Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 2 Apr 2008

Vol. 650 No. 3

Nursing Home Subventions.

I welcome the opportunity to raise this extremely important issue in the House even for only two and a half minutes. I was shocked when I got a phone call recently from the relative of a 99 year old in a nursing home in County Cavan who has been asked to pay the increased charges that the nursing home wants from 1 January this year because the Minister and the HSE have decided that no further increases would be allowed under the subvention system. This is supposed to be because the fair deal — or fairytale deal — that has been talked about has never been delivered. In December 2006 it was first hinted that there would be a new fair deal for nursing home charges. The details of that scheme were announced in February 2007 and we were advised that it would be brought through the Cabinet, Dáil and Seanad and be in place for operation on 1 January 2008. However, as of today we have not seen sight of that Bill and the Minister has refused to allow the subvention offices to deal in a sympathetic and realistic way with such situations. This is not the only case — I have several other letters. I welcome the fact that the Minister of State, Deputy Hoctor, is here as the matter relates to the elderly.

After nine years in a nursing home being covered by the pension and subvention, how can I say to this lady or her family that suddenly she must find the money, at the same time as the Minister has taken an increase of €35,000 for herself? I accept that does not apply to the Minister of State. I refer to the Minister, Deputy Harney.

The Minister, Deputy Harney, has not taken the increase either.

She has agreed it. At the same time she is asking the 99 year old person to pay the extra amount. Another nursing home has a similar situation where a man has already got a bill for €500 for the first ten weeks of this year. It is absolutely disgraceful. Are the elderly being asked to bear the brunt of the cutbacks and the other problems at a time when the better off are being made even better off? Regardless of what the Minister of State has said all that has happened is that the ministerial salary increases have been postponed to September. I urge the Minister of State to ensure the situation is rectified. Some €110 million was transferred from this section to prop up the overall HSE, which is unacceptable when the aged are being ordered to pay for something to which they are entitled.

Today I tried to extract information from the Taoiseach on the status of the fair deal scheme. He ends his time as Taoiseach as he began by keeping his cards close to his chest. I could only get an indication — I could not call it a commitment — that the health (long-term residential care services) Bill would be published in this term. Nothing was said to address the concern and distress caused to older people and their families by the current uncertainty over this scheme. A debacle is the only word I can use to describe that the legislation is mired in problems. I ask the Minister of State to confirm whether the €110 million allocated to the scheme has now been diverted. I also ask the Minister of State to where it has been diverted if that is the case. Will it be used to provide alternative services for older people?

In November 2007, nine organisations working with older people joined together to express their concern at the fair deal proposals. They raised the lack of clarity about what older people would be entitled to. They also stated the scheme was an erosion of the entitlement to State-funded long-term care in public nursing homes through the State's proposed claim to a proportion of all disposable income as well as up to 15% of the estate after death. It seems that this property provision has caused the constitutional and other legal difficulties for the legislation. That problem should have been obvious to the Minister, the Cabinet and the drafters of the proposed legislation. The Government failed to heed the warnings and now €100 million allocated to the scheme is to be diverted. This is gross mismanagement and older people in nursing homes or those who expect to enter such care are being left in a state of doubt and confusion again. Instead of proceeding with this scheme the Government should move towards direct provision of care for older people in their homes, the community and, where necessary, in public nursing homes.

On a related matter, I deplore the decision of the HSE to close 12 respite beds for patients with Alzheimer's disease in Cherry Orchard Hospital. Approximately 24 individuals are affected, for many of whom residential care is not available. Now even respite care is being taken away. I urge the Minister of State to have that specific and disgraceful development addressed urgently.

I am taking this matter on behalf of the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney. I thank the Deputies for raising these questions as it provides me an opportunity to outline to the House the improvements made to the existing nursing home subvention scheme and the position in respect of the new nursing home support scheme, the fair deal.

Government policy regarding older people is to support people to live in dignity and independence in their own homes and communities for as long as possible and, where this is not possible, to support access to quality long-term residential care. This policy approach is renewed and developed in the latest partnership agreement, Towards 2016. The nursing home subvention scheme was introduced in 1993 to assist with the cost of private nursing home fees. A subvention may be paid where a person has been assessed as needing nursing home care by the Health Service Executive and where the person has satisfied a means test.

