Written Answers Nos. 110-127
110. Deputy Michael Moynihan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the amount of money spent broken down between EU funding and national funding under each heading of the current 2007-2013 rural development plan; the allocation for the programme under each heading; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14657/13]
View answerUnder the Rural Development Programme 2007 - 2013 [RDP] close on €4.8Bn, including national exchequer top up of €516 million, is allocated at programme level. This amount includes an allocation of EAFRD funding of €2.94Bn. Since the launch of the RDP expenditure under the programme up to the end 2012 amounted to €3.74bn. This represents close on 77.6% of the total value of the Programme and 83% of the EAFRD amount. Axes 1 and 2 of the Rural Development Programme are administered by my Department while Axes 3 and 4 are delivered by the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. Details of the allocation and expenditure per measure under the RDP up to the end of 2012 are set out in the table below. This table does not include funds already committed but not as yet claimed.
The programme, like all national spending, is subject to ongoing budgetary constraints but is configured to maximise all available EU funding. Ireland's draw down rate under the Programme has been among the highest of EU Member States over the lifetime of the current Programme.
Spending under a number of measures may continue until the end of 2015 and this will provide considerable scope to allow all measures to spend up to their full allocation. Adjustments have already been made to the RDP financial plan and will continue to be made to the end of the Programme in order to achieve the fullest possible draw down of available funds.
|
Axis / Measure |
Total RDP Allocation €m |
EAFRD and Exchequer Expenditure 2007 –2012 €m |
Of which EAFRD spend |
Of which Exchequer spend |
|
AXIS 1 – Competitiveness |
|
|
|
|
|
Vocational training (REPS) |
5,675,440 |
7,133,733 |
4,040,626 |
3,093,107 |
|
Installation Aid |
12,261,081 |
12,892,430 |
6,504,938 |
6,387,492 |
|
Early Retirement |
219,188,239 |
212,653,617 |
112,687,662 |
99,965,955 |
|
Farm Modernisation |
154,570,446 |
78,194,859 |
45,671,306 |
32,523,553 |
|
TOTAL AXIS 1 |
391,695,206 |
310,874,639 |
168,904,532 |
141,970,107 |
|
Axis 2 – Environment and land management |
|
|
|
|
|
Less Favoured Areas |
1,617,984,198 |
1,288,821,995 |
708,852,098 |
579,969,897 |
|
Natura 2000 |
528,582,998 |
84,365,076 |
47,134,930 |
37,230,146 |
|
Agri-environment |
1,922,493,570 |
1,898,093,784 |
1,057,028,093 |
841,065,691 |
|
TOTAL AXIS 2 |
4,069,060,766 |
3,271,280,855 |
1,813,015,121 |
1,458,265,734 |
|
Axis 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
Broadband |
17,884,000 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
TOTAL AXIS 3 |
17,884,000 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Axis 4 |
|
|
|
|
|
Competitiveness – Food Projects. |
5,000,000 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Implementing Local Development Strategies – Quality of Life |
265,470,511 |
110,674,473 |
72,544,133 |
38,130,340 |
|
Co-operation Projects |
7,878,000 |
1,902,011 |
1,316,225 |
585,786 |
|
Running of LAGS |
62,464,000 |
49,506,681 |
31,197,141 |
18,309,540 |
|
TOTAL AXIS 4 |
340,812,511 |
162,083,165 |
105,057,499 |
57,025,666 |
|
Axis 5 – Technical Assistance |
|
|
|
|
|
Technical Assistance |
6,000,000 |
1,441,575 |
720,788 |
720,788 |
|
OVERALL RDP |
4,825,452,483 |
3,745,680,234 |
2,087,697,940 |
1,657,982,294 |
111. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his plans to ensure that food processors and traders are obliged in future to report the results of tests that they conduct themselves and which indicate irregularities or contamination. [14996/13]
View answerThe Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI) under the aegis the Minister for Health has overall responsibility for the enforcement of food safety in Ireland. It carries out this remit through service contracts with my Department and other agencies including the Health Service Executive (HSE), Local Authority Veterinary Service and the Sea Fisheries Protection Authority.
