Brian Ó Domhnaill (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the delegation from the Irish Farmers Association and thank Mr. Bryan for outlining the association's position in advance of the budget. I concur with the Chairman that it is critical that Ireland secures an agreement on the Common Agricultural Policy that maintains the allocation at its current level. Achieving this objective would still entail a reduction in real terms of 6% or 7%. Political volatility across Europe and elements of the domestic agenda in certain countries, including imminent elections, are putting severe pressure on the CAP budget. The joint committee must support the Minister in making every effort at the Council of Ministers and in the European Parliament to secure an agreement on the budget as quickly as possible. If this issue is allowed to fester, it may not be good news as CAP expenditure accounts for a large proportion of the overall European Union budget.

While European expenditure may be a debate for another day, the allocation for agriculture at domestic level is within the control of the Minister. I wholeheartedly agree with Mr. Bryan on the need to protect agriculture in so far as possible. We all know that cuts are necessary given that we are in an adjustment programme, the country is in a difficult economic position and a significant gap between revenue and expenditure remains. As Mr. Bryan noted, cuts of €114 million or 8% are earmarked for the agricultural budget next year. We should not cut the budget by this level. While the Minister must contend with Government colleagues at Cabinet level as they examine areas where cuts could be made, it should be noted, as demonstrated by the findings of an IFA commissioned report, that all moneys expended by the State in agriculture are reinvested in the economy.

At a meeting of the joint committee yesterday, members had a good discussion with the Minister during which they suggested areas where expenditure could be reduced and other areas where it must be protected. All political parties agree that we must protect the schemes to which Mr. Bryan referred, in particular, the disadvantaged areas and suckler cow welfare schemes. The IFA was to the fore in highlighting last year that proposed changes to the disadvantaged areas scheme would not work. It has been proved correct. The allocation for the scheme last year was €190 million compared with €222 million in the previous year. By the end of October this year, however, €186 million had been paid out and this figure will increase as adjudications are reached in the appeals process. The reason the Department's proposals did not work was that we had derogations and an appeals mechanism. Yesterday, a member of the joint committee suggested increasing stocking rates on better land as a means of reducing expenditure on the scheme. What is Mr. Bryan's view on that proposal?

Many farmers will exit the rural environment protection scheme, REPS, in 2014, which will be a major issue. While I hope this issue will be addressed in the Common Agricultural Policy, it is not yet clear if that will be the case given the uncertainty about the new programme. I had hoped more places would be made available under the new agri-environment options scheme and that the allocation for the scheme would have been higher. Despite its difficulties, however, we at least have a scheme in place. The deadline for submission of applications must be extended until at least the end of the year in light of the difficulties emerging with commonage. The joint committee raised this issue with the Minister yesterday and was given an assurance that he would not issue letters until the matter had been discussed with members and he had consulted farming organisations.

That is important because there would be huge difficulties if the letters concerning minimum and maximum stocking rates were issued. It would simply not work if one had to go to a neighbour to try to agree a stocking density on land.

To return to the budget, some of the issues raised had to with the REPS and the suckler cow welfare scheme. To fulfil the requirement in respect of calves born this year, the cost will be €12 million. This year's budget is €25 million. The representatives of the Irish Cattle Breeding Federation who appeared before the committee three weeks ago highlighted the importance of the suckler cow welfare scheme to the beef sector. In the event that there is no suckler cow welfare scheme next year farmers will divert to the dairy sector and buy different breeds and the beef sector will suffer as a consequence. I wholeheartedly agree that we need a well funded suckler cow welfare scheme next year. There are issues that should be examined by the Minister in the lead-up to the budget There are measures within the budget to protect farm schemes, but this can only be done by reducing funding in other areas. We can agree on an average figure across Departments and whether it is 3% or 8%, there will still have to be cuts. On the current side, there is €50.7 million and more than €5.5 million on the capital side available for greyhound racing and Horse Racing Ireland this year. This is one area that should be examined. It is a profitable sector which is important to the economy. However, payments to small farmers should not be cut, while leaving that sector largely untouched, as it would send the wrong message in the current economic climate.

The staffing complement within the Department and the six State agencies under its auspices is 5,000. Whether we like it, there will be 500 fewer by mid-2014, according to figures from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine has to comply in remaining under the ECF ceiling. Why not take 500 staff out of the Department next year? I am sure all farmers would agree that most of them should be inspectors. I know the president would agree with this. Yesterday in west Donegal three inspectors were driving around and did not know where they were. A progressive elderly farmer in my constituency who suffered from ill health was subject to a 65% penalty this year following a week-long inspection of her farm. It was disgraceful. Her partner had cancer and she was in ill health. We are appealing the decision in the case. That an inspector should spend one week on a farm is incomprehensible. Given the increased costs, the wet weather conditions for tillage farmers and the fact that dairy cows had to be housed during the summer months, it was crazy that inspections took place this year. The Minister should fast-track the removal of staff from the Department by means of a redundancy programme or transfer them to other Departments such as the Department of Social Protection to achieve the savings required in agriculture. I am not sure what the saving would be, but it could amount to €20 million across the State agencies and the Department. This issue should be seriously considered instead of seeking, as Mr. Bryan said, a cut of 3% here or 4% there in schemes. Certainly, we on this side support what the representatives have said in that regard.

Time is against us as the budgetary process has begun. While we had a good discussion yesterday, Fianna Fáil will make its own budgetary submission, but largely we support the representatives and are looking at other areas within the Agriculture Vote where savings can be achieved. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the Minister and either he or his officials will be listening today. I hope the IFA's proposals will be taken into consideration as farmers are struggling and under pressure. There is much uncertainty about the CAP and in line with Food Harvest 2020 we must increase exports, the one area within the economy that can help to bring about recovery. The only way we can do this is by protecting the schemes that are so important to farmers' incomes.