Denis Naughten
Question:13 Mr. Naughten asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the plans she has to review the compensation schemes for farms locked up by tuberculosis or brucellosis. [24425/04]
View answerWednesday, 13 October 2004
Questions (12)
Oral answers (7 contributions)
The compensation regime for the TB and brucellosis eradication schemes was improved significantly with the introduction of the on-farm market valuation scheme, which became fully operational from April 2002. This scheme provides for compensation to be paid to farmers on the basis of live market valuations of all TB and or brucellosis reactor animals by qualified independent valuers. The arrangements allow for the rejection of the first valuation either by the farmer or the Department and for a valuation to be undertaken by another valuer. Where either the farmer or the Department further rejects the appeal valuation, the case can be referred to an arbitration panel set up to deal with these matters.
Apart from the market valuation element, farmers whose herds are affected by these diseases may, subject to conditions and the circumstances involved, also qualify for assistance under the income supplement, hardship or depopulation grant schemes. The overall compensation arrangements are working well and I have no plans to change them. However, my Department keeps the compensation schemes under ongoing review.
I welcome the changes to some degree but there are problems from time to time depending on the state of the stock, for example, whether animals are in calf, freshly-calved or otherwise. It is sometimes difficult to get agreement with the Department in this context. I am aware of a case in which a herd went down just after Christmas and the previous year's production was more in the farmer's favour than the current, yet the Department insisted on taking account of the current year with the result that the farmer lost €6,000. There must be some degree of common sense and flexibility. This case occurred two years ago when bad weather conditions prevailed and the farmer's production fell dramatically but the lower production level was taken into account. Will the Minister examine this issue?
I am glad the Deputy has recognised that we have moved from the flat rate to the valuation system. According to the figures to the end of September of this year, some 5,611 valuations took place involving 24,596 bovine animals. Of those, just 1.5% of the first valuations were appealed with 0.2% going towards arbitration. Therefore, in comparative terms, there is quite a degree of satisfaction. I appreciate that on individual cases there may be outcomes that are disputed.
At the risk of being accused of being facetious by the leader of the Labour Party, I cannot avoid the opportunity to remark on an altercation Deputy Crawford and I had in the House when he implored me to take into consideration the current valuation for farm assist grants. What goes around comes around. To be fair there have been changes.
At least the Minister remembered——
I always remember.
——although she did nothing about it.
In regard to individual farms and farmers, one cannot make up for personal, not to mention financial, loss. If there are particular concerns, I ask the Deputy to bring them to my attention and I will do what I can to ensure the system is fair.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.