Other Questions.
6 Deputy Noel J. Coonan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the discussion he has had with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government regarding the expected impact on the farming community of new river basin management plans; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16963/10]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe implementation of the water framework directive, under which river basin management plans are being developed, is a matter for the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Draft river basin management plans for each of the river basin districts were published on 22 December 2008 and were open for public consultation for six months until 22 June 2009. The draft plans provided an assessment of the status of Ireland's water bodies, proposed the environmental objectives to be achieved and suggested measures which will be required to achieve the objectives. The measures proposed in the draft plans included a range of existing measures, such as the implementation of the nitrates regulations, and a range of possible supplementary measures for consideration. The river basin management plans are due to be finalised by 30 June 2010. My Department made a detailed submission as part of the public consultation process. It has had further input, where appropriate, through its involvement in working groups established under the auspices of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. It is also represented on the water framework directive national advisory committee, which is chaired by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. From the point of view of agriculture, the nitrates regulations are the primary measures under the water framework directive in terms of improving water quality. Studies such as the EPA review of the nitrates regulations and my Department's agricultural mini-catchment programme, which is due to report from 2012, will provide information on the effectiveness of those agricultural measures in reducing pollution of water by nitrates and phosphates from agricultural sources. If these findings show there is a need for additional agricultural measures, it would be appropriate to consider them in the context of a future revision of the nitrates regulations after 2013.
Where stands the issue of the lead authority or the single agency in respect of inspecting compliance with the nitrates directive? It is 12 or 18 months since the Minister, Deputy Smith, announced he had an agreement with the Minister, Deputy Gormley, on this issue, namely, that there would be a single agency and that we would rule out duplication?
The nitrates directive was adopted only three years ago. In that period more than €2 billion has been invested by farmers in farm facilities to improve their compliance with the directive. Why are we now discussing supplementary measures after the extraordinary investment by and commitment from farmers?
I again thank the Deputy for raising the issue with me. I take the opportunity to welcome the fact that we at least have a time scale and schedule because the plans have been discussed for the past five years. By 20 April the plans will be adopted — it is a reserve function if necessary. Alternatively, it will be adopted by executive function by 14 May. The EPA is to submit a report to the Minister by 31 May 2010 and the Minister is to make amendments, if any, by 30 June 2010. Plans are due to come into effect from 9 July 2010.
The Deputy is aware that the Department is concerned about the impact it will have on the agricultural sector. Again, we are mindful of the fact that it is all about clean water and ensuring that we reduce the level of nitrate in our water, not just in our rivers but also our lakes, across all sectors. I am sure the Deputy is acutely aware of the what we saw last winter, in terms of the level of flooding and the difficulties which that posed at that particular time.
On supplementary measures, we will be informed about them from the findings of the EPA review of the nitrates regulations. It will inform the Department of its position regarding where it will stand. The Department has also raised concerns about specific proposals on the use and control of pesticides, over grazing remediation and aquacultural licensing. It is an area on which we are keeping a close eye.
I am glad the Minister of State mentioned the word "flooding" because one can have all the nitrates alleviation measures in the world, but if one does not tackle the issue of flooding it does not amount to anything. Would the Minister of State acknowledge that since the serious flooding last year nothing has been done, in concrete terms, to instigate measures which would prevent such flooding happening again, in particular in the Shannon basin region? The consultation process is lagging behind the need for direct action on flooding events, such as those we saw in the west and throughout the Shannon region. Action is now needed and it precedes the consultation process. We should not envisage a situation in the coming months like that which we saw previously, in terms of its effect on agriculture.
I reject the accusation that nothing has been done. As the Deputy is aware, there was an immediate and swift response to the difficulties which people had. My colleagues across several different Departments were involved in setting up measures in terms of funding for people who were badly affected and also dealing with local authorities to examine the level of flooding which took place. As the Deputy is aware, a number of investigations are taking place across the country. I do not accept the Deputy's contention that nothing has been done.
Farming, like every other industry, has to work in conjunction with nature. We all want to protect the environment and our flood plains. It is difficult when one sees the situation which has developed whereby people may have built on flood plains. It is another issue which we may deal with at some stage in the future. I live in New Ross and have dealt with flooding on an ongoing basis because I operated beside a river. I am acutely aware of the awful hardship which is suffered by people when they experience this.
