Michael Fitzmaurice
Ceist:6. Deputy Michael Fitzmaurice asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine when the digitisation of all maps will be completed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48389/14]
Other Questions
Land Parcel Identification System
Over the past few weeks, it has come to my attention that there are many farmers who have not received their direct aid scheme payments. There seems to be a problem with the digitisation of the maps. Could the Minister inform us when this will be finished and how soon the farmers will be able to get their money? If the digitisation is not done, they obviously cannot get their money.
I can confirm that there is currently no delay with the digitising of maps. The majority of farmers, 98%, have been paid. Each year, my Department receives over 130,000 applications from farmers under the direct aid schemes, which are funded or partially funded by the European Union. The schemes involved include the single payment scheme, the disadvantaged areas scheme, REPS and AEOS. Under EU regulations, all applications must be subjected to robust administrative checks prior to payment. The main element of the administrative check is an area assessment. This is achieved by using the detailed database of individual land parcels. This is known as the land parcel identification system, LPIS, which currently records electronically some 1 million individual land parcels and which is required to be kept fully updated. This is done by the Commission because it audits us in this regard.
The Department’s systems in this critical area must meet demanding EU and national audit requirements. In 2014, my Department has received approximately 122,000 applications under the single payment scheme from applicants who hold entitlements or have applied for the transfer of entitlements under the scheme. Only valid applications under the single payment scheme that fully comply with the requirements of the EU legislation are paid. Consequently, all applications under the scheme are subject to administrative checks.
Cases that do not pass the validation process go into error and cannot be paid pending a resolution of the error concerned. These errors include over-claims, dual claims and incomplete application forms. My Department enters into correspondence, mainly through the issuing of inquiry letters to farmers, to resolve these error cases. This year, 26,850 farmers submitted maps for updating of the LPIS. There is no delay in the digitising of these maps, except where queries have arisen over the outcome of the digitisation process and are the subject of correspondence with the farmers concerned. In virtually all cases, digitisation of areas is required in advance of applications being fully processed for payment. I can assure the Deputy that there is no delay in the digitisation of the results of inspection cases and that the vast majority of inspection cases have been processed to finality and are paid.
To date, a total of 119,539 applicants, accounting for over 98% of all applicants with entitlements under the single payment scheme, have been paid a total of €1.142 billion between advance and balancing payments. The processing of the remaining unclear cases remains a priority, with twice-weekly payment runs being made to pay on applications that have been cleared for payment.
In other words we are working as fast as we can. The vast majority with which there were no problems have been done. The only cases that have not been paid are those with outstanding queries which we are trying to clarify. We are making payments twice a week to try to get through that list.
My understanding from a company in Dundalk which was digitising the maps and from farmers who have been checking it, is that they were told there was a delay whereas the Minister is saying there is not a delay. It is good to know that there is not a delay on the digitising of the maps. Obviously, what the Minister is saying is that other problems are holding up payment.
Some of them require inspections to back up the maps.
I know that takes time. What I am dealing with specifically is the maps. My understanding is that when farmers telephoned asking about their payments they were told the maps were gone for digitisation and were not back and there appeared to be a delay.
I can understand why that would be the perception because there were significant delays in digitisation a couple of years ago relating to the agri-environment options scheme. There has also been concern for a number of farmers in regard to the LPIS review and the accuracy of maps and so on. The mapping and digitisation and the change of system that has been in place for a year has caused many concerns and in the past caused many delays for AEOS which was very frustrating in the Department in terms of trying to overcome those delays. I do not think that is the problem now. If it is, I will look into it and we will fix it, but my understanding is that digitisation of maps is not the reason for the delay at the moment but I will certainly check it out.
Will the Minister please look into it?
I will, of course. I will come back to the Deputy if there is a problem.
Bord na gCon Administration
Mick Wallace
Ceist:7. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the reason it is not currently the standard practice in the Irish dog racing industry to make public the results of all doping tests, positive or negative, as is the usual practice in other sports; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48418/14]
As the Minister of State is aware there are many people in Ireland who are very passionate about working with greyhounds in different facets but we have a serious problem with greyhound racing in Ireland. As the Indecon report stated, the IGB was unfit for purpose. I am aware some changes have been made recently and some new people have been put in place to deal with the drug problem which is haunting the sport. Unless we get seriously improved regulation it will be hard to restore the reputation of greyhound racing.
