Private Members' Business. - Incomes from Agriculture: Motion.
The following motion was moved by Deputy Connaughton on Tuesday, 2 November 1999:
That Dáil Éireann condemns the Government for its lack of understanding of the ongoing deepening income crisis in agriculture and, in particular, its total failure to open up market export opportunities for both cattle and sheep, and calls on the Government to:
–adequately co-finance the REP, headage, farm retirement, on-farm investment and young farmer installation aid schemes and control of pollution grant schemes over the next seven years through the National Development Plan on a pound for pound basis, taking into account the increased numbers of farmers who may join such schemes up to 2006;
–immediately open discussions with the EU Sheep Policy Committee to have the current calculation of the ewe premium scheme changed to take into account the particularly low level of lamb prices in Ireland, and to have sheep included for extensification payments;
–re-open the Libyan market for live cattle;
–abolish stamp duty for young farmers;
–increase the installation aid grant for young farmers;
–provide an opportunity for small and medium sized milk producers and young newly trained entrants to achieve viability for breaking the land/quota system in a controlled and imaginative way, leading up to an efficient milk restructuring scheme;
–expedite the national cattle breeding plan;
–provide extra funding to An Bord Bia to provide a very distinct country-of-origin labelling system for Irish bacon and pork products on the home market; and
–provide adequate funding for Leader groups.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after "That" and substitute the following:
"Dáil Éireann commends the Government and the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development for their continuing support for the agriculture, food and rural development sectors, and their efforts to deal with the issues currently affecting farmers through:
–the success of the Minister in protecting and enhancing the incomes and prospects of farmers over the medium term through the agreement reached in negotiations on Agenda 2000;
–the success of the Minister in relation to the European Commission's allocation of £1.75 billion towards the financing of the Rural Development Plan for Ireland;
–the Government's inclusion of substantial funds in the draft National Development Plan to aid farmers and the food and rural development sectors in the years ahead;
–providing very substantial direct income support to farmers involving record direct payments of over £1,000 million to farmers in 1998 and a high level of support to be continued in this year and future years;
–providing very substantial market support for farm produce involving in excess of £500 million expended in 1998 to support the prices of farm produce;
–supporting farmers and the food industry in maintaining high standards of food safety and animal welfare, so essential for the protection of consumers and the development of markets;
–supporting farmers, particularly young farmers, through the restoration of the farm installation scheme and concessions in the taxation and stamp duty regulations;
–the successful programme of improving the efficiency of our farms through continued reform of quota arrangements;
–the continuing and successful efforts of the Minister to aid farmers and the food industry in expanding overseas markets for livestock and food exports;
–the setting up of an agri-food 2010 Committee to develop a strategy for the long-term future of agriculture and the food industry.".
–(Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development)
Mr. S. Ryan: I wish to share my time with Deputy Moynihan-Cronin. I am pleased to have the opportunity to contribute to the Fine Gael Private Members' motion on agriculture. I intend to refer specifically to the horticulture industry.
Throughout the years, the horticulture industry has been deemed the poor relation of the agriculture sector. This is the due to the structure of the industry, the location of growers throughout the country and the lack of organisation of growers. Furthermore, they were deemed by the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development to be a soft option. They were seen not to have any political clout, unlike the dairy and beef sectors, which had the support of the IFA.
The horticulture industry has witnessed major changes over the past decade. These have come about through open competition, especially from outside the country, demands of supermarket chains and the legitimate concerns of consumers regarding the safety and quality of products. This aspect is important. While some growers have unfortunately fallen by the wayside, the vast majority have responded positively and successfully to the challenges. Changes in the operation and implementation of quality systems to ensure horticultural produce is produced and handled in line with best practice and procedures were essential and costly. By and large, this cost has been borne by the growers. For example, it could cost between £150,000 and £250,000 to purchase the equipment to meet the standards required by supermarkets such as Tesco before they accept produce from a grower.
Further changes are inevitable, but the question posed by the growers is how, in our climate and the topsy turvy situation in the horticulture industry, they can afford to pay for these improvements. Further changes are inevitable to meet ongoing hygiene and quality standards, health and safety requirements, safe use of crop protection products and environmental protection. These will require substantial investment.
The growers have a strong case for looking for grant aid from the Minister to help them take the next step in developing the horticulture industry. The Government should not stand aside as growers meet these new market requirements. It is essential the concept of partnership, a concept which created great benefits in other sectors of the economy, is now applied to horticultural growers. I appeal to the Minister in the context of the national plan to respond positively to the needs of some 40,000 commercial growers throughout the country. As part of a wider package, I strongly recommend that a grants scheme be introduced immediately to facilitate further necessary improvements. Lip service is no longer acceptable to the industry. The growers and their families are entitled to the same service from the Government as others in the agriculture sector. The Minister should ensure the needs of these growers are provided for in the development plan.
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this timely and important debate on agriculture which has become the forgotten sector of the economy in the days of the Celtic tiger. Glowing reports of the spectacular performance of our economy fail to take into account the hard times which affect the largest sector of the economy, the agriculture sector. Declining farm incomes, the continuing flight from the land and rural depopulation are problems affecting the agriculture sector. Innovative agriculture policies are essential if we are to seriously address these related problems and chart a new course for rural Ireland.
The Minister has failed to grasp this challenge. His tenure in the Department has been characterised by a cautious approach to the problems of rural Ireland. The future rural Ireland needs and deserves a more radical approach than the Minister has shown to date. I hope the ideas generated by the debate will encourage him to adopt a more innovative approach to agricultural policy and rural development.
I compliment the Minister and his officials on the handling of the complex Agenda 2000 negotiations. A welcome degree of certainty regarding a key factor in Irish agriculture has been put in place. This certainty provides us with an excellent opportunity to plan and develop new policies which will produce results over the coming decade for farmers and for rural Ireland. However, the actions by the Minister since the conclusion of the Agenda 2000 negotiations do not inspire confidence. The method of allocation of the additional milk quota secured under the terms of Agenda 2000 was a missed opportunity. The majority of this quota should have been allocated to farmers producing 35,000 gallons or less.
There are approximately 24,000 of these farmers and they struggle to make ends meet as farm incomes continue to decline. These farmers find it increasingly difficult to attract their sons or daughters to take over the farm. As a result of Agenda 2000, the Minister was presented with a great opportunity to make a difference to these farmers and to the viability of hundreds of family farms throughout the country. The Minister knows family farms are a crucial aspect of rural Ireland. The flight from the land is hitting small family farms increasingly hard. Given the paltry income many families have on which to survive, it is little wonder that the sons and daughters from family farms are reluctant to take over and instead are drifting into the towns and cities to find well paid jobs in industry.
Against this background, there is an overwhelming argument to divert the moneys and method of payment to those who need it. The bureaucratic manner in which the Department deals with small farmers as regards headage payments is unacceptable. A constituent of mine applied for a headage payment for ten animals. When completing his form, he inserted one number twice. The Department wrote back to him, he sent in the correct number but he was penalised. He had ten animals and made one mistake. He was not making a fraudulent application to the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. The Minister should have some appeals system for these unfortunate individuals who are only human beings and who are not used to this paperwork but are penalised for mistakes in it. The amount in question, £320, is a great deal of money to a small farmer. I appeal to the Minister to put a system in place.
