Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 3 Nov 1994

Vol. 446 No. 7

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Set-Aside Scheme.

Proinsias De Rossa

Question:

9 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the total acreage taken out of production under the EU set aside scheme; the total number of farmers who qualified; the total paid out in compensation; the average received by each farmer; if the EU is considering any proposals for less wasteful use of land; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2765/94]

This year, some 3,745 tillage farmers undertook to set-aside 36,753 hectares of arable land under the EU arable area aid scheme. Payments began in October 1994 and are ongoing so final figures are not available. It is estimated the EU funded subsidies in respect of set-aside totalling some £12.4 million will be paid. This represents an average payment to each farmer of £3,300.

Under the EU arable aid scheme, under which compensatory payments are made for eligible crops grown as well as land set-aside, total payments of £67.5 million have been applied for by 15,778 tillage farmers. To date £42.5 million has been paid out to 12,743 of the applicants.

Under EU regulations set-aside land may be used for the growing of crops for manufacture within the EU of products not primarily intended for human consumption. A range of annual and perennial crops is permitted under the scheme but of most interest to us is oilseeds and sugar beet for the production of biofuels and pharmaceutical materials. Forest trees with a short harvest cycle of ten years, may also be grown for the production of biomass for burning in power stations for energy. There is major interest in the EU in this scheme and this year the estimated area of crops sown for non-food purposes was 685,000 hectares, an increase of 160 per cent and the previous year. While the use of set-aside land for non-food purposes has been relatively small in Ireland, I am encouraged by the development of a pilot project in the Leinster area where over 480 hectares of oilseeds have been grown for use in the pharmaceutical industry.

Does the Minister not agree that it is very hard for the general public outside the agricultural sector to appreciate the reason for set-aside and the fact that farmers are getting considerable amounts of money for leaving land idle? While it is certainly a preferable option to over production there is an onus on him to ensure that there is greater investment in alternative uses for this land such as biomass and biofuels. What does the Minister intend to do to ensure that the experimental work already being carried out by Teagasc is translated into real alternative use for set-aside land?

I agree with Deputy McManus that there is considerable concern about setting aside land as a supply control policy. The policy is in place, however, and we must make the best use of it by encouraging companies and co-operatives in the biofuels area. It is environmentally friendly and would have considerable economic and commercial value. The Department had discussion with both Teagasc, who set up the pilot project, and the co-operative and a feasibility study is being carried out. I hope that the much greater use of set aside land in the European Union is paralleled here and we will see far more environmentally friendly productive use of set aside land.

When the Minister says he wants to encourage this type of development, is he simply talking about extending words of encouragement or does he envisage the Department assisting in alternative use? Also, when does the Minister expect the feasibility study to be completed?

The encouragement is supported in a financial and tangible way by the EU in its ALTENER programme administered by the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications. The Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry is encouraging the co-operatives in particular to take up the financial incentives in this programme. With the co-operatives the Department is examining the possibility of developing a biofuel industry here and the feasibility studies are being carried out. I expect that before the end of the year those studies will be completed and a report will be provided. Nothing concrete has emerged so far and it is generally recognised that a biofuel programme could only succeed if substantial tax concessions were available. That is obviously a matter for the Department of Finance and the Revenue Commissioners but it is an area which is to be encouraged. The fertile land set aside should be used for productive purposes to keep rural communities together, provide job opportunities and enhance the environmental amenity which exists in Ireland.

I concur with the view that the good land left idle growing weeds which are cut once a year, and which is totally fallow is immoral. It is totally alien to good farming practices. Will the Minister consider, for example, why a circus coming to a local rural town was refused permission to camp on set aside land? That was considered against the rules. Is there any sense in that? If the farmer cannot use the land, it should at least be made available for recreational activity for the local community. Somebody should benefit from the land. Why should a circus be refused permission to literally set up a tent on set aside land? Why are pony clubs refused permission to have camps for local children on set aside land? Why can set aside land taken out of production due to a surplus of products— we understand the theory if we do not like the practice — not be used for sport horse production and competition? Why can it not be used for any agricultural activity that is not in surplus and that will not cost the taxpayers of Europe anything? I urge the Minister to allow a little common sense in the use of this land if it cannot be used for mainstream agricultural production.

I accept fully that to the average person there are some nonsensical regulations and conditions applying to set aside land. I am endeavouring to have many of those removed and while it is one thing to have an economic policy on supply control — and people might agree or disagree with it — the uses for that land should be examined and sensible proposals, such as those put forward by Deputy Doyle that will not increase the amount of surplus products, as the EU finds it, should obviously be allowed.

To return to the question of biomass and biofuels, will the Minister agree that in the long term it is important to develop a national strategy in this area? Is it the responsibility of his Department or the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications to develop that kind of strategy?

The Department of Transport, Energy and Communications is the lead Department in this case and it is responsible for implementing EU programmes. Because my Department has a responsibility for the development of the land resource, we have an immediate interest in it and, along with Teagasc and the co-operatives, we are working with the Department of Transport, Energy and Communications to encourage better use of this set-aside land which would benefit the economy and the people living in rural Ireland in particular.

Top
Share