I welcome the Minster's comments on the BSE problem which we discussed earlier.
The degree of panic, particularly among farmers, in relation to the BSE crisis is a big problem. When making decisions in relation to cattle pur chases or sales, people do not know what direction to take. This is causing panic which the Minister needs to address. I acknowledge he has being doing his utmost to deal with this problem at a national level.
A few issues need to be addressed, particularly in relation to the consumer aspect. RTÉ carries an advertisement showing a stumbling cow which it has been asked on several occasions to change. The Minister should make a direct approach to RTÉ to have this advertisement changed because it is sending out the wrong message. Whenever anything about BSE crops up, this same cow falling all over the place is rolled out. This is not acceptable because everyone is doing their best and people's livelihoods are at risk in relation to the BSE crisis. Given that this is a food producing country of which we are very proud, our national television station should be called into question in this regard.
Another important issue is the widespread concern among small local butchers in relation to the levy they pay under the destruct scheme. I ask the Minister to address this matter because it increases the cost of meat to the consumer at a time when we are trying to promote the consumption of beef and prove the quality of our meat. In reality, if a housewife goes into a butcher's shop in any part of the country, whether Cork, Tipperary or Dublin, the vast majority of the meat for sale is young heifer beef. Given that housewives are not assured this meat is safe, it is imperative that the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, on a once-off promotional effort, spend some money to try to drive home to our own consumers that the beef they buy across the counter cannot be affected by BSE because it is all under 30 months of age. This is an important point which needs to be emphasised before we start worrying about overseas markets, even though they are extremely important. We need to cement our market at home and I believe the Minister should consider this important aspect.
I welcome the Bill for which farming organisations have been calling. The general thrust of the Bill is welcome because it will alleviate many hardships. People will now have an independent forum in which to air their problems. As soon as payments are made every year, politicians get representations from farmers who have money docked from them for whatever reason. Given that premiums are now such a big part of farmers' incomes, it is important that the payment of this money is seen to be fair.
When one examines in detail the Bill, there are many questions which need to be asked. I have major concerns about the independence of this appeals mechanism in relation to the Department. While the Bill states that responsibility will lie with the Minister, I question the independence of an authority which is set up by the Department to examine the Department's own decisions. I ask the Minister to consider setting up a board of governors to administer the proposals in the Bill. If people are to have confidence in the authority, they must be in a position to say that it is totally independent of the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. To be successful and to ensure people have confidence in the authority, it must be seen to be totally independent of the Department. The Minister should consider six people, whether representatives of the Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, the Oireachtas or the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine, to sit on an independent board of governors to oversee this appeals body. This is a major body, employing a staff of 30, not a small number of people. In order for the authority to be independent, it needs to stand alone from the Department. I ask the Minister to give this proposal genuine consideration because I want the authority to be successful. I believe every Member of the House wants the authority to be independent and successful so that people can have confidence in it.
Another important issue is the number of people who have been penalised in the past. I ask the Minister to look at cases which were brought to attention over a number of years. Many of my constituents – the Minister may be aware of them because they probably went to him directly – who had a genuine case to relate came to me regarding this issue. Severe hardship was imposed on people. The Minister should give consideration to some of these hardship cases which left people minus thousands of pounds.
I question why the disease eradication scheme is not mentioned in the Bill. At a time when disease is so prevalant, whether bovine TB, brucellosis or BSE, it is important that people are allowed to appeal some decisions in relation to disease eradication. I have instances of hardship cases in my constituency in this regard. There is nothing more devastating for farmers than having their whole herd wiped out for a technical reason. Sometimes there are good reasons for this, but the omission from the Bill of the disease eradication scheme must be questioned. I ask the Minister to have the matter investigated.
I have received correspondence from the farming organisations in recent days in respect of a number of issues. For example, the ICMSA believes that a time limit within which cases should be dealt with should be set down. That is very important because there is nothing more frustrating than having an appeal drag on. A time limit should be established in order that decisions can be made promptly.
Will oral hearings be taken in private or will politicians or Teagasc advisers be able to make representations at such hearings? I am not sure whether this matter is dealt with in the Bill but I ask the Minister to ensure that it is addressed. Politicians or other representatives such as solicitors etc., should be allowed to attend oral hearings because many people will be daunted by the prospect of appearing before the appeals board. I request that people be allowed to be rep resented by the individuals to whom I refer at oral hearings.
People must always be provided with a detailed explanation of the decisions taken in their cases. I welcome the Minister's comments regarding the harshness of penalties. The penalties attaching to the REP scheme are particularly harsh. The REP scheme has proven to be extremely good for the environment, but the level of its success will only be recognised in the future. Major changes are taking place in our environment and a huge clean-up process is in operation in the areas to which the scheme applies. I hope the Minister will be successful in highlighting to Europe the fact that the penalties involved are too harsh. We must fight to ensure that the penalties attaching to the REP scheme are changed because they are overly harsh.
I ask the Minister to take on board the points I have raised, particularly in respect of the independent board of governors. I welcome the establishment of the appeals board, particularly as farmers are so dependent on the various schemes for their incomes. Farming has changed dramatically in recent years and the days when people sold cattle or milk to earn an income are gone. The cheques farmers receive in the post are now their main source of income. It is good that the independent appeals unit is being put in place, but I again request that the Minister take on board the points I have raised.