Since 1 January 2007 there are no longer three separate rates for subvention. Persons who apply may receive any amount up to a maximum of €300 per week. The change in the rate means that many people who were not previously eligible for subvention may now qualify for a payment. The payment of subvention is managed by the HSE under the Health Act 2004. In 2007 the HSE finalised and circulated national guidelines to the local health offices, for the standardised implementation of the nursing home subvention scheme. Under the guidelines, the assessment of means will now be carried out using a national standard financial assessment method. In addition to the increased rate of basic subvention, a person may receive enhanced subvention. This is a supplementary subvention, which may be paid by the HSE, to a person in or entering private long-term care. The amount of enhanced subvention paid is at the discretion of the HSE and varies according to the cost of care and the circumstances of the applicant.

That is not true. There is a maximum.

Enhanced subvention should be used to develop consistency between the payment of subvention and the new nursing home support scheme, and to work towards equalisation of the level of support paid to people in different areas taking local prices and a person's means into account. The HSE guidelines provide that an applicant for enhanced subvention will be subject to the means assessment. Regarding the specific case raised by Deputy Crawford, I understand from the executive that the individual concerned is on the current maximum enhanced subvention rate.

The new nursing home support scheme, a fair deal, was approved by Government and announced in December 2006. The fair deal is designed to remove real financial hardship from many individuals and their families who, under the old system of nursing home subvention, are forced to sell or re-mortgage homes to pay for the cost of nursing home care. This is the essence of the policy.

Since December 2006, my Department has met groups and organisations, including the national federation of pensioners associations, the Irish Farmers Association, the Irish Senior Citizens Parliament and the social partners. The Department also attended the Irish Senior Citizens Parliament AGM at its request and participated in a workshop on the new scheme.

The Bill to provide for the scheme is currently being finalised by the Office of the Attorney General and I hope to publish it as soon as possible following Government approval. On publication of the Bill, further engagement will take place with stakeholders on the details of the new scheme. This will take place under the auspices of Towards 2016. The subsequent presentation and passage of the legislation through the Houses of the Oireachtas will be a matter of priority for me as I wish to make the benefits of the scheme available to older people as soon as possible.

Where is the €110 million? The Minister of State did not answer that question.

Health Services.

I thank Deputy Dan Neville for allowing me to go ahead of him as I have an urgent appointment elsewhere.

The north east hospital situation is in crisis, including Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital. Serious concerns raised by cancer X-rays have recently been brought to light. There is no clarity and no objectivity and we do not know what is going on. The HSE is releasing information bit by bit. These concerns are serious and have been evident for some time. The HSE has not appointed radiographers, which it ought to have done, as recommended by the former health board. There has been a deficit of full-time professional staff to read X-rays and a lack of commitment by the HSE to the entire north east, particularly Drogheda and its hospital.

I am deeply saddened by the news I heard tonight that the new north-eastern hospital will not be located in Drogheda but in County Meath, at Navan. Drogheda will have a population of 90,000 people in the near future, it has rail links, motorway links, it is beside the airport and is at the centre of the growth of population. The people of Drogheda and those in the surrounding county, as well as in east Meath, will absolutely resist the removal of the centre of excellence at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital. That hospital has been run down by the HSE.

Professor Carney, the leading professional cancer consultant in the north east for over 17 years, resigned last October because he was not consulted about changes being made to breast cancer services vis-à-vis staff at the hospital. He recently withdrew his resignation, which the HSE did not accept. I wish to quote directly from and place on the record of the House his letter of 7 March 2008, when he wrote to the chief executive of Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital. Professor Carney is a national figure dealing with oncology and cancer. He is an absolute professional who is totally dedicated to the north east and has been for 17 years. In his letter he states that he withdrew his resignation because:

I now realise, for a variety of reasons, that it has not been possible to make the arrangements that would allow a smooth transition of care, particularly of patients currently undergoing active chemotherapy treatment, for newly diagnosed patients, or indeed for patients receiving chemotherapy for recurrent cancer. Moreover, arrangements are not in place for the follow up and support of patients who have attended our clinic for a number of years and who, for one reason or another, have become dependent upon us.

All of the above has led to considerable stress and uncertainty for patients, their family and for the oncology staff in Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda.

The HSE is an absolute disgrace. It is running down the hospital and allowing a situation to pertain whereby the patients of the most eminent professor in oncology and cancer care in this country will not, in his medical opinion, be properly looked after. Professor Carney is not being allowed to continue to treat those patients until the transition, as he points out in his letter, is in place. It is unacceptable and is an appalling, shameful situation for which the Government is totally responsible.