The control, administration and regulation of greyhound racing are the responsibility of Bord na gCon under the Greyhound Industry Acts 1958 and 1993. Two statutory committees of Bord na gCon, namely the Control Committee and the Control Appeals Committee are central to the regulatory process. These committees operate independently of Bord na gCon. The Control Committee and the Control Appeals Committee of Bord na gCon were established under the Greyhound Industry (Control Committee and Control Appeal Committee) Regulations 2007 (SI 301 of 2007).
Under that legislation, full details of any laboratory findings can only be published at the conclusion of proceedings by the Control Committee and the Control Appeals Committee.
Article 8(6) of Greyhound Industry (Control Committee and Control Appeals Committee) Regulations 2007 (SI 301 of 2007) provides that the Control Committee shall publish its findings in all decisions in a manner it deems fit and that such publication may be delayed subject to appeal procedures. The majority of samples obtained at licensed stadia are tested for prohibited substances in the National Greyhound Laboratory at Bord na gCon headquarters in Limerick and some samples are tested in an appropriate laboratory the UK.
When a sample returns a positive result, owners-trainers are afforded due process including a hearing at the Control Committee and an appeal to the Control Appeal Committee. This can lead to a significant time lag from the initial notification of the positive sample to subsequent publication of the results of the positive samples. Consequently, the number of cases published in a particular year can span more than one calendar year.
Bord na gCon has confirmed to me that it is currently involved in a public consultation process with stakeholders with a view to putting in place legislation which will enable the publication of details of all adverse findings after positive results have been returned by the laboratory and prior to consideration of such cases by the Control Committee. It is envisaged that the information to be published will include the identity of the greyhounds involved and the owners and trainers.
I am informed that Bord na gCon has recently, in a move towards greater transparency, confirmed a finding of positive results after the analytical phase and prior to the hearing at the Control Committee. The complete details on the owners and the greyhounds will be available when the Control Committee, and the Appeals Committee - if appropriate - has concluded its deliberations on findings which are upheld.
Bord na gCon has recently appointed a Director of Racing, Governance and Compliance. Furthermore, I have appointed a person to the board who has particular expertise in veterinary and related matters.
We are also changing the legislation. Officials from my Department are currently working on greyhound legislation to identify any legislative changes that need to be made. That will be brought before the House as soon as we possibly can.
I thank the Minister of State. Given the way the matter is being dealt with, I am glad to hear a review is about to take place because stakeholders, small owners, who are concerned about how things have gone on up to now have approached me. There is little doubt that there have been people involved in controlling how things are regulated in the greyhound industry who should not be involved in it. There is some serious conflict of interest also where the chairman of the control board has dogs in training with a guy who has been found to be guilty of doping dogs. How in God's name can this be allowed happen? There has to be a serious look at who has been involved. As the Minister of State is aware, in September the greyhound board in Britain made a statement warning English buyers against purchasing dogs in Ireland because they were drug ridden. How bad is this?
I will allow the Deputy back in again.
We need to be very careful in terms of drawing a line and saying this industry is full of people who are breaking the law.
I did not say that.
That is what is being said and that is the perception. I attend many tracks up and down the country and several functions and I hear this all this all the time. I want to be quite clear, the Indecon report which we published has several recommendations on regulation. We will implement them. There is no room in this industry for anybody who is breaking the law. We are quite clear on that and we will move as fast as we possibly can. I want to assure the Deputy and everybody in the industry that no stone will remain unturned on this issue. We will do everything possible and if anybody is involved in drugs they will be dealt with as they have no place in the industry. We want a clean sport. This industry is subsidised by taxpayers in a major way. As the Minister responsible I sent out a clear signal that we want this area regulated 100%.
I am not saying all dogs in Ireland are drugged; they are not. In actual fact, the view on the street is that it is the bigger trainers and owners who are the most guilty in this area and the small guys have far less access-----
That is speculation. We cannot speculate.
