Mr. Kevin Smyth:

The three of us will split the questions between us. I will try to run with the themes contained in members' contributions. In that context, Deputy Kyne posed an interesting question with regard to a commonage with 300 sheep which is being used by three farmers but in respect of which there are ten shareholders. Which is the most important aspect? Is it that three farmers with 100 sheep each are actively working the commonage? Should we insist that the ten farmers should each have 30 sheep on it? I would say that the three farmers with 100 sheep each should continue to work the commonage and that it should be maintained in GAEC. The key point is that a whole-of-commonage approach is the most important thing in the context of what we achieve here. We must ensure that we put in place practical solutions that help us to solve the problem.

Senator Ó Domhnaill referred to the minimum and maximum figures. I accept that they were contentious at the time but they provide a starting point. The consultation process is ongoing. The problem is that there are four specific dangers which will arise if we do not do this right. The first of these is the damage that would be done to the reputation of this country if we lost the commonages. The second is the loss of payments to farmers. If the latter are not doing what they are supposed to be doing, they will lose their payments. The third is the possibility that the Commission could either restart proceedings against this country or put in place massive disallowances against the Government for not enforcing the rules. The fourth is the loss of biodiversity, recreational areas, etc., as a result of the fact that the commonages would simply become overgrown. Those are the dangers and that is why we must get matters right. I am not putting a timescale on this because we are still involved in the consultation process and we want to discuss this matter with everyone.

In the gorse fires which occurred in 2011, we lost 1,500 ha of forest alone. We learned a great deal from what occurred in 2011 and it was a hard way to learn. If we have a burning policy, it must be managed in such a way that the appalling damage that occurred in 2011 will not be repeated.

Senator Comiskey referred to overgrazing and undergrazing. The agreements must reflect the realities that exist. That is the only way to proceed. If overgrazing is the problem, then animals should be removed from the commonage. Undergrazing is increasingly becoming a problem. We have lost 2 million sheep. This means that 2 million lawn-mowers have disappeared during the past few years. There were once over 5 million sheep in the national herd, whereas now there are around 3.5 million. Overgrazing is a problem in some areas but undergrazing is increasingly becoming a more major problem.

Deputy Barry referred to map acres. There is no tolerance for map acres from my Department's point of view. We have dealt with a number of cases in which people have had more entitlements than land and where they submitted bogus claims in respect of land that was not in GAEC or that was virtually mountainous. A number of cases went to the appeals office recently and those involved lost their entire payments. We have a zero-tolerance attitude to cases involving map acres.

The question of how to deal with dormancy is continually being discussed. As stated earlier, this cannot be avoided and we must come up with some way to deal with it. The issue that arises is whether those who are active will step up to the plate and assist us. The difficulty is that there are commonages in respect of which there are nine or ten shares but where there are only three farmers remaining. There must be some way of dealing with that issue.

A percentage of the future CAP payment will be devoted to coupling. There are a series of competing interests - whether it is suckler cows or whatever - in this regard. I am not sure, therefore, whether coupling is the solution.

Those are some of my preliminary thoughts on the points raised. I will now ask Mr. Evans and Dr. Bleasdale to offer their opinions.