Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 21 Jan 2016

Vol. 903 No. 3

Priority Questions

Farm Household Incomes

Éamon Ó Cuív

Question:

1. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views on the latest Teagasc report that family farm incomes were down 9% in 2015; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2366/16]

We must be concerned about the average reduction of 9% in farm incomes. Can the Minister confirm that this is mainly due to the reduction in the price of milk and that there has been a catastrophic drop in the incomes of dairy farmers last year which is impacting, in particular, on farmers with high borrowings? What will be done to rectify this issue?

First, I will clarify the statistics regarding farm income. The Deputy is correct. The average farm income last year, as estimated, is directly related to the fact that in the dairy sector the average income has fallen from nearly €68,000 in 2014, which is a very good income for an average farm income, to €47,000. However, there has been better news in all of the other sectors. There has been an increase in the cattle rearing, other cattle, sheep and tillage sectors. Incomes were increasing in all sectors except dairy last year. Farmers will be aware that there was a very significant drop in dairy commodities internationally and the base price for milk prices fell substantially. As a result, the sector that is traditionally the highest income sector is still the highest income sector but the average income has fallen from nearly €70,000 to approximately €47,000, which is still quite a good average compared to the other sectors.

That said, the dairy sector is in transition at present. Many farmers are investing to expand and grow. There has been investment of approximately €1 billion over the past three to five years on Irish dairy farms in preparation for expansion and growth post-quota. That is happening. Last year, despite the dairy price drop, there was a 13% increase in dairy output, so there is still a great deal of belief and confidence in the dairy sector. We introduced a €25 million package to support the dairy and pigmeat sectors. Due to the price drop, farmers received a support payment of approximately €1,400 each, with a top-up of €800 for young farmers. We are supporting this sector. The sector understands price volatility and that this is a temporary problem. It also understands that we will help it get through it.

We are talking about a drop of income in the dairy sector from €68,000 to €48,000. That is not hugely above the average industrial wage. In this case we are discussing people who are on the job for 365 days a year. With regard to income in the other sectors increasing, the Minister will be aware that incomes in those sectors are very small. Is he concerned that this huge drop in income in dairying will put many farmers, particularly new entrants, in dairy farming under pressure, just as they have made these big investments? The amount of money paid in the package is very small compared to an average loss of €20,000 in income. What will be done here and in the EU to address this issue after the abolition of quotas? It is a serious issue. They are not all in the same situation. Some can ride out the decline better than others.

I have spent a great deal of time with the dairy sector, and the dairy forum is discussing these issues. I speak to representatives of co-operatives and to dairy farmers on a regular basis. To put this in context, in 2013 and 2014 there were exceptionally high global prices for dairy products, and dairy farming was a profitable business with average incomes of nearly €70,000. In 2012, the average income was €49,000, which is very similar to what it was last year. The price drop last year, which was very dramatic, was disguised somewhat by the fact that we had a very good grazing season. Grazing right up to December was good on many dairy farms, so the quality of milk was very high. Farmers were getting bonuses on top of a low base price, which was disguising the fact that the base price had fallen so low. The concern this year is that when spring milk comes out, the farmers are unlikely to have that quality of milk because animals will have been kept in on silage, so a very low base price would be concerning. Obviously, we must do everything we can to work with the Commission to ensure we use the market intervention tools available to the European Union to try to get the base price for commodity traded dairy products back to some type of normality, which is significantly higher than the level at present. I am working with our Commissioner to do that.

Yes, but that still does not deal with the key problem we face, that despite the good grazing season, there is still a €20,000 drop in average dairy farm income. Many people are doing better than that but for every person who is doing better, there is somebody who is doing a lot worse. What will be done in particular for those who borrowed substantially and for new entrants? They were repeatedly encouraged to invest. Many of these people will be under severe pressure now and, in fact, will be losing money. What will be done to sustain them over what the Minister admits could be a very difficult year?

