Written Answers Nos. 16-31
16. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the steps he is taking to address farm penalties under the basic payment scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34030/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe reductions and penalties that apply to the Basic Payment Scheme are laid down in EU Regulations 1306/2014 and 640/2014. The reductions and penalties apply in instances such as the following situations:
- Where the applicant over-declares the eligible area of his or her land parcels.
- Where the applicant declares land that is also claimed by another farmer (dual claims) and it is established that he or she has no right to declare it for payment.
- Where the applicant claims land that he or she is no longer farming, which is effectively abandoned land.
- Where application forms are submitted after the deadline for the submission of applications.
The most effective method of reducing the level of penalties that apply to payments under the Basic Payment Scheme is to encourage farmers to ensure that they do not include such ineligible areas in the applications. In that regard, my Department issues maps of all the lands parcels declared for payment on an annual basis to all of the farmers submitting applications under the Direct Payment Schemes. In a covering letter accompanying the maps, farmers are strongly urged to carefully scrutinise the maps and ensure that they exclude all ineligible areas and features from the lands that they declare for payment in that year.
Many farmers have made arrangements with registered agricultural consultants/advisors to act as their agents for the submission of Direct Payment application forms. The majority of such applications are submitted on-line. Where a farmer has any doubts relating to land eligibility he/she should double check this matter when confirming their application form details with their agent prior to submitting the Direct Payments application form. The vast majority of farmers heed this advice, consulting their agents as necessary and have excluded these ineligible areas from their applications.
My Department continues to take other action to bring this message to farmers and their agents. For example, my Department issued a comprehensive booklet on land eligibility in May of this year to all applicants. In addition, the opportunity is taken at scheme information meetings throughout the country to make a presentation to farmers on what lands should be excluded from their claims for payment.
Those farmers, who have over-claims detected during the completion of the administrative checks or following ground or remote sensing land eligibility inspections have the right to seek a review of the decision and if they are not satisfied with the outcome of the review, they can appeal the decision to the Agricultural Appeals Office.
17. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views on concerns regarding the decline in profitability in the dairy sector; the European Union's refusal to increase intervention prices; and the action he proposes to take on this matter. [34216/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraHaving witnessed dairy market developments affecting milk and dairy commodity prices in Ireland and the EU, I presented a paper offering possible solutions to both the EU Commissioner and my EU ministerial colleagues in early September. These were presented on the basis of my belief that they were appropriate for consideration by the Council and as a response to the market issues that had developed. This list was not exhaustive and I sought to reach common ground with other Ministers regarding a suite of appropriate solutions. Whilst welcoming the steps previously taken by the Commission, including extensions to the dates for Aids to Private Storage and Intervention, I noted that having regard to the acute downturn in global milk prices over the past several months, and the severe impact this is having on farm incomes, that a number of further steps were urgently required including:
i. Utilising the provisions of Article 219 of the CMO Regulation to temporarily increase the threshold prices, with particular reference to skimmed milk powder.
ii. Restoring the scheme providing Aids to Private Storage for cheese which was introduced by the Commission in September 2014 but discontinued shortly after. In addition I called for the existing aid rates in the PSA schemes for butter and SMP to be reviewed immediately.
iii. Increasing the EU budget for market supports in light of the fact that the assigned revenues deriving from super levies will be some €400 million higher than originally foreseen in the draft budget for 2016.
iv. Using exceptional promotion measures to promote the consumption of dairy products on EU, but especially on 3rd country markets.
v. Increasing the advance of the Basic Payment and other elements of Direct Payments Scheme to 70%, to alleviate cash flow difficulties.
vi. I also called for the reopening of the scheme on Private Storage for Pigmeat which was closed in May of this year.
In the longer term, I also made it clear that from my perspective, it will be necessary to give consideration at EU level to responses to volatility issues in the future such as more price transparency through the EU’s Milk Market Observatory, further consideration of the role that might be played by futures markets, and the use of financial instruments specifically designed to take account of the cash flow impact of downward price cycles in commodity markets.
