Skip to main content
Normal View

Wednesday, 6 Nov 2013

Written Answers Nos. 142-147

Farm Inspections

Questions (142)

Dara Calleary

Question:

142. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will provide in tabular form on a county basis the number of unannounced farm inspections carried out in 2011, 2012 and to the end of September 2013; his views on the practice of unannounced inspections; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47234/13]

View answer

Written answers

In the context of delivering the Direct Payment Schemes my Department is required to carry out on-the-spot inspections on a number of farms covering such issues as eligibility under the Scheme, compliance with EU legislation in the areas of the environment, food safety, animal health and welfare and plant health and ensuring that the farm is maintained in good agricultural and environmental condition. These inspections are mandatory and there are certain minimum numbers and types of inspections that must take place annually. In addition, my Department undertakes Nitrates inspections under the Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) regulations on behalf of the Department of Environment, Community and Local Government.

Rules regarding the advance notification of inspections are clearly laid down in the governing EU regulations and must be adhered to by officials in my Department. In general, all inspections should be unannounced. However, the regulations allow my Department to give up to 14 days notice for land eligibility and cross-compliance inspections involving SMRs other than those related to animal identification and registration, food, feed, and animal welfare. For checks involving cattle and sheep identification and registration the maximum advance notice is 48 hours. For SMRs dealing with feed, food and animal welfare no advance notice may be given and these inspections must take place on an un-announced basis. Where it is considered that the purpose of any type of inspection may be jeopardised by giving notice, the inspection will take place on an un-announced basis. In determining the type of notice to be given for an inspection a number of factors are considered so as to ensure that the inspection process is not jeopardised. These notification procedures are in accordance with those outlined in my Department’s Farmers’ Charter and Action Plan.

The following table provides a breakdown, by county and by year, of the number of unannounced inspections under the Single Payment and Disadvantaged Areas Schemes and the Nitrates (GAP) inspections for the years 2011, 2012 and 2013 to end October. The 793 unannounced inspections for 2013 (to end October) equates to 10.35% of the overall total of 7,665 inspections undertaken to date within the above categories.

County

2011

2012

2013

Carlow

35

34

12

Cavan

86

52

13

Clare

84

60

52

Cork

240

153

54

Donegal

163

132

50

Dublin

18

15

7

Galway

185

164

104

Kerry

151

85

31

Kildare

52

44

11

Kilkenny

89

50

25

Laois

70

74

15

Leitrim

31

76

22

Limerick

80

96

55

Longford

46

37

23

Louth

20

21

6

Mayo

191

88

84

Meath

74

59

11

Monaghan

77

65

18

Offaly

59

39

14

Roscommon

90

55

32

Sligo

51

62

13

Tipperary

150

127

72

Waterford

41

43

23

Westmeath

63

74

11

Wexford

70

40

23

Wicklow

53

43

12

Farm Inspections

Questions (143)

Dara Calleary

Question:

143. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if his attention has been drawn to calls for an Agriculture Ombudsman to deal with farmers complaints regarding farm inspections; if he will give consideration to the idea; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47235/13]

View answer

Written answers

My Department, in the context of delivering the Single Payment Scheme, Disadvantaged Areas’ Scheme and other area related schemes, is required to carry out an annual round of inspections covering both the eligibility of the land declared to draw down payments and also cross compliance aspects, to ensure adherence with EU regulatory requirements in the areas of public, animal and plant health, environment and animal welfare and ensuring that the farm is maintained in good agricultural and environmental condition.

These inspections are a necessary requirement in order to draw down approximately €1.7 billion of EU funds annually and to avoid EU disallowances. The inspections are subject to repeated audits and my Department must therefore ensure that these inspections are conducted in a fair and equitable manner and in full accordance with the legislative provisions.

In implementing the inspection programme, my Department takes maximum possible account of the realities of farming. Inspecting officers are regularly trained on how to conduct these inspections. Where the regulations allow, notice periods can be provided. In addition, inspections are integrated in as far as is possible with a view to minimising the inconvenience to farmers.

My Department has also established a Farm Advisory System under the Single Payment Scheme operated by Teagasc and I recommend that any applicant with any inspection concerns whatsoever to avail of this service to allay any such concerns.

Finally, there is a comprehensive appeal system in place for applicants to avail of if they consider that the inspection has not been conducted in accordance with legislative requirements or if they are unhappy with the inspection findings. This appeal system incorporates an initial review by an officer more senior than the inspecting officer, with the option to appeal the outcome of any such review to the independent Agriculture Appeals Office. In the event that an applicant is not satisfied with the outcome of this review he/she has the right to pursue the matter further with the Office of the Ombudsman.

