I would like to share some of my time with Deputy Cotter.
Adjournment Debate. - Milk Quotas.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
You will appreciate, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, that Deputy Cotter originally came from my constituency and I am very pleased he is here.
The Minister was an erstwhile friend and I think we still are friends.
He is now representing the milk producers of the Monaghan area. The proposals of the Minister for Agriculture and Food for the distribution of the milk quota reserve among small producers — the extra eight million gallons becoming available for this purpose — are grossly unfair and inequitable to all small producers in the west but they are monstrously unfair to the small producers in the north Connaught farmer co-operative area. The proposals are a travesty of justice. They are also contrary to the spirit, if not the letter, of the EC Regulation which provided the extra supply and envisaged that all eligible producers would be treated equally and even-handedly.
I will give two simple figures to illustrate this injustice. There is no need to garnish or embellish the message from these figures; they speak for themselves. The eligible producer in a southern co-operative area, which the Minister of State knows very well, will get 833 extra gallons of milk; the eligible producer in the north Connaught farmer co-operative will get 189 extra gallons, the product of one blind teat. The story in the other western co-operative areas is much the same. This is unfair treatment of the small producer in the west. It derives, I regret to say, from the Machiavellian formula devised by the Minister, Deputy O'Kennedy, to limit allocation to any co-operative to 1.25 per cent of its existing quota level, irrespective of the percentage of the suppliers of that co-operative who might be eligible — I understand eligible suppliers are those supplying 12,800 gallons or less. This is not a formula based on fairness, justice or need; it is simply a craven cave-in to what I might call the Golden Vale lobby.
The Minister knows the facts better than I do but I have an obligation to put them on the record of this House because I certainly believe he will not do so. The small milk producer is defined as the man supplying 12,800 gallons or less. The average supply of farmers in the north Connaught co-operative area is 10,000 gallons; for Golden Vale it is 20,000 gallons; for Mitchelstown it is 30,400 gallons and for Avonmore and Waterford it is 33,600 gallons. Therefore, roughly two-thirds, or 2,300 producers in north Connaught will share about 450,000 gallons whereas in a southern co-operative 1,200 producers will share one million gallons.
The Minister said in the paper that all this has been done in the interest of balance. That is some balance. How can the Minister for Agriculture and Food preside over this injustice? How can Commissioner MacSharry, who knows the position intimately, tolerate this injustice where one man, who happens to be surrounded by big farmers will get 833 gallons while another man, who happens to be surrounded by small farmers, will get 189 gallons? I am not asking for a special case for the west; I am simply looking for equality all round, for the same even-handed treatment for the small producer wherever he is, and, at that, he would only be getting about 500 gallons which is not great but is important to the people for whom I speak. This formula came as a huge surprise to the entire agricultural community. If the Minister perpetuates this injustice he will be remembered, I regret to say, not with fond memories as long as cows are milked in the west.
I must advise Deputy Cotter that he has five minutes.
That is more than adequate for what I want to say. I want to straight away condemn the decision of the Minister in this matter. In everybody's view — and I have just received a letter from some of the parties involved — it is thought to be a ludicrous decision. It discriminates against farmers in the western counties in a very blatant fashion. It is unfair in the extreme. There is something quite sinister behind the decision. Since the original announcement that 11 million gallons were available, various pressure groups have been working on the Minister — it is normal practice that people will make representations — people who wanted the division carried out in a particular way. As decision day approached, my information and that of the Front Bench personnel who act on my behalf was that all the pressure groups, including the Minster's people in the Department, accepted that the extra quota would be divided equally between all the qualifying applicants. Two days later the Minister, Deputy O'Kennedy, made what was considered to be a very surprising decision.
The Department officials had no idea how this scheme was to operate and they are still not sure. The average supplier in my county produces about 12,000 gallons of milk. When the eight million gallons available for this purpose are divided, the suppliers in my county and in the western counties generally will get about 200 gallons and, in some cases, way below that. That in itself is not a big problem, except in so far as people in the south will get at least four times that amount. This is where the inequity arises. Surely anybody with a fair-minded approach will realise that it is grossly unfair. The western counties, and my county in particular, are the areas of greatest need. In those areas there is a very high proportion of farmers in dairying who are finding it very difficult to make a living.
What I particularly detest about this decision is the precedent that seems to be involved. Are we to expect that in future when a further quota becomes available, the same kind of approach will be taken by the Minister? Are we to expect that the heavies, as we have to call them, in the southern counties will be able to twist the arm again and ensure that the quota goes to their area rather than to areas of greatest need? This is one of my great concerns. I implore the Minister of State, Deputy Walsh, to prevail upon the senior Minister to change his mind even at this late stage because there is a great furore across the western counties about this.