I am pleased to note that the final decision at Council on the aid package, including the 100% increase in the case of the PSA scheme for SMP, took account of Ireland’s six point plan. Unfortunately a temporary top-up in the intervention price for SMP did not enjoy the support of all Ministers or the Commission. However the improved PSA scheme for SMP, which will include longer periods for storage as well as the improved aid rates, the re introduction of PSA for cheese, the provision allowing 70% advance in the single farm payment, the provision of increased funding for promotion, and the provision of almost €14m in targeted direct aid for farmers can go some way towards alleviating the worst effects of the current market downturn.
Provision of targeted aid is also a significant initiative. In order to address the existing market disturbance efficiently and effectively and to prevent the situation resulting from that disturbance, or its effect on the market, from continuing or deteriorating further, the Commission deemed it appropriate to provide grant aid to Member States in the form of a one-time financial grant. The aim of this is to support farmers in the relevant sectors who are experiencing the most acute price fall and consequences of the prolongation of the Russian import ban.
Taking these factors into account, Ireland has been granted an allocation of €13.7 million from an overall fund of €420M. I am consulting with stakeholders at present and will make a decision on the use of this aid in the very near future.
18. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views on his Department using the green low-carbon agri-environmental scheme as a means to reduce participants’ claimable area and that of their neighbours who are not participating in the scheme. [34212/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraI presume the Deputy is referring to the preparation of Commonage Management Plans under the new measure introduced for commonages as part of the Green Low-Carbon Agri-Environmental Scheme , GLAS. Commonages, which primarily consist of upland grazing, represent a mosaic of extremely important habitats, many of which are designated Natura areas. They are also, however, extremely important areas for agriculture and indeed their environmental value today and the richness of the biodiversity they present is to no small extent a result of hundreds, and indeed, thousands of years of agricultural use. Many of these commonages are now seriously under-grazed, which has had a detrimental effect on both land eligibility and biodiversity.
Under GLAS, one of our main objectives is to restore these uplands to agricultural and environmental health. To do that, we have created a specific measure within the new scheme that encourages shareholders on commonages to come together and draw up a new Commonage Management Plan with the help of a trained GLAS commonage advisor. The main component of this plan is the introduction of a new grazing regime on every commonage, which is tailored to the needs of that commonage, and to which each shareholder in GLAS must now commit and contribute.
The new GLAS Commonage Management Plans are required to review the entire area of the commonage, as all this area is potentially accessible to anybody grazing the hill. The Plan, when submitted, will provide a full assessment of the land cover that exists on the ground at present. This is one of its key values: these Plans are based on a new assessment of the condition of the commonage, drawn from site-visits and discussion with the participating shareholders. Amongst other things, the Plan needs to identify the actual grazable area on the commonage and then prepare a series of actions designed to at least maintain that area in good condition, while also addressing the conservation of other important habitats elsewhere. For this reason, under GLAS, my Department will pay on the entire area, not just the area directly available for agriculture.
The assessment undertaken must address any areas that are possibly ineligible under the current eligibility rules. If a consequence of this is that the Maximum Eligible Area (MEA) needs to be reduced, my Department will need to consider whether the BPS claim on the parcel in question also needs to be reduced in order to ensure that penalties do not occur. However, it should be noted that the MEA approach is considerably more flexible than previous ones, allowing areas of scrub for example to be accommodated within an overall calculation of what is eligible for payment. I believe that the combination of this approach, with a renewed and balanced grazing effort initiated through GLAS, will in fact safeguard the eligibility of these lands into the future.
19. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will provide the list of stocking rate calculations for commonages; respond to criticism that his Department officials are unable to provide clear guidance as to whether the stock that is carried on the commonage should include all stock, from both green low-carbon agri-environmental scheme, GLAS, and non-GLAS participants; and if the GLAS planner is only to take into account the stock carried on the commonage of GLAS participants. [34214/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraMaximum and minimum stocking levels have already been established and published for all commonages. However, in the context of drawing up the Commonage Management Plans required under GLAS, it is accepted that the GLAS advisor acting for the shareholders concerned may form a different impression of what the commonage can or should carry, in the best interests of its environmental health. In such cases, I have specifically provided that the Advisor may recommend a different stocking level to the one which has been published, to ensure the commonage is adequately grazed and that habitats are protected. If the basis for doing so is sound, that new stocking-level will be accepted and can be used for drawing up the required Commonage Management Plan. For commonages in excess of 10 hectares, the stocking figures adopted for the Commonage Management Plan are based on what is required to maintain the commonage and requires the active participation of all GLAS farmers who have signed up to the Plan. However, where there are also farmers grazing the commonage under AEOS contracts, the GLAS Advisor drawing up the new Commonage Management Plan may include the grazing effort of these AEOS farmers in his calculations. This has been fully explained to advisors.
