concluded.
Will a van be needed?
I could not and should not submit an application, even in respect of north Tipperary, that what is disadvantaged should all be classified as severely disadvantaged. The reason the Commission turned down my predecessor's application, when he submitted a global application that all of the existing disadvantaged areas be reclassified as severely disadvantaged, was that it did not reflect the degree of handicap.
Bearing in mind that there are many areas in my constituency and in others that are unjustifiably excluded from the Minister's submission to Brussels, is there any mechanism open to them at present for reconsideration or do they have to wait until an appeals tribunal is set up? Furthermore, will the appeals tribunal be open to all farmers who have not previously applied in view of the fact that the original scheme was not adequately advertised?
There are two points here. The Deputy will appreciate that this is not a scheme in respect of individual farmers; it is a scheme for disadvantaged areas. The disadvantaged area must be of a sufficient size and homogeneity to satisfy the criteria. It is not just for individual farmers. It is open to everybody to appeal. When all this has been completed 72 per cent of the country will be classified as disadvantaged and 28 per cent will be excluded. A line has to be drawn somewhere. Even if 85 per cent of the country was designated as disadvantaged, 15 per cent, which incidentally, includes city areas, would say: "We are outside the line". We have done a huge job here. Some, of course, will be at the wrong side of the line and will not be included in the disadvantaged areas.
We shall have to bring this matter to a finality.
I have a very brief supplementary, a Cheann Comhairle. Thank you for your indulgence. Did I hear the Minister say he is not prepared to publish the findings of the survey? In how many areas has the survey been published? Would the Minister not accept that the dogs in the streets throughout the country are barking the areas that have been included and the areas that have not been included in the submission to Brussels? I should like to draw the Minister's attention to a document in my possession in relation to my constituency which is headed "County Laois — new areas to be designated under Article 3.4". I have a similar document so far as County Offaly is concerned. Would the Minister not accept that everybody knows and that those on his backbenches know the townlands which are included and those which are not included because they have been published and leaked to newspapers throughout the country? How can the Minister stand over it and say he has not published or that he will not publish——
This is a total misunderstanding.
Perhaps the Minister would, once and for all, clear the air.
I want to make it quite clear that I did not say I would not publish the results; in fact, I said quite the opposite: that as soon as the Commission conclude I will publish them fully nationwide. The Deputy will be glad to note — although I do not like saying too much about it in advance — that a huge chunk of Laois-Offaly which was ignored previously will be included. All the farmers of Laois-Offaly who will benefit will be very happy about that and no doubt the Deputy will be happy also.
What about——
I do not know whether the Deputy is complaining that we are going to look after them or complaining that we have not told them in advance.
I am calling Deputy Deasy for a final question.
I yield to Deputy Connor.
That will be the final question.
Can the Minister comment on this example: will a farmer who qualified for £872 cattle headage in 1990 who had 30 livestock units and 40 acres of land qualify for £872 cattle headage in 1991?
I am glad to tell the Deputy that we will be particularly generous to Galway and that all that area of east Galway, which he and some others from this side of the House represent, will now be classified as severly handicapped with increased rates of grant which the Opposition never contemplated when they were in Government.
I am not talking about that.
I know that all the farmers of east Galway will recognise, as will those in Roscommon, that we have done a marvellous job for them and there have been increases——
I did not ask that.
Please, Deputy Connor. We have dealt inordinately long with Question No. 9.
May I just——
The Deputy should not try to shout down the Chair.
I am not trying to shout down the Chair. It is not your fault, a Cheann Comhairle.
He will be expert on the disadvantaged areas after this.
Yes, but this is to the disadvantage of all other questions and all other Members involved here today.
We are merely supporting the Irish farmers.
Is that the way Members wish to proceed? We have been able to deal with merely eight questions in virtually an hour. That is not progress from any standpoint. Question No. 10 please.
You will be glad to know there is an interest by the Opposition in matters other than the disadvantaged areas.
That has been to the disadvantage of a number of people.