It is a sign of how bad things are that, having gone through the Celtic tiger era, the Government is now destroying a fantastic hospital in Drogheda, which employs more than 1,500 people. Those people will not now be able to work in the place where they live but, more importantly, the cancer care to which patients are entitled, and which Professor Carney wants to provide, will not be provided. He is not satisfied that adequate and proper arrangements are in place for their medical care. This is the worst story that could ever be visited upon cancer patients in the north east, many of whom are breast cancer sufferers. They have been abandoned by the HSE and by the Government. I ask the Minister of State to respond to this issue.

I am taking this Adjournment debate on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Mary Harney. I welcome the opportunity to set out the current position to Deputy O'Dowd regarding cancer services, with particular reference to the north east region.

The HSE issued a statement on Monday, 31 March concerning radiology services in Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda, and Our Lady's Hospital, Navan, which have emerged in the media in recent days. The HSE has informed the Department that it is HSE policy, learned from recent events in relation to diagnostic services in the Midland Regional Hospital, Portlaoise, to ensure that if there are concerns regarding any aspects of patient care which are found to be valid, the patients and their families will be the first to be informed and supported. This requirement takes precedence over all other considerations and, on that basis, the HSE will not be making further comment on the details of the review until these arrangements have been finalised.

Regarding the small number of cases referenced in the HSE statement, arrangements are in train to ensure the necessary initial contacts and briefing, initiated via the relevant general practitioners, are in place. It is expected that this very important phase will shortly be completed. In tandem with this, the HSE is assessing the appropriate next steps to be taken. This will take into account the input of external experts who have been consulted by the HSE and the advice from whom has only very recently been received.

The HSE has advised that it will make a full statement on the matter, including providing details of next steps, very shortly after the contacts referred to above are completed. In making its statement, the HSE will be in a position at that stage to provide additional background information. The HSE is very anxious to provide such additional information as it can appropriately make available to inform the public and allay fears. However, it is entirely appropriate that the small group of those most affected are communicated with directly in the first instance.

As the House is aware, Professor Tom Keane has been appointed to lead and manage the establishment of the HSE national cancer control programme. Professor Keane has ambitious plans and has already made significant progress in implementation of the programme. The key objective of the national cancer control programme is to ensure equity of access to services and equality of outcome, irrespective of geography. This will involve significant realignment of cancer services to move from the present fragmented system of care to one which is consistent with international best practice in cancer control.

The HSE has designated Beaumont Hospital and the Mater hospital as the two cancer centres in the managed cancer control network for the HSE Dublin and north-east region, which includes Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital. The designation of cancer centres aims to ensure that patients receive the highest quality care while at the same time allowing local access to services, where appropriate. Where diagnosis and treatment planning is directed and managed by multidisciplinary teams based at the cancer centres, then much of the treatment, other than surgery, can be delivered in local hospitals, such as Our Lady of Lourdes. In this context, chemotherapy and support services will continue to be delivered locally. Cancer day-care units, including at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, will continue to have an important role in delivering services to patients as close to home as possible.

An absolute priority is to retain the key cancer clinicians in the networks even in circumstances where their own hospitals may no longer be involved in cancer control. Professor Keane has advised that meetings and discussions are under way with the eight designated centres and with the non-designated hospitals currently providing cancer services to manage the transition. These discussions have focused on identifying the capacity issues for the eight designated centres so that a detailed transitional plan can be put in place to facilitate the progressive, gradual and carefully managed transfer of services over the course of the next two years.

The HSE has informed the Department that early in 2007 a strategic decision was made to develop links for both breast services and oncology services with Beaumont Hospital, which has a major academic link with the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. Professor Carney tendered his resignation as a medical oncologist last October, as and from the 31 March 2008. The HSE has informed the Department that Professor Carney's resignation from Our Lady's Hospital was received with much regret by both management and staff within the hospital. His expertise, experience and commitment to patients and staff have been very much appreciated.

Following the receipt of Professor Carney's letter of resignation, management at Our Lady of Lourdes has been working with colleagues in Beaumont Hospital to put in place alternative arrangements for the transition of care of patients to a consultant medical oncologist from Beaumont Hospital. A series of meetings took place and a plan has now been put in place which will allow both new and review patients to be seen by this consultant and his team in Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital from 31 March 2008.