In addition, I have also provided for further flexibility in situations where a very small number of shareholders sign up to a Commonage Management Plan and the scale of the grazing requirement is clearly unattainable by that group. These cases will be reviewed by the Commonage Implementation Committee who may recommend that a lower total minimum grazing requirement apply.
Finally, where some shareholders signing up to the Commonage Management Plan are already grazing in excess of their individual maximum stocking level, I have also provided that this can be accommodated within the Plan if the other shareholders agree. In such cases, the other shareholders can reduce their own grazing effort by up to 50% to rebalance the Plan overall.
20. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the elements of the targeted agricultural modernisation scheme II that have been announced to date; the closing date for applications under each element; the allocated money; and if he will make a decision on the matter [34223/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraAll elements of the various TAMS II schemes have now been announced and in each case the relevant closing dates and indicative budgets have also been provided. In relation to the first tranches of each scheme, the position is as follows:
Young Farmers Capital Investment Scheme: closing date 25th September 2015, budget €10m;
Dairy Equipment Scheme: closing date 16th October 2015 , budget €4.16m;
Low Emission Slurry Spreading Scheme: closing date 20th November 2015 , budget €0.35m;
Animal Welfare, Safety and Nutrient Storage Scheme: closing date 30th October 2015 , budget €14.8m;
Pig, Poultry Investment Scheme: closing date 30 th October 2015 , budget €1.7m;
Organic Capital Investment Scheme: closing date 30 th October 2015 , budget €0.64m;
Subsequent tranches will open regularly under each Scheme and will continue to invite applications until 2020.
21. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine following the announcement of Food Wise 2025, the report of the 2025 agrifood strategy committee, the steps taken to ensure the targets set for agriculture production and exports fully take into account the accelerating challenge of climate change; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34210/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraFood Wise 2025 sets out a cohesive, strategic plan for the sustainable development of agrifood sector over the next decade. As part of the initial ground work to Food Wise 2025, a public consultation took place which involved 15 background papers and a questionnaire. These included a particular focus on climate change and sustainability.
Sustainability was the brief for one of the five core subgroups of the Food Wise 2025 committee. The projections in the report focus on the value of exports and production, rather than simply production increases and were developed giving full recognition that there is increasing pressure on global agricultural resources, and the environment.
Food Wise 2025 includes clear and comprehensive commitments to managing the projected growth in the sector in a sustainable way. There are sixty individual actions related to sustainability which aim to allow the sector reach its growth potential, while protecting and improving the environment, by managing finite resources in the most efficient and effective manner.
There is a strong commitment in the report to measurement and monitoring the sustainability credentials of the sector. As part of the implementation phase of Food Wise, a Sustainability working group will be established. My Department will work closely with relevant actors to ensure appropriate monitoring across all sectors of the agrifood industry on the environmental impacts of the strategy including possible impacts at regional level. This implementation process will include evaluation and assessment of the delivery of sustainability and mitigation actions.
In order to ensure that environmental considerations were at the heart of Food Wise 2025 an Environmental Analysis (which represented both a Strategic Environmental Assessment and an Appropriate Assessment) was conducted in tandem with the development of the Food Wise 2025 strategy. This analysis was carried out by an independent team of consultants and involved stakeholder and public consultation throughout the process. My Department chairs a Steering Group with representatives from Teagasc, the EPA and Bord Bia to oversee this process.
The submissions received in response to the eight week public consultation following publication of Food Wise 2025 and the draft Environmental Analysis report are currently being considered. These submissions will help to inform the final Environmental Analysis Report, which I expect to receive shortly.
