Written Answers Nos. 22 - 29
22. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the steps he is taking to ensure the continued success of the Irish agri-food sector, given the planned transatlantic trade and investment partnership agreement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41367/15]
View answerAn EU-US deal under the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is of significant importance for Ireland. The US is one of our leading trading partners, and we have a large and growing agri-food trade surplus with them (exports of €570m last year, compared to imports of €268m).
We have significant offensive interests in these negotiations. We see worthwhile opportunities in the US for cheese, powdered milks and sports products, and further opportunities for branded packaged butter, if we can reduce tariffs and remove some regulatory barriers. Prepared consumer foods and fish could also benefit from trade liberalisation.
Beef is a unique sector in that we have both offensive and defensive interests. In the long term, any significant increase in beef imports to the EU could have adverse effects on the Irish industry. That was confirmed by a number of recent studies, and is an issue we have raised strongly with the European Commission. Therefore we have legitimate concerns about the size, composition and administration of any quota offered to the US.
Of course, we should also seek a significant EU quota for beef to the US as part of any TTIP agreement. Following the re-opening of the market, Irish beef exports now fall under a 65,000 tonne quota for ‘other countries’ on a first come, first served basis. This is mainly filled by Latin American countries. When we get access for manufacturing beef we would stand to benefit greatly from a specific EU import quota in the US, and this can only be achieved through TTIP.
A number of key issues in these negotiations arise in relation to hormone treated beef, food standards, GMOs and Geographical indicators. In this regard, it will be important to ensure that the principle of equivalence continues to apply so that even where food production processes in the EU and US are not identical they will provide equivalent guarantees regarding the standards of production. This principle is recognised by both sides in the negotiations as the basis for an agreement. Equally it is important that both the EU and United States retain the policy space to restrict certain practices and processes on social and ethical grounds and this is also recognised, in principle, by both sides.
This is particularly relevant in relation to the use of hormones in meat production. The EU Commission has made it clear that it will not allow the importation of hormone treated meat into the EU and this is well understood by the US side.
23. Deputy Anthony Lawlor asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the communications his Department had with the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources regarding bio-digesters; if the need to increase the tariffs on electricity generated by bio-digesters was considered; if this would have advantages for the agricultural sector, as a result of the increase in the dairy herd; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41243/15]
View answerMy Department recognises the need to encourage the utilisation of agricultural waste as an alternative source of energy. In collaboration with the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and the Environmental Protection Agency, we have sought to encourage the use of animal by-products as "valuable by-products not waste". Electricity and heat produced from anaerobic digestion (AD) are supported under the REFIT 3 scheme, and the issue of electricity tariffs is a matter, in the first instance, for my colleague the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources. The current rates of tariff for AD technologies available under the scheme were calculated following analysis by the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources along with other relevant Departments and agencies, including my own. Since the introduction of the scheme in 2012, I understand there have been a number of applications from AD plants for support.
I recognise the role that a resource-efficient agriculture sector can play in contributing to renewable energy targets, especially where it can improve its competitiveness and promote job creation. In 2006, my Department launched a Pilot Waste Processing Facilities Scheme with funding of €4 million in order to provide grant-aid for the installation of anaerobic digesters on ten Irish farms. To date, two applicants have been paid under the Scheme and an extension to the end of 2016 has been given to another applicant to finalise an on-farm project.
As a large ruminant livestock producer, it is notable that methane contributes a significant portion of Ireland’s agriculture greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. While it is possible to produce and utilise methane through AD of stored manure, analysis to date would suggest that costs are a significant factor.
In early 2015, the Bioenergy Steering Group was formed by DCENR with the purpose of furthering the vision set out in the Draft Bioenergy Plan. Four working groups were established, aiming to develop measures on four aspects of Bioenergy, one of which is looking at electricity and heat. Public and private sector stakeholders will contribute to each working group. My Department continues to work closely with DCENR in assessing the potential of bioenergy from the agriculture and forestry sectors, including from AD and is actively involved in all of the four working groups. The work of these groups will be important in informing future policy developments in relation to bioenergy.
24. Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will condemn the legal and illegal treatment of hares, in the name of sport; if a debate is required on this draconian cruel form of entertainment; if there are real opportunities to stop animal cruelty while retaining jobs, through humane versions of coursing. [39538/15]
View answerUnder the provisions of the Greyhound Industry Act, 1958, the regulation of coursing is chiefly a matter for the Irish Coursing Club (ICC) subject to the general control and direction of Bord na gCon (BnG). The welfare of greyhounds involved in coursing is provided for in the Welfare of Greyhounds Act 2011 which inter alia requires that persons who course greyhounds must have regard to the “Code of Practice in the Care & Welfare of the Greyhound”, developed jointly by the ICC and BnG.
The ICC has assured my Department that it has extensive systems and practices in place to underpin the welfare of hares and greyhounds involved in coursing and that it goes to great lengths to ensure the highest standards of welfare are adhered to.
A Monitoring Committee on Coursing is in place, comprising officials from my Department, the ICC and the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS), to monitor developments in coursing and in that regard the situation is kept under constant review to ensure that coursing is run in a well controlled and responsible manner in the interests of both hares and greyhounds.
Hares can only be collected for coursing by clubs affiliated to the ICC in accordance with the terms of two licences granted by the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht.
These licences contain 26 conditions which have refined over the years, the majority of which are central to hare welfare. These include a variety of measures, including a requirement that a qualified veterinarian attends at all coursing meetings to report on the health of the hares, a prohibition on the coursing of hares more than once in the same day, a prohibition on the coursing of sick or pregnant hares, and a requirement that hares be released back into the wild during daylight hours.
The ICC also attends to the welfare of the hare and undertakes a range of actions to address issues related to health and welfare. Coursing clubs are required to comply fully with directives, instructions and guidance notes issued by the ICC in all matters relating to the capture, keeping in captivity, tagging, marking, coursing and release of hares, and the muzzling of greyhounds.
A review of the outcome for the most recent season indicates that the procedures and processes in place in terms of animal welfare are appropriate given that 99.4% of hares were released back to the wild at the conclusion of coursing.
I have no plans to ban hare coursing, but I have no hesitation in saying that it is critically important that those involved in the sport must operate in accordance with the regulatory framework and with the welfare of both hares and greyhounds in mind at all times.
25. Deputy Patrick O'Donovan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the number of students attending agricultural colleges; his plans to examine the level of teaching resources available to meet student demand in these colleges; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41234/15]
View answerTeagasc is the main provider of education programmes in agriculture, food, horticulture, forestry and equine studies. In excess of 3,500 learners participate annually in Teagasc further education programmes and higher education programmes which are jointly delivered with various Institutes of Technology and Universities. Typically, over two-thirds of learners attend the 7 agricultural colleges in the Teagasc network with the balance attending part-time programmes at 12 Teagasc Regional Education Centres and local advisory offices. Apart from this, in excess of 5,000 adult farmers and industry personnel participate in short term training programmes annually. Teagasc currently employ just over 1,200 staff working in the research, advisory and education directorates. The allocation of resources to particular directorates is an internal operational matter for Teagasc management to determine. My Department has responded positively to the demand that has arisen for additional college places in recent years sanctioning a number of exceptional appointments in the agricultural colleges.
My Department has also been working closely with Teagasc to address staffing issues in relation to the delivery of the part-time Teagasc Green Cert. In conjunction with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, Teagasc was approved to appoint 40 new temporary teachers to meet the demand from young farmers for Green Cert courses. It enabled Teagasc to increase enrolments from 500 in a typical year to 2,300 since late 2014. Subject to demand, it has been agreed that Teagasc can recruit a further 30 temporary teachers and 7 admin staff for the Green Cert bringing the total allocation of temporary resources to 77. It will help to ensure that every farmer who requires a Green Cert place can be accommodated.