First, we have put a €25 million income support package in place. Second, I think the Deputy is underestimating dairy farmers. With respect, most of them understand how the market works. They understand price volatility. They understand that there will be good and bad years, as do the banking system and co-operatives who help to finance them. I have had meetings with all the CEOs of top banks in Ireland and they have made it clear to me that they see their role as helping dairy farmers who have high debt. Most dairy farmers do not have high debt but some of them do. They see it as their role to help those dairy farmers get through what they see as a temporary pricing problem. In the medium term, everybody is still optimistic and confident about where the Irish dairy industry is going. We have had a difficult year last year from a volatility point of view, which is continuing into this year. The predictions are that in the second half of this year there will be an improvement in price and dairy factors have to factor that in, in terms of how they manage their businesses. Banks that are financing the expansion in some of these businesses also have to factor that in and I believe they will. There are multiple support programmes in place for dairy farmers whether it is TAMS, basic payments, GLAS or any of the other schemes they are availing of. The extent of the interest in dairy farmers is evident in the facts.

The Minister is over time.

While I will check the number of applications, there was significant interest in the dairy TAMS. Therefore, there is still interest in further investment and expansion but we need to get through a temporary pricing period. We will watch very closely and help dairy farmers as that progresses.

Fishing Industry

Martin Ferris

Question:

2. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will provide compensation for fishermen who, due to bad weather, have been unable to put to sea since November 2015. [2364/16]

Like all of us, the Minister is aware of the terrible weather conditions at the back of last year. There were six storms in about three months. That had an effect on inshore fishermen, in particular those with trawlers under 15 m, many of whom had not been able to put to sea from 3 November up to early January. Has the Minister put any compensation packages in place to help the fishermen?

It is important that the fishing industry take every precaution to avoid risk of injury or worse during periods of stormy weather and have full regard to local weather warnings before going to sea. Fishermen who may be experiencing financial difficulties while ashore during periods of adverse weather should contact the Department of Social Protection, which offers income support payments, subject to certain eligibility criteria. The National Inshore Fisheries Forum has invited the Department of Social Protection to its meeting today to discuss social protection policies relevant to the inshore fishing sector.

The new Seafood Development Operational Programme under the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund was adopted by the European Commission in December 2015. That programme provides a comprehensive range of supports for the seafood sector worth €241 million, including a dedicated scheme of supports for the inshore sector to address the various economic and sustainability challenges facing the sector. In regard to specific measures to support fishermen affected by significant losses arising from adverse weather events, the EMFF and the operational programme provide for the establishment by fishermen of a mutual fund for adverse climatic events and environmental incidents, which when established can provide aid to fishermen affiliated to the fund in line with pre-defined rules. The operational programme will co-fund the mutual fund, together with subscriptions from member fishermen. In that sense, the viability of such a mutual fund is dependent on the extent to which fishermen commit to membership of that fund.

Following the December adoption of the programme, I launched the initial tranche of schemes last Thursday at the Government press centre with the support of the European Commission. Further schemes will follow during 2016. For some of the inshore fishermen, particularly in the Celtic Sea, where there is an artisan herring fishery, we have sought to carry over a quota that could not be caught in December into January and February to ensure that what they lost because of bad weather in December carries over into this year. The Celtic Sea herring management committee will be considering those issues in the next couple of weeks.

I welcome the carryover of the herring fishery. I understand the Minister is talking about 1,300 tones whereas the carryover allocation is only 1,000, so that they are at a loss of 300 tonnes. If that is incorrect I would appreciate if the Minister would correct me. Most boats have been tied up since 3 November and some have not been at sea for 75 days. I am not talking only about the boat owner but the crew. The boat owner and the crew are self-employed people. They have enormous difficulty in accessing support from the Department of Social Protection. In order to get support one has to produce earnings for the previous year from one's accountant and so forth. That is creating huge difficulties. Most people involved in the sector, the crew and boat owners, are only barely surviving. We talked earlier about farm income at €47,000 per year but for most people involved in this sector their earnings are less than €15,000 and way below the minimum wage.

I thank the Deputy.

The difficulty in accessing support from the Department of Social Protection is proving very difficult. I have been working on this issue for quite some.