All food business operators are already obliged to report any information that indicates the food they have placed on the market may be injurious to human health. This obligation stems from EU food law (Regulation (EC) No 178/2002, the general food law). This regulation is given effect in Ireland by SI No 432 of 2009 (for farmers and for processors of animal-origin foods) and by SI No 747/2007 (for retailers and for processors of non-animal origin food). Significant penalties are set for breaches of this legal requirement.
Additionally, processors of animal-origin food approved by my Department have other obligations to report results of microbiological testing.
The finding in January by the Food Safety Authority of Ireland of equine-DNA adulteration of frozen beef burgers led to the subsequent findings in Ireland and across Europe of wide-spread contamination of beef products. As a result, the European Commission has launched a specific co-ordinated control programme to investigate the prevalence of horsemeat contamination in beef products and of the associated presence of residues of the horse medicine phenylbutazone (bute) in horses at slaughter. Results of this programme will be reported, which will include 50 test results from Ireland.
Furthermore, the FSAI and my Department met with representatives from the meat processing, retailing and catering sectors and agreed a protocol for DNA testing of beef products to check for adulteration with horse meat. The following categories of food are being tested – pre-packaged beef products on sale to the final consumer or to mass caterers, beef products offered for sale without pre-packaging to consumers or to mass caterers and meat ingredients used in processed beef products. The first two sets of results have already been published by the FSAI.
In my report to the Dáil on 14 March I stated that one Irish processor did not inform my Department about test results which detected horsemeat in some consignments of beef from another Member State, apparently because it did not consider that the results concerned the safety of the food. I consider this non-action to be unacceptable. Hence one recommendation of the report is that EU food legislation should be changed, to introduce a mandatory requirement on food business operators to notify competent authorities about incidences of mislabelling. I intend to pursue this at EU level.
112. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if his proposal on internal convergence is still on the table for the Common Agricultural Policy negotiations; if this proposal has been modified; if so, the way it has been modified; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14646/13]
View answer118. Deputy John Browne asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will provide details of the proposals agreed by the Council of Ministers at their recent talks on Common Agricultural Policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14645/13]
View answer121. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the progress made to date on the introduction of single farm payment reforms under the new Common Agricultural Policy budget; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14676/13]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 112, 118 and 121 together.
The negotiations on the reform of the CAP have made considerable progress across a number of fronts in recent weeks. Following the agreement by the European Council on the Multiannual Financial Framework in early February, the European Parliament two weeks ago agreed its position on the CAP reform package. This was followed last week by the successful adoption by the Council of Agriculture Ministers - by a strong qualified majority - of its General Approach on CAP Reform. The latter, in particular, marked a considerable achievement, taking place as it did against a background of lengthy, intensive negotiations with my Member State colleagues across a range of complex and sensitive issues.
The achievement of the Council General Approach is a vitally important development. It means that all three institutions are now ready to move on to the final, so-called 'trilogue', stage of the negotiation process, where the Irish Presidency will represent the Council in discussions with the European Parliament and with the Commission. It also means that the overall target of an inter-institutional political agreement by the end of June remains on schedule. I am hopeful that all participants across all three institutions will maintain their focus and redouble their efforts so that, together, we can bring the reform negotiations to a conclusion by the end of June.
Last week’s developments were not only a successful outcome for the Irish Presidency. They also represented a very good outcome for Irish farmers. All through the negotiating process, the key issue from an Irish perspective has been the distribution of direct payments within Member States, otherwise known as internal convergence. In order to avoid the very significant transfers of payments that would result from the Commission’s flat-rate proposals, I had proposed an alternative, partial, convergence model based on the principle that Member States should have the flexibility to move away from historically-based systems in a more measured way that respected their individual farming conditions. I am very pleased that the Council endorsed this principle and agreed to include the Irish model in the options available for the distribution of direct payments. This enhances the prospect of a more reasonable level of transfers of payments between farmers than would be the case under the Commission’s flat-rate proposal. Of course, this issue still has to be negotiated further, and the reality is that the final outcome will be somewhere between the Commission proposal and the Irish proposal. However, the important point is that the Irish model is at the centre of the negotiations, and I will be working to ensure that the final outcome is as close as possible to this model.