From an agricultural perspective, the bottom line is that the directive is about ensuring clean water. Farmers have to deal with environmental situations on a daily basis. We cannot deal with pollution which is caused by heavy rain or flooding. We have to work together to ensure we get the right balance.
I wish to follow up on the question asked by Deputy Creed regarding the consultation between the different authorities on who will be doing inspections or if any inspections will be carried out. It is a very serious problem for farmers who are now answerable to many different groups. It is vital that inspections are reduced to a minimum.
The Minister of State referred to the weather had last year. We cannot go by the calendar structures, as far as spreading slurry and things like that are concerned. In Northern Ireland, the authorities across the Border from where I live have a much more realistic system, whereby farmers can decide when the best time to spread slurry, that is, when the ground is dry and the weather is suitable. Has the Minister examined that system?
It is somewhat of an extension of the question.
It is a very big extension. Inspections are currently being carried out, not just by the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food but also by the local authorities. We have examined the situation. There is now a combination of co-operation between the local authorities and the Department on the level of inspections. It is an area which is currently being examined. The Minister, Deputy Smith, will probably examine it at some stage in the future. We are acutely aware of the level of inspection and the difficulties which farmers now have in dealing with the number of inspectors which are arriving on their farms. I will take the Deputy's comments on board and the Minister, Deputy Smite, might revert to him regarding same.
I am aware, as I come from an agricultural constituency, that the issue of farming by calendar is one which is of concern to farmers. However, we have rules and regulations in place. We must comply with the European Union regulations. I lobbied the Minister on these matters until I was appointed a Minister of State. As I said, there are regulations with which we must comply and, in that instance, we have done so to date.
The Minister of State is in a position to change the system now.
I am not sure about that yet. I will let the Deputy know as soon as I find out.
7 Deputy Pat Breen asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the progress that has been made since May 2008 to develop the pier at Cromane, County Kerry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16940/10]
Amharc ar fhreagraKerry County Council proposes to construct a new pier at Cromane. The proposed pier will be the property of that local authority who will be responsible for its development, maintenance and repair. Under the fishery harbour and coastal infrastructure development programme my Department has, in previous years, allocated funding to Kerry County Council to progress works at Cromane. This programme operates on an annual basis and provides funding for approved projects up to an agreed amount or 75% of the total cost in the year, whichever is the lower.
Approval for funding in any particular year does not imply any commitment of funding in future years and any funds not drawn down before the end of that calendar year return to the Exchequer. The summary of the funding my Department approved for the project in recent years is as follows: €150,000 in 2004; €200,000 in 2006; €500,000 in 2007; and €750,000 in 2008, a total of €1.6 million. I understand, however, that Kerry County Council has encountered difficulties in acquiring lands required to progress this project and is working to move matters forward.
No application in respect of the Cromane project was submitted by Kerry County Council for consideration for funding under the 2009 programme. Due to the current budgetary situation, funding cannot be provided for local authority owned facilities under the 2010 programme. Funding under the 2010 programme has been allocated to meet contractual commitments and essential safety and maintenance works. It is hoped that in the future, when the Exchequer situation improves, my Department will be in a position to recommence funding projects for the development and repair of local authority owned facilities under the fishery harbour and coastal infrastructure development programme.
To date €1.6 million has been spent and there is not even a defined access route or site for the pier. Do I take it no funding was applied for in 2009 and the Department will not be unable to provide funding this year? It is a logical deduction that the project has stalled. Does the Minister of State anticipate it going any further this year?
The Deputy will probably be aware that there were a number of difficulties with the application to An Bord Pleanála for this pier. In 2009 the board annulled the Kerry County Council compulsory purchase order, CPO, as the route for the road access outlined in that application was different from that which went to public notice in 2005. There are also difficulties with land acquisition. The Deputy should be in constant contact with the local authority on this matter. It is my intention to visit Kerry and I will be interested in what progress, if any, has been made with the €1.6 million committed to the project by my Department. There was no call for funding in 2010 because the Department had to honour contractual commitments and it did not have Exchequer funding to provide more money to the project. The Deputy should liaise closely with the county council regarding this project.
Do I understand correctly that Kerry County Council did not apply for funding in 2009 or 2010? I am glad the Minister of State will visit Kerry. I would love to bring him to Cromane.
With Deputy Healy-Rae.