There is another aspect I wish to put on the record.

I will allow the Deputy back in again.

I agree with much of what the Deputy has said. Many people in the inshore fishing fleet are on very low incomes and have had difficulty in accessing supports through the Department of Social Protection, not because it is anybody's fault but because fishermen are in a different position from people who are working in a more structured workplace. Often fishermen work on the basis of a share of the catch which is up and down, depending on the month, what quota is available, the weather and so on. This is a much less structured industry than other more normal employment. Sometimes that makes it more difficult to access supports. The national inshore fisheries forum is meeting the Department of Social Protection today to try to look at ironing out some of those problems. I spoke to the Tánaiste about this issue when there were severe storms either last year or the previous year and she was anxious that her Department would be helpful because everybody recognises that fishermen who are tied up to the quay because of bad weather for long periods will have income challenges.

I thank the Minister.

Let us see how that works. I would like to encourage the industry to make the mutual fund work. The idea is that everybody would put a small amount of money into a fund and that the State would match it, so that there would be a pool of money in place from which, during difficult periods, they could take that money out. That would be a sensible approach to hedge against income difficulties. We will be promoting that with the industry.

The difficulty with the mutual fund is that fishermen have to put money into the fund. I live in the area. I know the difficulties they have and the Minister probably has a good idea of them also. They have insurance costs and bank loans. They have to replace gear on an annual basis and try to find funding to do that. They are existing, not living. That is the problem. Some 80% of the Irish fishing fleet is in those circumstances.

A bit of imagination is needed. I have been working on this issue for quite some time. In the farming sector there was the single farm payment, now the basic payment scheme, from the European Union. Perhaps we should have a fishing payment scheme under the EU to help these people survive. Every cent the people involved in that sector earn is spent in their local community.

The Minister mentioned the Department of Social Protection and supports. I first mentioned the difficulties experienced by fishermen in accessing support from the Department of Social Protection four years ago, and I have raised it every year since. Nothing is happening and nothing will happen because the political will is not there.

I do not think the Tánaiste understands what it means to live in rural Ireland or a coastal community and the difficulties people living in such areas face. One has to be from these environments and part of that culture to understand it. She does not have a clue. She passes reports to her officials and they gather dust on shelves.

I have lived in rural Ireland. I have been to a lot of fishing ports and spoken to a lot of fishermen in the past five years and before. I have a pretty good idea-----

I was referring to the Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection.

I have spoken to her about this issue. There is the political will to deal with it, which is why I will be asking for the results of the meeting to be held today. We will speak to the group about it. This is the first Government to establish a proper structure to try to ensure the inshore fishing fleet will have a say on quotas and funding allocations. We are allocating over €6 million in the new EMFF fund for the inshore fishing sector.

Over €6 million. We are trying to put resources into the sector and are listening to those involved. We are including them in all of the key decision-making bodies in which they have not been included. As I said, in my Department we have had multiple meetings with representatives of the inshore fishing sector. I want to make sure the sector is viable. Deputy Thomas Pringle has tabled questions on the sector to make sure those involved in it will have access to the north-west herring fishery when it is reopened. We want to keep them in business and make sure they have reasonable incomes and access to fishing opportunities, but we also need to consider imaginative ways to insure against the income losses to which the Deputy referred. Having a mutual fund is a good way to do this and a very cost-effective way for the industry to do it.

Fish Quotas

Thomas Pringle

Question:

3. Deputy Thomas Pringle asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the status of the implementation of a catch-and-release bluefin tuna angling fishery in the north west; if he will ask for a quota to facilitate this potentially important tourism initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2363/16]

This question relates to a submission the Minister's Department has received from angling operators in the north west on the potential of a catch-and-release bluefin tuna fishery. There is significant tourism potential and it is something many inshore fishermen could use to supplement their income throughout the year, especially during the off-season months of September and October when such fishing could take place.