Fisheries Protection

Questions (144)

Pádraig MacLochlainn

Question:

144. Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if his attention has been drawn to the impact on fishermen in some coastal communities of the directive to increase the size of a lobster allowed to be caught from 87mm to 90mm in length; the consultation that took place in advance; and his views on whether the conservation practices of fishermen are the same along the coast. [47258/13]

View answer

Written answers

Presently, there are two legal restrictions which provide protection to the lobster stock, namely a minimum landing size of 87mm and a prohibition on fishing v-notched lobsters, all of which are over 87mm. The minimum landing size provides some protection to juvenile lobster, allowing some spawning to occur before lobsters enter the fishery. The v-notch regulation prohibits the landing of v-notched lobsters until the notch is repaired by growth (usually occurs over 2-4 years) thus allowing such lobsters to contribute to spawning. V-notching is a voluntary conservation measure and v-notching rates vary around the coast.

Recent stock assessments, and evaluation of the existing conservation measures, indicated that spawning stock is not adequately protected and recruitment to lobster stocks may be impaired. Having examined the issue with my Department’s scientific and technical advisers from the Marine Institute, Bord Iascaigh Mhara and the SFPA, I initiated a consultation process on 20 August 2013 on proposals to change the current lobster stock management rules. I proposed two alternative measures; either to introduce a maximum landing size of 127mm or to increase the minimum landing size from 87mm to 90mm. The consultation documents I published set out in some detail the pros and cons of each option. Both options assumed the continuation of v-notching at present rates and further measures would be required in the absence of v-notching. The deadline for submissions was 25 October 2013 and I am now reviewing the in excess of 200 submissions received. I am encouraged by the high level of response received to the consultation from right around the coast.

EU Meetings

Questions (145)

Thomas Pringle

Question:

145. Deputy Thomas Pringle asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine further to Parliamentary Question No. 356 of 15 October 2013, if he will provide an update on the matter. [47278/13]

View answer

Written answers

I placed this issue on the agenda of the Council of Fisheries Ministers held on the 17th of October. In advance of that meeting, I also held bilateral meetings with Commissioner Damanaki, Spanish Fisheries Minister Canete, UK Minister Eustice and Scottish Minister Lochead to press Ireland’s case. At the Council meeting, I sought information from the Commission (who negotiate on behalf of the EU at the Coastal States meetings) on the current state of play in the negotiations, details on the Commissions’ discussion with Norway, a key partner for the EU on this issue, and confirmation that the Commission were prepared to consider an approach to the negotiations that would protect Ireland’s interests and at the same time go some way to meeting the legitimate expectations of Iceland and the Faeroes.

I argued strongly against rewarding Iceland and the Faeroe Islands for their unacceptable and irresponsible actions in respect of the shared mackerel stock over the past number of years and outlined what I consider must be the fundamental principles for any agreement with Iceland. Specifically, I expressed my view to the Council that any new offer to Iceland must be jointly agreed with Norway on the basis of equal burden sharing and that Iceland should not be granted access to EU waters as a part of any deal. I made it clear that I was not opposed to a deal and recognized that Iceland should be provided with a fair and justifiable quota share. However, I also made it absolutely clear that any deal must also protect the interests of EU Member States like Ireland who have relied on this fishery for over 40 years.

In this regard, I asked that the Commissioner and my fellow Ministers give serious consideration to a proposal developed by the European Pelagic Industry that would involve a tiered approach with different percentage shares for each of the Coastal States depending upon the level of the Total Allowable Catch advice. The core concept behind this proposal is to protect those fleets that have developed and now depend upon the mackerel fishery over a long number of years. I was pleased that the Commissioner and many of the Member States took away this concept for more detailed examination in advance of the Coastal State negotiations in London the following week, and with the positive consideration of all of the points raised by me.

At the negotiations in London on 23/24 October, in addition to my officials, Ireland was also represented at industry level. Unfortunately however, there was little by way of concrete progress. In large part this was due to the fact that a new Norwegian Fisheries Minister had only been appointed the previous week. One positive aspect was that, again at Ireland’s instigation, there was a detailed presentation to, and exchange of views with Member States, from the European Pelagic industry on their proposal.

Another round of Coastal State negotiations is now due to take place in Clonakilty from 18-22 November. Ireland will play a constructive role at those negotiations and will leave no stone unturned in an effort to reach a solution that is balanced and fair to all of the parties.

Agriculture Schemes Payments

Questions (146)

Éamon Ó Cuív

Question:

146. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine when a person (details supplied) in County Kerry will be paid their 2013 disadvantaged area payment and 2013 single farm payment; the reason for the delay in paying these grants; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47295/13]

View answer

Written answers

An application under the 2013 Single Farm Payment/Disadvantaged Areas’ Scheme was received from the named person in my Department on the 2nd of May 2013. During the processing of this application it was discovered that there was an over-claim on a commonage parcel claimed by a number of applicants, including the person named. An Official of my Department has made direct contact with the person named and clarified the matter regarding this overclaim. I expect that payments will shortly issue to the nominated bank account of the person named.

Disadvantaged Areas Scheme Payments

Questions (147)

Éamon Ó Cuív

Question:

147. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine when a person (details supplied) in County Galway will be paid their disadvantaged area payment for 2013; the reason for the delay in granting payment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47296/13]

View answer

Written answers

Payment under the 2013 Disadvantaged Areas Scheme issued directly to the nominated bank account of the person named on 1 November 2013.

Top
Share