Why have we allowed a system to prevail where it takes three weeks to get a result back from Limerick whereas in Britain results can be back in 48 hours? Surely that does not make for great transparency. The fines have been larger in Britain. The suspensions have been much clearer and enforced to a greater extent. We have been very lax in how we have done things here. The small trainers feel that the playing field is not level.
The big boys are getting away with murder and being shown favouritism at the expense of the industry in general and the small guy. Does the Minister of State know if there are tests for stanozolol, a new drug on the market, in greyhounds?
If I go to a greyhound track, the first person I meet will tell me one thing about it, while someone else further on will tell me the opposite and not to listen to others. That is the view on the street, but the facts are totally different. A full assessment of the greyhound board was carried out by Indecon which contained 27 recommendations, a large number of which related to testing and doping, all of which are being dealt with, even though we only received them several months ago. A new regulatory committee will be put in place and will be appointed by me. It will be independent of Bord na gCon, as well as small and big trainers. We want a level playing field for everyone involved.
That is good news for Deputy Mick Wallace.
The Deputy should welcome it.
Farm Household Incomes
Éamon Ó Cuív
Ceist:8. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the steps he is taking to mitigate the projected drop in farm incomes in 2015 of 25% forecast by Teagasc; the amount of funding projected to be paid to farmers through his Department in direct payments next year through all schemes, including schemes under the rural development programme, RDP, compared to 2011 and 2014; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48281/14]
Teagasc has forecast a drop of 25% in farm incomes next year. As well as facing challenges with prices, farmers face the other challenge that the amounts paid in direct payments are consistently falling. Will the Minister outline the scale of the fall next year compared to 2011?
If one adds up all of the direct payments, there has been a fall for several years. Next year, however, there should not be. Between now and 2020, there will be an effective increase in payments because of a very strong rural development programme, with increased expenditure each year. When one looks at the amounts of direct supports going into farming, rather than the number of schemes and so forth, the totals have been falling from 2011 each year until this year. We have tried to limit it as best we can and ensure the moneys are well spent.
There has also been a reduction in the guts of €100 million in the cost of running the Department. Five years ago the number of departmental staff was 4,500; it is now fewer than 3,300. Across the board, we have reduced expenditure, applying it to the Department first, with some reductions in schemes.
We negotiated a new rural development programme in the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, which will see a significant increase in expenditure every year for the next six years. Next year is essentially about stopping further reductions and building from this. Accordingly, next year’s rural development programme spend will come to €439 million. I can send the Deputy the detailed figures for the different areas. It is anticipated that next year’s direct payment spend will be roughly the same as this year’s, €1.65 billion, counting the single farm payments, as well as the rural development programme spend. It should not be forgotten that we are spending heavily in areas such as forestry which does not involve any European funding. We have managed to prevent cuts to the forestry programme, maintaining it at between €110 million and €115 million.
Like every other sector that relies on Government budgets, there have been reductions in expenditure in the past six years. Farmers can now look ahead with much confidence that expenditure will be moving the other way in the next few years.
Beef Industry
Martin Ferris
Ceist:9. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the effects on Irish beef producers of the Russian sanctions. [48285/14]
Given the situation in Ukraine, with sanctions imposed on Russia by the European Union and the West and counter-sanctions imposed by Russia, what has been the effect on Irish farmers and food producers? Does the Minister foresee this continuing?
Exports of all Irish offal to Russia have been suspended following an audit inspection by officials from the Russian Federation in May this year. It also resulted in the suspension of exports of other prime beef cuts from a number of meat plants supplying to Russia at the time. In late June the Russian Federation also introduced an EU-wide ban on beef trimmings owing to alleged adulteration of beef consignments with pork. This had nothing to do with Ireland. In addition, Russia introduced a ban on the import of some agricultural products, including beef, from the European Union in August.
While Russia is not a major destination for Irish beef exports, it does provide a useful alternative third country outlet for Irish beef, particularly beef offal. In 2013 Ireland exported 7,494 tonnes of beef, worth a little under €10 million, to Russia, the majority of which was beef offal. Overall, Ireland produced approximately 520,000 tonnes of beef in 2013 and of which Bord Bia estimates that around 470,000 tonnes was exported. The main markets for Irish beef are the United Kingdom and continental Europe, two of the highest priced markets in the world.