I have much more to say on the matter, but unfortunately I do not have the time. I support the motion.
I understand Deputy Brendan Smith is sharing his time with Deputies Michael Kitt, Coughlan, Donal Moynihan, Johnny Brady, McGuinness and Cooper-Flynn.
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important debate and to support the Minister's amendment. During the course of 1998 and the early part of 1999, this House and the farming organisations were exercised by the difficulties and dangers which might arise from the Agenda 2000 negotiations. Thankfully, as a result of the diligence, commitment and work of the Minister, the Ministers of State and Department officials, we witnessed a very successful outcome to the talks. That outcome has secured the medium-term future of farming and will facilitate long-term planning.
The Minister, in a very comprehensive and positive speech, last night outlined in no uncertain terms the importance of farming and agri-industry to the Irish economy. The Department will provide £2 billion in support to the farming industry in 1999. There are 147,000 full-time and part-time farmers in this country and in 1998 direct payments amounted to £1 billion. I am glad the Minister has clearly stated that a substantial increase in funding for agriculture will be provided in the national development plan. That is to be welcomed, not alone from the point of view of those directly involved in farming but also by those living in rural Ireland who depend on the rural economy.
I welcome the fact that, on taking up office, the Government reintroduced the control of farm pollution and dairy hygiene schemes, schemes which were abolished by Deputy Yates when he served as Minister. He was supported in that by his Labour and Democratic Left colleagues. The Minister provided the funding for these schemes and paid the bills left outstanding by the previous Government in respect of those schemes. The control of farm pollution and dairy hygiene schemes are very important from the point of view of bringing about necessary structural improvements, particularly on smaller farms. If it is possible for the Minister to review the schemes in the near future, I would advocate that the payment system under the control of farm pollution scheme should be modulated, whereby smaller scale producers would receive a higher level of grant assistance. I also hope that in future the maximum payment of £10,000 will be increased.
One of the sectors currently facing difficulties is the sheep sector. The farm organisations have advanced the opinion that the stabiliser should be abolished and that the retention period should be staggered. I hope the Minister and the Department can give urgent consideration to those specific proposals. That might help to improve the sheep meat market.
In the Border region in particular severe difficulties are being experienced in the pigmeat sector. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle and other public representatives from Monaghan, Donegal and Cavan have continually lobbied, together with individual farmers and farm organisations, to offset the severe difficulties faced by that sector, particularly since the end of June 1998. At that time a fire occurred in the Lovell and Christmas plant in Ballymoney, County Antrim, which was the main outlet for the slaughtering and processing of pigmeat in the Border counties. Unfortunately, since the fire there has not been adequate slaughtering or processing capacity in the northern part of the country and the pig producers in the region, particularly the smaller scale producers, are not getting the prices they should be getting for pigmeat. Serious difficulties have arisen for individual farmers. The Minister has met with various groups and Oireachtas Members on this point. He has succeeded, with the European Commission, in introducing the aids to private storage scheme and increasing export refunds. I urge the Minister to continue his efforts to ensure that we will never again have an inadequate slaughtering and processing capacity in the northern part of the country, in counties north and south of the Border. Many pig producers are experiencing serious financial difficulties and I hope it will be possible to introduce some scheme of assistance for them.
I support what the Minister is doing for agriculture at a very difficult time. He referred particularly to the investment the Government made in 1998 in support of Irish farmers in the food sector and the rural development programme. I am glad this investment will continue under the national development plan.
The Agenda 2000 proposals are one of the Minister's greatest successes. Great concern and anxiety surrounded the negotiations. We heard of proposals involving a loss of £1.386 billion. However, the final outcome resulted in a net gain in the seven years up to 2006 and that is to be welcomed. The Minister has experienced difficulties in regard to BSE, the closure of the Russian markets and bad weather. The Minister was very quick to introduce a £40 million fodder package, a package which, although not well received at first, resulted in more areas of the country than had been anticipated being included in the scheme following debate in this House and in the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine. We experienced some very bad weather in September of this year although October was better. All Ministers will encounter these kinds of problems from time to time.
In conjunction with the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs, the Minister introduced the farm assist scheme to help low income farm families. That scheme has been a great boon. The Minister referred to the fact that an increasing number of farmers are participating in off-farm employment. I do not know whether that is a positive or negative move. On the one hand, it shows that the economy is doing well but, on the other, it means that people are moving away from farming. The falling interest rates as a result of the economic boom have been very helpful to farmers.
The most important aspect of the Minister's speech related to the position of young farmers. Macra na Feirme campaigned for a long time for the reintroduction of the installation aid scheme and changes in the farm retirement scheme and I am glad the Minister has been able to meet its demands. I also welcome the changes in stock relief and land leasing, capital acquisitions tax and capital gains tax.
The installation aid scheme was reintroduced at the end of 1998. The Minister has clearly stated that the scheme will be financed by the Exchequer over a three year period. Some 800 applications have already been received under the scheme and 290 young farmers have been paid a total of £1.6 million. It is very important for the future of agriculture that young farmers are supported. Their situation must be considered very seriously in the context of the national development plan. Many of the measures referred to by Fine Gael will be included in the national development plan.
I welcome the Leader model of rural development and the establishment of new businesses and community development groups. The only difficulty we are experiencing in County Galway in this respect is a shortage of money which seems to run out around the middle of the year. If there is surplus money available in other counties, I hope it will be redirected towards County Galway. I would like this issue addressed in the new Leader programme and I would like to see increased emphasis placed on the control of farm pollution and dairy hygiene schemes.
Deputy Penrose was very generous in his comments on the national beef envelope and the use of the £8.2 million to top up the £21 heifer slaughter premium. Heifers had been excluded from the scheme until now.
The flooding problem in south County Galway does not come under the Minister's area of responsibility. However, he is aware from meeting farmers at the opening of the new mart in Gort that there are serious concerns about four particular areas. The Minister was informed that a sum of £1 million would be very helpful in tackling the problem in areas such as Kilchreest, Cregclare, Tarmon and Mannin Cross. I hope the Minister will provide that funding, which is a small amount in the larger financial context, in order to alleviate the flooding problem, particularly the flooding of good land.
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. It is farcical that Opposition Members would table a Private Members' motion when they are really not aware of what is happening in the area of agriculture. This side of the House does not suffer from amnesia or problems of bilocation. We know where we are supposed to be. This Minister and his team in Agriculture House have been understanding and sympathetic and have not reacted to what has been happening in agriculture, but they have been proactive in looking at the future of agriculture and what we need to do after Agenda 2000 and the negotiations in which the Minister and his team have been involved in trying to get the best possible deal for farmers. It is not Fianna Fáil's fault we had bad weather, nor is it its fault there was a BSE crisis.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Was it ours?
It was not Fianna Fáil's fault that market forces changed. I am not saying it was Fine Gael's fault, but it did not do much about it when it had the chance. The Minister has made a tremendous impact in trying to address these problems. No one on this side will stand up and say everything is rosy in agriculture.
