Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 28 May 1992

Vol. 420 No. 5

Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Headage Payments.

Andrew Boylan

Question:

15 Mr. Boylan asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food when headage payments will be made to a person (details supplied); the reason for the delay in making these payments in view of the hardship being caused; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

This applicant has already been paid his grants under the 1991 beef cow and equines headage and suckler cow premium schemes. He has been deemed ineligible for grants under the 1991 special beef premium scheme as he listed on his application form two animals on which premium had already been paid. He did not apply for grants under the 1991 sheep headge scheme. There was no delay in making the payments due in this case.

This man is typical. How on earth can the Minister justify this type of question having to be answered? I agree that the Minister's answer today said it has been paid but there are still thousands like this man in the country.

This question refers to a specific case. I am not allowing any extension of that case.

It has a general relationship which is very relevant.

I have a question on that case.

On that case only.

Has the Minister evidence that a deliberate omission was made in the application?

In this case the applicant was deemed ineligible for grants under the 1991 special beef premium scheme as two of the 33 animals applied for had already received the premium.

The question I want the Minister to answer is if he or his Department can state that the omission was intentional because that is crucial to whether or not he can qualify.

In general what I have asked the Department to do in cases of accidental or innocent error is to pay people. In this case there was no question but that the two animals concerned had already had the premium drawn in respect of them so they were deemed ineligible, but in all those cases——

Who adjudicates on whether errors are accidental or innocent?

There is a relatively small number of cases to be reviewed individually so that people would not be deprived of quota particularly now that there is a higher rate of grant. There is a responsibility on the herdowner to take greater care in filling up the application forms.

Top
Share