22. Deputy Thomas Pringle asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views that the integrity of the penalty points system of the Common Fisheries Policy has been undermined by the recent refusal of the Danish authorities to allocate points to a vessel detected fishing without a quota in Irish waters over the summer of 2015; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34207/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe imposition of points for the licence holder of a vessel involved in a serious infringement of the CFP is set out in Article 92 of Council regulation 1224/2009 and the detailed rules for its implementation are set out in Commission Regulation 404/2011. These regulations are given effect in S.I. No. 3 of 2014 European Union (Common Fisheries Policy) (Point System) Regulations 2014. Article 126(1) of Regulation 404/2011 places the obligation on the Flag Member State of the vessel to assign the points to the licence holder as a result of a serious infringement.
The procedure for vessels held liable for an infringement in the waters of another Member State are set out in Article 126(5) of Regulation 404/2011, the implementing rules. These state that the competent authorities of the flag Member State shall assign the points upon notification under Article 89(4) of the Control Regulation. The operation of these articles in the context of S.I. No. 3 of 2014 allows for the foreign licence holder to utilise the appeals mechanism in Ireland. However, if found liable for the infringement following an appeal, the SFPA will notify the competent authorities in the flag Member State of the infringement.
Article 126(5) of 404/201 1 is clear that it is the Flag Member State which is liable for the assignment of the points when it has been notified pursuant to Article 89(4) of the Control Regulation that a vessel is held liable for a serious infringement. The wording of this Article does not appear to give discretion to the Flag Member State in this process.
It should be noted that operational issues in relation to sea fisheries control are a matter for the Sea Fisheries Protection Authority (SFPA) who operate independently in relation to enforcement. The SFPA has issued the following statement in relation to the failure of the Danish Authorities to issue the points in accordance with the detection of a serious infringement by one of their vessels in the Irish Exclusive Fishery Zone.
“Ireland is a coastal state in whose waters numerous fishing vessels operate. The points for serious infringements are significant sanctions to deter non-compliance with fisheries regulations across the EU and the SFPA is working to ensure that compliance is the norm for all vessels operating within the Irish EEZ, irrespective of nationality.
The Authority is continuing to pursue this matter with the Danish Fisheries Control Authorities. SFPA has also been in communication with the EU Commission and will be seeking formal clarification on the assignment of points by a Flag State which have been notified to it by a Coastal State.”
The SFPA continues to press the EU Commission for a formal clarification on the discretion afforded to the Flag Member State when it has been notified that the licence holder has been held liable for a serious infringement.
23. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he has considered the implications of research conducted by the Institute for Global Food Security at Queen's University Belfast that interference with badgers may be contributing to maintaining bovine Tuberculosis; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34016/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe study referred to by the Deputy related to research into the impact of interference with badger setts and the relative roles of badgers and cattle in the transmission of Bovine Tuberculosis, using data solely related to Northern Ireland. The findings, therefore, can only be applied to the situation in Northern Ireland. In Northern Ireland badger populations are not controlled, even in areas where the historical risk of TB is high. As the Deputy is aware, my Department implements an official badger population control in areas where badgers are implicated in TB breakdowns and, in this respect, the situation here differs from that in Northern Ireland. As I have stated, the study referred to relates to the possibility that TB may be spread by illegal interference with a sett, not by the removal of badgers in a controlled manner as implemented under my Department’s programme. Accordingly, it has no implications for the implementation of this programme. In addition, in Ireland we have no evidence that interference with badger setts may be contributing to maintaining bovine TB. It is the experience of staff in my Department that they very rarely find any evidence of badger sett interference, such as discussed in the research paper to which the Deputy refers. I should also stress that interference with badger setts is illegal and where such instances are found by staff of my Department the details are passed on to officials in the National Parks and Wildlife Service who follow up such reports.
There is very considerable scientific evidence of a link between badgers and cattle in the context of the spread of bovine TB. Research conducted over the years by my Department and others has demonstrated that the eradication of bovine TB disease is not a practicable proposition until the issue of the reservoir of infection in badgers, which is seeding infection into the cattle population, is addressed. It is therefore necessary to eradicate TB in both species. In view of this, the comprehensive TB Eradication Programme as implemented by my Department has incorporated a badger removal and population control policy since 2004.