Sheepmeat is important in a constituency such as mine where we rely very much on quite volatile markets for the export of our young lambs in particular. We also had considerable problems as regards prices in recent months. The reduction in prices is costing the small farmer in particular, many of whom in my constituency are totally reliant on sheep farming, between £8 and £10 per lamb. It is a severe loss and they are making no money on their lambs. They are expected to feed them with meal and nuts which is costing the farmers money and, as a consequence, they may have to rethink the production of lamb next year.
We met the IFA and it put some proposals to us of which the Minister indicated he is supportive, particularly in regard to ewe premium. I hope the Minister will get the support necessary in Europe and that the Commission will look at additionality, how the calculation of ewe premium takes place and also additionality as regards a supplementary premium. That is the only way we can deal with the immediate impact of price reduction. I am sure every Member of this House wonders why, although we are an export orientated country and produce the best quality, sheep and pigmeat is being imported? How will we address that problem if we have overproduction, particularly in pigmeat? Why is the country importing pigmeat and New Zealand lamb?
The pig industry is on its knees. We met the Minister and were pleased with the meeting. We fully support him in trying to address this horrendous problem. Many aspects of the industry are supported by the Commission, but there is no support for the pig industry. I ask for a national support for the pig industry, in particular in the Border regions where in two or three years' time there will be no pig industry.
Tá áthas orm go bhfuil seans agam labhairt anocht ar an rún atá romhainn. I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak in this debate. I commend the Minister and the Ministers of State on the successful negotiations on the Agenda 2000 agreement and their continued support for farmers. Schemes, such as the early retirement from farming scheme and the new installation aid scheme for young farmers, and incentives, such as stock relief, land leasing, tax relief on agriculture education and training programmes, assist in the handing down of family farms from the last generation to the next and offer young people the chance to run a viable business on a family farm. The REPS and the control of farmyard pollution scheme ensure that our environment is protected and preserved for further generations. These programmes have contributed greatly to rural development and many enterprises have been given assistance which help them to become thriving businesses in rural Ireland.
The opening of the export market has greatly assisted farmers and gives our producers a valuable market for their produce. In 1998 there were 7.5 million cattle in this country and about eight million sheep. Since 1996 the number of vessels approved for the transport of live cattle has increased from nine to 17, in addition to the three roll-on/roll-off ferry services in operation. I note that in 1997 there were 57,000 live exports. From January to June of this year over 200,000 cattle were exported. This is as a result of the hard work and dedication of the Minister and Ministers of State. We should, however, put more effort into processing our meat at home to the final product which can go straight into the supermarkets.
Distribution of additional milk quota designed to help the smallholder should give those with low incomes the support they need to make their living on the land. Disease eradication is always uppermost in the minds of farmers and the Government has taken every step possible to ensure that our produce is top quality and reaches the consumer in its purest condition. Overall, the future of farming in Ireland is positive and the Minister has put in place the schemes and agreements which will bring farmers into the new millennium with confidence that their work will be valued and supported financially by the Government.
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on this motion by Fine Gael Deputies. A motion condemning the Government for its lack of understanding and support for farmers is a bit of a joke, particularly when tabled by those who, when in Government, treated farmers with contempt and succeeded in bringing confidence in the industry to a new low. The Minister is acutely aware of the importance of the agriculture industry to the national economy. His colleagues in Cabinet, particularly his parliamentary party, support him in his endeavours to fight the cause of the farmer to the bitter end. He is not confronted with a situation where a senior Minister in Government is of the opinion that Irish farmers are rolling in it. That was the attitude of a Minister in a Fine Gael led administration to problems facing farmers during the BSE crisis. It was a statement which went uncondemned by his Fine Gael colleagues in Government.
An announcement on the eve of the last general election on the opening of the Egyptian market by the then Minister for Agriculture and Food was an insult to farmers and mere opportunism on the part of Fine Gael. The Minister has worked hard to try to secure markets for our cattle and beef. Ministerial and official delegations have visited Russia, Egypt, Iran, Lebanon and the Gulf states. There have been no false declarations in relation to these visits. The Minister did not declare himself at Dublin Airport with people boarding a flight when he was elsewhere.
The Minister for Agriculture and Food in the previous administration, the rainbow administration, had his hands tied and it was disastrous for Irish farming. It was during his term that the control of farmyard pollution and the dairy hygiene schemes were brought to an end. I commend the Government on its commitment to agriculture. A vibrant farming sector is vital to the development of rural Ireland. The family farm is the cornerstone of rural society.
Going on its record, the Government will ensure that agriculture will make a greater than ever contribution to our economy. The sector has seen difficult times in recent years with the BSE crisis, bad weather and economic setbacks in other parts of the world leaving farmers vulnerable. This Government has put a range of measures in place to help farmers through these difficulties. Policies implemented by this Government have ensured increased employment is available to all. An increasing number of farmers and their wives, if it suits their situation, can supplement their incomes through off-farm jobs. The Minister has adequately addressed the areas referred to in this motion. I compliment him on a variety of positive measures and achievements to date on the issues of concern to Deputies. I have no doubt this Government is committed to the future of our farmers and accusations to the contrary are without foundation.
The motion before us reads like a well-crafted list of soundbites to attract maximum publicity, though it lacks any content, sincerity or vision. The real challenge to the Opposition is to bring forward a debate on their vision for the future of agriculture and rural life. It is not good enough to present a wish list in the hope that someone will believe one's case. Happily, the public is not that gullible.
However, I recognise the need for radical change in the support and development of the agricultural sector if we are to secure the future of farming and ensure the industry is populated by young, dynamic and progressive farmers. Our markets need to be developed so that we deliver to the consumer the product that is being demanded in a way that associates excellence and quality with Irish farm produce. We do not do enough here from the factory to the supermarket shelf to secure that quality status and a world market. There are world markets available to us outside the traditional markets which we have served for years. We need a marketing strategy that will deliver our produce directly to the supermarket shelves and that is based on quality and excellence. We can no longer take any market for granted and there should be a strong emphasis in a new strategy on organic produce.
Young farmers in particular need support and encouragement, but another group in agriculture should get special support. Elderly people living on farms, sometimes alone, having worked all their lives in agriculture, are now in a position where they have very little income and a poor quality of life. They do not enjoy the comforts of a successful economy and may be without their families. Many young people from such families have moved to more lucrative work in other sectors of the economy. These elderly people often live in hardship because farming is a way of life to them rather than a business. A special effort should be made in this year's budget to ensure they are looked after. State agencies, the Leader programme, local authorities and the Government have a collective role to play to establish the proper way forward. The energies of all these organisations must be harnessed if we are to suc ceed. The White Paper on rural development is a starting point and I commend the Minister, Ministers of State and all who were involved in drawing up that document.
The Leader programme has been a major success and its successor should be announced sooner rather than later. Substantial European and Exchequer funding is necessary to ensure the continuity of this programme beyond mid-2000. This announcement is needed now to give some comfort to the qualified people who have served in this scheme for many years and who are now very concerned for their future. I would welcome that announcement – with appropriate funding – sooner rather than later, as never before was such a structure required. Substantial European funding is needed and we need to target the different projects throughout the country to form a national plan and then every part of the country can benefit from the investment that should take place. I commend the Leader programme and acknowledge the work undertaken by the Department and the Minister.
I am delighted to speak in this debate.
