SELECT COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND THE MARINE debate -
Thursday, 2 Dec 1999

Vol. 2 No. 5

Estimates for Public Services, 1999.

Vote 31 - Agriculture, Food and Rural Development (Supplementary).

Vote 31 - Agriculture, Food and Rural Development (Second Supplementary).

Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development (Mr. Walsh)

I am pleased to present, for the approval of this committee, two Supplementary Estimates for the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. The first is for £20,246,000 which is mainly for animal health, headage payments and administrative expenditure on the delivery of services.

The second Supplementary Estimate is for £13,500,000, and that is required as some Structural Funds will be received in 2000 rather than in 1999. That is purely a technicality.

Before going into detail, I wish to comment on the general economic situation. Ireland has seen exceptional growth, increased employment and reduced inflation in the 1990s. Since 1993, for example, the economy has grown at more than 9% per annum, employment increased by more than a quarter, and unemployment has fallen from a peak of almost 16% to a mere 6%. Low inflation and falling interest rates have enhanced competitiveness while ESRI projections to 2005 forecast continued growth at a slower pace.

Agriculture and food have played a very important part in the stability of our economy in the past decade and made significant contributions to GDP and employment. In 1998, primary agriculture contributed 4.7% to Ireland's GDP and the agri-food sector as a whole contributed an estimated 11.5%. They were responsible for 8.7% and 11.8%, respectively, of total employment, and 10.2% of all Irish exports were from the agri-food sector which contributed 33% of Ireland's total non-foreign revenues from trade.

The agricultural sector has benefited from the general boom. Growth in employment has facilitated an increase in off-farm employment for farmers and their spouses. Many have been able to continue farming on a part-time basis where they would otherwise have had to leave. Wider access to employment has also provided a valuable source of income for future investment in the farming operation. Farmers have also benefited from the improvement in tax and social welfare, from reduced rates of interest and low rate of inflation.

I will now turn to the individual subheads. I will start with animal health. An extra £23 million has been provided under subhead C(2), Bovine Tuberculosis and Brucellosis Eradication, to meet expenditure on reactors and herd depopulation. There are also additional costs relating to testing and supplies. The number of TB reactors in 1999 is expected to be around last year's level of 44,500. Reactors have been identified throughout the country in some 8,500 herds. However, 99.5% of the country's 7.8 million cattle still pass the TB text each year. The committee will be aware that TB levels tend to be cyclical and that the 1997 level was the lowest recorded for many years. Nevertheless, I am concerned by the increase in 1998 and 1999 here, in Northern Ireland and in parts of the Britain. The general veterinary view is that there has been a real increase in the level of TB and that TB infected badgers are a major constraint to TB eradication - the level of TB that has been found in badgers is about 20%. The effect of badger removal on TB levels is being studied in detail. The east Offaly project is well established, and research commenced in 1997 in experimental project areas in parts of north Cork, Donegal, Kilkenny and Monaghan. Similar work recently started in the UK.

In anticipation of the outcome a vaccination strategy has been devised which is aimed at providing a solution to overcoming the wildlife constraint. We have taken initiatives in areas where disease levels are particularly high. Herds in these areas are subjected to an intensive testing regime on top of the annual round test. The additional testing is funded entirely by the Department, and there is some indication that reactor levels have peaked. Fewer reactors were identified in recent weeks compared with 1998. Even so, the position remains unsatisfactory.

On brucellosis, the committee will be aware that after a fairly stable period, the brucellosis position deteriorated in 1996, 1997 and 1998. The main problem was in the south-west. However, there has been at least one brucellosis breakdown in most counties in recent years. To address the problem, I introduced a series of measures during 1997 and at the beginning of 1998. These measures, which were retained in 1999, included annual blood testing of all eligible animals, a compulsory 30-day pre-movement test and movement restrictions on foot of tests, significant additional testing. Some five million samples were tested up to the beginning of November this year, compared with 4.8 million last year. In addition, administrative measures were introduced, including an awareness campaign, increased epidaemiology earlier removal of reactors, improved monitoring and other measures, such as, the use of An Post Swiftpost service to ensure the speedy delivery of blood samples to laboratories. In 1999, I introduced further initiatives, including the screening of cows at factories, improved arrangements in respect of a milk ring test regime, a review of laboratory testing procedures and wider contiguous monitoring of herds. The current regime was reviewed during 1999 by an EU veterinary mission which broadly endorsed the measures in place and being introduced.

The impact of the new measures is still being evaluated. There are some good signs. The testing regime up to 1 November 1999 identified 4,253 laboratory positive animals, a much lower figure than the 6,007 for the same period in 1998. There have also been fewer new herd breakdowns to the end of October than in the corresponding period in 1998. Nevertheless, the disease incidence and the costs remain much too high and it is essential to make rapid progress in reducing and eradicating brucellosis in the national herd.

The expert view held by, among others, the EU mission team is that some further time will be required but that the measures should deliver that objective. The view is that if we persist with the current regime on brucellosis, it will achieve results. Progress is being made on brucellosis and most experts believe that the regime in place will address the problem. The TB position is less clear, although the outturn for 1999 is unlikely to be as bad as predicted by some.

I am conscious of the level of expenditure on animal health and this must be considered in the context of the protection of trade in livestock and livestock products. This trade is worth over £2 billion annually to the economy and every measure must be taken to ensure that the situation regarding animal health allows the trade to be maintained and developed. This is not to suggest that we will avoid looking critically at the expenditure. In this regard, the committee will be aware that the current eradication regime is due for review. This review has commenced in the Department and with the assistance of the TB investigation unit and an economic input by an external consultant. I hope it will be possible soon to finalise proposals for a rapid improvement next year and to present them to the animal health forum for its views.

I am providing an additional £2 million under other animal health measures under subhead C.3 and £2.5 million under subhead C.5 for cattle registration and tagging to cover the cost of supplying the first 20 tags free of charge to all farmers. These tags were issued following discussions at the animal health forum. Farmers pay for any tags ordered in excess of that figure. It is generally acknowledged that the cattle registration system is working well and it has been reviewed by EU auditors.

An extra £10 million has been provided for headage. As Deputies will be aware, there has been a considerable improvement in the rate of processing of area aid applications and headage applications by my Department. The Department will be in a position to expend over £120 million in headage payments this year and maintain the progress made in 1999.

An extra £1.5 million is being provided to Teagasc which plays an important role in the agricultural sector and is a forward looking body. The additional £1.5 million will bring the Exchequer contribution to Teagasc this year to over £56 million. The amount is made up of £0.5 million towards the cost of capital development atTeagasc's research centre at Grange and £1 million to reduce Teagasc's core debt.