Given the relative size of the Russian market for Irish beef exports, the impact of the trade restrictions is limited. The price of beef has been rising in Ireland in recent weeks and increased by over 7% since the beginning of September. Third country market access for Irish beef is a priority of mine. I hope that in the next few weeks Irish beef exports to the United States will resume and that next year the market in China will open. Chinese scientific experts are examining our beef market with further meetings with my officials scheduled for tomorrow.
While we would like the Russian ban to be reversed, we are coping with it. The sanctions are having a big impact in some other sectors. In the meantime, I recently met the Russian ambassador to discuss offal exports to Russia.
Have we found alternative markets for our produce that Russia is now refusing to take?
Yes, we have. The particular market for offal in Russia was attractive for us, as there are limited markets that pay well for offal. That is why it would be good to export offal back into the Russian market, if we could. This is one of the conversations we are having with the Russian authorities. Other countries are having similar conversations. Ultimately, we want to get back to a normalised trading relationship with Russia. However, that is not possible because of other foreign policy and security issues linked with the situation in Ukraine.
Commonage Framework Plans
Éamon Ó Cuív
Ceist:10. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he has examined the proposed implementation strategy for commonages here, presented to him recently by the representatives of commonage farmers; if he accepts this strategy as the only practical way forward; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48278/14]
There is significant concern among farmers in hill areas which include a large amount of commonage about the proposals for GLAS, the green, low-carbon, agri-environment scheme, mainly centred on the collective agreement aspect of the scheme. Allegations were also made by the Department that undergrazing was a major problem caused by farmers. When I sought the maps and details of the places involved, the Department could not provide them. Will the Minister clarify the position on commonages and GLAS?
My approach is to ensure everyone who wants to participate in GLAS will have the opportunity to do so and that the scheme is flexible enough to respond to different types of farming, whether it be in Connemara, east Cork, the midlands or County Donegal.
We have listened to what farmers say. Hill farmers in commonage areas, predominantly in the west - particularly in parts of Counties Galway, Mayo and Donegal - have expressed concerns and we have listened. I met hill farmers from the region recently with Deputy Seán Kyne, who, along with other Deputies, has been hugely vocal on this issue. We are trying to resolve the problems and we have had some success. In the past three weeks we have spoken to the European Commission about accommodating this issue for commonage farmers. We have dealt with concerns relating to Pillar 1 payments, so farmers in commonage are not now required to have a certain stocking level to get payments, and this is a huge step forward. We have argued that commonage farmers should be able to apply in their own right rather than organise collective agreement beforehand, and we think this will be facilitated. We examined a requirement that 50% of active farmers on a commonage would have to be involved in GLAS, but we are now trying to negotiate this as a guideline rather than a requirement. If farmers cannot agree on a planner to put in place a collective GLAS commonage plan, as some farmers believe will be the case, the Department will appoint a planner from a list of approved people.
We are addressing all of the issues, including the matter of 50% agreement on GLAS, the possibility of applying on an individual basis, the seeking of extra time to allow commonage farmers access and the appointment of planners to put collective GLAS commonage plans in place. We are making progress with the Commission on all of these issues and we will get a conclusion that will allow for a practical solution for commonage farmers. We are listening to farmers and working with them to achieve an outcome that suits the Commission's audit system, can be implemented on time by the Department and, most important, is workable for farmers in commonage and non-commonage areas. I am asking for a little time to get the deal done and achieve a reasonable outcome.
The hill committee whose members met the Minister in Dublin a few weeks ago raised 12 points, and I am pleased to see that he is moving in the right direction. Will the Minister continue to discuss the details of the progress he is making with the hill committee, which consists of experts in the field? If the Minister informed Brussels that he had to put together these proposals on foot of an unwillingness among farmers to graze the hills, will he correct this? As the Minister knows, the Department could not identify any under-grazed areas on hills when asked for the information in a parliamentary question and in committee meetings. All of this is based on a false premise, and it is important that this be corrected in Brussels in the same way that I had the Ceann Comhairle correct it in the Dáil. How can Brussels make the right decision on an incorrect premise? While this process continues, will the Minister or his officials meet the hill committee regularly?