I was also pleased with the Council’s agreement to my proposals on the greening of direct payments. These proposals bring the necessary flexibility to the Commission’s original proposals, so that farmers can practise sustainable agriculture without overly bureaucratic impediments. The agreement also addresses Ireland’s requirements for a greening payment to be applied as a percentage of each farmer’s single payment rather than as a flat rate.
Another good outcome is the agreement amongst my Council colleagues to end sugar quotas in 2017. This is a good compromise, as it pulls back substantially from the 2020 end date that had been demanded by many Member States.
113. Deputy Andrew Doyle asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will provide an outline of his plans regarding the consolidation of district veterinary offices across the country; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14865/13]
View answerFollowing on from the successful restructuring of my Department’s local office network, which reduced the number of local offices from 58 to 16, my Department has reviewed the business processes and procedures and, in particular, the administrative support requirements, in its 16 Regional Offices. Arising from this review, the Department has recently introduced a number of significant changes to the procedures in relation to the implementation of controls in the context of the TB eradication programme. In light of this and having regard to the significant efficiencies which have already arisen as a result of the investment made by the Department in IT in recent years, the number of staff required to deliver the service in the local offices has been considerably reduced. The review concluded that further substantial efficiencies would accrue from the centralisation of administrative support and, in light of this, my Department has decided to centralise this support in one or more centralised office(s).
Centralising administrative procedures will enable my Department to reduce the number of administrative staff it requires to support Veterinary Office operations and, accordingly, the cost of providing its services. This is in line with Government policy. In addition, the centralisation of administrative functions will facilitate the re-deployment of staff from the regional offices to other State agencies and, thereby, enable the Government to provide services through these agencies more efficiently.
I should emphasise that these changes will not negatively impact upon local access and services for local customers. Frontline services will be fully maintained and public access for all of the Departments stakeholders will continue to be available at the 16 regional offices. The Department vets, inspectors and technical officers will remain in place at these offices to service our clients across all of the schemes that are provided from our Regional Offices.
In line with my Department’s decision to centralise administrative services, administrative functions have already been transferred out of a number of regional offices (notably, Clonakilty and Limerick), without any negative implications for the provision of services to farmer clients. The administrative staff in the Tipperary office will also be transferred to the Garda vetting office shortly. It is not possible for me at this stage to give any indication of the time-frame for the transfer of the administrative functions out of other regional offices because this will depend on the availability of opportunities to redeploy the staff concerned to support other critical public services. However, I can assure the Deputy that administrative support work in the local offices will not be transferred to a central office unless the staff concerned can be redeployed to other State services. Furthermore, I am satisfied that the centralisation of this work will not result in any diminution of the services provides by the local offices to the farming community.
114. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he intends to propose, as President of the Council of Ministers of the EU, that each country will have the flexibility to put a national cap on the maximum single payment at a level appropriate to that country; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14642/13]
View answerIn line with its budgetary proposal to limit the level of direct income support that large agricultural holdings could receive, the Commission’s original CAP reform proposals contained a mandatory cap of €300,000 on the amount of direct payments that could be paid to an individual farmer, together with provision for further cuts in payments between €150,000 and €300,000.
Ultimately, as part of the European Council’s agreement on the MFF, it was agreed that capping of payments would in fact be introduced by Member States on a voluntary basis. The Irish Presidency therefore proposed amendments to the Commission text which reflected the balance of opinion among Member States that they should be allowed to decide whether to apply reductions to payments exceeding €150,000. In addition, the scale of any reductions, together with the tranches of payments to which reductions might apply, would be a matter for Member States to decide. These provisions were included in the Council General Approach agreed on 19 March.
115. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he supports the proposal to introduce new legislation, in view of the food contamination cases, to tighten up traceability and country of origin labelling. [14668/13]
View answerThe Minister for Health has overall responsibility for the general food labelling legislation and the new EU food information regulations that were adopted by the Council of Health Minister in December 2011. However, my Department plays an important role in the enforcement of this legislation under service contract to the Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI).
In my capacity as Chairman of the EU Agriculture Council I have, together with my ministerial colleagues and the E U Commission, given a high priority to food labelling issues. Consumers should rightly expect not to be misled by inaccurate labelling and must have confidence in knowing what they are eating. Ireland will continue to show leadership in this area and will work with our E U partners to strengthen consumer assurance measures, including more accurate labelling requirements as set out in the Food Information for the Consumer (FTC) Regulation (1169/2011/EC).
This legislation extended explicit compulsory origin labelling requirements to meats other than beef, with the detailed rules to be adopted in implementing acts by 13 December 2013, following an impact assessment by the Commission.
116. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his timetable for the introduction of paid parking charges in Howth Harbour, Dublin 13, and if he will reconsider his decision not to meet local stakeholders in Howth on the matter, in view of their strong opposition to the introduction of parking charges, given the potential serious negative impact on local marine tourism; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14670/13]
View answer120. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he has received any submissions from local community, business, residents, sporting or cultural organisations based in Howth, Dublin 13 on his proposals to introduce paid parking charges to Howth Harbour; his views on the opposition expressed to his proposals by local stakeholders; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14669/13]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 116 and 120 together.
The Deputy is aware that I have been considering introducing a charge for parking facilities within Howth Fishery Harbour Centre for some time, for the following reasons - :
- to assist in operating Howth Fishery Harbour Centre on a financially-sound basis
- to provide a source of revenue for further investments in Fishery Harbour Centre facilities
- as part of an overall traffic management plan to bring order to what has become a source of concern to the Harbour authorities and the emergency services.
- in order to maximise the return on this significant State asset
As I have said many times, Howth Fishery Harbour Centre is first and foremost a working fishery harbour, one of 6 operated by the State, each of whose primary purpose is to provide facilities and services for the fishing industry and fisheries-related activities. Financing for the upkeep of those facilities comes from the ring-fenced Fishery Harbour Centres Fund, which is financed solely from the income generated by the Fishery Harbour Centres for use of their facilities. It is used exclusively for day to day operating, management and development costs and is the only source of revenue available for that purpose.
There has been significant capital investment in the Fishery Harbour Centres in recent years, underpinning both the fisheries side and their expanding use for leisure and marine tourism and other maritime enterprises. Howth has a long tradition in both areas. In the current economic climate, the State must be fully committed to maximising the return on its investment.
Moreover, my Department is required to ensure that the Fishery Harbour Centres are run on a financially sound basis. With over 500 parking spaces within the boundaries of the Howth Fishery Harbour Centre, it is clear that a significant source of revenue exists that could assist in balancing the books, and providing funding for enhancements that would not otherwise be possible.
As well as those directly involved in fishing, there are many other users of the fishery harbour–harbour business customers, yacht club members, sport fishermen, Dart users, tourists, walkers and many others. All of those users have to use the parking facilities of Howth Fishery Harbour Centre.
This combination of uses and wide range of users of the Harbour brings its own inherent dangers and it is essential that all users are accommodated as far as possible in a safe and secure facility.
Traffic and parking management within the Harbour itself has been an issue for some time, particularly in the light of concerns raised about safety and emergency access for the Coastguard, the Lifeboat service, and an Garda Síochána. There have been a number of occasions where the volume of cars in the Harbour and the resultant pressure on parking has led to a situation where emergency access has been seriously compromised. The Harbour authorities have received specific complaints from elements of the emergency services in that regard. Fortunately no serious incident has arisen yet.