From 1 July there will be a registrar in place on site specifically focused on oncology. While the HSE is continuing with the three sessions per week by the consultant oncologist, previously provided by Professor Carney and now provided by a consultant from Beaumont, it is working to develop a full-time oncology post for Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, which would be linked with Beaumont Hospital. The HSE has confirmed that there will be no interruption in the continuity of care that patients are receiving in the provision of oncology services at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda.

The Government is committed to making the full range of cancer services available and accessible to cancer patients throughout Ireland in accordance with best international standards. The developments which I outlined here today will ensure that a comprehensive service is available to all patients with cancer in the eastern region.

Suicide Prevention.

I welcome the opportunity to raise the issue but, with all due respect to the Minister of State, I am very surprised the Minister for Health and Children or the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Devins, are not present. However, I can understand this in the context of their disinterest towards the issue I am raising. More than 500 people die by suicide annually. In 2005, Reach Out, the national strategy for action on suicide prevention, was published and it made more than 90 recommendations which have been practically ignored. The National Office for Suicide Prevention, NOSP, was established but it only has a budget of €3.5 million annually, which means it can continue with its current work but it cannot develop its service during 2008.

I ask the Minister of State not to say €8 million is being spent on suicide prevention. I refer only to the investment on the strategy for suicide prevention published in 2005. In 1998 the national task force on suicide reported with recommendations and approximately £4 million was spent on that but the Government has rowed back on this as well. One of the key recommendations of that report was the appointment of suicide resource officers but their budget has been cut back. Suicide resource officers were available in 11 areas but three of them are not being retained and, therefore, the number available has reduced to eight.

Last year, the budget for the Applied Suicide Intervention Skills Training, ASIST, programme for volunteers in suicide prevention was also reduced. The Minister of State, Deputy Devins, cancelled eight training courses under the programme because he would not pay for hotel accommodation. The Government, therefore, reduced the funding for those who wanted to be involved in suicide prevention and who were anxious to obtain intervention skills in suicide prevention. ASIST funding will reduce further this year because the co-ordinators of the two-day courses provided under the programme are the suicide resource officers. However, three of them are not being reappointed in key areas because of the cutbacks and the Government's decision.

The Taoiseach in 2005 stated:

At Government level, a task force will be established with representatives of relevant Government Departments to advise on and provide support in overcoming any barriers encountered in implementing the strategy. Additional funding allocations will be made available for the coming years to support the strategy and to complement local and national efforts.

However, the Government is rowing back on this commitment. I compliment the suicide prevention office on the work it is trying to do but it is being frustrated by a lack of funding.

A sum of €3.5 million is allocated to the NOSP while last year there were 500 deaths by suicide. The Road Safety Authority receives an inadequate allocation of €44.3 million and 338 road fatalities occurred last year. Why the difference in the Government's approach to the prevention of suicide and road safety, which is given 15 times the allocation? Why does the Government ignore the issue of suicide?

I am taking the debate on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Health and Children. I assure the Deputy that the Government is fully committed to the implementation of suicide prevention initiatives and the further development of services to prevent and reduce further tragic loss of life.

We should be encouraged by the progress to date in suicide prevention, in particular the launch of two important strategy documents: Reach Out — A National Strategy for Action on Suicide Prevention 2005-2014, which was launched in September 2005, and A Vision for Change, the report of the expert group on mental health policy, published in January 2006. Since the establishment of the HSE's NOSP in 2005, which is responsible for the implementation of Reach Out, additional funding of €3.55 million has been provided for its implementation. This brought the total funding available to support suicide prevention initiatives to €8 million and this level of funding continues into 2008.

I asked the Minister of State not to say that.

The NOSP has an annual budget of €4.5 million. Initiatives funded by the office include developing and implementing national training programmes, developing mental health awareness campaigns, implementing recommendations arising from a review of bereavement services and supporting voluntary organisations working in the field of suicide prevention.

A number of other suicide prevention initiatives are also delivered by the HSE for which funding does not come within the suicide prevention office's budget. These include funding for 11 dedicated resource officers and deliberate self-harm response nurses in accident and emergency departments. It should also be emphasised that a range of services such as general psychiatric services and primary care services are important in helping to prevent suicide. These services play a vital role in the drive to reduce the incidence of suicide and should be taken into account when considering the level of expenditure devoted to suicide prevention. A total of €1 billion is spent on mental health services.