Many groups, not just one group, are interested in the implementation of GLAS. We meet farming organisations regularly, particularly the Irish Farmers' Association, IFA, and other groups including the Irish Cattle and Sheep Farmers' Association, ICSA, and the Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers' Association, ICMSA. I have met the representatives of the hill committee on a number of occasions and I speak to Deputy Kyne in detail on this issue around twice a week. Deputy Kyne and Deputy Ó Cuív speak to the members of the hill committee regularly. It is not fair to suggest that I am not consulting people, as we had public information sessions all along the west coast. I deliberately did not attend those meetings because I did not want them to turn political - I wanted them to be factually based meetings that gave information.
They were not factually based.
Departmental officials met farmers at those meetings; some were very happy with the proposals and others want changes. We are trying to respond in a progressive and sensible manner.
To correct the record, I do not think it is a false premise to say there has been a problem with under-grazing on some commonage lands. Some areas have been under-grazed.
Where are those areas?
There is a difference between acknowledging problems and providing Deputy Ó Cuív with all of the evidence.
Under-grazing is a problem that has been caused by destocking.
Correct.
The answer is to change the approach to destocking. This problem has not arisen because of an unwillingness on the part of farmers to farm the land, but that was the premise of the Minister's proposal. I sought details on the areas the Minister has identified as under-grazed, because if they are the same areas as those that have been destocked, it is clear the problem has been caused by the Department and not farmers.
I never said farmers are not willing to graze. I said that decisions made in the past and the manner in which things have unfolded since those decisions mean that some land is under-grazed. That is a problem because the only way to manage this land is to graze it, and that is why we introduced stocking rates as a requirement for the disadvantaged areas scheme, DAS. We want to get more animals grazing on land that can be managed only by grazing. We introduced an island scheme under the new Common Agricultural Policy, CAP, to ensure that stock is maintained on land and islands where farming is difficult. We have examined other schemes to support farmers, and commonage farmers are a priority in GLAS because we aim to ensure that stock is maintained on land. Much of the land of which I speak can become unfarmable due to a lack of stock and, when this happens, it is difficult to restore it to a farmable condition. The GLAS plans are about working with farmers to get stock on land so that it can be managed and maintained in a good agricultural condition. This will ensure income for farmers and the maintenance of agricultural land in commonage areas. It is not a question of farmers being unwilling to do this. Farmers were sometimes required to destock in the past, and this subsequently proved to be a mistake.
Organic Farming Scheme Applications
Michael Fitzmaurice
Ceist:11. Deputy Michael Fitzmaurice asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if payments to organic farmers processed in the Athenry office, County Galway, will be issued before Christmas; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48388/14]
It has been brought to my attention that organic farmers are experiencing problems with receipt of payments, particularly in County Roscommon and western counties. There is a serious problem in Athenry at the moment and it seems the person responsible for signing off on payments in Castlebar is not doing his or her work. Can the Minister update me on whether these farmers will receive payment before Christmas?
Hear, hear.
The Deputy is concerned that a farmer in the organic scheme may not be able to avail of GLAS. I think it has been clarified that a farmer in the organic scheme can avail of GLAS.
A farmer with less than 10 hectares of land cannot avail of GLAS.
I will clarify that matter for the Deputy, but my general point is that organic farmers are welcome in GLAS.
Regarding the Deputy's question on organic farmers and the Athenry office, I am advised by my Department officials that an industrial dispute at local office level has developed in recent days and, unfortunately, this is delaying the processing of organic farm payments in some local offices. This is a most regrettable development at a time when plans for the required payment run were at an advanced stage. I understand that a consultation process is under way and that every effort is being made to resolve the issue. I will take a personal interest in this matter to see that it is resolved as quickly as possible.
Christmas is coming, and many of the people to whom we refer are not in the agri-environment options scheme, AEOS, so this is the only payment they will receive. I ask that some of the money be forwarded to them, as it could make it a happy Christmas. Otherwise they will have to simply wait.
The Minister can be like Santa Claus.
I work in the political area. As I said, there is an industrial relations issue at the heart of this and it does not have a political solution. I will try to ensure that payments are received as quickly as possible.
Written Answers follow Adjournment.