Regarding subhead H.3, Deputies will be aware that in July the Horse and Greyhound Racing (Betting Charges and Levies) Act, 1999, was processed in the House. This provided a new system for the financing of the horse and greyhound racing industries. One of the innovative features involved was the abolition of the 5% on course betting levies collected by the IHA and Bord na gCon. The introduction for the first time of tax free betting at racecourses and greyhound tracks has given a great boost to both industries. The new system introduced charges on off course bookmakers, the revenue from which will go directly to the IHA and Bord na gCon. This way of having the buoyant off course betting market part fund the breeding and racing industries, which provide the essential raw material, that is, quality horses and greyhounds, and a strong domestic racing environment is another welcome first.

We decided at the time that the State should also in a partnership approach make a special contribution of the sum equivalent to 0.3% of the off course betting turnover to the new financing arrangements to replace the income lost to the State bodies from the abolition of the on course levy. To ensure that the industries do not lose out in the changeover, I am proposing an increase in the 1999 grant-in-aid to the IHA under subhead H.3 of £1.5 million and an increase in the 1999 grant-in-aid to Bord na gCon under subhead H.4 of £400,000.

A supplementary sum of £7.671 million is being sought under my Department's 1999 administrative budget. This relates to increased costs in staffing, IT requirements, special projects and payments to temporary veterinary inspectors. The costs include meat inspection duties at former local authority abattoirs which, having been upgraded to export status, come under my Department's control. We have recruited staff for the veterinary labs to deal with increased blood testing of cattle. There has been a significant increase in the number of direct payments to farmers and we have expedited these payments as well as implemented demanding food safety regimes.

The Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development has made great progress in recent years in the delivery of services. Since the reform of the CAP, the Department was subjected to a huge increase in administration and rigorous standards of accountability to the EU. An example of the scale of operations is that the total number of applications to be handled this year by the Department under the various schemes will be approximately 500,000 and a total of 1.2 million payments will have issued by the end of 1999. These payments must be made in accordance with complex EU regulations.

I wish to point out again that the Department's overall performance, particularly since accession to the European Community, has not been properly acknowledged. For example, in financial terms alone, it has secured and disbursed as the EU paying agency approximately £22 billion to assist Irish agriculture while incurring very minimal disallowances by the EU of less than 0.5%. This is one of the lowest figures in the entire EU. Ireland is one of the top three performers in the EU regarding the dispensing of necessary payments in cheques in the post to farmers. The Department has been exemplary given the magnitude of the pay out each year which involves 500,000 applicants. It is one of the best in the EU but that is not properly acknowledged.

I pay tribute to the administrative staff in the Department who work under extremely difficult circumstances. When the payments were introduced in the early 1990s, the Department had to move to Hume House and introduce a range of schemes, varying between ten and 22 months. No other Department deals with such a complexity of schemes. It is subject to EU audits and also to domestic auditing by the Comptroller and Auditor General. We are accountable to the Committee of Public Accounts and also to the House. It is important for accountability purposes that Members of both Houses can table parliamentary questions and raise matters on the Adjournment. They can also bring the Minister and officials before committees such as this one. This is not the case for all other bodies in this and other Administrations. Good work has been done and I want to acknowledge it.

Under subhead L.2, Market Intervention Losses, I am proposing an additional £2 million to cover disallowances in the clearance of the 1995 FEOGA accounts and some delayed payments of extensification premium. The main 1995 item relates to the stocking density for extensification and statistical data for REPS and the ewe premium.

Deputies will note there has been a net reduction in appropriations-in-aid. This is partly because expenditure on EU co-financed REP schemes will be lower than forecast. In addition, funding for Leader will be mainly channelled through the European regional development fund and accrue directly to the Exchequer rather than the Agriculture Vote.

There will also be a shortfall of £13.5 million in EU receipts under subhead N.17 and I am seeking a supplementary amount to cover this technical adjustment. EU recoupment in 1999 was based on a financial profile which has since been updated with Commission approval. The Estimates for 2000 will be adjustedto show higher receipts in 2000. The neteffect over the years 1999 and 2000 will be neutral.

Savings of approximately £76 million reduced the supplementary amount required. The main savings are £5 million under subhead F.1. This is because the EU examination of the Western Development Fund as an acceptable state aid will not be completed in time to allow payment in 1999. This payment will be carried forward to 2000 and there will be no loss in the amount earmarked under the Western Development Fund measures. Savings of £15 million arise under subhead L.1, Market Intervention Measures, as a result of reduced intervention intake, disposal of beef stocks and reduction in interest rates.

Savings of £17.5 million under subhead L.4 are linked to the timing of the introduction of REPS supplementary measure A and uncertainty over the rules of the new scheme. Regarding subhead M.1, Farm Investment, expenditure of £16 million will arise in 2000 rather than 1999. Regarding Leader, there is a saving of £9 million. While 94% of funds are committed at this stage, the number of projects completed is behind schedule. Under subhead M.8, there is a saving of £3.3 million regarding grants for institutional research and development. Expenditure in respect of 1994-9 can be carried forward to 2000 provided commitments have been entered into by 31 December 1999.

One of the priorities I set myself was to ensure that the Department's performance in the delivery of income support to farmers would be among the best in Europe. We have come a long way towards meeting that objective. While the Agenda 2000 agreement and the national development plan have established the overall framework for the development of agriculture well into the next decade, these Supplementary Estimates are necessary to meet ongoing commitments and so ensure that the sector can continue to be developed. I, therefore, commend these Supplementary Estimates.

Mr. Connaughton

I compliment the staff of the Department for the way the various subheads are outlined in the document which has been made available. They are very readable. At least we will know what we are talking about. That is very important because in the past one hardly knew from the documentation what was being discussed.

I wish to make a number of general comments. First, Fine Gael will not vote against the Supplementary Estimates. We are happy enough with their content but we are worried about what they do not contain.

Given the complexity and multiplicity of payments which the Department must make, I accept the Minister's assertion that by and large it does as good a job as is humanly possible in the circumstances. The great problem is that however well the Department is doing, farmers are not doing well. It is like saying that agriculture is doing well but farming is doing badly. It is against the background of pig farmers standing outside the gates of the national assembly for the past month and last Saturday week seeing half the sheep farmers of Ireland at the livestock mart in Roscommon that one sees the general discontent. When one finds there is a slump in the market for weanlings and the mv Venus - which provided the roll-on roll-off service - is taken out of service for whatever reason, obviously, whatever else is happening, the structural defects in the industry are getting worse by the year.