It must be difficult for an Opposition spokesperson on agriculture to recognise the success our Minister has achieved in agriculture.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): And listening to rubbish.
(Interruptions.)
They have to justify their existence, which is why they have come to the House with this ridiculous motion. Nobody could argue that the Minister and his Ministers of State have not shown a real commitment to agriculture, food and rural development.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Farmers are making a fortune.
I recognise how difficult it must be to see the success our Minister achieved at the Agenda 2000 negotiations, when those in Opposition could only proclaim that he would be anything but successful. It must be very difficult when the farming organisations come out in recognition of the success our Minister has achieved on behalf of Irish farmers. As a result of those negotiations, I am delighted that Irish farmers are to receive £395 million more over the next seven years as a result of the excellent negotiations by our Minister.
Why will they not go to the sheep conference in Galway?
I compliment the Minister on looking forward. It is something that the Opposition is probably not used to. When he established the Agenda 2010 Committee, he was the first Minister to decide he wanted to know where agriculture is going in the future—
(Carlow-Kilkenny): Where is it going?
—and to plan for the inevitable changes. He has shown a commitment in that £2 billion per annum is spent on agriculture, food and rural development in Ireland. Direct payments to farmers are more than £1 billion per annum, which is 56 per cent of total farm income.
Listening to Opposition contributions over the years, one would almost believe we on this side of the House are responsible for the weather. We have consistently recognised the serious problems in agriculture in recent years. Those problems have arisen as a result of BSE, the weather and closure of some markets, such as the Russian market. What has our Government done about it?
As Deputy McGuinness said, we are not talking about a wish list, we are talking about real action and not what might happen in the future. We have introduced a farm assist programme to help low income farmers.
A farce. The new Messiah.
There have been 7,404 farmers approved for that programme since its introduction. We have provided incentives to young farmers to facilitate the early transfer of land to young, trained farmers and they include the abolition of stamp duty, stock relief, changes in land leasing, capital acquisitions tax and capital gains tax. That is what we want to do – to provide opportunities to young people, particularly young farmers. I recognise the changes in my own constituency.
We have made agriculture a priority. It is an established priority in the national development plan and as a result of that the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development will have its funding increased by more than 50 per cent, which will fund great improvements in the next seven years. We reintroduced installation aid for young farmers and the Opposition will know all about that – we saw the end of that scheme under their negotiation. The Opposition will also remember that we introduced on-farm investment schemes, including the control of farmyard pollution scheme and the dairy hygiene scheme. The Opposition will remember that, as those were abolished in its term of office also. We have provided real help to farmers when the weather was bad under the winter fodder scheme.
In my constituency we provided compensation to farmers who suffered flood damage and in the previous year, when the Opposition was in Government, not one penny of compensation was paid to farmers in north Mayo. I can stand over the work done by the Minister not just in my constituency but throughout the country.
The Deputy is back in the fold again.
It is a great pleasure to speak from this side of the House. I thank the Minister for his commitment. It is a shame those on the other side of the House cannot recognise that commitment and congratulate the Minister on the excellent work he has done.
I call Deputy Coveney. I understand the Deputy wishes to share time with Deputies Perry, Neville, Ulick Burke, Deenihan, Stanton, Boylan, Belton and Ó Caoláin.
Mr. Coveney
I thank Deputy Connaughton for ensuring the House has the opportunity to debate agriculture and rural life in Ireland. The debate comes at the right time of year, the start of a new growing season, before the winter sets in and before the time which last year brought most hardship to farmers. We also have the opportunity to look ahead to the future for Irish farmers in the light of CAP II and Agenda 2000 negotiations.
Everybody accepts that farming and rural life in Ireland is undergoing a period of real change, as it is throughout Europe. Rural communities accept this and will live and adapt with it. However, they will not accept the excess pain and suffering in their industry and livelihood that could have been avoided through support systems, imaginative Government policy and more aggressive negotiation at European level.
My job in Opposition is to highlight the failures of the Government and hopefully spur the Minister into action in the areas I think he has neglected since taking office two and a half years ago. I have limited time and, therefore, will concentrate on the two sectors I know best, namely, the cereal sector and the future for young people in farming.
The cereal harvest was reasonably good this year from a yield point of view while from a price point of view it was similar to last year, that is, not particularly good but acceptable. However, the future looks very worrying as a result of the disappointing deal struck for Ireland under the CAP II negotiations in Europe before the summer. I think our negotiating team must take a portion of the blame for this. It is now clear that at least five other countries in the negotiating process managed to receive special concessions for their countries in the grain and other sectors on the basis of their set of circumstances. However, the 16,000 Irish grain farmers received no concessions. Finland and part of Sweden, for example, received a grain drying subsidy worth £15 per tonne because they have a short growing season and high rainfall at 28 inches per annum. However, as the Minister knows, we have a rainfall level in County Cork of 42 inches per annum. Surely we had a case to make. Spain, Portugal and Italy managed to increase their reference yield for cereals, the figure for which in Ireland is 2.4 tonnes per acre. This is the figure used to calculate the level of arable area payments per acre by the EU. Our own cereal yields have increased in recent years, yet why have we made no attempt to increase our reference yield?
Another example concerns Italy which managed to get concessions on milk quota because it had a milk net deficit. In other words they consume more than they produce and therefore do not export to other EU countries which would add to excess supply. However, Ireland produces less than half its grain requirements – we produce 1.8 million tonnes of grain but have a net requirement of approximately four million tonnes per year. Yet we do not get extra concessions in this area.
It is up to the Minister and his team to devise realistic but persuasive reasons to get a better deal for Irish grain farmers, something he has not done. Many of the small and medium sized grain producers face a bleak future as prices are reduced in the next five years under Agenda 2000.
I wish to turn to the future for young people in farming. It is proving more and more difficult to persuade the young to stay in farming as a business and as a way of life. Over 4,000 families are leaving the land each year and many others are being forced to find alternative and secondary sources of income to remain financially buoyant. These are hardly the facts which will attract young people into an agricultural way of life when so many other businesses are booming. However, the Government does not seem to be helping the situation.
There are two areas which need investment, namely, education and installation aid. The agricultural colleges are under pressure with high costs and falling numbers of students. Agricultural facilities need to be high quality and, therefore, need investment. The Government has given the agricultural colleges no grant aid and no financial support of any kind as far as I am aware.
I compliment Deputy Connaughton on providing an opportunity to debate this issue. I would like to deal with the Leader programme and the future development of Leader Plus, the new initiative for rural development. Currently £35 million has been allocated for Leader for the next seven years, a very disappointing figure. Leader to date has been a success, but there is uncertainty regarding its future in the context of staff being on temporary contracts.
In County Sligo £2.5 million has been committed to private and community projects, an investment which will lever an additional £3 million in private funds, yielding an investment of over £5 million for development in the county. It is envisaged that in excess of 500 full-time jobs will be created as a result of such investment. The Leader programme has assisted community and private promoters in terms of rural tourism, small business, natural resources and environmental and cultural projects. One of the main elements of the Leader programme is the assistance it provides in terms of rural development, something which is most important given the crisis which exists in the agricultural sector and the survival of rural areas. The County Sligo Leader Partnership has adopted a proactive approach to this through the provision of outreach services in the rural parts of the county and the provision of assistance to groups and individuals which allows them take a professional approach to the development of their communities, something which will leave a lasting legacy.