While the current approach to badger control is cost effective and has contributed significantly to the very significant improvement in the disease situation in recent years, the ultimate objective of my Department is to incorporate badger vaccination into the Irish TB eradication programme. However, this strategy can only be deployed when data are available to ensure that this can be done in an optimally effective and sustainable manner. In view of this, various projects, involving vaccine development and oral-delivery techniques are under way (including a collaboration with the United Kingdom), with a view to developing a viable badger TB vaccine and vaccination strategy.
24. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the progress made to date in negotiations with the European Union on increasing its market intervention price for milk to reflect production costs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34222/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraProvisions in the CMO indicate that the reference thresholds and by extension reference prices for intervention shall be kept under review by the Commission, taking account of objective criteria, notably developments in production, costs of production and market trends. It also provides that when necessary, the reference thresholds shall be updated in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure in the light of developments in production and markets. The Commission have been reluctant to engage in such a review, preferring to utilise enhanced supports in other areas. Furthermore, they have made it clear that the legislative procedure under which this would be undertaken would entail an 18 month lead in time. In such circumstances, my preferred approach was to examine the possibility of utilising provisions under “Exceptional Measures”, to introduce flexible instruments, such as a modified or temporary intervention scheme, more quickly, by delegated act.
In early September I presented a paper offering possible solutions to both the EU Commissioner and my EU ministerial colleagues. These were presented on the basis of my belief that they were appropriate for consideration by the Council and as a response to the market issues that had developed and I sought to reach common ground with other Ministers regarding a suite of appropriate solutions.
I welcomed steps previously taken by the Commission but noted that having regard to the acute downturn in global milk prices over the past several months, and the severe impact this is having on farm incomes, that a number of further steps were urgently required. These certainly included utilising the provisions of Article 219 of the CMO Regulation to temporarily increase the threshold prices, with particular reference to skimmed milk powder. As outlined earlier to the house I made calls for numerous other measures in the areas of Aids to Private Storage for cheese, which was introduced by the Commission in September 2014 but discontinued shortly after. In addition I called for the existing aid rates in the PSA schemes for butter and SMP to be reviewed immediately.
Another key request was increasing the advance of the Basic Payment and other elements of Direct Payments Scheme and from 16th October 2015 to 70%, to alleviate cash flow difficulties. In addition to these more immediate concerns I made it clear that from my perspective, it will be necessary to give longer term consideration at EU level to responses to volatility issues.
I am pleased to note that the final decision at Council took significant account of Ireland’s requests. Unfortunately a temporary top-up in the intervention price for SMP did not enjoy the support of all Ministers. However the improved PSA scheme for SMP, which will include longer periods for storage as well as the improved aid rates, the re introduction of PSA for cheese, the provision allowing 70% advance in the single farm payment, the provision of increased funding for promotion and the provision of almost €14m in targeted direct aid for farmers can go some way towards alleviating the worst effects of the current market downturn.
In respect of the direct aid element within the suite of measures mentioned above, I am engaging with stakeholders and will make a decision on the use of this aid in the very near future.
25. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the reason if green low-carbon agri-environmental scheme planners are qualified by his Department to make the maximum eligible area assessment, they are insisting on re-assessing the planner’s reduction with a departmental inspection. [34215/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraI presume the Deputy is referring to the assessment of the Maximum Eligible Area (MEA) in terms of the preparation of Commonage Management Plans as part of the Green Low-Carbon Agri-Environmental Scheme, GLAS. Commonages, which primarily consist of upland grazing, represent a mosaic of extremely important habitats, many of which are designated Natura areas. They are also, however, extremely important areas for agriculture and many of these commonages are now seriously under-grazed, which has had a detrimental effect on both land eligibility and biodiversity. Under GLAS, one of our main objectives is to restore these uplands to agricultural and environmental health. To do that, we have created a specific measure within the new scheme that encourages shareholders on commonages to come together and draw up a new Commonage Management Plan with the help of a trained GLAS advisor. The main component of this plan is the introduction of a new grazing regime on each commonage, which is tailored to the needs of that commonage, and to which each shareholder in GLAS must now commit and contribute.