For whatever reason, we do not seem to be able to adapt to a given situation. I do not intend to say too much about this except that it is bad enough to be locked out of third country markets, such as Iran, Egypt, etc., but it is worse that we cannot send cattle to the countries to which we have access. I confess it is hard to know who one should blame for this. When I stand at the marts in Ballinasloe, Tuam, Roscommon and so on, I know on the day whether the boats are sailing - and the primary one was not sailing this week. I receive telephone calls from hauliers from all parts. I must have taken ten or 12 calls today from people who bought new lorries in anticipation that this roll-on, roll-off service was likely to be around for a couple of years. They did not have the road tax paid on the new lorries when they were told that the boat in question had been taken out of service.

This is a serious matter. Today the Irish Farmers Journal reported that the boat seemed to be losing money. I do not know whether that was the case and I am only telling the Minister what I hear, but people in the industry have said to me that there is some sort of anti-competitive messing going on in that some of the bigger operators want to make sure that there will be no operators like the mv Venus. Given that departmental officials passed the boat as fit for service - all the “i“s were dotted; they must have been because we are working under EU rules - it is difficult to understand that the French port authorities could then see something wrong with it. That worries me greatly. If I do nothing else today, I want to make this plea to the Minister. Whether it is necessary to talk to his counterpart in France or do anything else at Government, he should get a ship back into service. At this stage there are so many thousand weanlings on Irish farms despite the fact that it is late in the year, that if this is not done, it will create havoc with the cattle trade.

The Minister knows where I stand on the sheep sector. I cannot understand why he allowed a situation to develop the night of the Agenda 2000 negotiations so that sheep were calculated for extensification but not paid for. If he had any interest in the 45,000 sheep farmers, he would have walked out of the meeting because it will create havoc for the sheep farmers of Ireland. The Minister raised this matter at the last meeting of the Council of Ministers. Whatever will happen with this review, Irish farmers are citizens of the EU and they should enjoy the same privileges as anybody else. On a day like today when French farmers are getting £1.30 per lb. for their lamb,Irish farmers are finding it difficult to get 95p per lb. for them here. As farmers in Ireland and France get the same ewe premium, that could not be fair or equitable. Whatever the result of the review, let it be done in such a way that the lamb price in Ireland will be reflected in the size of the ewe premium. That is the only way it can be balanced. If sheep are to be taken into account for extensification, they should be paid for. If not, the Minister should take them out of it altogether. A farmer who has cattle and who has done his sums will have no alternative but to cease raising sheep.

Some of the pig farmers I met in the past few days are in a difficult financial position. Some of them told me that they owe merchants and banks £300,000. I am not talking about the farmers with large numbers of stock - these are farmers who have only 300 or 400 sows. Six or eight weeks ago it looked as if the market would liven up a bit but now we are back to square one. I need not tell the Minister that if it is that bad at this stage, and farmers are still hardly breaking even, the Government must put together a compensation proposal to help them. This affects the best Irish pig farmers. It is highly implausible to think that there are only 600 or 700 Irish farmers in pig production and it looks like half of them will be cleaned off the slate in another year or two. The position is that serious.

All last year I accepted the message of the Department, the Minister of State and the best advice available that the pig cycle would turn and that by last June or July pig farmers would be breaking even but that did not happen. It happened for two or three weeks and now they are losing money again. I repeat, this is serious. Yesterday many pig farmers must have been looking at the budget on television. In all £954 million was being kicked around but there was nothing for them. We are at the stage where someone must do something. It is a difficult matter but we cannot stand by and watch half the pig farmers being taken out of production. The Minister's backbenchers, particularly those from the northern constituencies where people are going through a horrible time, will echo that message.

I wish to address a few individual issues. Yesterday evening I referred in the Dáil to TB testing. Suffice to say that it is back on the agenda. We have been talking about this issue for 20 years or more, and we are still talking about it, that is, badgers as agents for spreading tuberculosis, pilot projects and epidemiology, and we still have the same level of disease. The Minister said the early warning system, where a warning is given to contiguous herd owners that their neighbour has TB, has improved. I recently received one from a neighbouring landholder. It was clear a neighbour had an animal with TB. What is being done to pinpoint why it arises? That is important; the rest is peripheral.

Where there is a herd breakdown it is not good enough that reactors are not removed for two, three or four weeks. If they are identified they should be removed from the farm within a couple of days, or even within one day if possible.

The Minister said there is a 20% risk of contamination from badgers. I understood it to be 24%. Either way it is a huge risk, yet the country is crawling with them. While there is a view that badgers must be protected, I hope the manufacture of a new vaccine to neutralise the risk of TB contamination from them will not operate in the same way as the TB blood test, which was operated over a number of years but never came to anything. Will this new vaccine work or will the badgers be culled? Do the Minister's veterinary officials have the stomach to do anything about them?

The Estimate provides £1 million to repay the debt incurred by Teagasc. The Minister made no mention of financial provision to the private agricultural colleges for maintenance. A number of people have contacted me on this. Over the years some money has been made available to the private colleges for maintenance. The board of Teagasc, or whoever else was involved, must have used it for other reasons because it sometimes did not reach its intended destination. How much will be provided to the agricultural colleges this year? Given the rationalisation process and the consequent closure of the colleges at Athenry and Monaghan, will a programme be established to maintain the remaining colleges in good order?

What is the position on the proposed establishment of a cattle breeding authority? It is probably the most important matter to be addressed. Our survival over the next three to four years depends on our ability to change the confirmation and breeding of livestock to the extent that we can produce what the market wants. What are Brian Wickham's plans for the future and how well progressed are they? At present we are going nowhere.

In some places tags are being removed as quickly as they are being put on. While they are easier to use and do not rust, there continues to be a huge problem with them. I do not know how it can be solved. Some cows lose their tags every day. It is a technical matter and I hope somebody with technical expertise in the Department is addressing it because it is not working.

The consequences of the beef tribunal are likely to cost more money next year than this. Payment will be made more speedily than it will be to the pig farmers in County Monaghan.

I do not like the proposals for the REP scheme and the retirement pension scheme. I understood it was the policy of the Department that the upper age limit for the retirement pension scheme would be increased from 70 to 75 years of age. However, it appears that proposal was never submitted to Brussels and the new scheme will be more restrictive than the old one. I understand the Irish Farmers’ Journal has reported on this. Many of my colleagues have asked me about the future of people who are now 70 years of age. Does it mean that they can get an extension of five years under the new scheme? That was the perception this year but it now appears it will not be the case. Even worse, new entrants to the scheme will not have that length of time at their disposal. Is it the case that those seeking entry to the REP scheme or the retirement pension scheme will not be accepted until next September? It is now understood by many people in the know that it could take much longer.