Alternative enterprises in terms of developing the farming sector are very important and the role of the Leader programme in this regard to date has been very successful. However, as I initially stated, the funding allocation of £35 million, that is £5 million per year over the coming years, is disappointing. The Exchequer must match these funds if Leader is to continue its great work.
The starting point of all action under the local development programme is the principle of partnership and collective decision making. The distinguishing feature of its work is the deliberate emphasis it places on measures to combat and counteract long-term unemployment, something which is very important in rural areas, and to promote social inclusion. The Leader approach to local development is threefold, involving piloting, developing and testing new ways of tackling unemployment with a view to mainstreaming co-ordination and brokerage through linkage with influencing agencies which work in partnership. It has been a very successful role and the initiative in County Sligo has been very successful. A huge number of people have benefited from the Leader programme. In the context of the decline in agriculture, Leader has been quite effective in a very difficult period. Continued funding and a clear statement of what will happen the Leader programme is an issue of huge concern.
The Minister should also consider food processing and retailing in terms of developments in agriculture.
I too congratulate Deputy Connaughton on his initiative in bringing forward this very important debate at a crucial time in agriculture. The sector is in a very depressed state and is in urgent need of intervention by the Minister who must, together with the Government, adequately finance agriculture and agricultural development, especially in the context of REPS, the age of farm retirement, on-farm investment, control of pollution grants and young farmer installation aid schemes. The Minister must address these issues over the next seven years through the national development plan.
The Minister has failed dismally in the Limerick area in providing a service to deal with farm retirement pensions and installation aid grants and I ask him to address this. Earlier this year one of the officials of the Department in the office went on sick leave and nobody replaced him. The files were left unattended. This has led to an unacceptable situation where 65 files are awaiting processing and the waiting period is now three months. The waiting list in the neighbouring county of Cork is less than half that and the waiting period is six weeks. Similarly in Kerry, the waiting list is 24 and the waiting period is six weeks. In Clare there are just five files awaiting attention. I ask the Minister to provide immediately extra staff to clear the backlog in Limerick. The current situation is inexcusable.
Agriculture continues to be one of the most important sectors of the economy but it is severely depressed at a time when all other areas of the economy are booming. Farmers are fearful for their continued existence and their families have no confidence in farming. Four thousand families are forced to leave farming each year and many more are forced to become part-time farmers and to take up outside employment to feed their families. This puts more pressure on the family.
Young people are not going into farming. This is clear from the reduction in the number of students attending agricultural colleges. The Salesian College, Pallaskenry, County Limerick, had over 130 students in 1997. This dropped to 117 in 1998 and this year there are only 97 students. Mountbellew has 40 fewer students – down to 57 – than last year and Gurteen has 30 fewer students. It is predicted that Athenry will cease to provide agricultural training after this year. As a gesture, the Government should abolish stamp duty for young farmers and encourage them into agriculture.
At a time when capital is freely available for investment in other sectors of the economy, it is not available in agriculture. Farmers with small and medium sized farms cannot get loans from their banks. This indicates a lack of confidence on the part of banks in agriculture and its future. The value of store farmers' stock has more than halved since 1997. If agriculture is to continue to play a major role in the economic and social life of the State, farmers must be given the opportunity to earn a decent living.
The Government is responsible for the survival of rural Ireland as we know it. The collapse of agriculture will have a devastating effect on society. Farmers have always responded positively to change, but the present uncertainty will create difficulties for the survival of farm units. The Minister must fulfil his commitment to open the Libyan market. We have heard for more than two years that this market will reopen, but it has not yet done so. Thirteen years ago, when I was involved in the beef industry, beef cattle were realising between £1 and £1.20 per pound. Today they are realising 82p to 84p per pound.
I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate and I compliment Deputy Connaughton on instigating it at this opportune time. Last night the Minister said the Opposition refused to recognise that the Government had done tremendous work over the past two and a half years in helping Irish farmers through a series of difficulties and putting the industry on a sound footing. This is an indication of how out of touch the Minister is with the crisis that exists in Irish agriculture.
Over those two and a half years the Minister failed to find a market for lamb, beef or pigmeat. Never before have these three major sectors been in such a state of depression at the same time. Lambs are at pre-1970 prices, beef cattle now average £300 less than they did five years ago and pigs are making half the price they made three years ago. To compound this disaster, the Minister of State threw in the towel. He told a conference in his constituency that people in rural areas would need jobs outside agriculture in future if the countryside is to "thrive". I believe he meant to say survive. He continued by saying that the long-term trend is for the relative significance of conventional farming to decline. The Minister and the Minister of State have aided and accelerated the decline in agriculture. Will this statement inspire confidence in farming in the younger generation? Does the Minister subscribe to the same picture of agriculture's future?
Let us recall the report last night on the actions of senior officials in Agriculture House. Will the Minister conduct an in-depth inquiry into the content of that report? Are the officials out of control and has the Minister ever indicated his concern about their antics? What chance has an ordinary farmer of getting a fair hearing about problems relating to grant schemes and EU entitlements under the regime that now exists in Agriculture House?
A total of 27,000 applications under the various schemes during the period 1992 to 1997 were refused. In some cases they were classified as fraudulent when, in truth, their only inaccuracy was the misplacement of a single digit on the form or the duplication of an animal's identification number. The over-zealous and arrogant attitude of some officers at senior level is strangling many schemes while, simultaneously, some of these officials are costing the taxpayer huge amounts of money in the course of defending the indefensible in court. I urge the Minister to con sider requesting the resignation of the officials who have brought agriculture and the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development into such disrepute.
During a previous debate on agriculture I remarked that the lethargic, nonchalant, blasé and laid back approach adopted by the Minister and his colleagues would not solve the crisis in agriculture, and my remarks have been borne out. The sheep and pig sectors are in turmoil. As Deputy Neville said, beef was realising between 112p to 119p per pound a few years ago, now it is only realising 83p per pound. Milk production is also in decline and after 2005 the price of milk will decrease. Four thousand people are leaving the land every year and that trend is accelerating. Every day there are notices in the newspapers about another herd being sold. One sees people selling quotas of 50,000 gallons in a strong dairying area such as north Kerry even though there is a young person on the farm. No direction is being given in agriculture and there is no energy in the sector. People have lost their morale and their interest in farming.
Last night the Minister referred to the numerous unfortunate misunderstandings under which the Opposition labours regarding the main issues in agriculture. However, the evidence for the Opposition's arguments can be seen in the collapse in prices. With regard to the Agenda 2000 negotiations, the Farmer's Journal reported that it is generally acknowledged that the Irish input into the negotiations was of little significance. We achieved our concessions on the backs of the French. Were it not for their strong negotiating position, we would not have secured concessions. That is publicly acknowledged. The sheep sector, however, was ignored in those negotiations and we are now paying the penalty.
I do not see the benefit of the farm assist programme in north Kerry where there is a large number of small farmers. I do not know where the Minister got the figure of 7,400. I agree with Deputy Connaughton's proposal to increase installation aid to £12,000. Young farmers are not being encouraged to go into farming and I urge the Minister to talk to the Minister for Finance with a view to doing something through the taxation system to encourage them.