The new GLAS Commonage Management Plans are required to review the entire area of the commonage, as all this area is potentially accessible to anybody grazing the hill. The Plan, when submitted, will provide a full assessment of the land cover that exists on the ground at present. This is one of its key values: these Plans are based on a new assessment of the condition of the commonage, drawn from site-visits and discussion with the participating shareholders. Amongst other things, the Plan needs to identify the actual grazable area on the commonage and then prepare a series of actions designed to at least maintain that area in good condition, while also addressing the conservation of other important habitats elsewhere. For this reason, under GLAS, my Department will pay on the entire area, not just the area directly available for agriculture.
The assessment undertaken must address any areas that are possibly ineligible under the current eligibility rules. If a consequence of this is that the Maximum Eligible Area (MEA) needs to be reduced, my Department will need to consider whether the BPS claim on the parcel in question also needs to be reduced in order to ensure that penalties do not occur. However, it should be noted that the MEA approach is considerably more flexible than previous ones, allowing areas of scrub for example to be accommodated within an overall calculation of what is eligible for payment.
In some circumstances my Department may deem it necessary to conduct a ground check on certain commonages where the planner has indicated that there is a change in the reference area/MEA of a commonage. I believe that the combination of this approach, with a renewed and balanced grazing effort initiated through GLAS, will in fact safeguard the eligibility of these lands into the future.
26. Deputy Helen McEntee asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine in view of the high cost of fertilisers for farmers; the global structure of the fertilisers manufacturing industry; if he will update Dáil Éireann on his efforts at the European Council of Ministers to ensure a concerted approach by the European Union in tackling fertiliser prices; his discussions with the European Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development, Mr. Phil Hogan, regarding this matter; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34091/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraNo fertilisers are now manufactured in Ireland, resulting in indigenous fertiliser companies being price-takers, dependent on global supply and demand and subject to Euro exchange rates against the US dollar and other currencies. Nitrogen, in the form of Calcium Ammonium Nitrate (CAN), Phosphorous and Potash constitute the vast majority of fertiliser nutrients used in Ireland and since all fertiliser used in Ireland is imported, Irish fertiliser companies have little control over the price at which they buy their products on the global market.
On-farm prices range from €330 to €450 /tonne depending on type and nutrient content. Fertiliser costs are among the highest input costs in Irish agriculture at 20% on average and can amount to double this for certain tillage crops.
Currently, Europe is only 80% self-sufficient in fertiliser production and must import 20% of its requirements. As such, European and Irish fertiliser prices are strongly linked to global prices and heavily influenced by supply and demand. With global demand outstripping supply, Irish fertiliser prices have increased by 6-8% so far in 2015. It is anticipated that world demand will continue to increase into the future maintaining upward pressure on prices to the final consumer in Ireland.
The advice from Teagasc is for farmers to keep in contact with merchants as prices often spike at periods of high demand when European order books are full. Purchasing fertilisers at off-peak periods will help minimise prices. Teagasc further advises that finding alternative sources of major nutrients will save money and farmers should consider the use of slurry applications to minimise expenditure on chemical fertilisers. In addition, soil testing will prevent unnecessary applications.
27. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the rationale behind the sale of Coillte’s portfolio of telecommunications assets; his plans to sell off other Coillte assets; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34217/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe rationale for the disposal of Coillte’s portfolio of telecommunications assets is that it will enhance Coillte’s focus on its core activities in forestry and the operation of its board mills, which was an underlying principle in the Government Decision relating to Coillte in June 2014. The restructuring is also consistent with the Government Decision, also relating to Coillte, in June 2013. I understand that Coillte has stated that the proceeds from the transaction will strengthen the company’s balance sheet and support their ongoing investment of €59 million in one of their panel board subsidiaries, SmartPly which is based in Belview Port, outside Waterford city, and further investment in its renewable energy business. In relation to the actual transaction, Coillte Teoranta was established as a private commercial company under the Forestry Act 1988. In compliance with the Code of Practice for the Governance of State Bodies, such a significant disposal was a matter for the Board of Coillte while my approval and the consent of the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform for the disposal were required, also under the Code of Practice. The business was sold through a competitive bidding process in which the sale of the assets was widely advertised. The sale was handled on Coillte’s behalf by Goodbody Corporate Finance and overseen closely by the Board of the company.