A meeting was held yesterday with some people from the Connacht region. They were flabbergasted that this had happened in the first place. I have a letter from the Cavan-Monaghan area, which was delivered to me by hand a few minutes ago, telling me the people there cannot understand how this came about. The underlying problem is, of course, that the officials still do not know how the division is to be carried out. The Minister acted in a way that is completely outside the norm. Surely he should have taken advice from the people in the Department. Surely he should have first tried to figure out if it was possible to do what I am suggesting so that the day after he made his announcement the decision would not be looked upon as asinine. That is what is being considered. We are angry about that and we will continue to draw attention to it whenever possible. I hope the decision will be reversed immediately.
Mr. Ferris rose.
The time that remains belongs to the Minister.
Will the Minister give me 30 seconds to put a question to him? I should like to know why the Department insisted on herd numbers being part of the application. That has created pandemonium in the DVOs. Those offices have enough problems dealing with efforts to eradicate bovine TB.
First, I do not accept that there was any inequity contained in the decisions I announced recently for the allocation of the 11 million gallons of quota. In the distribution of this quota, my first priority was to ensure that the additional quotas are allocated to those producers most severely affected by the quota system. In fact, the only real problem I had was that the additional quota was not sufficient. If we had 111 million gallons we would have been able to do a lot more for deserving producers in the north-west and the south-west. For that reason, I decided to allocate eight million gallons to small scale milk producers whose quotas do not exceed 12,800 gallons, a further two million gallons to young farmers under 35 years of age with appropriate training and educational qualifications and one million gallons to other special category producers who have suffered hardship because of inadequate quotas.
I was also concerned to ensure that the additional quotas would be divided as evenly as possible and that the co-ops and dairies in any area should not gain to an unfair extent over those in other areas. For that reason, I decided that, in relation to the total of ten million gallons to be allocated to small scale milk producers and to young farmers, a limit would apply so that no individual co-operative or dairy will obtain an allocation in excess of 1.25 per cent of their quota level. I consider this approach to be the fairest and most equitable in order to achieve a reasonable balance. I am satisfied now that I have set it at about the right level as I have the western and north-eastern co-ops complaining that it is not high enough while those in the south and east have stated that it is too high. There are complaints from both areas. It is difficult to please everybody when there is not enough to go around.
I should point out to Deputies Nealon and Cotter that I have already taken similar steps in the past to ensure that the western and north-eastern co-operatives would not suffer disproportionate losses of quota in comparison to the south and east. In particular, in relation to the Community milk cessation scheme, I succeeded in negotiating an amendment to the Community regulations specifically to ensure that excessive amounts of quota would not be lost to the western areas of this country. As a result of my endeavours, the amount of quota leaving the western and north-eastern areas on a voluntary basis was restricted even though this meant that compulsory cuts had to be made in the quotas of producers in other parts of the country, principally in the southern and eastern areas. We do not want all of the milk or a disproportionate amount of it produced in any single area.
It is evident that without my taking action and fixing a maximum limit for loss from any area at 3.25 per cent of a co-operative's quota, the losses of quota from western and northern areas would have been significantly higher.
Furthermore, in 1984 in the original distribution of the national quota, because of the favourable treatment bestowed on co-operatives or daires with a large number of small scale milk producers, those in the west and north-east received 6 per cent to 8 per cent above their 1983 levels of deliveries, while those in the south and east received approximately 4 per cent above those levels. Small scale producers in the west and north-east have also generally fared better than their southern counterparts in other quota schemes such as restructuring, temporary leasing and flexi-milk allocations.
In deciding on the allocation of the additional 11 million gallons, I had to have regard to the various arrangements made under the quota system since its introduction in 1984 and to maintain as far as possible a reasonable balance in all parts of the country. I considered that imposing a limit on the overall amount of quota to go to any co-operative or dairy was the best way to achieve this. I therefore included this condition in the proposals I submitted for the approval of the EC before making my announcement on these matters. The Commission's prior approval was required under the scheme and they accepted the validity of the case for an upper limit to prevent unfair losses of quotas from certain areas. So I consider the decisions that I have announced for the allocation of this 11 million gallons of quota—which incidentally was introduced in response to a joint initiative from the French Minister for Agriculture and our Minister, Deputy O'Kennedy last year — are the fairest and most equitable, taking into account the varied needs of producers, co-operatives and dairies in all parts of the country.
Those regulations and conditions were prepared in conjunction with the milk quota review group who are representative of all the farming organisations and the ICOS, the co-operatives' governing body. Deputy Ferris asked why herd numbers were required. In many cases farmers, with an existing quota who had one member of the family with an outside portion of land, were operating the farm as one unit. This move was in order to prevent farmers with a sizeable quota getting an additional quota. We wanted to ensure that new entrants were bona fide farmers in their own right with their own milking parlours, equipment and herd numbers. We want the most deserving to get the little milk that is available. Perhaps some of those in the north-west and south-west, with small milk producers in their co-operative area, are a little alarmed because they are taking the average of all the small farmers in such an area. For example, in Drinagh Co-operative they serve a considerable number of small farmers. The qualifying criteria will include only those who produce at least 90 per cent of their eligible milk, those whose quotas were not leased or a part of them leased and farmers who had not purchased in excess of 2,000 gallons under any previous scheme.