I am grateful for the opportunity to raise this matter. This is an extremely important subject throughout the agricultural sector. It is of particular importance to young farmers who desire to take over their parents' farms and to facilitate the smooth and earlier transfer of these farms which is extremely beneficial from a structural and socio-economic perspective.
The installation aid has been suspended since 7 August 1997, a period of more than nine months, and, despite empty rhetoric, it has not been restored. While one might accept the explanation put forward in September 1997 that there were inadequate means to fund the scheme, this explanation does not hold water now as there was a clear failure on the part of the Government in the budget on 3 December 1997 to provide the necessary finance to permit the scheme to recommence in January 1998. Instead, there was a fudge and an attempted smokescreen with an amount provided in the budget to permit those who had been in the process prior to the suspension date to be now processed. However, the nub of the matter is that there was no funding for the many new applicants who had the necessary educational and training qualifications who sought entry to the scheme but remain locked out and deprived of a grant to which they are entitled.
I have referred to the drop-off in numbers participating in agricultural colleges in the 1997-8 academic year. In 1996, 932 students enrolled in the 11 agricultural colleges; this number dropped by over 8 per cent to 858 in 1997; the agricultural colleges have the capacity to take in 950 students. When I attended one of these very fine colleges at picturesque Multifarnham, County Westmeath, in 1976 the college was overflowing with students. Teagasc has a number of training centres which have the capacity to enrol 534 agricultural students each year but only 343 students enrolled in 1997.
These are the facts and it is hardly a coincidence that the drop in numbers in agricultural colleges and Teagasc training centres happened at a time when there was a suspension of installation aid. These are stark statistics which tell their own story. The recently published Santer proposals bring further bad news for young Irish farmers and there is little doubt that these proposals will make it even more difficult to attract young people into agriculture.
While these proposals allocate an additional 1 per cent milk quota to Ireland, it is obviously wholly inadequate as we are surely entitled to an additional 7 per cent or 8 per cent quota. It was recommended that member states make young farmers the priority category for the distribution of available quotas within the regime. The broad thrust of these proposals is extremely negative. They will lead to further reductions in the number of farmers. They will also increase the permissible level of installation aid to 25,000 ecu. This is a clear recognition of the difficulties encountered in attracting young people into farming.
Recent figures from the Central Statistics Office confirm that, on average, our farmers are the oldest in Europe with only 12 per cent under the age of 35. The average Irish farmer is 15 years older than his Australian or New Zealand counterpart. In the last year or so the numbers directly employed as farmers have fallen by 4,000.
Those who live in rural Ireland are aware of these statistics and of the drift from the land which is proceeding at an alarming rate. If a factory was to shut down with job losses of a similar scale, there would be uproar and the Government would immediately and correctly establish a task force to alleviate the plight of the people affected. The last thing it would do is suspend a scheme of vital importance to the economy.
The reintroduction of the installation aid scheme would play a significant role in maintaining farm families and young people on the land. The grant was £5,600 and to qualify applicants had to have the appropriate educational qualifications and be under the age of 35. It is my information that the overall cost of reintroducing the old scheme would be approximately £6 million per annum. I understand the proposed new scheme is more tightly focused and targeted. The cost will probably be lower, perhaps £4 million. It costs, on average, almost £5,000 to transfer a farm. This includes legal fees, capital acquisitions tax and the cost of purchasing or leasing land under the enlargement clause of the early retirement scheme. If the Commission's proposals are implemented, I hope this clause will disappear.
The cost of reintroducing the installation aid scheme would be a small price to pay to keep a young person on a farm and thus prevent rural depopulation, maintain jobs and increase farm standards. It is worth noting that, on average, the IDA spends £11,700 in creating a new job in industry. I fail to see why we should not pay less than half that amount to keep a young person in farming.
I understand the Minister concluded negotiations with the farming organisations about six months ago and reached agreement, in principle, on the type of new scheme that should be introduced but nothing has happened since 3 December 1997. All we have had are smokescreens. I ask the Minister, on behalf of young farmers, particularly in my county of Westmeath and the midlands, to indicate when the new agreed scheme will be introduced. Will he, please, indicate a start-up date? The parameters have been agreed with the farming organisations. The time for fudging has past.