I set up Leader II when I was in office. I appeal to the Government to continue the Leader groups in their existing areas. At this stage they are well established and they should be allowed to continue in their present format. I also put huge emphasis on cattle breeding, but the same commitment has not been given to that area since I left office.
It is obvious that the agriculture industry has been abandoned by the Government. It has thrown in the towel. My colleagues have expressed their concerns about the price of heavy cattle, sheep and pigmeat. I wish to deal with another area.
The Minister and his team have the distinction of presiding over the closure of the only plant in the country which processed frozen vegetables. It was in Midleton. The Government did precious little to sustain or replace it. That is another nail in the coffin of the agriculture industry. Instead of expanding these plants and providing substanial support for farm produce, the Minister turned his back on them. He did not appear in Midleton, he passed very little comment on this and showed no interest in it.
The Leader programme is another area that demands attention at this time. Leader groups around the country are upset because they do not know what the future holds for them. It is time the Government did some work in this area and made clear to the Leader companies and other community groups that rely on the Leader companies what its intentions are.
Many of my colleagues have referred to the drift from the land, the fact that more and more young people are showing less interest in farming. Many older farmers who spent years building up their enterprises find that their children are no longer attracted to agriculture. I appeal to the Minister and his officials to examine this area. If young people do not go into agriculture, there will not be a future for the industry, bad and all as the industry is at present. The Minister has a great deal of work to do in the next short while he will remain in office, to try to rescue the agriculture industry from almost certain oblivion unless he gets his act together.
I welcome the opportunity to speak on this debate, the subject of which is always an important one, particularly in the present climate. I support the motion introduced by Deputy Connaughton.
I welcome the statement by the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell, on the chairmanship of the agricultural committee this afternoon. That will go a long way towards restoring honesty, decency and integrity in this House and confidence among the farming community.
There are two aspects of farming about which I am particularly concerned, which have been brought to the Minister's attention on more than one occasion. One is the plight of pig farmers in my constituency and the Border region. Sympathy is no longer any good. What is needed is a rescue package, as those farmers are facing bankruptcy.
The other aspect about which I am concerned is the plight of small farmers. I refer to farmers who have less than 50 acres of land and whose farms are not yielding an income. I stand over the strong statement that farm families are going hungry. Children are hungry going to school and students attending third level colleges in this city and regional colleges are going hungry because their family farms are not yielding an income to support them.
The farm assist scheme has not worked. I accept that moneys were set aside – perhaps £20 million or £30 million for that purpose, but officials in the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs do not understand farming. Counting the eggs on the dresser is of no help in terms of giving assistance to these families who are in dire straits. No income is coming into these farm households for six months of the year, from May when the last of the previous year's headage payments come in until they start again in November. Given the small size of these farms, only a limited number of cattle can be sold.
How can these families live without an income? Yet the Minister's officials assess that these farmers have a weekly income of £150 or £200. If these farmers had that income they would not be seeking benefit under the farm assist scheme. These farmers are decent people, not beggars. Will the Minister get that message across to the officials in the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs? We should support these family farms, which are the backbone of rural Ireland. These farm families are the honest, decent people who brought the country to the level it is at today, which enables our young people to reap the benefit of their input. Surely they are entitled to a fair income, the same as everybody else. Farmers who have reached middle age cannot adapt to or get another job. They are tied to their farms and they must be supported. I implore the Minister to talk to his colleague, the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs, Deputy Ahern, and ask him to take his officials aside and to talk commonsense to them.
On the schemes for headage premium and other premiums, the Minister should not treat farmers as criminals. We all make mistakes. The Minister makes mistakes, I make them, but if a farmers makes one he is deemed a criminal and a person who is trying to deceive. Anyone can make a mistake, especially when one is checking cattle under some of the farm conditions where there are not proper holding conditions. Tag numbers can be read wrong, the sex of the animal can be reported incorrectly, but that is not done deliberately. If one was to visit a farm, one would see the cattle are there. Farmers should not be treated as criminals or penalised by adopting the big stick attitude towards them and suspending for two years the minimal payments they get that are so necessary. They should be treated with a little more compassion. Everybody would benefit from that. Money invested in rural Ireland is spent locally. It benefits shops and small businesses and enables the country to prosper.
The Minister is in office at a time when farming as a career and a way of life is rapidly disappearing because young people are not going into farming. The Minister might say that is not his fault, but neither he nor his Department has done anything to change that situation. My colleagues pointed out that under various headings, including the farm installation grant and stamp duty, every possible blockade is put in the way of farmers. There are road blocks everywhere. That is the work of the Department. The Minister must shake up his Department and ensure his officials, especially the inspectors, address problems in this area.
In Longford the position with regard to REPs inspectors is disastrous. Two farmers waiting for months for inspections to be carried out, contacted me recently and the inspections have yet to be carried out. I ask the Minister to ensure sufficient staff is employed to carry out such inspections.
One farmer who happens to fall into the 5 per cent category has to wait six months to have an inspection carried out while another farmer who does not need to have an inspection carried out has already got paid. That is another example of what is wrong in agriculture. Who would want to be involved in an industry and treated like that by the Government?
Deputy Neville pointed out that some counties are not as badly off as others. I ask the Minister to check out the blackspots tomorrow morning after he has taken one of the eggs off the dresser for breakfast.
It gives me no pleasure to have to rise in this Chamber this evening in support of the motion tabled – far from it. I would, as should all objective opinion, much prefer to be able to recognise the grand claims in the amendment in the Minister's name, which laud his and his Government's efforts to deal with the many and varied problems currently affecting the broad farming community in this State, but I cannot and I suggest he cannot sell it.
Given the short speaking opportunity available to me, I will reflect on only one area of great need at this time. Following a meeting last Wednesday with myself and other Border county Deputies and Senators, the Minister is fully aware of the dire circumstances of the pig farmers of Counties Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan. They are some 94 in number and they face economic ruin and the subsequent toll that will exact on their health and well-being and on the future of their children. It is a small number perhaps, but let no one be tempted to view this issue as marginal or less important for that. It is a crisis. It arises from the exceptional losses incurred by these farmers who were dealt body blow after body blow with the closure of traditional processing outlets in the north-east, with the subsequent fire in the Ballymoney plant in June last year, and the exploitative stance taken by those outlets who saw their desperation and paid below market prices for their produce while their counterparts elsewhere continued to enjoy the then best available returns. There are no second class pig farmers in this economy; they are all entitled to equal and fair treatment. I call on the Minister again to approve – without first recourse to Brussels – a financial rescue package that will allow these producers regain a toehold into that sector and into that industry. We cannot and must not allow their downfall and ruination. I support the motion.
I am glad to have the chance to respond to this debate. I have listened with interest to the contributions of Deputies from all sides of the House and I will deal with some of the detailed issues in a few minutes.
I will begin with the all important issue of funding from the European Union and national resources, which is absolutely essential if we are to properly support our farmers and rural communities. The Government has successfully steered the Agenda 2000 negotiations in the agriculture sector to a successful conclusion while at the same time ensuring that EU budget arrangements are in place for the implementation of the national development plan for the years 2000 to 2006. The full details of EU and national funding will be available in that plan when it is published later this month.