Given all I have heard about the Leader programmes being short of money, how is it that £9 million less was spent this year? The Leader programme in Galway ran out of money a long time ago. Have some of the projects not been completed or were there not enough projects at the outset?

Why does it cost farmers in some parts of the country £60 to have a fallen animal collected? It is an outrageous imposition. It is enough to have to pay the vet to try to save the animal. What are the Minister's proposals to look at the huge area covering the knackery trade, the renderers and the meat and bonemeal processors? Is it the case that farmers are being overcharged? If so, who is responsible?

The western development fund is a fiasco. Last year I asked the Taoiseach in the House when the 91 projects under evaluation would be paid. I was told legislation was required. That was enacted earlier this year, yet not a penny has been allocated. How can it have any credibility? Public and private projects, some of which involve private funding, are waiting to be paid. On the Committee Stage debate on the relevant legislation I asked the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Deputy Davern, if he was sure the measures proposed were acceptable to the EU. He said the best advice available indicated there would not be a problem. Now the situation is different. It is a shocking indictment of how we conduct business. We should have ascertained the correct position before allowing people and organisations to plan their projects.

The area aid programme has done good work this year, although faults are beginning to appear. It is taking a long time for some of the maps submitted for digitalisation to be returned.

Overall it has been a bad year for farming. I hope next year will be better. I hope the Minister will respond to some of the important matters I referred to.

Mr. Penrose

I welcome the Minister and his officials. I hope our comments will be constructive and I ask the Minister to take them in that vein.

Last year we complained about tardiness in respect of issuing payments and other matters. In that context, Deputy Connaughton referred to area aid which was a major bone of contention last year. However, we must acknowledge that improvements have been made in the interim.

I will continue to be vociferous in terms of encouraging the introduction of an independent appeals system to deal with cases where disputes arise between farmers and departmental officials. There is no point going to court with the devil and holding the hearing in hell. The existing system does not allow for natural justice. The REPS system is disgraceful because people are sent letters by the local district inspector in respect of which they must make a submission within ten days, refuting an inspector's assertion that they carried out an examination and came across haws where there should have been blackberries.

A great scheme is being destroyed by bureaucracy and officialdom. I support the work done by officials and others involved in State service and I know they are concerned about the possibility of EU audits being carried out. In my opinion we should also instil common sense into EU auditors. A period of ten days to submit a reply to the inspector is not adequate. As sure as God made apples, the original letter is sent out again with additional information to the effect that a person can make an appeal to the superintendent, the superior of the inspector who made the original decision. I am weary of such behaviour. If I behaved like that at the other forum with which I am involved, the Constitution would be torn to shreds.

Let me provide an example - I always decorate the mahogany with examples. Let us consider the case of an elderly farmer between 58 and 60 years of age, a bachelor living alone, who can barely survive on the profits yielded by his dry stock. He submits a plan, is granted an examination and it is found that a number of small blackthorn hedges had been removed from his land. Why was this done? The Office of Public Works deepened the drain running alongside his land and the owner of the neighbouring farm had fenced off his property. In compliance with our fastidious disease regulations, the farmer to whom I refer did not want his cattle trespassing on to his neighbour's land and he removed a number of blackthorn bushes and installed a fence to ensure that this did not happen. Lo and behold, those examining his land stated that he had not complied with the rules and imposed a 100% penalty.

What is the basis in law for a penalty so disproportionate to the Act which gave rise to it to be imposed? In my opinion such a penalty cannot be imposed under any interpretation of the regulations, be they directly applicable, directly effective or whatever. Penalties of that nature cannot be imposed because there are principles in European law which must be upheld in the application of such penalties and that is not one of them.

I intend to fight this tooth and nail. I am prepared to employ a solicitor and a senior counsel and appear in my own capacity as a barrister and fight this in every court. I am not going to allow a 58 year old man to be trammelled into the ground as a result of this kind of behaviour. That is how strongly I feel about this matter and I will fight the case on a pro bono basis. I am sickened by what is happening. We need an independent appeals mechanism with a facility to hold oral hearings. We want to be able to present our case, though not at the discretion of the Department. A statutory framework must be put in place so that people can appeal as of right.

I will continue to fight for the establishment of an independent appeals mechanism. The Minister indicated that he intends to take action in this regard. I hope he has the necessary courage to follow through on his commitment because I will hound him until he establishes such a mechanism. That is not a threat, it is a promise. I will see this matter through to a conclusion on behalf of ordinary farmers.

It is difficult enough for farmers to keep track of their books. The man to whom I refer, like many of his generation, worked on his parents' farm from an early age and he did not have a great deal of time to devote to his education. I like to protect the rights of such people. The man removed the blackthorn bushes in the interests of ensuring that his cattle would not be responsible for the spread of disease and the problem was accentuated by the actions of another authority. Common sense must be brought to bear in cases of this nature before the regulations are applied. If I was in the inspector's position I would not wait for the arrival of the officials who carry out EU audits, I would invite them to look at the file before they decided to carry out an audit.

There are a number of pig farmers operating in north Leinster and the north midlands. Most of them have informed me that if £50 million was invested in their industry they would be able to survive in business and they are prepared to pay this money back by means of a statutory level when the price reaches a certain level. I spoke to a number of them yesterday and they referred to the introduction of interest subsidies, etc. These people require some form of assistance.

When difficulties occur in their agriculture industry, the French are always able to find a mechanism to circumvent the commonality of the policy. We should try to explore various avenues in the interest of helping pig farmers. I know the Minister is interested in doing so and we will have to support his efforts in that regard. We must take a constructive approach on this matter.

Until last Tuesday morning I did not realise there were shipping interests in County Westmeath when I was confronted and told to travel to Dublin immediately to exert pressure on the Minister. I know that the Minister cannot solve some of the problems in this area and I informed those by whom I was confronted that various forces are at work. I have expounded on this issue on previous occasions, particularly in relation to weanlings. Deputy Connaughton is correct to state that when the necessary facilities are not available there is a negative impact on the price, particularly at this time of the year when farmers are obliged to make judicious decisions about what they should or should not do.

I will not repeat what Deputy Connaughton said in respect of sheep farming. As I see it, you either have your loaf or you eat it. Sheep should either be included for extensification and the premium should be payable or they should be excluded if there is no premium payable. They should not be included for stock rate purposes because this will lead to farmers incurring net losses. A decision is required in respect of this matter which is giving rise to difficulties.