Enabling works and upgrading works have been taking place in order to improve traffic management within the Harbour and a number of additional measures are being considered, only one of which is the introduction of pay parking. All aspects of health and safety within the Harbour are of course kept under constant review and must be paramount in the management of the Harbour.
My officials have consulted with officials of Fingal Council, with An Garda Síochána about this and other related matters, and my Department’s engineers have met some of the Harbour’s business tenants individually about new traffic management and road markings etc. My officials also attended a recent Harbour Users Forum where pay parking was on the agenda and heard the views of the harbour users at first hand.
The introduction of pay parking at Howth Fishery Harbour Centre was originally examined in detail in 2007 in the context of a proposed Howth Traffic and Parking Management Plan, in conjunction with Fingal County Council. There was widespread public consultation at that time and all of the various views that were expressed and submissions that were made then are still on file. I am well aware of and acknowledge their concerns. I am receiving new correspondence on this matter from a wide range of harbour users as well as those local community, business, residents, sporting or cultural organisations based in Howth, Dublin 13, listed by the Deputy. I am also aware that there is a website dedicated to countering the proposal.
I am reviewing all aspects of the matter at present. I can assure the Deputy that the views of the various harbour users, the potential earnings, the possible impact on the harbour businesses and recreational users, the impact on the local economy, the impact on overall traffic management within the Fishery Harbour, are all matters that I will take into account in coming to a decision. I can also assure the Deputy and all of the Harbour users in Howth that I am committed to continuing investment in and development of Howth.
117. Deputy Sean Fleming asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine when the new agri-environment option scheme, AEOS, programme will commence; when farmers will be informed whether their applications have been successful; the number of applications received; the number of these that were valid; the number to be admitted to AEOS; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14650/13]
View answerDespite the challenging budgetary constraints facing my Department, last year I allocated €20 million annually to fund the Agri-Environment Options Scheme (AEOS) and on foot of this I announced the re-opening of the scheme. I decided on a maximum payment of €4,000 per annum for individual applicants which, on the basis of previous experience in implementing the scheme, indicated that up to 6,500 new participants could be accepted into the scheme.
The Agri-environment Options Scheme (AEOS III) will build on the success of the Rural Environment Protection Scheme (REPS) and both AEOS 1 and 2 in delivering an annual payment to farmers in return for farming to high environmental standards.
The closing date for receipt of AEOS III applications was Friday December 7 and 9,689 applications have been received by my Department. The initial processing of the applications has been completed and acknowledgement letters have issued to all applicants. The detailed actions listed in each application are currently being recorded and the approval of applicants will be determined by the following priority selection criteria:
- applicants within a targeted area of the Boora region of Co. Offaly who select Wild Bird Cover Option B (Grey Partridge) will get first access,
- Applicants with eligible Natura land will get access next,
- Applicants with at least 0.5 hectares of Utilisable Agricultural Non-Natura Commonage land rank next,
- Farm Partnerships,
- Previous Participation in REPS,
- Farm Size (Favouring smaller holding) based on the utilisable agricultural area,
- Location of farms in Less Favoured Areas.
This process is well advanced and is expected to be completed shortly. During this data entry process it has been noted that a number of applications either do not contain all the necessary information or the information submitted contains errors. In these cases, officials from my Department are making contact with the applicants concerned to obtain the required information in order for the application to be appropriately assessed. My intention is to complete the selection process as quickly as possible and to notify all applicants of the outcome and of the commencement dates under the scheme in the case of successful applicants.
Based on the initial processing of applications approximately 4,500 applications have been submitted under the Commonage/Natura option. In the event that these applications fulfil all eligibility requirements of the scheme, these applicants will gain priority access to the scheme. I also expect that a further 2,000 farmers without designated land will be admitted to the scheme.
Applicants should note that they should not undertake any actions listed in their application until approved for participation in the scheme as actions undertaken or expense incurred prior to formal approval will not be eligible for reimbursement.