As the Deputy knows, Atlantic bluefin tuna is a highly regulated species, with annual catch limits set by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna, ICCAT, based on scientific advice. Within the European Union, quota shares were allocated in 1998 to member states on the basis of track record. Ireland, which did not have a track record of fishing for bluefin tuna, does not have a quota.

The unequivocal advice from the European Commission is that a recreational fishery for bluefin tuna is not legally possible in the absence of a national bluefin tuna quota. We do not have such a quota and it is extremely unlikely that we could obtain one, as it would involve reducing the share of the total allowable catch of those EU member states that do have quotas and for which bluefin tuna is an important commercial fishery.

Ireland does have access to a small bluefin by-catch quota as part of the albacore tuna fishery. This by-catch quota is also available to other member states and cannot be used for recreational or sport fisheries, even in the context of catch and release, since it does not allow the targeting of bluefin tuna. There is a possibility of Ireland participating in an ICCAT scientific research programme on bluefin tuna that would require the use of experienced vessel operators. My Department is investigating the possibility of Ireland participating in this scientific tag and release programme. In this regard, the Marine Institute and BIM have undertaken to examine the parameters for a research proposal to engage in the ICCAT Atlantic-wide research programme for bluefin tuna. This process is in its very early stages and, once completed, the proposal will have to be submitted for approval to the European Commission in the first instance before seeking sanction from the ICCAT. We are examining whether we can consider a catch-and-release programme under the auspices of a research project around the sale of the stock. Without a quota, we are really limited in what we can do, which I know is frustrating, given the fact that they are off the north-west coast.

The Minister's answer is basically the same as the one he gave me six months ago when I raised this question. It goes to the heart of the European Union's fisheries policy. The Minister has referred to the fact that a country has to have a track record of fishing for bluefin tuna to be able to secure a quota. I have tabled another parliamentary question today on the issue of track records. Lithuania was allocated a scad and mackerel quota off the west coast of Ireland, despite never having fished here or having a track record. How can that be? They are European Union rules. The people who have researched catch-and-release schemes for bluefin tuna estimated that a quota of about 3 tonnes would be required to make this a viable proposition. The European Union's quota for bluefin tuna was approximately 22,000 tonnes in 2014. Is the Minister seriously saying we, as a nation, cannot go to the European Union to ask for a quota of 3 tonnes for bluefin tuna to do something that could assist those involved in the inshore fishing community who need our help?

The Deputy knows exactly how quotas are allocated. He and others would advocate having a track record system in certain instances when it suited our fleet. One example is the European Union's boarfish quota, of which Ireland has 85% because a track record system is used. Having a track record or not can work for or against a fleet, but the bottom line is that once decisions are made - they were made long before I came along - reversing and changing them is very difficult because for one person to gain somebody else has to lose. We are very protective of our boarfish quota and do not want to give any of it away. Even though the United Kingdom, for example, wants more, we say "No" because of the deal reached. I agree with the Deputy. I would love us to have access to a bluefin tuna quota, even a small amount, in order that we could create a sport tourism fisheries proposition which could prove very viable. I will examine the issue and speak to the Commissioner about it. He understands the position on the catching of tuna very well, given the fact that he comes from Malta. I give the Deputy a commitment that I will explore the opportunities available, but it will not be easy for us to say the European Union has to give us a quota, given the fact that there was a basis for the decision made and that bluefin tuna stocks are about the most sensitive in the Atlantic. They are also managed differently from other stocks because of the ICCAT. They are not discussed and negotiated in the normal way other quotas are in December. To be fair, the Deputy probably knows this.

I do, but the reality is that it would involve a maximum of 3 tonnes out of a quota of 22,000 tonnes across the European Union. It is welcome that the Minister has said he will discuss the matter with the Commissioner. That is progress because the Minister said previously that there was no point in even asking for a quota. If we do not go looking for something, we will never get it. I take on board what the Minister said about track records, but we are not looking to have a major commercial fishery or anything that would impact on any commercial fishery across the European Union. The quota for which we are asking might never be caught. I understand it has been estimated that there is about a 1% mortality rate in a catch-and-release fishery. The quota would be insignificant in terms of what would actually happen. What we are looking for is, therefore, entirely reasonable. If we do not start a conversation with the Commission, we will never ever get a decision on the matter. It is welcome that the Minister has said he will start the conversation because that is progress.