With regard to prices, utilising the same co-efficient for prices across Europe cannot work particularly when the price in Ireland is 40p lower that in France. The playing field is not level and Irish farmers are suffering. There is a need to tackle this problem because it will have a major impact on the compensation package that can be secured.

I am concerned about the future of marts. This is an area in respect of which Deputy Connaughton has more expertise than most. Due to social progression and development, the mart in Mullingar, a privately owned concern which has been in existence since the early 1950s, is up for tender. However, the Department could be more proactive in trying to secure alternatives in the area, which may involve acquiring land. If the mart closes, the only secure form of competition and outlet for the disposal of cattle for farmers will be gone forever. The focus is on agri-parks in Drogheda and I subscribe strongly to that concept because a number of activities take place simultaneously but the mart remains the central focus with ancillary activities built around it. That is the way forward but we must intervene to provide help. It is not easy, as is evidenced by the housing situation, to facilitate the erection of new marts on the periphery of towns, despite good infrastructural development. It should be ensured that they are not forgotten about.

Administratively, tagging has had an impact on marts. The incidence of loss according to the Department is 4% but a friend of Deputy Connaughton's who is involved in a mart told me that the figure is up to 10%. He said that the tags are not suitable for our climate and environment. They may be suitable in France but they are not here. Marts try to operate within the confines of the regulations laid down and they have difficulty. It seems Mullingar Mart might close down and I am afraid that if it does, there will be nothing left. Meat processors would then operate monopolies.

The Minister has a great team in the abattoirs section of the Department. Maire Waters was the head of section and I pay tribute to her excellence in tackling various difficult matters relating to abattoirs. The EU seem to keep moving the goalposts and the Department cannot be blamed directly yet many abattoirs spent a great deal of money, having anticipated that they had complied in full. They then got word that they had more work to do and several million pounds is needed throughout the country to upgrade abattoirs to the relevant standard. Will small local butchers be put out of existence? Attention should be paid to that before such industry is lost.

I have a sneaky feeling that installation aid applications were delayed on purpose because there was insufficient money in the budget. The Minister is shaking his head vigorously. I prefer to say something rather than think it, but I do not say it without empirical evidence. Some of the older applicants, prior to 26 August 1997, had their applications queried and were put through the wringer. It is hard enough to get young people to take up farming, without having their parents put through the wringer in supplying various types of information. Perhaps I am wrong but it seems that applications are not processed at the speed at which they should be processed, and, as Deputy Connaughton said in the House last night, £5,600 is a small amount of money. Sums of £12,000 or £13,000 are paid to attract industrial jobs and we will always support that policy, but the level of installation aid should be increased. I acknowledge that the Minister had a problem getting it through at EU level and I compliment him on succeeding.

I thought that the Minister might have news on compensation for the loss to farms under the farm retirement scheme as a result of the introduction of the euro. He had good news on premium payments. Will applicants under the farm retirement scheme have any money for Santa because they have lost approximately £35 to £40 per month in recent months? It would be welcome given the adverse circumstances that many farmers have found themselves in. I thank the Minister for his presentation.

Chairman

The Minister must leave at 3.30 p.m.. Will Members bear this in mind as he must respond to their questions before he leaves.

Mr. M. Kitt

I welcome the Minister's comments and thank him and his officials for their help. It is a user-friendly Department from the point of view of Members. There has been a great improvement in the supply of information on headage and the premia payments and the area aid section must be complimented given the problems it has surmounted. Farmers are dissatisfied with the attitude in meat plants regarding sheep and cattle. In the past, factories were taken on by various Ministers and a case was taken to the Competition Authority regarding a monopoly, yet much progress does not seem to have been made on it. While it is important that extra ships are supplied for live exports, the interests of farmers should be impressed upon the factories and a fair deal should be available for farmers. The Minister is trying to obtain agreement at EU level for support for the temporary abolition of the stabiliser for sheep, which was an issue raised with us by the IFA, or an increased ewe premium for farmers in Ireland and Britain, which is an unlikely ally. Will the Minister provide an update on those proposals? It is a serious matter for the sheep sector and the west is very much dependent on sheep farming.

I support my colleague's remarks on cattle tags. It is a particular problem at marts where tags seem to be lost and farmers are disappointed that the cattle cannot be sold. I support Deputy Penrose's comment on REPS. The Minister has been successful in obtaining funding for it, as indeed he has for other investment schemes, but many people are disappointed at being refused under the scheme for minor factors. A number of areas cause problems, such as split holdings, especially in County Galway, boundaries could be wrongly marked and there are problems where land is rented. The Minister should examine this. I am aware of one farmer who had to repay £10,000 he received under REPS. That is appalling and disgraceful and I will provide details to the Minister. As Deputy Penrose mentioned, he was not even told about his right of appeal. If the issue concerns split holding or rented land, which may be small, why could payment not be made on the main holding? Why is a man hounded because of rented land or a split holding when payment could be made on the main part of the land he owns? This should be looked at.

Objective One status will soon be in place in the Border, midlands and western regions. There is supposed to be increased payment per head of population. Farmers have asked me what this means in practical terms if they live in an Objective One region. We fought long and hard for the Structural Funds for those regions and it is good we retained them. However, does it mean more?

Mr. Sheehan

I congratulate the Minister and his staff on his presentation and this glossy statement. However, I warn him that everything in the garden is not rosy as far as his Department is concerned. I remember at the last election the Minister promising the small butchers in his constituency in west Cork, where I laboured in the vineyard with him, that he would give them generous grants towards the operation of their abattoirs. I have met some of those butchers since and they have asked me if the Minister has gone asleep as he has forgotten about the promise he made. They have not received the grants promised by him. He should do something about this under subhead A9. These butchers operate in rural areas and find it hard to comply with the EC regulations. The Minister should come to their aid as soon as he can.

The Minister has allocated an extra £23 million towards TB testing, bringing funding for the TB and brucellosis eradication programme to £65 million. It is wrong that after 30 years of testing we are still bedevilled by TB. I do not know what is wrong. Will the Minister explain why it has taken a generation to remove this scourge from the animal population whereas it was done in Great Britain and several other countries in five years? I am amazed it islingering so long here and it cannot be stamped out.

As regards cattle breeding, I am concerned we are not breeding the right type of animal for beef production. It has been brought to my notice that only 28% of our beef qualifies as grade A product. The Minister should investigate this to see what can be done to raise the standard of the beef produced. For the past couple of decades, every kind of scrub bull has been running around the country——

Mr. Walsh

In carnival mood.