119. Deputy Niall Collins asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views on the redistributive payment proposal from the French Government and a similar proposal included in the Council of Minister proposals; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14647/13]
View answerThe proposal for a redistributive payment allows Member States, as an add-on and not an alternative, to flat rate or partial convergence, to use up to 30% of the national ceiling for top-up payments to farmers on hectares up to the national average farm size (32 hectares in Ireland) or up to 30 hectares.
I am open to considering whether it would be of benefit to Ireland to avail of this option. However, I do not believe we should rush a decision on this option. The agreement last week established a Council position for opening negotiations with the European Parliament and the Commission. Many elements of that agreement may be changed in the course of these negotiations and we need to see the final outcome on all aspects of the direct payments regime before we can take informed decisions on what is the best course for Ireland. I will of course consult widely before taking any decisions on this matter.
122. Deputy Charlie McConalogue asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the number of farmers with stacked entitlements for single payment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14654/13]
View answerThe total number of farmers who availed of the Consolidation measure under the Single Payment Scheme from 2005 to 2012 is 24,589.
Consolidation (stacking) of entitlements means that in certain circumstances a farmer may give up to the National Reserve his/her own existing entitlements. The farmer is then re-allocated a lower number of entitlements with a higher net unit value. The overall level of payment remains the same.
The reduction in the number of hectares declared must have arisen because of one or more of the following circumstances:
- The afforestation of land under the Afforestation Premium Scheme;
- The acquisition of land by a Public Authority for non-agricultural purposes;
- The expiry of a lease or rental agreement in respect of land that was leased or rented in during the reference period 2000 – 2002.
Consolidated entitlements are allocated from the National Reserve. Up to 2009, consolidated entitlements have been subject to certain restrictions for the five years following consolidation. The entitlements could not be sold or leased out for the five years; any consolidated entitlement not claimed in any given year was reverted back to the National Reserve.
123. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the amount of money allocated to the farm improvement scheme since 2007; the spend to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14662/13]
View answerThe Farm Improvement Scheme was introduced by my Department in July 2007 with a total funding allocation of €79 million. Under the Scheme, grant-aid was available up to a maximum eligible investment ceiling of €120,000 for animal housing and related facilities with a separate ceiling of €120,000 being available for investments in relation to dairy hygiene. The standard grant-rate was 40%. The Scheme was suspended on 31 October 2007 as the value of applications received, in grant terms, exceeded the financial ceiling. 12,675 applications were received from farmers prior to the closing date of the Scheme and these applications were processed by my Department up to the level of funding which was available. This funding permitted my Department to process only those applications received up to 21 October 2007.
The annual expenditure which has taken place under the Scheme since its introduction in 2007 is set out in the following table:
|
Year |
Amount (€m) |
|
2007 |
0.014 |
|
2008 |
12.910 |
|
2009 |
27.076 |
|
2010 |
12.402 |
|
2011 |
3.512 |
|
2012 |
3.355 |
|
2013 (end-Feb) |
0.194 |
|
Total |
59.463 |
The Farm Improvement Scheme was subsequently replaced by the Targeted Agricultural Modernisation Schemes (TAMS) which provided €110 million to support on-farm investment in a number of specific areas such as animal welfare, bioenergy, dairy equipment, rainwater harvesting and sheep fencing/handling.
124. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views on whether farmers on poorer heavier hill and-or mountain land who are producing to the best of their ability and the land capacity should receive lesser payments than other farmers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14675/13]
View answerThis refers to the EU Commission’s proposal to move to a flat-rate payments system. This would, in the case of several Member States (including Ireland), result in significant transfers between farmers. I believe there is a need for redistribution but I am concerned that moving to a flat rate as proposed would be harmful for the Irish agricultural sector and the Food Harvest 2020 strategy.