Coillte has stated that, while sites at 298 locations were included in the sale, the total area of land associated with these sites is less than 15 hectares. The company has also given an assurance that access to its forests for recreation use is unaffected by the sale of their telecoms portfolio.
The decision to dispose of Coillte’s telecommunications portfolio was not made by me or the Government. It was a business decision by Coillte to capitalise on the significant value built up in its telecommunications business over the last 30 years at a time when there is considerable interest in acquiring infrastructure assets and to use the proceeds for re-investment in core aspects of its business thus creating new State assets.
As I have mentioned, under the Code of Practice, significant disposals are a matter for the Board. The company is currently refreshing its corporate strategy which I will be considering in due course.
28. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his views on recent consideration of amending the Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013 to provide increased protection to animals, particularly regarding outlawing hare coursing; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34017/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraCoursing of a hare is permitted under Animal Health & Welfare Act 2013 Act unless the hare is hunted or coursed in a space from which it does not have a reasonable chance of escape. The protections, such as the muzzling of greyhounds, which were introduced in 1993 have played an important role in safeguarding hares involved in coursing. In addition to supervision by officers from the National Parks & Wildlife Service, my Department’s veterinary officials attend around 10% of coursing meetings with a view to ensuring optimum welfare standards. These are selected through a combination of random and risk-based decision making. The Deputy will be aware that the matter was both debated at length and voted upon during the extensive debates that occurred during the passage of the Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013 through the Houses of the Oireachtas. I think that we have struck a reasonable balance in the legislation as between those opposed to hare coursing and those who consider it to be a legitimate sport.
I would like to emphasise that I am fully committed to promoting good practices that respect the welfare of all animals and my Department devotes considerable resources to protecting animal welfare and in dealing with breaches of animal welfare legislation. The Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013 applies across the board, both to rural and urban areas and to all animals, irrespective of species, whether kept for commercial, domestic, sport, show or for other purposes. Under the Act, the penalties are as high as can be permitted under our legal system such that on summary conviction, a person can be fined up to €5,000 and/ or imprisoned for up to 6 months; on conviction on indictment, a fine of up to €250,000 and/or imprisonment up to 5 years may be imposed. There is provision for fixed penalty payments for lesser offences.
I am satisfied that the Act provides the framework within which the welfare of animals can be safeguarded and I am hopeful that the substantial and significantly increased levels of penalties for offences of animal cruelty provided for under the Act will act as a deterrent to animal welfare abuses. I have no plans to review the Act so soon after it has come into operation.
29. Deputy Seán Kyne asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will provide up-to-date figures for applications under the green low-carbon agri-environment scheme, with particular reference to counties Galway and Mayo; and how commonage plans as part of the scheme are progressing. [34202/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraAlmost 27,000 applications to join GLAS were received under the first tranche of the new scheme this year, making this one of the most successful launches of any agri-environment scheme ever in Ireland. All applications are now being assessed and applicants will be notified in writing in October of the outcome of their application and of their contract commencement date. A total of 3,250 applications were received for Galway and 2,681 applications for Mayo. A full breakdown of the applications received is supplied in the following table:
|
County |
Submitted |
|
Carlow |
299 |
|
Cavan |
961 |
|
Clare |
1684 |
|
Cork |
2347 |
|
Donegal |
2043 |
|
Dublin |
66 |
|
Galway |
3250 |
|
Kerry |
1853 |
|
Kildare |
305 |
|
Kilkenny |
473 |
|
Laois |
393 |
|
Leitrim |
1067 |
|
Limerick |
1130 |
|
Longford |
536 |
|
Louth |
160 |
|
Mayo |
2681 |
|
Meath |
481 |
|
Monaghan |
611 |
|
Offaly |
505 |
|
Roscommon |
1585 |
|
Sligo |
978 |
|
Tipperary |
1233 |
|
Waterford |
393 |
|
Westmeath |
680 |
|
Wexford |
859 |
|
Wicklow |
362 |
|
' |
26935 |
I am pleased to say that GLAS Commonage Advisors have already been appointed to 1,800 Commonages, while appointments to the remainder will be made very shortly. Where Commonage Advisors have been appointed, preparation of commonage management plans can commence and I am aware that fieldwork has already been carried out in many cases. In addition, some 200 applications were in respect of commonages under 10 hectares in area, and these do not require the appointment of a single Commonage Advisor; in all such cases, applicants are free to draw up individual plans with their own advisor.