Both the Agenda 2000 agreement and the national development plan have benefited from the partnership approach which is a fundamental feature of this Government's policy. These two major landmarks are highly visible evidence of the Government's continuing commitment to the agriculture, food and rural development sectors. Alongside these landmarks, the Department has continued to provide direct and indirect financial support to its clients both from the European Union and the national budgets, with an overall annual expenditure of £2 billion pounds.
This budgetary expenditure is paralleled by an increasing involvement by the Department in the regulatory areas for the monitoring of standards of food production and processing. These policies and operations are being implemented in an ever-changing national and international framework for food production and trade. The Government and my Department are vigilant in responding to changing agricultural circumstances, particularly those international situations over which little control, if any, can be exercised by any one country, particularly a country such as Ireland with its continuing dependence on exports and on a limited number of sectors for its agricultural well-being.
The BSE crisis in Britain from 1996 onwards, with its beef safety implications, had repercussions in all livestock and meat sectors and these repercussions are still being dealt with at national and international level. The economic setbacks in the Far East and Russian markets are still adversely affecting our agricultural markets. Poor weather conditions cannot be planned for in advance but, as in the case of last year, were effectively dealt with by the Government with a fodder package of over £40 million.
Shortfalls in EU budget resources for ongoing Irish schemes were dealt with by national financing, following EU approval. As Deputies are aware, my Department is subject to the administrative budget agreements which are now an integral part of successive Governments' policies on public expenditure. These budget agreements have practical implications for the delivery of schemes and services. Difficulties and delays sometimes occur and these will continue to be dealt with on an ongoing basis as and when they arise.
In so far as specific agricultural sectors are concerned, I acknowledge that the sheep and pig sectors are going through difficult times at present.
What will the Minister of State do about it?
The Minister dealt with that in detail last night. He has been endeavouring to deal with the matter over a period of time.
My position on both sectors is clearcut. I will continue to press for changes in the EU market regimes for these two products to take account of these difficulties.
I will follow up on a number of specific questions raised by Deputies and I will communicate directly with them. As Deputies are aware, I recently launched the Government White Paper on Rural Development, entitled, Ensuring the Future: A Strategy for Rural Development in Ireland. For the first time a detailed exposition of Government policy on the various elements relevant to the needs of rural communities is readily available. The Government's policy will be reflected in the national development plan. As the recognised lead Department in the rural development sector, my Department will provide specific resources to implement Government policy and to ensure a co-ordinated approach across Departments. Other political and administrative structures are provided for, consisting of a Cabinet sub-committee chaired by the Taoiseach and comprising Ministers and Ministers of State whose policy responsibilities impinge on rural development and an interdepartmental policy committee comprising senior officials of relevant Departments who will report directly to the Cabinet sub-committee. The input of local and regional authorities, the social partners, local development bodies and the wider voluntary and community sector to rural development policy issues will be assured through a national rural development forum.
The farming community can look to the future with increased confidence because of the actions taken and the policies being followed by this Government. The Agenda 2000 agreement is in place, a White Paper on Rural Development has been published and the national development plan will be published later this month. There will be a Leader Plus programme and national resources will be provided in addition to those provided by the EU.
I wish to share my time with Deputies Browne and Connaughton.
I compliment Deputy Connaughton on tabling this motion which is timely. Deputy Neville referred to the difficulties in the Limerick office. The official who handles the installation aid and farm retirement schemes is a gentleman to deal with. The Minister responded recently to queries about the farm retirement scheme and he outlined the average waiting times for every county. There is a difficulty in the Limerick area where it takes an average of five months to process farm retirement grants. When parliamentary questions are tabled, the response is always the same – the delay will not restrict the overall amount paid and retrospection will be considered. However, that is not much use to farmers. I ask the Minister to consider this matter. I question whether the Department deploys its resources effectively because in County Cork the number of farm retirement grants processed has trebled and the average waiting period is only six weeks. There is a big difference between six weeks and five months. What has happened to the principles of the farmers charter to expedite such issues? The Minister should look at the specific difficulties in the Limerick office.
I criticise the deployment of resources. In the mid-west region there are 200 staff in the Limerick office, 80 staff in the Ennis office and 54 staff in the Nenagh office. Both Ennis and Nenagh are approximately 25 miles from Limerick city. A Government building in Newcastle West was built a few years ago, but only one member of staff is employed there on a part-time basis two days a week. Yet the Minister had the gall to say to me in a recent reply that the people of Newcastle West were getting a fitting service from the local office. That is nonsense. The farmers in west Limerick are extremely critical of the fact they must drive to the agricultural office in Limerick city and run the risk of getting a parking fine if they park on a double yellow line. That is no way to treat people and is in direct conflict with the farmers charter. I ask the Minister to address this issue. I know of officials in the Department office in Limerick who would give their right arm to work in west Limerick. This would be an effective deployment of resources and it would also show the commitment of the Department to facilitate the people of Newcastle West The county council recently embarked on a £1 million development of a new office there to sustain the local area.
Our poultry industry is worth £120 million. Approximately one third of our poultry is imported, a significant amount of which comes from European Union countries. An increasing amount of poultry products are imported from Thailand and Brazil and other countries outside the European Union. The Food Safety Authority of Ireland must ensure that proper controls are in place. The Minister may be aware that a number of British parliamentarians recently visited Thailand and were extremely critical of its poultry processing industry. Yet poultry products from such countries are sold alongside Irish products. Multiples such as Tesco and Dunnes Stores rely on quality audits carried out by Department officials in the processing unit to ensure that such products are of good quality. Yet 30 factory units in Thailand are approved under the EU rules. Not one of those factories was subject to an EU inspection in order to achieve that standard. There are not any 'on the spot' inspections. In the interests of the consumer, the country of origin should be shown on all products sold here. In that way consumers would know whether a product was made in Brazil, Ireland, Thailand and so on. They would have freedom of choice when purchasing goods. Products should be properly labelled. People should be more conscious of the products on sale nowadays. We had a recent scare with dioxins in Belgium and sewage being fed in France. The Irish consumer who does not look for a quality Irish product is foolish.
The Minister of State spoke about the rural document and I appreciate that it has been produced. It is significant as far as sustaining people in rural Ireland is concerned. I am a director of a Leader group and I know of the excellent work done by these groups. However, there is uncertainty now as most groups have run out of money and cannot allocate grants. In many cases industries or products more suited to Leader programmes are being referred to county enterprise boards which have limited funds.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): On a previous occasion I quoted speeches the Minister made while he was in Opposition. They sounded very well and were good even when I read them but they had no effect on the Minister. I will not quote from them tonight. He has been reminded of what he has not done. Will the Minister please ignore the advice of his backbenchers? It is quite clear that some of them have not even seen a farmer in the past five years let alone spoken to one. They are living in a land that seems to be flowing with milk and honey. I do not see any difference for the farmers in Carlow or Kilkenny, be they Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael. If they are sheep or pig farmers they are on their knees. Beef farmers are also in trouble. That the backbenchers can speak about them in such glowing terms means they are living in cloud cuckoo land.