Nothing can be seen on the ground for the €1.6 million. The site for the pier has changed on a number of occasions. The current site seems to be the most expensive but I am not an engineer. One must take the Ring of Kerry to get direct access to the proposed pier. I look forward to the Minister of State visiting the site and, hopefully, we can move the project forward collectively.
Like my colleagues, I congratulate Deputy Connick on his elevation to the ministerial ranks.
I thank the Deputy for his best wishes and I look forward to visiting Kerry.
The council did not apply for funding in 2009 because An Bord Pleanála had an issue with the planning application. The Department did not put a call out for funding in 2010 because we did not have funds to give out and we had commitments with which we had to comply. We have committed €1.6 million to the project to date. While I am not familiar with the project on the ground, I would like to think an amount of work has been carried out to date. I understand the logic and thinking behind the project is to facilitate aquaculture and fisheries in the area. I am committed to ensuring we take advantage of this. Perhaps there will be an opportunity to meet local public representatives such as the Deputy and council officials when I make my visit to ascertain the current position on this matter.
8 Deputy Tom Hayes asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his views on the increase in malt imports; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16995/10]
Amharc ar fhreagraI presume the Deputy is referring to recent reports of imports of malt from the UK by a major Irish brewer. This is a private commercial matter for the company in which I have no role. However, since my Department has had a long association with the malting barley industry in Ireland, I am naturally interested in developments in this area. With regard to its decision to use imported malt, I understand the company continues to source 90% of its malt requirement for its brewing operation in Ireland and its commitment in this regard is unchanged.
The past decade has seen significant changes in the malting barley industry in Ireland. My Department's association with the growing of malting barley began with the introduction of a Guinness-initiated programme of breeding and trialling, dating back to the early 1900s, to improve the varieties of malting barley available to Irish growers. This association was formalised in 1971 when my Department and Guinness agreed to share the operating costs of the programme. The programme ceased in 2002 with Guinness withdrawing from it.
A number of other significant developments also took place in the brewing industry in Ireland at that time. These changes resulted in a new operating relationship and cost structure arrangement between my Department and the malting industry on the programme of variety breeding and trialling. The malting industry and my Department collaborate in identifying the most suitable barley varieties for malting through the official Department variety evaluation programme. The industry pays an annual fee to the Department for providing this service.
The past decade has also seen increased focus and discussion between maltsters and growers' representatives with regard to the prices being paid. However, this is a matter exclusively for the growers and the malting companies. Irish grain growers have a well established track record of producing high quality malting barley which has been facilitated by the breeding and trialling programme to which I have referred and I am confident they will continue to produce this high quality product.
I thank the Minister for his reply, which was somewhat reassuring. Tillage farmers have had a difficult few years and recent media reports about the levels of imports of malting barley have given rise to concern. Will the Minister remain vigilant on this issue in order that this industry can be retained at its current level?
I agree with the Deputy that the cereal industry has gone through a difficult time. Top quality product is grown here. I spoke to the chief executive officer of Greencore regarding his company's termination of its interest in this business in Ireland. Greencore is still in negotiations with the IFA regarding redress for farmers whose contracts have been terminated and an appeals mechanism is being established. The Minister of State is also conscious of difficulties that have arisen for farmers in his area and in other counties. I assure the Deputy we will remain in contact. My officials met a number of farming organisation representatives yesterday about the issue of cereals and the growing of malting barley.
I am also reassured by the Minister's reply. Given the alleged breaches of contract, will a mechanism be introduced to facilitate the compensation of farmers for loss of contract? Potentially, the company has abused its dominant position by allegedly breaching contracts. What is the Minister's view on that?
One of the issues brought to my attention by farmers at one stage in regard to pricing is the disagreements between the farming organisations and Greencore Malt about the price paid for the crop over a number of years. Apart from considering the price to be too low, the fact that Greencore Malt only set the price at harvest time placed the farmer in a more vulnerable position than usual as well. Deputy Connick and I spoke to the chief executive officer of Greencore about the issue and the company has been in contact with the IFA.
The Minister could facilitate forward selling.
I am not privy to the negotiations and how they have progressed but I hope there will be redress for farmers whose contacts have been terminated. I understand consideration is being given to the establishment of an appeals mechanism. It is an important product for an important Irish brand. Any of us who sample the product can always attest to its quality. We are proud that the raw material is grown to a high standard in our own country.
