Written Answers. - Rural Environment Protection Scheme.
Ulick Burke
Question:
122
Mr. U. Burke
asked the
Minister for Agriculture and Food
whether, in relation to an application for REP scheme, a husband and wife may produce separate accounts with their applications and, in order to minimise their tax liability, can choose to have these accounts jointly assessed; and if he will make a statement on the mattter.
[12853/98]
Ulick Burke
Question:
123
Mr. U. Burke
asked the
Minister for Agriculture and Food
his views on whether the REP scheme appeal board is an independent body in view of the fact that the members of the board (details supplied) are involved in the daily running of this scheme; his views on whether the board should be immediately disbanded and replaced with an independent board comprised of a representative from his Department, a farming representative, a representative of Teagasc and the farm consultants and an independent chairperson or some alternative membership; and his further views on whether this leaves decisions taken by the board open to question and the Department vulnerable to litigation.
[12855/98]
Ulick Burke
Question:
124
Mr. U. Burke
asked the
Minister for Agriculture and Food
if there is a minimum income or a minimum volume of farm trading required before a farmer is eligible for the REP scheme; if there is a minimum stocking density for the REP scheme; and the number of REP scheme applicants in County Galway with a stocking density of less than 0.25 livestock units per hectare.
[12856/98]
Ulick Burke
Question:
125
Mr. U. Burke
asked the
Minister for Agriculture and Food
the reason it is necessary for a person (details supplied) in County Galway to have a bank account to be eligible for his Departments schemes.
[12857/98]
Ulick Burke
Question:
143
Mr. U. Burke
asked the
Minister for Agriculture and Food
if he will specify the accounting year his officials are using in basing their decision on an application of a person (details supplied) in County Galway; and the aspect of these accounts on which their decision to refuse her application is based.
[12971/98]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 122, 123, 124, 125 and 143 together.
Each of these questions is related to different aspects of a particular application under the REP scheme. The applicant in question, having applied for a second year payment, was selected at random for a pre-payment inspection control check my Department is required to carry out under the scheme. As a result it was evident that the applicant was, under lease, farming seven hectares of land previously farmed by her spouse and located some ten miles away from her residence together with 33 hectares of leased commonage, to be stocked with a maximum of four horses, located some 56 miles away from her fenced land.
Under REPS there is a 40 hectare limit on payments to farmers. There are appropriate provisions to ensure compliance with this limit, to avoid the creation of split holdings and to ensure that farmers, in particular family members, are farming separately. To this end, under the terms and conditions of REPS the term "farmer" means a person or group of persons or body corporate deemed by the Minister to be engaged in the practice of farming and the term "farm" means the total area of land whether owned, leased jointly or singly, or otherwise worked in one or more parcels for the purposes of farming.
It is further provided in the terms and conditions of REPS that, applicants may be deemed to be farming as a single unit where they share some or all of the following characteristics — farm ownership, management, farm dwellings, herd numbers, IACS returns, farm accounts or tax returns.
The applicant in this case was asked for evidence of her claim to be farming separately from her spouse. In response she provided joint farm accounts and joint assessment tax returns in support of her claim to be farming separately from her husband. An examination of these showed that in the year 1994, prior to her spouse joining REPS, her farm enterprise generated some £188 towards the overall farm profit of £13,402 including some £9,209 in EU related payments. That year the applicant's spouse included in his area aid application to my Department the seven hectares of land which the following year was leased by the applicant for inclusion in her REPS application.
In 1995, the following year, the applicant's spouse joined REPS and her farm was constituted. That year her farm enterprise contributed some £301 to the overall farm profit of £13,356 including £13,561 in EU related payments of which REPS made up £6,053.84.
In 1996, when the applicant joined REPS, her sole income seems to have comprised REPS payments of £6,054. That year the overall farm profit was £15,547. However, EU related payments for the year amounted to some £20,315 including the REPS payments.
In all these circumstances my Department concluded that the applicant and her spouse were farming jointly and were involved in the splitting of a farm previously worked as a unit.
Applicants for REPS may submit any relevant information in order to substantiate their applications. The question of having accounts jointly assessed is a matter for the Revenue Commissioners.
The REPS appeal board examines all appeals on the basis of compliance with the Department's agri-environmental specifications. The chairman is completely independent of the day-to-day operation of REPS and the inspection process. The two other members, one administrative and one professional must, of necessity, be very familiar with the detail of the agri-environmental specifications to enable the committee operate effectively. I am satisfied that the board operates an even-handed approach to appeals. Of the 228 appeals heard to date, 81 have been upheld, 24 significantly reduced and 123 rejected. I have no plans to make changes in its operation.
The REPS conditions do not set specific income or trading levels for eligibility. However, the Minister has discretion to accept or reject plans and in so doing he takes into account such matters as non-stocked or minimally stocked-cultivated farms, income or volumes of trading. Stocking density figures are not available in a way that would enable them to be extracted other than on a file by file basis which would not be feasible.
Eligibility for departmental schemes does not require the applicant to have a bank account. However, many participants have requested that payments be made directly to their bank account.