I am the kind of person who looks for every opportunity to obtain more fishing rights. I hope the fishing industry understands we fight for every scrap we can get in a European context. I have a good relationship with the Commissioner. I can speak to him about the issue and we can explore the opportunities available. We are examining how Ireland could fit into a broader research programme which might allow for a catch-and-release initiative. I do not want to over-promise and under-deliver. I will, however, raise the issue to see whether we can make some progress on it.

Beef Exports

Éamon Ó Cuív

Question:

4. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine to set out the steps he is taking to protect farmers and address the increased price differential between Irish and British beef in British supermarkets, contrary to the Single Market; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2367/16]

As the Minister is aware, there is great concern in the beef industry about the widening gap between the price paid to Irish farmers and that paid to British farmers, in the British market. The beef forum confirmed that the gap had widened to 82 cent per kilogram or €293 a head last year. I understand at the moment it is €1 per kilogram. What steps is the Minister going to take to deal with this issue? We have been pursuing the Minister on it for a long time but we have not had any action.

The Deputy will know that any Minister in any EU member state has limited scope to influence price one way or the other. The market determines the price for beef. Let us consider the performance in price in the past five years and compare Irish beef prices versus the EU 15 countries or 28 countries. We have seen that in the past five years for the first time we have pushed on past 100% of the average price of the EU 15 and EU 28 countries. In previous periods under previous Ministers, the figures were far lower. In 2009, we were at 90% of the EU average and in 2010, we were at 91% of the EU average, whereas in 2012, 2013 and 2015, we were well above the average. We need to put this into context in terms of how Irish beef is seen. I am keen for it to be seen as a premium product and for it to be higher priced than the average across the European Union.

Obviously, we have an important relationship with the United Kingdom because more than half of our beef exports now go to the UK. I am keen to see the gap closing rather than opening up but there is a series of reasons there is a price gap. The main reason is that British consumers want British beef first. After that, they are happy to take Irish beef, which they see as very good. All of the research shows this. As a result, most of the retailers want to buy British beef first. Then they will buy Irish beef to meet the extra demand that exists. Therefore, there is a higher percentage of British beef going onto the shelves of supermarkets in Britain and that is the highest price segment for beef. The higher the percentage that goes into that higher price segment, the higher the price those involved can pay for British cattle versus Irish cattle. It does not take a genius to figure that out. Given the country of origin labelling rules, this is the reason all British supermarkets want to sell British beef first. Only three of them actually stock Irish beef but they are the big three and that is why we have huge volumes going in there. Exchange rates have added significantly to this in the past 12 months but the main reason is that there is a far higher percentage of British beef going into the higher value markets in Britain, which is the highest value market for beef in the world, than the percentage of Irish beef. We will continue to market and work to get more Irish beef into that higher value market.

It is funny that others in the European Union are not half as sanguine as the Minister about the dominance in the market of a small number of retailers and processors. Every time I have gone over there, they have shared my great concern that there is what we call the hourglass effect. In other words, there is dominance in the centre and basically beef farmers are price takers not price makers.

Other than what is turning out to be a rather toothless beef forum, what steps is the Minister going to take here? There is a grocery price adjudicator in England, for example. Moreover, what is the Minister going to do at EU level, where there is total willingness to try to deal with this matter? What steps will the Minister take to address a fundamental undermining of the free market?

Furthermore, is the Minister concerned, b'fhéidir, about the move by ABP Foods to take over 50% of Slaney Foods? That would further concentrate ownership of beef processing in a small number of hands?

I share the concern that the margin available to primary producers from the final sale price of food has been getting slimmer. That is a concern I share with Phil Hogan and I have spoken about it many times. However, I have also been honest with people, unlike other people. I have said that this issue has to be dealt with at a European level. If Ireland starts introducing heavy-handed laws in Ireland alone, retailers will simply source produce somewhere else - that is the reality. Therefore, at a European level, we need to try to ensure that primary producers get a fairer share of the final price in terms of the margin. That would be good across all sectors, not only the beef sector, and I am fully supportive of the Commission efforts to do that.