Not if one is loyal to Beamish.
I mean no disrespect to other good products.
9 Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his views on whether milk supply levels have dropped 10% during the first two weeks of the quota year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16985/10]
Amharc ar fhreagraMilk supplies are subject to a number of variables, including price, climatic and other factors. On the 2009 to 2010 quota year, which ended on 31 March 2010, preliminary figures from the co-ops indicate that milk deliveries were 9.82% under-quota nationally for the year as a whole.
Milk markets have been subject to extremes of volatility in recent years. From the high prices in 2007, world dairy markets returned to far lower levels in 2008, primarily due to a collapse in demand caused by the global economic downturn. That trend continued into 2009, before gradually improving later in the year. Adverse weather conditions in 2009 were also a significant factor in the supply levels in that year.
The outlook for 2010 is far more optimistic. In 2009, I continually pressed the European Commission to take all appropriate actions to deal with the dairy market situation and the implementation of a range of support measures helped to stabilise the market. The application of the full range of market support measures helped to put a floor under prices, which began to stabilise last autumn and have recovered significantly since then. They needed to recover significantly. The medium-term prospects for global dairy markets are also good. Growth in wealth and population is forecast to stimulate strong levels of demand for dairy products and returns should improve to all parts of the sector.
While the very cold first quarter of 2010 was not conducive to grass growth, temperatures have increased recently and the price outlook is far more positive than at this time last year. Returns on milk deliveries are supplied to the Department on a monthly basis by milk processors. The figures in respect of April 2010 will not be compiled until mid-May. At this point, therefore, I am not in a position to comment on milk supplies for the first two weeks of the quota year.
Is the Minister concerned that if the trend were to continue that not only would it call into question viability inside the farmgate, but it would also call into question the sustainability of jobs in the agrifood sector? Will he comment on that issue?
Does the Department have a method of tracking the profile of people exiting the dairy industry? I do not claim to have carried out any scientific analysis but my observation is that many of the people now exiting the dairy industry are not the small producers but are medium to large producers. That is an alarming development. The Minister and his officials would do well to track developments in that regard, analyse them and take steps to address what is happening because those producers are the engine of the dairy industry and this development is giving cause for concern. I do not in any way undermine the fact that producers of all sizes in the dairy sector are under pressure but the people I have seen exiting in the biggest numbers are at least medium-sized quota holders.
Regarding the drop in production, even though we do not have official figures, we have made informal contacts with the industry. It has been suggested that in the first two weeks of April deliveries were considerably down, perhaps in excess of 6% compared to the same period last year, due primarily to restricted grass growth as a result of the prolonged cold spell. However, more recent evidence received through informal checks with the industry indicates that the situation appears to have improved considerably in the past ten days. Current expectation is that supply will be within 2% or 3% of last year's total by the end of the month.
We want to maintain our production base. Reports of people leaving the industry suggest a mix of producer size. Those in various processing sectors and co-operatives indicate that there is no set pattern. We will analyse the situation further.
Last year, when additional quota became available to this country as a result of the health check of the Common Agricultural Policy, I devoted a certain percentage of it to new entrants. Based on the applications, the quality of the entrants was extremely high. Unfortunately, we had to disappoint well-qualified applicants. Another scheme is currently under way which I expect will be oversubscribed as well.
We all have to be seen to be doing something when it comes to the dairy sector but it appears that every mechanism that could be put in place has been put in place. I refer to the market management regime, the export refund scheme and intervention stocks. Will the Minister acknowledge that until such time as there is a pick-up in global demand that the system will remain as it is for some time? Perhaps I am wrong but it appears that not much more can be done in terms of intervening to facilitate a recovery until such time as global demand for milk and milk-based products picks up.
What Deputy Sherlock said is correct. It is often a case of supply and demand. Buoyancy will return to the market and that will ensure an adequate price will be returned right along the dairy chain. The market management measures put a floor under the price. Last year, we argued that they were extremely important but we would have liked to have had that floor at a higher level under the price. The poor price last year in conjunction with the harsh winter contributed to a lower production. We hope the weather, fodder and good grass will contribute to an increase in production this year. The recent auction and the Fonterra auction have given a strong signal to the market on an improved situation. I hope the increases that have occurred since autumn of 2009 and the spring will again lift in April.