The Minister should deal with his Department which is over-officious in dealing with farmers who make simple mistakes. I know of a widow who paid someone to cut her hedges under the REPS. He did it the wrong way and she has been thrown out of the scheme and must pay £800 back money. A young farmer whose wife put down a wrong number for one of the animals was hammered by the Department officials. Everything else was perfect and it was obvious it was a mistake. People who saw the Prime Time programme last night must be sick to the teeth knowing that not one person in the Department will suffer the loss of a day's pay. Instead the officials will probably be promoted. It is time sanity reigned in the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development and people who make obvious, simple, innocent mistakes are not punished as if they had perpetrated a fraud.
I heard the Independent Deputies being complimented last night on the brave stand they were taking in voting against Partnership for Peace. The farmers in Donegal, Wicklow or south Kerry will not be called upon to march to Europe to keep peace but they will be asked to survive on the miserable prices they receive for their sheep. I appeal to the brave Independents to show some interest in their constituents by voting for this motion and to stop acting the fool, voting for something they know cannot be defeated when Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael are voting for it.
I thank those Deputies and the Minister and Minister of State who contributed to the debate. I was amazed at the comments made by Fianna Fáil backbenchers. They know well what is happening as does the Minister. Their view is that agriculture is good but farming is bad. Neither of them had spoken for two minutes before they said the pig, sheep and cattle farmers are doing badly. What is left? If I were a store cattle farmer, a small milk producer, a pig or sheep farmer I would be even more worried by what the Minister said last night. He does not have any answers. There are some things the Minister does not have control over and we all acknowledge that. However, what he did for sheep farmers on the night of Agenda 2000 was despicable. The only flag he raised was a white one. He has made it extremely difficult to get a balanced approach to the ewe premium scheme. It is hugely irresponsible for the Minister to expect farmers with sheep to count them for extensification purposes and not pay them. Farmers hold the Minister responsible for that. There was no one else to help them that night in Brussels and the Minister did not do anything for them.
There was a serious allegation in the Prime Time programme against the Department and its handling of the Emerald Meats case. I did not know much about the case but the programme, which was excellently presented, provided an opportunity to see how the Department acted and the public is not impressed by what it saw. At the earliest possible opportunity the Minister should give an indication of the grounds on which his Department decided to bring an appeal to the Supreme Court, given what happened in the High Court and what Mr. Justice Costello said. It seems as if the taxpayer will be exposed to a huge settlement figure and in view of that it is extraordinary that the case should be dragged on for so long.
Farming families have always had dignity and long may that remain so. They are taking a terrible battering at present. They have great respect for their industry but for whatever reason – I do not think it is the Minister's view – whatever is happening in the Cabinet, it does not appear that the Minister wants to help farmers in their hour of need. It is very easy to help an industry when it is doing well. Thankfully, for all our sakes, many sectors in the economy are booming but the Minister does not seem to be able to deliver the necessary assistance and commitment to farming families in their greatest hour of need. Everyone knows the farming community was the original Celtic tiger. The agriculture industry carried this country for many years. It is not a good idea for the Government to turn its back on old friends. At every forum at every level across the country everyone agrees that the Government has turned its back on the farming community.
I do not expect the Fianna Fáil backbenchers to vote against the motion but the Independents have said on many occasions over the past two years that they would not be in the Dáil but for the small farmers in their constituencies. I put it to them, particularly those in sheep rearing areas, Deputies Healy-Rae, Fox, Blaney and Gildea, if they have any respect for the farmers who voted for them, tonight is the night to give the Government a shock. If they have any respect for the farmers who elected them to this House as Independents, tonight is the night to give the Government a shock. It will not change the Government but at least it will show their constituents and small farmers they are prepared to put pressure on it. If they do not do that, God help the people whom everybody aspires to help. This House is the place to do that.
Amendment put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 69; Níl, 59.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies S. Brennan and Power; Níl, Deputies Barrett and Stagg.
Amendment declared carried.
Ahern, Dermot.
Ahern, Michael.
Ahern, Noel.
Ardagh, Seán.
Aylward, Liam.
Blaney, Harry.
Brady, Johnny.
Brady, Martin.
Brennan, Matt.
Brennan, Séamus.
Briscoe, Ben.
Byrne, Hugh.
Callely, Ivor.
Carey, Pat.
Collins, Michael.
Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.
Coughlan, Mary.
Daly, Brendan.
Davern, Noel.
Dennehy, John.
Doherty, Seán.
Ellis, John.
Tá–continuedFahey, Frank.
Fleming, Seán.
Flood, Chris.
Foley, Denis.
Fox, Mildred.
Gildea, Thomas.
Hanafin, Mary.
Haughey, Seán.
Healy-Rae, Jackie.
Jacob, Joe.
Keaveney, Cecilia.
Kenneally, Brendan.
Killeen, Tony.
Kirk, Séamus.
Kitt, Michael.
Kitt, Tom.
Lawlor, Liam.
Lenihan, Brian.
Lenihan, Conor.
McCreevy, Charlie.
McDaid, James.
McGennis, Marian.
McGuinness, John.
Martin, Micheál.
Moffatt, Thomas.
Moloney, John.
Moynihan, Donal.
Moynihan, Michael.
Ó Cuív, Éamon.
O'Dea, Willie.
O'Donnell, Liz.
O'Donoghue, John.
O'Flynn, Noel.
O'Hanlon, Rory.
O'Keeffe, Batt.
O'Keeffe, Ned.
O'Kennedy, Michael.
Power, Seán.
Roche, Dick.
Ryan, Eoin.
Smith, Brendan.
Treacy, Noel.
Wade, Eddie.
Wallace, Dan.
Walsh, Joe.
Woods, Michael.
Wright, G. V.
Allen, Bernard.
Barrett, Seán.
Bell, Michael.
Belton, Louis.
Boylan, Andrew.
Bradford, Paul.
Broughan, Thomas.
Browne, John(Carlow-Kilkenny).Bruton, Richard.
Burke, Liam.
Burke, Ulick.
Carey, Donal.
Clune, Deirdre.
Connaughton, Paul.
Cosgrave, Michael.
Coveney, Simon.
Crawford, Seymour.
Currie, Austin.
Deasy, Austin.
Deenihan, Jimmy.
Farrelly, John.
Ferris, Michael.
Finucane, Michael.
Fitzgerald, Frances.
Flanagan, Charles.
Gilmore, Éamon.
Hayes, Brian.
Higgins, Jim.
Higgins, Michael.
Hogan, Philip.
Howlin, Brendan.
Kenny, Enda.
McCormack, Pádraic.
McDowell, Derek.
McGahon, Brendan.
McGinley, Dinny.
McGrath, Paul.
McManus, Liz.
Mitchell, Jim.
Mitchell, Olivia.
Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.
Naughten, Denis.
Neville, Dan.
Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.
O'Keeffe, Jim.
O'Shea, Brian.
O'Sullivan, Jan.
Penrose, William.
Perry, John.
Rabbitte, Pat.
Reynolds, Gerard.
Ryan, Seán.
Sargent, Trevor.
Shatter, Alan.
Stagg, Emmet.
Stanton, David.
Timmins, Billy.
Upton, Mary.
Yates, Ivan.
Question, "That the motion, as amended, be agreed to", put and declared carried.