A fundamental aim of Reach Out is to prevent suicidal behaviour, including deliberate self-harm and to increase awareness of the importance of good mental health among the general population. A Vision for Change considers mental health as a resource that needs to be promoted and protected. The report views mental health awareness and promotion as relevant to the whole population, regardless of age, social status or either physical health or mental health status. Thankfully the level of discussion and openness on mental health issues, including deliberate self harm and suicide has also increased significantly in recent years. We do, however, need to ensure that public discussion and media coverage of suicide and deliberate self harm remains measured, well informed and sensitive to the needs and well-being of psychologically vulnerable and distressed individuals in our society. In particular, we need to continue to work as a society to create a culture and environment where people in psychological distress feel they can seek help and support from family, friends and health professionals.

Mental health awareness campaigns launched by the NOSP and the National Disability Authority, NDA, in 2007 further highlight the importance of taking care of our mental health and go a long way to helping to remove the stigma that is often associated with mental health issues. These are very welcome developments. Suicide affects all age groups and communities and reducing the present rate of suicide requires a collective, concerted effort from all age groups in society, health and social services, other professionals, communities and community leaders, voluntary and statutory agencies and organisations, parents, friends and neighbours. I assure Deputies of the Government's commitment to ensuring the actions identified in Reach Out are implemented.

Special Areas of Conservation.

I raise the matter of the proposed off-wintering and destocking regime to be applied in Connemara in the Twelve Bens-Garraun and Maumturk mountain complex special area of conservation. Proposing what will effectively be a six-month withdrawal of sheep from the Connemara mountain commonages cannot work in practice and while whoever drew up this directive might know something about protecting grouse, if grouse were in this area which they have not been for 20 years, they certainly know nothing about mountain sheep.

To produce a regulation that all sheep have to be removed from mountain commonages from 1 November to 31 December and from 14 February to 13 May in reality means from 1 November through to mid-May as it would not be practical to have the sheep back on the mountains for the month of January. This will not work. How can hill farmers who have limited lowland accommodation, which is the situation in Connemara, accommodate their flocks off the hills for half the year? These sheep will have to be fed when they are removed from their natural grazing area and with the increased cost of sheep nuts, now up to €8 a bag compared with €6.25 a bag last year, flock owners would not be able to sustain this extra cost.

If a farmer is in REPS he or she cannot winter the sheep on the limited low lands. The cost of providing sheds will be prohibitive, even if planning permission can be obtained for such buildings in special areas of conservation, which will be very difficult.

Last Monday night, I attended a meeting in Maam Cross with 300 concerned farmers and it is a pity the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government or his representative did not accept the invitation to attend as he could have received first-hand knowledge on how these proposals cannot work. One colourful speaker there in referring to the national parks and wildlife scheme, NPWS, said the acronym stood for "no people west of the Shannon".

A line in the reply from the Minister's office to the IFA's invitation to attend the meeting states: "It has also been our experience that the convening of mass meetings of farmers, particularly in the evening, is not conducive to good and accurate communication and discussion of proposals." When else could one have a meeting with farmers except in the evening? It would have been productive if the Minister had bothered to attend or send a representative.

I am all for preserving the environment and no one is more committed to the environment than I am, but we will not do it this way. The majority of the people who attended the Maam Cross meeting will not support the Lisbon treaty and neither will the Connemara and west coast fishermen because they see European directives wiping out their livelihood and way of life. Let us protect the grouse and other birds and wildlife by taking measures to control foxes, badgers and mink which are now major threats to bird life on the hills. Grouse feed on fresh young heather shoots and, therefore, they need the heather to be grazed.

If the hills are destocked it will lead to greater growth and more hill and heather fires in the summer months and, therefore, these proposed measures will be counterproductive for the protection of wildlife. Last year the majority of calls to the Clifden fire brigade dealt mainly with mountain bog fires. Some commonage is growing wild from undergrazing, such as the Shanakeela commonage of approximately 1,500 acres with approximately 550 ewes. The heather there is growing strong and wild.

Look at what happened in the Burren. Under a directive a number of years ago, cattle had to be taken off the Burren. The hazel and other brambles came up and people are now trying to put cattle back on the Burren to control this as the Burren was controlled in a natural manner for thousands of years.

I urge the Minister to meet the Connemara hill farmers and to work with the IFA to establish a satisfactory solution to this problem in everyone's interest. We need the co-operation of everyone concerned in the interest of the environment and who better to protect the environment than the people who have been doing this for generations.