Mr. Sheehan

——in carnival mood, as I said in the House 15 years ago. This has continued and I am sure it has had a detrimental effect on the quality of the product.

Mr. Connaughton

They never got tired.

Mr. Sheehan

The Minister said 99.5% of the 7.8 million cattle in the country are free of TB. Surely at this stage the cattle population could be declared TB free. If the Minister does not take the bold step of setting a deadline for TB testing, it will continue and the taxpayers will have to subsidise it for generations to come.

The Department's processing of the cattle and sheep headage schemes is unsatisfactory. Deputy Penrose referred to a constituent who is a bachelor farmer. The Minister and I have a large constituency of bachelor farmers. I know one who is 75 years old and has a mountain farm about 12 miles east of Bantry. He had to leave his desolate farmhouse for a shack in Bantry two years ago because he had been robbed several times. Last winter, he suffered a serious loss in his sheep flock when 24 of his ewes died in the snow covered mountains of the Meelagh Valley. I do not need to tell the Minister where that is. It is hard to visualise the conditions there in December, January and February when the mountains are snow-capped.

That poor man was unable to bring in his sheep in time and he lost 24 from the number for which he applied for headage. This was over 10% of his entire herd. He was disqualified because he did not inform the Department within ten days of the death of these animals. He was unable to visit his sheep for three months because of the conditions. When he discovered some of them had died and sent in a veterinary certificate to that effect, the Department ignored it and turned down his application. I ask the Minister to look into the case of that unfortunate man who is not costing the Exchequer a penny because he does not get a pension. As one lives, so one shall die - that man will continue farming until he dies because he loves the farming tradition. I am amazed the Minister's Department is so cold hearted that it ignored the plight of that misfortunate man who has lost two premiums, from 1998 and 1999, because of this incident, which occurred 12 months ago.

The application was appealed to one of the senior officers in the Department and was turned down. I would like some of those senior officers to come down from the palace of Agriculture House and visit the Meelagh Valley in January and February - they would not get very far. That farmer has no transport apart from a bicycle. How can he travel ten miles in those conditions? I will give the Minister the full details of this case because I want action taken on it. He is only one of many in the same position.

Last January, farmers participating in the REPS and farm retirement schemes received notification that their grants and pensions would be reduced by 5.05% because of the conversion to the euro. I put down a parliamentary question to the Minister in the first week of last April and he replied he hoped to refund farmers before 30 June. I raised the matter again in September and was told it would be paid by 1 October. I raised it again in October and was told it would be paid by Christmas. Will the Minister now give an assurance that it will be paid by Christmas because the pension is small enough and the returns on the REPS are small enough without reducing them by 5.05%. What other section of the community would allow its salaries or pensions to be reduced by such an amount? This is what is happening to these people who are the forgotten section of the community.

In addition, there are very serious area aid problems. I spent 35 minutes today trying unsuccessfully to get through to the area aid office concerning problems in my constituency. The Minister must also come across such problems because people will go to the parish priest if the curate cannot deliver the goods. The area aid office is at wits end because some whiz kid in Brussels decided that people should prove legal title with regard to commonages. The Minister was not born on a commonage as he was 40 miles further east in the constituency. There are still commonages. How are people supposed to define the exact amount of acreage in the commonage? People have been paid area aid for the past ten years on the basis of the same maps. Why are the maps not acceptable in 1999 when they were acceptable in 1992, 1993, 1994 and 1995? People can prove that they have so much in their title - one eighth of the commonages. Many farmers have applied to the Department and the Land Commission which the Minister banished to Johnstown Castle. I do not know why he did so but it is operating with a skeleton staff and cannot cope with the number of applications.

I have many applications for divisions of commonages in my constituency and nothing is being done. It is the same story - the Department and the Land Commission do not have the staff. We can adopt European laws but we cannot remedy the ills which result. The plastic tags would work perfectly if we were ten degrees nearer the Equator. However, they do not seem to work in our cold climate. That is the problem and the Minister will have to devise a different kind of tag if we want to avoid trouble.

Installation aid amounts to £5,600. However, it was the same when first introduced in 1984 and there is a large difference in the value of that money today as opposed to 1984. The amount should be doubled at least, if not trebled, to bring it up to the same value as 1984. We are giving pittance to young farmers; it is no wonder agricultural collages are half empty for the want of young farmers. There is no light at the end of the tunnel for these people. We must nurture them and give them some incentive. It takes £14,500 to create an industrial job yet the Minister is only providing £5,600 to create an agricultural job.

The dead animal collection system is proving hazardous for poor farmers. We should never have done away with the knacker trade which provided a good service. Things are not going well in the Department and the Minister should act before it is too late.

Mr. J. Brady

I welcome the Minister and his officials. I wish we had the same co-operation in my constituency as exists between the Minister and Deputy Sheehan. They seem to work well together.

Mr. Sheehan

The Deputy should not believe that.

Mr. J. Brady

Deputy Connaughton raised the issues of TB and brucellosis. There is no sign of the eradication of TB. How long will it be until we come up with a better system using blood sampling? Is there any possibility of such a system? The present system is outdated and is a disaster. It is costing millions of pounds which could be better spent helping farmers in periods of hardship. It would be good to have such money but it would not be there at all if we did not have to pay Department and veterinary staff. We are spending a disgraceful amount of money in this area. It is unbelievable.

Brucellosis was a serious problem some years ago but stabilised for many years because of the improved system which used blood sampling and the introduction of a vaccine. Will a TB vaccine ever be produced? A certain amount of gangsterism is going on because a substance can be injected to produce a lump and a further substance can be injected into the lump to get rid of it. If this is true there should be an investigation. It would be terrible if such things were happening.

The mv Venus has been taken out of service but I compliment the Minister on the number of ships he provided over the past 18 months and the enormous amount of young stock which left the country over the past 12 to 18 months. The situation would be much worse if these young cattle had not been exported. I am sure the Minister will try to rectify the problem if one exists, though matters will be more difficult if this is outside his area of responsibility. However, I compliment him on the number of ships he has provided which have been welcomed by farmers.

There is a problem in the sheep sector and many sheep farmers are in a bad way. The Minister will do whatever can be done to address this issue. Few young people are getting involved in this sector and it is important that these people are looked after. The problems in the pig sector are also difficult and many small pig farmers, particularly in Cavan-Monaghan, are experiencing difficulties. Whatever can be done to help these people should be done. I do not know what we can do about the problem with tags. We are always receiving complaints about missing tags. One can get to the factory with one tag but one needs two tags to go to mart. This is a serious problem for people trying to sell stock.

