Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 28 Mar 2002

Vol. 551 No. 4

Adjournment Debate. - Bovine Disease Controls.

Mr. Crawford

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to again raise this important issue in the House, and I thank the Minister of State for coming into the House at this late hour before the Easter recess to reply.

This issue, which I first raised in the House last November, concerns 190 farmers whose animals were taken from their farms by the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development and slaughtered in Henshaws meat plant. Payment in respect of a total of 125 animals has not been made because the Henshaws cheques bounced. Twenty-one of those animals were bought under valuation and I thought at that stage that pay ment had been made on those animals but I have since learned that some of the cheques are still with the farmers concerned.

I will tell the Minister of State about one old age pensioner who sold the last of his cattle to Henshaws, through the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. This man did not have a clue where these cattle were being taken. He put the last of his animals in the hands of Department officials to dispose of them under the disease eradication programme but the cheque for those animals is still in that man's house some five months later. It is totally unacceptable that farmers should be left out to dry.

The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development advised me that this is a difficult situation and that he cannot speak for meat factories. I am not talking about that. I am talking about animals which were removed from farmers by the Minister's officials. Those farmers had no choice in how the animals were sold. They were not given any indication where the animals were going until the lorry arrived.

The Minister promised at that time, and I hope I hear something positive from the Minister of State now, that the Attorney General would deal with the problem. I realise the Attorney General has been busy but it only took him ten days to deal with the problem of the Taoiseach's own project. He has had five months to deal with this problem. This problem needs to be dealt with quickly and the farmers paid.

Another problem is that many farmers have not been paid moneys due to them since last October by the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. The excuse given for the delay is that the computers are not compatible and the area aid section and other sections are not able to sort it out.

I bring two cases to the attention of the Minister of State, one of which I raised in the House last February. The reply I received at that time was to the effect that the problem would be sorted out under the cattle movement monitoring system, CMMS, that the details regarding the purchase of the animals had been inputted and that the cheque would be issued in February. That money still has not been paid.

Another case was brought to my attention today by my colleague from west Cork, Deputy Jim O'Keeffe, who was delighted to get the news that one of his constituents will soon receive a cheque for almost €11,000, which was due to him last October.

Is it acceptable that money owed to so many farmers is not being paid because of difficulties with the computer system in the Department? The Minister of State will tell me that payments are made in 95% or 98% of cases but if a farmer or a farmer's wife is not paid the money they expect to get – and one figure is €11,000 – what do they tell their bank manager or suppliers? Banks are being extremely strict with farmers at the present time; I have been shown some letters from them.

I urge the Minister to make payments on the basis of necessity. The beef farmers will not run away but they will be gone if they cannot get the necessary funding to pay their bills and other expenses on a daily basis. Six months is too long to wait and while the numbers involved may be small, there is no excuse for the delay in payment to these farmers.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development (Éamon Ó Cuív)

I thank the Chair for accepting this matter and Deputy Crawford for raising it. I fully appreciate the seriousness of the two issues he raised.

As regards the first aspect, the position is that the procedure for disposing of reactor animals under the TB and brucellosis disease eradication schemes operates on the basis that meat factories tender on a weekly basis for the slaughter of these animals. The Department selects the meat factories on the basis of the prices they offer for different types of animals.

Under current arrangements, compensation for reactor animals comprises the salvage value of the animal which is paid by the factory directly to the farmer and a reactor grant, or live valuation less the salvage value paid to the farmer by my Department. The Deputy will be aware that the reactor grant regime will be discontinued when the valuation system is extended to all breakdown situations from next month.

It is important to note that at all times the ownership of the reactor animal continues to reside with the farmer and, therefore, the contract for the salvage value is a matter between the farmer and the meat factory involved. My Department's responsibility is to ensure the secure removal of the animal to slaughter and to pay the appropriate compensation.

In the circumstances where a factory goes out of business, such as happened in the case in question, the recovery of any moneys due to losses incurred by farmers is a matter for resolution between themselves and the company's liquidators. The Deputy said this matter has been referred to the Attorney General. I will pursue it and try to get an update on the position because there is no reference to that in this reply. As the Deputy raised this issue, he is entitled to a reply.

As regards the second issue, the position is that over the past four years my Department has made major strides in the timely and efficient delivery of payments to farmers. We have set quality of service as an integral part of all our operations. We acknowledge the importance of providing services in an efficient, effective and user-friendly manner. In the period since 1 January 2001 to date, in excess of €1.286 billion has issued to farmers under the various premium and area based compensatory allowance schemes of which about €875 million relates to payments made under the 2001 schemes. Over the past month alone, over 103,000 payments totalling almost €112 million have been made. The process of introducing a new mapping and area aid processing system has raised some issues in clearing a small number of payments. The first and main phase of that redevelopment has now been completed and every effort has been made to keep any delay to a minimum, including the use of manual payments.

With regard to the schemes for which I have direct responsibility, the rural environment protection scheme and the area aid scheme, I monitor where problems arise in regard to them by way of parliamentary questions and I also keep in contact with my officials. It surprises me that when many farmers are written to, they do not reply and many of them do not reply to a second letter. When information is needed for audit purposes, it is important that farmers reply to us.

My Department has been making progressive use of the CMMS database in processing applications since 1997-98. In line with EU requirements, cross-checks against the CMMS have intensified since January 2000. The relevant regulation stipulates that premiums can be paid only in respect of an animal which is properly recorded on the CMMS. For example, under the 2001 suckler cow premium scheme, over 1.1 million animal tag numbers have been cross-checked in this manner and difficulties arose initially in respect of 30,000 tags or 2.7% of animals. These difficulties mainly relate to farm-to-farm movements where, unfortunately, the buyer or the seller, or both, fail to notify the movement to the CMMS. We are also experiencing difficulties with birth and death notifications to the database. In a number of cases, animals being applied for as cows were, according to the CMMS, heifers at the time of application. A further difficulty arises where farmers dispose of animals on which they have applied for premium during the retention period. My Department, through contact with individual farmers, is making every effort to have all these outstanding problems cleared as quickly as possible. I have dealt with a large number of cases through my constituency office and non-notification of animal movement is a major issue.

My Department's fundamental objective is to serve the citizen in a proper, fair and impartial manner which will ensure a high degree of farmer and public confidence. Raising the quality of services and responding positively to customer needs is and will continue to be an operational priority for my Department.