Once sheep are taken off their natural habitat on the mountains for six months of the year it will be impossible to put them back because mountain cross-bred scotch ewes are bred for grazing on mountain commonage. I appeal to my fellow Galway TDs, none of whom was able to attend the meeting in Maam Cross on Monday night, to ensure this directive does not go through on 1 November because it will be the death knell for sheep farming in the traditional manner in the Connemara mountain range.

I am very disappointed, although not for the sake of the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Hoctor, who has been put in the House tonight to take every Adjournment matter. Her office has nothing to do with the matter I raise and she will make a reply prepared for her without any reference to the serious points I raise. I wish, however, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government or someone responsible would have the manners to come here and deal with this serious problem. They did not have the manners to attend the meeting at Maam Cross on Monday night. I assure the Minister of State that this will not work and I ask her to take this message back.

I am replying on behalf of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. While I play a significant part in the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, the area referred to by Deputy McCormack is not my immediate area.

The point I am making is that I am not totally removed from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

The Minister of State is a long way removed from the hills of Connemara.

The Deputy might be surprised.

I am glad of this opportunity to provide some background to the agri-environment measures to apply in the Twelve Bens-Garraun and Maumturk mountain complex special areas of conservation, in addition to providing clarification on the further measures that are to be implemented. These measures are an effort to meet fully the requirements set by a European Court judgment in 2002. The court ruled that:

[B]y failing to take the measures necessary to safeguard a sufficient diversity and area of habitats for the red grouse and by failing to take appropriate steps to avoid, in the Owenduff Nephin Beg complex special protection area, the deterioration of the habitats of the species for which the special protection area was designated, Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 3 of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds and Article 6(2) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora.

Major efforts are being made by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, in co-operation, to address the court finding. These Departments took a number of steps to try to reduce damage to red grouse habitat across commonages generally, and in the Owenduff-Nephin Beg ranges specifically where an intensive and generously funded agri-environmental programme of measures has been in operation for some years. Almost all farmers in the area have co-operated fully in implementing these measures, which include two periods of off-wintering for sheep between November and May. I acknowledge their co-operation.

In addition, since 2005 the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has been evaluating the condition of habitat for red grouse in commonage and non-commonage land throughout the country, with particular focus on sites found to be damaged in the initial commonage framework planning exercise. Notwithstanding these efforts, the Commission has pursued Ireland for full compliance with the ruling and has taken the necessary preliminary steps to refer Ireland to court for a fine for failure to comply.

In particular, the Commission continues to be concerned that the detailed monitoring I mentioned has established that no recovery has taken place to the extensive areas damaged in the Twelve Bens-Garraun and Maumturk mountain complex special areas of conservation despite the commonage framework plan and the existence of schemes such as the rural environmental protection scheme.

As a result, the two Ministers have agreed to put in place the following additional measures to deliver recovery. It is intended there will be a five-month off-wintering period in commonages in the Twelve Bens-Garraun complex special area of conservation and the Maumturk mountain complex special area of conservation similar to that applying in Owenduff-Nephin Beg. This should be in place for five years, from 1 November to 31 December and from 14 February to 13 May annually, commencing on 1 November 2008. Farmers in these areas will be required to comply with the new farming conditions by amending their existing REPS plan or entering the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government's national farm plan scheme.

The revised plans will ensure the commonage is grazed sustainably and that the off-wintered stock can be managed on the private land over the winter period. The level of sustainable stock numbers in the open commonage period and on privately owned SACs will be assessed by the farm planner taking into account the farmer's share, where relevant, the habitats involved and the condition of the habitats. Farmers who join the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government's farm plan scheme will be compensated on the model that has been successfully operated in the Owenduff-Nephin Beg SPA, through compensation for each destocked ewe — below the level of five ewes per hectare over the whole farm — or the off-wintering of ewes which requires the provision of foodstuff by farmers. REPS farmers are entitled to substantial payments under the scheme.

During the coming weeks both Departments will arrange a series of local meetings or clinics in the area concerned in order that these measures and the necessity for them can be explained to farmers on an individual basis. The Ministers for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Environment, Heritage and Local Government believe these measures are necessary to secure the closure of the outstanding infringement proceedings against Ireland. I add the warning that if the measures set out are not implemented, Ireland is likely to be referred to the court and face very large fines for its failure to comply with EU legislation.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.05 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 3 April 2008.
Top
Share