There are problems with REPS, suckler cow, beef and sheep premia, headage and the appeals system is not working. There should be an appeals office in every county where the person who has the problem can put his case to an appeals officer or, in the event that he cannot make the complaint himself, he can get an officer from the IFA, ICMSA, local councillor or politician to discuss the problem with the appeals officer.

A man from my parish who telephoned me yesterday morning was in severe trouble. I know him well. He farms about 150 or 160 acres of land and has a suckler cow quota. With a view to keeping his son on the land he bought and leased a quota for him and leased a farm five miles away and set him up in business. The application form asks if one is associated with any other herd number. The man said he was associated with his son's herd number and the son said he was associated with his father's herd number. The son is working with the farmer who is paying him a wage but he has his own herd. Lo and behold, the officer in Navan has rejected both applications as he maintains they are mixing herds. This is a disgrace at a time when young fellows are encouraged to stay on the land, which is difficult. Because he filled in the application form incorrectly he is penalised. I appeal to the Minister to set up an appeals system in each county where a person can make his case to the appeals officer.

Chairman

I call Deputy Ring and ask him to be brief as we have agreed that the Minister would be out of the meeting at 3.30 p.m.

Mr. Ring

Chairman, as this is the first meeting of the committee I congratulate you. The Cork constituency is amazing having Deputies such as Deputies Sheehan and Walsh. The latter was recently conferred with a doctorate in agriculture in America and I congratulate him. Chairman, on your direction, shall I call him Minister or doctor?

Mr. Sheehan

Dr. Minister.

Mr. Penrose

The Deputy must be going to give him St. John's wort.

Mr. Ring

I am coming to that next. I will not go over what has been covered by our spokesman about cattle, sheep and the pig sector. However while I do not come from a pig producing area I appeal to the Minister to support that sector which has to depend on the market. That sector is in urgent need of support and many of the people involved in it will not continue in business without support.

I wish to raise two matters but I shall not delay as I will have another opportunity to do so at Question Time. I raised the question of appeals in the Dáil recently to which the Minister gave a positive response. I agree with all previous speakers in relation to the appeals system. Some officials are reasonable while others are not. Some take umbrage if a parliamentary question is tabled and regard it as an insult. To those officials I say: "Too bad, that is what you are being paid for". I will not allow anybody tell me when I can table a parliamentary question. I do not like being called off; I have my job to do as a public representative, the Minister has his job and the officials have their job.

In the area aid unit there has been a small improvement this year except, as Deputy Sheehan has said, in relation to commonage. Will the Minister adopt a common sense approach and pay the people who have been paid for the last number of years? If there are problems they can be resolved later. Given that farming is in crisis, the people need the money. For those who were paid for the past ten years but not this year I ask the Minister to issue a directive and ensure they are paid.

On the issue of REPS, will the Minister look at one case which could save the Department money in the courts? A constituent, who got land from his uncle, applied for REPS under the old scheme but because registration was delayed in the Land Registry, he was ruled out of order. He did not own the land although he had it for many months previously. Given that the Land Registry held up the maps he was ineligible under the old REPS scheme. If I give the Minister that case, will he give an undertaking to look at it? It is unreasonable to rule out any individual in that way. The officials said that on 20 July the land was not in his name, even though he had lodged his papers in the Land Registry many months previously. I could continue to speak about all the sectors in agriculture but previous speakers have dealt with them. I shall forward the details of the case to the Minister and ask him and his officials to have a look at them.

Chairman

Before calling the Minister I ask him to respond on the area aid unit. I think there is a great deal of nonsense about transferring it out of the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development to some bureaucratic body. Should that happen we will not be able to table parliamentary questions and it will not be answerable to the democratic process. If, as suggested, it involves the transfer of 1,500 staff, the Department will be irrelevant. Perhaps the Minister will respond to that.

Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development (Mr. Walsh)

I thank the Chairman and Deputies for their constructive comments. I appreciate the specific cases made in respect of many of the schemes and services provided by the Department. As Deputy Connaughton said, there is a fair share of money available through various schemes and programmes and we want to ensure it is well spent and that people get their payments expeditiously. Having regard to the EU audit and that of the Comptroller and Auditor General and the Committee of Public Accounts it should be done as smoothly and as effectively as possible.

One of the items referred to by Deputy Connaughton and others was the mv Venus. I was contacted over the weekend in relation to this ferry. That ferry was providing a good service, taking about 3,000 animals per week. Even though we have a total of 17 craft on the high seas this was a major ferry and in recent times the Department has increased the number of lorries it was capable of taking. At the end of last week it was inspected by the French authorities who said it did not measure up to their standards, even though it had been approved by the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development and Marine and Natural Resources. The French authorities said if the ferry came back once more it would be impounded. Given that it was due for its annual repair and refurbishment, the owners took it off the dry dock and will carry out the annual repairs now. Had it continued to run for the couple of weeks up to Christmas it would have been very valuable. I have contacted the French authorities and our Agriculture Attaché in Paris about it. Our intention is to get it back on the seas as quickly as possible. I have said to Cork Marts and others if they can get an alternative ferry we have inspectors standing by to give clearance and approval straightaway. Were it not for the live trade this year we would be heading into this fall in a much more difficult situation. That is the position with the mvVenus. The suggestion was that it had been losing money. There is some jostling around with the ferry companies and they want to get back into a monopoly situation if possible. Any time I was associated, as was Deputy Sheehan, with Cork Swansea ferry and the mv Purbeck, the ferry companies used up the funds quickly and were back seeking more. It is a difficult situation. In Ireland given our dependence on export markets for cattle and beef we need a service out of the island of Ireland.

In regard to the sheep sector there are three issues about which farmers are disappointed and want remedied: extensification - where they are included for numbers and are not paid; the stabiliser - they want it abolished - and the premium. They see a tremendous anomaly and disadvantage for Irish sheep farmers. The case has been made here that the French can get £1.30 or £1.40 per lb while we get 90p, 95p or 96p. Thankfully, in the last few weeks they have come up a little bit. We get the same premium as the French do. There was supposed to be convergence a few years ago when this was brought in but there is no convergence.

We have raised this matter at Council meetings. I have raised it with Commissioner Fischler and so have the farming organisations through COPA and COGECA. I had no support until the last Council meeting when the UK supported Ireland's case. Commissioner Fischler has said there are two problems in Ireland, sheep and pigs, and the pig problem is confined to the north west area. He is doing a review of this problem with the stabiliser, the ewe premium and extensification. We expect to hear the outcome of that review at the January meeting. We are hoping the outcome will be positive because we are told at Council meetings that the sheep regime is the most expensive per kilo. Given the great constitutional progress being made today, it is significant that the Welsh and Scottish Assemblies have been very important in highlighting the difficulties of sheep farmers. We would never have the support of Whitehall but for those bodies. If they do nothing else they highlight the difficulties of the farming community in their countries. We are pressing on with this and we hope there will be a positive outcome for Ireland and for our 45,000 sheep farmers, many of whom are in the west and need at least to play on a level playing pitch with everyone else.