I do not accept Deputy Ó Cuív's accusation that the beef reform is toothless. The beef forum was never supposed to negotiate price. Legally, it is not allowed to negotiate price but Deputy Ó Cuív seems to ignore legality when it suits him politically to do so.

No, sorry, a Cheann Comhairle. What we are doing directly is-----

No. I have to watch the clock because of the time limits.

What we are doing directly is setting up a new negotiating structure that will strengthen the hand of farmers by setting up new legal entities, known as producer organisations, for beef farmers. They will be able to negotiate and operate with economies of scale because they will represent a large number of farmers.

I will let you back in presently.

They will negotiate directly with factories to get better prices.

It is a question of the clock. There are limits on this and I am only applying the rules. Otherwise, other Deputies down the line will not get to their questions.

There has been a major failure to develop the live trade in recent years and the percentage of cattle exports fell last year by 25%. Does the Minister now accept that beef farmers are likely to come under tremendous pressure in the second half of this year - there could be between 50,000 and 80,000 extra cattle coming out - because of the lack of live exports last year?

Is the Minister going to address this with the same vigour as he addressed difficulties in the dairy industry? Is he considering the introduction of a direct payment for farmers in the beef industry, like the payment he brought in to dairy farmers when there were difficulties in that trade? Beef farmers are facing a serious situation at the moment because of the extra cattle and the failure to create competition through a robust live trade out of this country that would serve as competition with the factories. These factories are squeezing the life-blood out of farmers by not paying them fair prices.

One can tell there is an election coming up with this stuff - God Almighty.

One can tell that on both sides.

Anyone who understands the beef industry understands the reason there was not as big a live export last year as the year before. It was because there was a better price to be got in Ireland. That was the reason. There was not the same demand for live cattle exports as there was previously. Actually, we have facilitated the live export trade in recent years. I have said consistently - I will always say it - that live cattle exports have an important role to play in the Irish beef industry. The option keeps factories honest and ensures there is a competitive pricing option for farmers if they wish to export animals live rather than going to the factory or the mart.

However, the truth is that when we have years when prices are on the up, farmers hold on to their animals because they believe they can get a better price. They are paying more in marts because they believe prices are strong. The price of store animals last year was at an all-time high.

We face some challenges, obviously, in terms of live exports. In particular, we were sending a large number of animals to Libya in north Africa. Obviously, that country has problems at the moment and, therefore, there are difficulties for us. However, we will continue to support the live trade, especially when there is increasing supply, which is the case at the moment, to ensure we get as much competition into the market as we can.

Hardship Grant Scheme

Martin Ferris

Question:

5. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will put a relief or compensation scheme in place for those farmers whose land has suffered severe damage due to recent flooding. [2365/16]

Following the terrible weather conditions in the lead-up to Christmas and afterwards, in many areas, there was unprecedented terrible flooding on farmland and consequential losses incurred. Has the Minister put in place any mechanism whereby people can access support to deal with the vast losses they have incurred?

The recent severe floods of December and early January caused widespread problems and have impacted significantly on a number of farms. Farms in western counties and those located in the catchment areas of larger rivers, including the Shannon, were most significantly affected. From my own first-hand experience of the situation it was clear that farmers experienced significant difficulties including loss of fodder, damage to sheds and milking parlours and challenges in managing livestock. Livestock was also lost in the floods.

While the problem of preventing regular flooding of agricultural lands at risk is one that requires an integrated inter-agency response, the immediate problems facing the worst-affected farmers must be dealt with directly and at first hand. When the floods started last December, the welfare of animals on some farms was at risk due to rising water levels and lack of access to critical fodder supplies. To deal with this problem, I operated an emergency welfare scheme to provide the worst-affected farms with short-term emergency feed. To date, 136 farmers have benefited from this scheme, receiving 360 tonnes of concentrate in total, some of which was dropped in by helicopter in south Galway.