10 Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will provide a breakdown of the level of REP scheme penalties on a county basis; if he will further provide a breakdown of penalties by measure; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16931/10]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe details requested are contained in a tabular statement which will be circulated to Members. Under EU regulations, the Department is required to carry out controls each year on 5% of participants in REPS. These controls involve a full check of the farm plan as well as an on-farm inspection. Where farmers are found to be in breach of their undertakings, a penalty must be imposed. The penalties are set out in the scheme documentation. A farmer on whom a penalty is imposed has the right to appeal it locally in the first instance. If he is not satisfied with the outcome, he can appeal further to the Agriculture Appeals Office, and ultimately to the Ombudsman.
The financial value of penalties imposed since REPS began in 1994 is less than 1% of the total paid over that period to farmers, which now stands at more than €2 billion. This indicates that the penalty regime is reasonable and is applied sensibly, and also indicates the generally high level of compliance among farmers.
REPS has been one of the most successful schemes operated by the Department. It has delivered multiple benefits to the environment in terms of water quality, biodiversity, conservation and landscape enhancement. It has also brought welcome income benefits to farmers, with more than €342 million paid out to REPS participants last year, which was the highest level in any year since the scheme began. Payments due to REPS farmers this year will continue at that high level. Farmers will continue in REPS right up to the end of 2014. By the time the scheme finally comes to an end, payments to farmers will have exceeded €3 billion.
On 30 March this year, I launched a new agri-environment scheme using EU funding secured from modulation and the European Economic Recovery Package. A substantial top-up from the national Exchequer will allow for up to 10,000 farmers to be admitted to the new scheme at a rate of up to €5,000 a year for five years. The scheme is designed to make a positive contribution to the priorities of biodiversity, water quality and climate change. In those respects I am confident that it will build on the success of REPS and that it will be widely attractive to farmers. The number of individual penalties imposed per county will be circulated.
|
County |
Number of Penalties imposed 2009 |
Number of Penalties imposed 2010 |
|
CARLOW |
51 |
14 |
|
CAVAN |
68 |
19 |
|
CLARE |
96 |
40 |
|
CORK |
333 |
62 |
|
DONEGAL |
186 |
76 |
|
DUBLIN |
6 |
3 |
|
GALWAY |
271 |
164 |
|
KERRY |
115 |
30 |
|
KILDARE |
49 |
12 |
|
KILKENNY |
98 |
33 |
|
LAOIS |
89 |
28 |
|
LEITRIM |
58 |
45 |
|
LIMERICK |
125 |
32 |
|
LONGFORD |
83 |
11 |
|
LOUTH |
12 |
2 |
|
MAYO |
196 |
77 |
|
MEATH |
59 |
9 |
|
MONAGHAN |
45 |
2 |
|
OFFALY |
105 |
52 |
|
ROSCOMMON |
84 |
33 |
|
SLIGO |
50 |
66 |
|
TIPPERARY (NR) |
136 |
25 |
|
TIPPERARY (SR) |
89 |
36 |
|
WATERFORD |
73 |
31 |
|
WESTMEATH |
71 |
43 |
|
WEXFORD |
132 |
81 |
|
WICKLOW |
41 |
50 |
|
Totals |
2,721 |
1,076 |
|
County |
2008 Scheme Year Penalties |
2009 Scheme Year Penalties |
|
CARLOW |
18 |
16 |
|
CAVAN |
114 |
33 |
|
CLARE |
40 |
50 |
|
CORK |
121 |
126 |
|
DONEGAL |
343 |
100 |
|
DUBLIN |
8 |
5 |
|
GALWAY |
302 |
140 |
|
KERRY |
263 |
125 |
|
KILDARE |
21 |
35 |
|
KILKENNY |
39 |
37 |
|
LAOIS |
44 |
44 |
|
LEITRIM |
98 |
21 |
|
LIMERICK |
137 |
52 |
|
LONGFORD |
19 |
40 |
|
LOUTH |
9 |
7 |
|
MAYO |
283 |
68 |
|
MEATH |
22 |
18 |
|
MONAGHAN |
73 |
35 |
|
OFFALY |
39 |
80 |
|
ROSCOMMON |
282 |
35 |
|
SLIGO |
142 |
23 |
|
TIPPERARY (NR) |
68 |
61 |
|
TIPPERARY (SR) |
76 |
60 |
|
WATERFORD |
87 |
46 |
|
WESTMEATH |
39 |
43 |
|
WEXFORD |
81 |
45 |
|
WICKLOW |
13 |
47 |
|
Totals |
2,781 |
1,392 |
I do not have access to the tabular information. However, I accept the Minister's reply. In posing the question I was interested in finding out why farmers were becoming liable for penalties and what was the source of the non-compliance. If we had a record of that information, matters could be rectified in future.
