Vol. 470 No. 5
13 Mr. Cowen asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the number and percentage of dairy farms who do not come up to EU standards; and the steps, if any, he will take to ensure quality in the industry in view of the closure of the dairy hygiene scheme. [19589/96]
All Irish dairy farms have been registered from the initial date of application of EU Directive 92/46, which is implemented in Ireland by means of SI 9/96. Under the directive these farms are subject to ongoing inspection. To date, almost 3,000 farms have been formally certified as having reached the required standards.
Under the dairy hygiene scheme, a total of 4,800 producers have either received grant aid or have had approval to proceed with the necessary work under the scheme resulting in a total commitment of £25 million. A further 3,000 applications have been received and will be dealt with in due course. While the scheme has had to be suspended due to shortage of funds, I have already made it clear that if moneys become available, I will consider the reintroduction of grant aid for upgrading dairy farms.
Will the Minister indicate the time span involved for the 3,000 applicants waiting for dairy hygiene grants? He said they will be paid in due course but many applicants require the money now. Will the Minister include an allocation in his own Estimate to deal with this matter? Also, will he indicate the way the Department's policy can be pursued regarding more competitive agriculture if we are facing the prospect of not having an on-farm investment grant programme for the first time in 40 or 50 years? Will the Minister confirm he does not have any plans to reintroduce this scheme?
The net point is contained in the last question. The position is that the money has run out. While the scheme was in operation a total of 7,800 applications were received, of which 5,300 have been fully processed and approval to commence the work has issued. With the money allocated in the Structural Funds programme to 1999 we will be hard-pressed to cover the remaining cases but I am considering, within the overall programme, reintroducing the scheme, although I cannot give a commitment in that regard now. We are examining it in terms of the overall food sub-programme and, if the scheme is reintroduced, it will be at a lower rate of grant. There simply was not enough money in any of these schemes to meet the demand. Under the agricultural envelope it is not possible to get more money at this time unless the mid-term review yields something but there is no indication of that.
Will the Minister agree that farmers applying for grants under these schemes are trying to maintain a future in farming? Will he agree also that if such investments are not made, the whole question of selling our produce as environmentally friendly does not have the credibility it would otherwise have if the schemes were in place? Will the Minister agree he is handicapped in trying to persuade consumers, domestic and foreign, that we are committed to more environmentally friendly farming if we are not prepared to invest in these schemes? Given the increased demands made on milk producers by co-ops, how does the Minister expect small producers to stay in business if these schemes, which assist in maintaining farm families in rural communities, are not available? Also, will the Minister confirm these schemes were suspended by fax informing the local offices they were being suspended from closing time that day? Is that a precedent? Has any similar scheme been stopped so precipitously on a previous occasion? I have had several queries in this regard and I ask the Minister to give favourable consideration to the inclusion of those farmers whose applications had reached the offices prior to the suspension of the scheme. Is the Minister prepared to allow those applications be processed? I am aware of a number of hardship cases, one of which is in relation to the alternative enterprises scheme, which I want to bring to the Minister's attention. Will the Minister ensure that person will not be penalised because of the way the scheme was suspended?
In relation to the latter point, I will consider the matter. Applications had to be received by the close of business on that Friday. If there is a problem with regard to applications not being properly recorded I will examine that in a sympathetic manner. The total amount of money provided as part of the overall Structural Funds was £31 million. The grant approval commitment to date is £25 million. I cannot invite applications if there is no money to meet them. I regret these funds have been exhausted.
The Cabinet will give the Minister £6 million. It is not a lot of money.
The £6 million in respect of unapproved applications will go towards those which have yet to be processed. It was also the case in the previous tranche of Structural Funds which terminated in 1993 that much of the money for these schemes had run out before we had reached the end of the five year tranche. The position is not without precedent. We support dairy hygiene but of all the schemes, I do not see any prospect of the alternative enterprise scheme being reintroduced. I will do my best, however, to give this matter priority for the reasons stated by the Deputy.
The Minister has approved a number of applications for the farmyard pollution scheme. The approval form states that payment will not be made until 1997. Will payments be made in 1997? Also, will the people who have already completed the work be paid early in 1997 or will the matter drag on?
Those people will be paid in 1997 and we will discontinue issuing approvals for 1997 when that money is exhausted. There is a possibility that some people will be paid before the end of 1996; discussions are ongoing with the Department of Finance in that regard. If some people have completed the work and everything is in order, we will give approvals for 1997 for the amount available in the Estimates.