The pig problem is localised. Pigs in any part of the country have not been doing well for the past 18 months but farmers in the south can have their pigs taken and are at least breaking even. In Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan there are a number of problems since the fire north of the Border. They cannot have their pigs taken and they get less for them. According to the IFA pigs committee, there are about 100 pig farmers who are in desperate trouble. I have met the feed people, the banks, the processors and Enterprise Ireland. There is no processing facility in that part of the country and that is why the midlands and south can do a little better. I have made the case to Commissioner Fischler and senior officials of the Department have gone to the Commission to get approval for a scheme. We are making some progress but we have not got the green light yet because direct aids are illegal.

A scheme to tide a small number of farmers over a difficulty would not cost very much. There would be considerable support for such a scheme at Government level and there would be no problem in getting the necessary money from the Department of Finance. However, as a small country it is better to get EU approval for such schemes rather than ask farmers to repay money. We did this with the fodder scheme, we had a problem with grain farmers in 1997 and we have got approval for a number of schemes over the years. I may go to Brussels myself next week to meet Commissioner Fischler because the only thing holding this matter up is EU approval. It would be a great pity if out of 450,000,000 people in the EU we could not help 100 who are in great difficulty. We are working very hard on this.

Animal diseases, particularly TB and brucellosis, are a great problem and are costing a great deal of money. It is a long time since the whole country was declared free of these diseases and now things are as bad as ever. We have a more difficult job because there is more cattle movement in Ireland than in other countries. I know wildlife regulations are very strict and it is difficult to get licences but if 24% of badgers are carrying TB, infecting herds and destroying up to 45,000 cattle every year they must be dealt with. This is a most intractable problem but that does not mean it cannot be dealt with. The question of vaccine has been raised by a number of people. The advice I am given is that it is not available in the short-term. It would be desirable if it were available but it will only be a solution in the medium term. The vaccine has not been authorised and it will be a couple of years before it is available.

The question of training and of the agricultural college was raised by a number of people. Numbers have gone down and everything possible is being done to make farming more attractive to young people. Nevertheless, if one were buying a piece of land, especially around Beara, one would pay for it. There was 42.5 acres of land sold recently by two bachelors. They were supporters of mine this time.

Mr. Sheehan

I am glad to hear the Minister gets support from bachelors.

Mr. Walsh

It is not easy but I pick off a few of them here and there. It is not easy.

Mr. Creed

I hope it was not Deputy Sheehan's bachelor.

Mr. Walsh

Deputy Sheehan and I need a few asylum seekers in west Cork to redress the bachelor problem.

Mr. Creed

Wait until you get the airport.

Mr. Walsh

That's it. The farm made over £400,000 with no quota, out-offices, building or anything else.

The colleges need to be upgraded and modernised. The farmyards in many colleges are not up to the standard of those of ordinary commercial farmers. We made a start this year and £2 million has been allocated for modernising colleges.

Mr. Connaughton

Will the colleges actually get the money?

Mr. Walsh

They will. Grange got it earlier this year but they were not in a position to spend it. This is only a start and we need to upgrade both the farmyards and the colleges themselves.

Mr. Connaughton

This is maintenance, although it is very welcome.

Mr. Creed

What about part-time rather than full-time courses?

Mr. Walsh

We are doing everything possible to provide them. It is not easy because of industrial relations considerations. In the old days Teagasc people used to go out to damp halls and give lectures. They did great work in every kind of area but now people object to unsocial hours and part-time work. It is impossible to get help on a farm now. Farm labourers are a thing of the past. The allocations for colleges will apply both to Teagasc and the private colleges.

Mr. Connaughton

Very good.

Mr. Walsh

Cattle breeding needs to be addressed very urgently. Deputy Sheehan mentioned 24% but I think only about 20% are eligible for the very top grade, that is to get on to supermarket shelves in the EU. That means that 80% - the old sinn féiners - are doing a lot of damage around the country.

Mr. Sheehan

I will have to eliminate them.

Mr. Walsh

They will have to be curtailed. With regard to REPS, early retirement and the 5% which was affected by the euro, the European Union has been responding to my representations all year long. We got the first payment out this week and that is a help. We hope to get the other REPS and early retirement scheme payments out before Christmas. It will be January before arable aid is paid. Farmers will get their payments and they will be backdated. However, anyone on a fixed income or pension should be entitled to have his money paid promptly.

Mr. Connaughton

What about next year's schemes?

Mr. Walsh

The national plan for REPS and the early retirement scheme will go to Brussels in the next few days, certainly before Christmas. Brussels must then process them and give approval. Farmers should receive their payments around Easter or before the summer. I hope we can keep Brussels to that.

Mr. Connaughton

They have a bad record.

Mr. Walsh

They have a terribly bad record. I will keep up the pressure. Representatives of the farming organisations are meeting senior departmental officials today to fine tune the detail.

On the early retirement scheme, the upper age limit will be 70 years. The amount available has been growing in the last four or five years. Last year £72 million to £75 million was available. Under the national development plan £80 million per annum will be available to which conditionality will apply. We will try to improve the scheme by getting rid of additionality and resolving the difficulties in respect of part-time farming. Having a sustainable farm would be more helpful. We will also seek to have pensions index-linked. At this stage it would be better to await the new scheme. We will keep up the maximum pressure to have it approved as early as possible in the new year.

A number of other issues were raised. I have informed Deputy Ring in the Dáil that an appeals unit will be established not just to resolve petty problems but also to correct errors innocently made and which are not criminal. As Deputy Penrose said, the penalty should fit the crime. The appeals unit will cover the entire range of services provided by the Department, including milk quotas and the national beef assurance scheme, and it will be completely independent. This should prove very helpful.

The difficult issue of commonage was raised by Deputy Sheehan. Acquiring title is awkward but we will try to sort it out. It must be 20 years since the Land Commission was dissolved. We were told that when that was done there would be no more problems but we have more problems now than ever.

I thank Deputies for their contributions. If there are any matters remaining I will be glad to deal with them when I reply to parliamentary questions next week.

Mr. Sheehan

I will give the Minister the details of the 75 year old batchelor to whom I referred.

Chairman

I thank the Minister and his officials.