30. Deputy Helen McEntee asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine in view of the abolition of dairy quotas and the consequent market turbulence, as well as the significant borrowings undertaken by dairy farmers who share the Government’s ambition to increase Irish milk production in this new era for the sector, if he will update Dáil Éireann on his engagements with banks to ensure they afford credit flexibility to dairy farmers while the Irish dairy sector consolidates its expansion; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34092/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe price of milk and dairy commodities is determined by supply and demand factors at international level . Food commodity markets including dairy markets have been characterised by significant levels of volatility for a number of years prior to the abolition of dairy quotas. Factors contributing to global price volatility in 2015 include the Russian Ban and the softening of Chinese demand on one side, coupled with increased production among key global producers on the supply side. The longer term perspectives remain very positive and Irish dairy farmers are well placed to take full advantage of rising global demand. The ending of EU milk quotas has not witnessed anything that could be described as a spike in production at EU level. Ireland has sought to avail of the opportunity that longer term trends will bring. I have maintained ongoing contact with the Irish banks and have impressed upon them at every opportunity of the need to show flexibility in their dealings with farmers experiencing temporary cash flow difficulties in 2015 and into 2016. Most recently at the dairy forum, I reiterated these calls to the three main banks in attendance. The Irish dairy sector is cost competitive and Teagasc figures indicate that Irish farmers have relatively low levels of indebtedness compared to counterparts in competition countries. The banks assured me that they will remain vigilant on this issue, particularly if prices continue to deteriorate into spring 2016 therefore and will be facilitative in the measures available and in their dealings with dairy farmers. They stressed the need for early engagement for those who see early signs of such liquidity imbalance.
The Government has also been proactive of course and chief among the initiatives here are provisions allowing dairy and other farmers to use income averaging over five years when it comes to paying income tax bills. This also offers respite to the sector from a cash flow perspective. Furthermore, I have also ensured that priority has been given to measures for the dairy sector in the Rural Development Plan. The recent agreement at the council of Agriculture Ministers to increase the rate of single Farm Payment advance to 70% will also be of assistance from a cash plan perspective.
Finally I decided to make a 3 year interest free instalment arrangement available to all those affected by superlevy this year. This option has been availed of by approximately 3,700 producers and will be of assistance to farmers facing cash flow difficulties arising from super levy in the final year of the milk quota regime.
31. Deputy Terence Flanagan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will provide details of future tendering processes for properties at Howth fishery harbour in County Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [34014/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe property portfolio in Howth, one of six Fishery Harbour Centres managed and operated by my Department, encompasses a range of diverse properties reflecting its remit as a working fishery harbour and its unique features which facilitate a broad range of other diverse activities which are important from both an economic and social perspective. My Department’s aim, working within the Government Framework for the management of State property and relevant legal frameworks, is to ensure that the sites within this diverse portfolio generate a competitive economic return while fostering a diverse range of maritime activities. In this context my Department reviews the portfolio of properties on an ongoing basis in order to optimise those returns to the Exchequer.
On Monday 15th June 2015 my Department offered two of these properties for tenancy under lease agreement by competitive public tender. The competitions were advertised on my Department’s website, in a national and local newspaper and within the harbour and were open to all interested parties. The successful and unsuccessful Tenderers for these competitions have been notified and the finalisation of the lease agreements is well advanced.
A further two properties are currently subject to legal, operational or planning considerations and cannot be made available for tenancy until these issues are resolved. These issues are being progressed and, when appropriate, further tender competitions will be publicly advertised, in a similar manner to the previous competitions.