As the floods continued unabated, a significant number of farmers experienced damage and losses to stocks of fodder and feed. Following Government agreement, I launched a fodder scheme on 7 January, to assist these farmers in replacing fodder including hay, silage, straw and concentrates that were badly damaged by the flooding and where these losses were not covered by insurance. As of Tuesday last, 183 applications for support had been received under the scheme. On-farm visits will be undertaken by Department personnel in all cases to confirm the quantities of fodder lost due to flooding. The closing date for applications is tomorrow, Friday, 22 January. The application period is relatively short in order to ensure we can make payments quickly, which we want to do. Farmers will get full market value for their lost fodder.

A further measure is also under consideration to cover a very small number of farmers who have experienced extreme hardship, including through the loss of livestock. Any such measure must comply with European Commission state aid rules. We will publish details of this more extensive support scheme for the farms that have suffered extreme hardship.

I thank the Minister. I appreciate the work done during this terrible period by the Minister, the Minister of State, Deputy Simon Harris, the farming organisations and communities to try to help each other in very difficult circumstances. This January and at the end of December, land was flooded that had never been flooded before. Some tens of thousands of acres were damaged.

The weight of water on top killed off vegetation and grass, and farmers will have to plough, rotavate, reseed and fertilise their land in order to get it back working, hopefully, by June or early July. Until then, they will be at a loss for grazing. Tillage farmers had tens of thousands of acres of potatoes in the ground before Christmas, and they have lost them. Are there any provisions in the Minister's proposals to help or compensate these farmers in some way for the losses they have incurred?

It is very difficult to start compensating farmers for the loss of a crop in a field. We are exploring the possibility of compensating farmers for the loss of stock in polytunnels, glass houses or farm houses, in the same way as stocks of feed or grain that are lost because flooding has come in the door. It is very difficult to assess the loss of a crop or the cost of reseeding grassland that has been under water for eight weeks. If we start doing it, we will be into a whole new category of assessment and we probably could not afford it.

Ireland is a wet place. We are experiencing more extreme winter storms and we must examine adapting to floods more effectively. We are trying to reach out and support farmers as best we can by way of emergency support for feed and animal welfare, basic compensation for loss of feed. Most of the problems are on livestock farms. If there is damage to buildings or what is stored in them, we will consider supporting it. However, it would be difficult for us to extend it to assessing crop losses and providing compensation for it. There is a series of income supports under the common agriculture policy, CAP, that should be helpful. The schemes have probably gone as far as they are likely to go.

I am disappointed. I would have assumed that grass was feed for the coming months, particularly February and March, when there would be early grass. This is gone for many farmers. Some of those affected are the more marginal and less well-off people. It will cost a lot to plough, rotavate, reseed and fertilise land and put it back in working use. Many of the people affected do not have adequate resources for it.

The Minister said 22 January will be the cut-off date for applications. Will he extend it? Many people are only coming to terms with the loss they have incurred and are trying to get it assessed, fill in the forms and send them in and get the local authorities to come and examine the damage. The Minister should consider extending the date for the people affected.

Farmers do not have to get local authorities to examine anything. Local authorities are involved in approval for the Red Cross scheme, which is a separate scheme. Farmers have to fill in a self-declaration form detailing the number of silage bales in the field they have lost or the amount of nuts or feed in a shed that was lost. We will send somebody out to verify it, which will be a straightforward process. The reason we set tomorrow as the deadline is that we want to get payments out quickly. I want to get cash to farmers within the next few weeks, rather than having a long period for applications. My only motivation is to try to turn it around quickly so farmers can get money to replace lost fodder if they need to.

There is plenty of fodder in the country, given that we had a very good grass-growing season last year. Fodder is not particularly expensive relative to previous years when we have had fodder problems. As long as we give full market value for fodder that was lost, farmers will have the option of buying fodder in if they need it. If there is significant demand for an extension of the scheme for genuine reasons, of course we will consider it. I am not looking to exclude anybody.

Top
Share