More generally, we have recently agreed new delegated sanction arrangements to provide Teagasc with greater flexibility over permanent staff appointments in research, advisory and education. The arrangements will enable Teagasc to replace staff when they retire and to make new appointments in specified grades, subject to compliance with multi-annual pay ceilings. While Teagasc must remain within its overall pay budget, the flexibility provided by the new arrangements will allow them to fill a significant number of critical vacancies and to react faster when such vacancies arise in the future. I understand Teagasc plan some appointments in the agricultural colleges to meet the current spike in demand for places.
I am confident that the new arrangements will greatly assist Teagasc in delivering much needed advice; support and training to farm families and the wider agri-food industry.
26. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his interaction with the European Union regarding an increase in the intervention price of dairy products; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41251/15]
View answerIn early September I presented a six point plan to address difficulties in the dairy and pig sectors to the EU Commissioner and my EU ministerial colleagues.
This Plan suggested utilising the provisions of Article 219 of the CMO Regulation to temporarily increase the threshold prices, with particular reference to skimmed milk powder. I also called for the restoration of Aids to Private Storage for cheese, which was introduced by the Commission in September 2014 but discontinued shortly after. In addition I called for the existing aid rates in the PSA schemes for butter and SMP to be reviewed immediately.
Another key request was increasing the advance of the Basic Payment and other elements of Direct Payments Scheme and from 16th October 2015 to 70%, to alleviate cash flow difficulties. In addition to these more immediate concerns I made it clear that from my perspective, it would be necessary to give longer term consideration at EU level to responses to volatility issues.
I am pleased to note that the final decision at Council in September took significant account of Ireland’s requests. Unfortunately a temporary top-up in the intervention price for SMP did not enjoy the support of all Member States. However the improved PSA scheme for SMP, which will include longer periods for storage as well as the improved aid rates, the re introduction of PSA for cheese, the provision allowing 70% advance in the single farm payment, the provision of increased funding for promotion and the provision of almost €14m in targeted direct aid for farmers can go some way towards alleviating the worst effects of the current market downturn.
The Common Market Organisation Regulation provides that when necessary, reference thresholds shall be updated in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure in the light of developments in production and markets. The Commission, supported by a number of member states, have been reluctant to engage in such a review, preferring to utilise enhanced supports in other areas. Furthermore, they have made it clear that the legislative procedure under which this would be undertaken would entail an 18 month lead in time. In circumstances where it was not possible to obtain member state approval for a temporary increase in threshold prices the prospects of securing approval for a longer term increase in such prices are remote.
27. Deputy Terence Flanagan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine for details of future tendering processes for properties at Howth fishery harbour in County Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41314/15]
View answerI previously responded to the Deputy on this matter on the 7th of October. The property portfolio in Howth, one of six Fishery Harbour Centres managed and operated by my Department, encompasses a range of diverse properties reflecting its remit as a working fishery harbour and its unique features which facilitate a broad range of other diverse activities which are important from both an economic and social perspective.
My Department’s aim, working within the Government Framework for the management of State property and relevant legal frameworks, is to ensure that the sites within this diverse portfolio generate a competitive economic return while fostering a diverse range of maritime activities. In this context my Department reviews the portfolio of properties on an ongoing basis in order to optimise those returns to the Exchequer.
In June 2015 my Department offered two of these properties for tenancy under lease agreement by competitive public tender. The competitions were advertised on my Department’s website, in a national and local newspaper and within the harbour and were open to all interested parties. Lease agreements have been finalised with the successful tenderers for both properties.
A further two properties are currently subject to legal, operational or planning considerations and cannot be made available for tenancy until these issues are resolved. These issues are being progressed and, when appropriate, further tender competitions will be publicly advertised, in a similar manner to the previous competitions.
28. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views on concerns regarding the movements of the Annelies Ilena and the Margiris motor fishing vehicle, the largest and second largest fishing vessels in the world, and their location and operations in Irish waters; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41366/15]
View answerControl of the vessel within Ireland’s Exclusive Fisheries Zone is a matter for the Irish control authorities who monitor fishing activity of all vessels operating the area. The Control authorities have on-going information in relation to the vessels operating in the Irish Exclusive Fisheries zone including their activities and characteristics. Under the Sea Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Act, 2006, all operational issues of this nature concerning sea fisheries control are, as a matter of law, exclusively for the Sea Fisheries Protection Authority (SFPA) and the Naval Service. As Minister, I am precluded from getting involved in operational matters including in relation to law enforcement. The SFPA has advised me that it is currently monitoring the activity of 5 large pelagic freezer trawlers within Irish Exclusive Fisheries Zone. Vessels with the scope to catch large quantities of fish with onboard grading facilities create specific compliance risks therefore justifying specific focus of available control resource. For each of these, I am advised that the SFPA has clarified through contact with the flag state the entitlement of the vessel, and has identified particular compliance risks pertaining to those vessels. Since arrival SFPA has been monitoring these movements in the Irish Exclusive Fisheries zone through VMS and declared catches through ERS. In general terms it advises that its monitoring indicates particular compliance risks around vessels with entitlements for individual species of fish. This risk assessment has informed the SFPA’s identification of some of those vessels as a high priority for at-sea inspection, and aircraft surveillance.
The SFPA is reliant on the seagoing fishery patrol activity of the Naval Service to verify compliance of vessels not landing into Ireland. Boarding vessels of this size at sea creates specific challenges and to date the operational decision of the naval service has been that weather has been too severe. On a risk basis, I am advised that the SFPA and the Naval Service do intend boarding these vessels when possible.
In relation to the overall framework for fisheries control in the EU, in October 2009 a new regulation dealing with fisheries controls was adopted. Council Regulation 1224/2009 establishes a Community control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy. Control and inspection is now focused where it is most effective through an approach based on systematic risk analysis. Inspection procedures are standardised and harmonised for all stages in the market chain, including transport and marketing. The Control Regulations were introduced so that there is a common EU level playing field and to provide for an effective range of controls across EU waters.
29. Deputy Seán Kyne asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if areas that were deemed eligible as forage in 2008 under the single payment scheme, and designated as special areas of conservation or special protection areas, are still deemed to be eligible for payment, even if there is encroachment of scrub (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [41361/15]
View answerUnder the provisions of the Basic Payment Scheme, farmers need to declare an eligible hectare for each payment entitlement held in order to benefit from payment. The hectares declared must be eligible and must have an agricultural activity carried out on them. The governing EU regulations define an agricultural activity as the production, rearing or growing of agricultural products, including harvesting, milking, breeding animals, and keeping animals for farming purposes and maintaining an agricultural area in a state which makes it suitable for grazing or cultivation. An applicant is free to choose an activity that best suits their farming enterprise and if s/he so wishes can choose to just top the land. Where an officially approved environmental management plan under the Birds or Habitats Directives requires certain management practices to be conducted on agricultural areas, such management practices will take precedence in determining the level of agricultural activity to be conducted on agricultural areas declared for payment. Article 32(2)(b)(i) of Regulation (EU) 1307/2013 provides that an eligible hectare includes any area which gave a right to payments in 2008 under the single payment scheme and which no longer complies with the definition of 'eligible hectare' as a result of the implementation of Directive 92/43/EEC, Directive 2000/60/EC and Directive 2009/147/EC.
In that regard, the 2015 BPS Terms and Conditions set out details with regard to land eligibility and payments. Section 1.7 refers to land eligibility and states that in order to draw down payment in respect of BPS entitlements, applicants must have an “eligible hectare” to accompany each entitlement. An eligible hectare is land that is used for an agricultural activity. Section 1.7 of the Terms and Conditions further makes reference to The Birds and Habitats Directives and provides that land that no longer complies with the definition of eligible hectare as a result of the implementation of Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds or Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora is eligible for payment where the following conditions are met:
(i) The land must have been claimed under the 2008 Single Payment Scheme;
(ii) The land must have been eligible for payment under the 2008 Single Payment Scheme;
(iii) Any increase in the ineligible area should be directly linked to the management requirements for the habitat.
Where an applicant is claiming on land that is otherwise considered ineligible, such land will be deemed eligible for payment where the applicant satisfies the requirements as set out above. In the event any BPS applicant is dissatisfied with the findings of any inspection case he or she can of course, in the normal course of events, avail of the appeals process.