I do not have an exact percentage breakdown between the reasons for the different types of penalty imposed. We will carry out a scoping exercise and provide the results to the Deputy. We did not have the time to gather that information in the time available as there is pressure to make payments in the REPS area.
By and large the farmer undertakes to comply with a number of conditions of the scheme. The penalties cover breach of scheme requirements, for example, not undertaking work signed up to or failing to complete the term of the contract and other issues such as late submission of payment claims. It is unusual but that actually happens.
Having spoken to officials towards the end of November last year I learned we had sent out a card that only had to be signed and sent back. We want to have the money sent out before the end of the year. We had to send out reminders to people and had to put a notice in the newspapers asking them to help us. We said we had the money, wanted to pay it and asked that the documentation be returned. It is not the most onerous task to return a payment claim. We will try to obtain for the Deputy, through a scoping exercise, the types of penalties that exist. At times an inspection will take place and the inspector will ask the person in question to rectify something that is relatively minor.
How many did not submit payment claims or did so late?
I believe the number is relatively small but late submissions necessitate otherwise unnecessary clerical work by the Department. It costs us to write to people. We even telephone people to ask them to return their claims before the end of the year so we can pay them. That is not always the biggest problem. Inspectors are trying to finalise submissions when they visit individual farmers.
The Minister will agree that the farmers in Kerry would not be too disappointed if they received a penalty of 1% given that they have been waiting since 15 December to receive their REPS payments.
Over €8 million is owed to REPS farmers in Kerry. Is it possible that payment could be speeded up? Some farmers are heavily in debt to the banks and the banks are putting pressure on them to make repayments. The farmers are depending on receiving their REPS payments in order to do so.
Deputy Ferris and all Members from Kerry have spoken to me on a number of occasions regarding delays in payments from the two offices in County Kerry. From recollection and from having spoken to Oireachtas colleagues in the past day or two, I note approximately 60% of payments had been made in County Kerry. There was a difficulty over staffing in the office but it has been resolved today. I hope we will be able to make payments rapidly.
I welcome the fact that the issue has been resolved because there has been no change to the figure of 60% that I received about six weeks ago.
The deadline of 17 May is looming. There are cases to be considered in the Department in respect of single farm payments and the agri-environment options scheme and some in respect of REPS 4. Some of those who applied to join REPS 4 did so over 12 months ago and have had no communication whatsoever from the Department. They expect, in the coming days, to receive a reply indicating in some fashion that their applications are deficient. They will have to return the applications through their planners by 17 May.
One should bear in mind the planners are working night and day to make single farm payment submissions and they are trying to deal with new applicants under the agri-environment options scheme. Some applications for REPS 4 have been with the Department for over 12 months. There is a small handful of cases nationwide. Can there be some leniency in those cases? If planners are logistically unable to submit all the applications and paperwork to the Department by 17 May, farmers will be the losers, through no fault of the planners. The planners submitted the applications in good faith over 12 months ago and have heard nothing from the Department.
I discussed the relatively small cohort to which the Deputy referred with officials relatively recently. I will obtain an update and inform the Deputy of the outcome on Tuesday next. I asked whether there was a provision that could facilitate those who, through no fault of their own, had not the opportunity to return a form.
A period of 12 months or more is unacceptable.
The schemes are run very efficiently. Many applications that are received are deficient. At times, the Department sends back applications for further clarification and in respect of which further data must be submitted. The replies do not always come as expeditiously as the Department would like. We want to ensure farmers receive their payments rather than deny them the opportunity of participating in a scheme.
The Minister stated the problem in Kerry was sorted today. What exactly does he mean by that?
In order to sign off on some applications so payments can be made, officials of a certain rank are required. In the offices in question, we had no officials of that rank. An agreement has been reached to allow for officials to be put in place who will be able to sign off on the forms.
When?
That will start immediately in regard to Kerry.
When can the farmers expect their payments?
I presume they will be sent out quite rapidly, although everybody will not have them on Monday.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