The reality here in Ireland is that we are facing two sets of demands on this issue. On the one hand, there are those farmers on low payments per hectare who are arguing for a larger share of the available funding on the grounds of equity and fairness. On the other hand, there are those farmers on high payments per hectare, who have invested Single Payment funds in improving the productive capacity of their farms and do not want to move back from this position. Both sets of demands are understandable and reasonable, but difficult to reconcile. We need a solution that is fair to everyone, which will on the one hand represent a real move away from historic payments, which seriously disadvantage some farmers, but which avoids unreasonably large cuts to those on high payment rates. This is why I have put forward the approximation model, which would give a Member State like Ireland the flexibility to do this.
The key will be to reach a fair compromise, which levels the playing field without putting productive farmers out of business. As is the case with any negotiation, the final position will be somewhere in between my approach and that of the Commission. I am fighting to ensure that the best possible outcome for all farmers is reached, in a balanced and fair way.
125. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his plans to amend the legislation under which aquaculture licences are granted; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14730/13]
View answerAquaculture licensing is governed by the provisions of the 1997 Fisheries (Amendment) Act and the 1933 Foreshore Act as amended.
My Department has no plans at present to amend this legislation.
126. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if farmers with stacked payments will be able to carry these forward into the new Common Agricultural Policy 2014-2020; if he is in favour of maintaining these rights; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14653/13]
View answerThe EU Commission proposal is to move to flat rate payments by 2019. Earlier this month the EU Council of Ministers agreed an alternative approach based on the approximation model put forward by Ireland and supported by a number of other Member States. This would, among other things, limit the reductions to higher payments – whether they arose from stacking or otherwise. Over the coming months we will be entering into trilogue negotiations with the three EU institutions – the European Parliament, EU Commission and the Council of Ministers – in order to arrive at a common position on this and all of the other details of the reformed CAP. The outcome of these negotiations will determine the direct payment regime that will apply post 2014.
127. Deputy John Browne asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he intends to introduce a unitary registration system for horses; if all change of ownership will have to be registered on this system; if the system will be similar to that for bovines; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14737/13]
View answerThe identification and registration of equidae is governed by EU Council Directives 90/426/EEC and 90/427/EEC and Commission Regulation (EC) No 504/2008 of 6 June 2008. The latter regulation, came into effect on 1 July 2009, provides that equine animals registered after that date must be identified with a passport and a microchip.
The EU legislation has been transposed into national legislation via S.I. No. 357 of 2011 - European Communities (Equine) Regulations 2011 (as amended). This legislation provides that if an equine animal has not been identified within six months of the date of its birth, or by the 31st of December in the year of its birth, whichever date occurs later, then the equine animal cannot be admitted to the food chain. S.I. No 357 of 2011 was amended in September 2012 by S.I. 371 of 2012 in order to strengthen the powers of the Minister in relation to approval of an issuing body for equine passports and prosecutions in relation to equine identification and to make it an offence to forge or tamper with an equine passport.
With regard to a single registration system for equidae, the position is that Regulation 504/2004 provides that, in the case of equidae which qualify for registration with a breed society, the passport must be issued by the relevant breed society. I have indicated that this regulation should be amended to provide for passports to be issued by a single Passport Issuing Organisation. I note that the EU Directorate General for Health and Consumers has indicated in its recently published Action Plan for dealing with the fall-out from the horsemeat issue that it intends to submit a proposal to the Council and European Parliament for the transfer responsibility for the issuing of passports from Passport Issuing Organisations to the competent authorities. A formal Commission proposal is expected in the second half of 2013.
On the issue of the transfer of ownership, there is no provision in the EU or national legislation on equine identification for recording the transfer of ownership of equines and my Department is currently considering how best to deal with this issue in the absence of an EU legislative basis. However, my Department is developing a central database of horses which will involve migration of selected data from Passport Issuing Bodies to the Animal Identification and Movement database in the Department. The intention is that this database may be used, as it develops, to facilitate the recording of changes of ownership. The system for equines will be similar to the approach used for bovines. However, the recording system on the equine central database will be designed specifically to reflect the specific regulatory requirements in the equine sector which are somewhat different from those in the bovine sector.
