Mr. Eddie Downey:

I thank the Chairman and members of the joint committee for the invitation to address the major concerns of farmers about eligible land under the new basic payment scheme. We have for some time expressed serious concern about the lack of clarity on eligible land under the scheme. Farmers expected that this issue would have been addressed and clarified at the recent Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine CAP meetings held throughout the country. We believe this was the forum in which the issue should have been addressed.

At a recent charter meeting it was agreed that the Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine would send a booklet on eligible land to every farmer in advance of the application process. This has not happened. The quicker it is done the better, as there is considerable confusion. Farmers are entitled to practical guidance on this vital issue and it is the job of the Department to provide it. I understand discussions are continuing between the Department and the European Commission on this important issue. Without guidance, farmers are being left in a very precarious position as they are uncertain whether they should include or exclude certain lands. There is a serious concern that they could take out areas which would and should be eligible for payment.

It is important that a fair degree of tolerance be shown to farmers, as it is quite clear that determining whether land is eligible or ineligible is an inexact science and open to interpretation. This is particularly the case in large parts of the country where there is mountainous and other marginal land.

Much of this land is designated as Natura as well as commonage. However, this is a significant issue across the country in all counties where there is marginal land. In fact, most farms have some marginal land and have adjusted for this. Some 4.7 million hectares of eligible land are declared by applicants for direct payment every year. Of this, 330,000 hectares of commonage are declared, representing about 7% of the total area. However, approximately 100,000 hectares of commonage land is not declared as the ownership is held by dormant shareholders and others who do not make a claim.

In the recent CAP negotiations, there was a lot of emphasis on focusing payments towards active farmers. I can recall debates at this forum and I believe everybody was of the same opinion, namely, that payments should go to active farmers. The recent CAP negotiations and the resulting reform have led to a reallocation of support through a convergence model which was discussed and agreed at the EU Council of Ministers. It is a compromise outcome. It is worth pointing out that one of the options put forward by Commissioner Ciolo is that member states could opt for regionalisation. If this had been applied in Ireland, it would have divided the country geographically based on the productivity of the land. This would have been discriminatory against hill farmers and farmers on marginal land, as it would have left their average payment per hectare significantly lower compared to the final outcome. The IFA at all times strongly opposed the regionalisation approach. While the outcome of CAP is not perfect, the protection of active farmers had to be central to the debate.

The priority now must be to ensure that the full Rural Development Programme allocation of €580 million per annum is fully spent over the coming six years. In the case of GLAS, some recognition is given to the reference area. For example, in commonages, the GLAS payment of €120 per hectare applies to a wider area than that which is eligible for the basic payment scheme.

In regard to the hen harrier areas, the decision to extend GLAS Plus to farmers who have greater than 13.5 hectares is welcome. However, more needs to be done, as this concession is only given in areas where farmers have substantial land areas designated for endangered bird species. In addition, the issue of splitting parcels in the current round of GLAS must be addressed, as farmers are in a better position to maximise their payments through a combination of land-based and linear measures.

In regard to areas of natural constraint, a stocking rate criterion of 0.15 has applied for a consecutive seven-month period. This ensures that payments go to active farmers, albeit at a very low stocking density, as the stocking rate does not differentiate between the types of land. There will be a review of the areas of natural constraint over the next number of years which will classify land based on the natural handicap of soil moisture deficit. There will be an opportunity to re-examine the support structures of the areas formerly known as disadvantaged areas, but the priority for the IFA will be to protect those farmers whose lands are marginal and to ensure that the payment levels clearly reflect this.

On inspection specifically, I want to clearly state that the IFA is particularly concerned about the over-zealous approach of some inspectors on the issue of land eligibility and cross-compliance. Recent information on the level of penalties obtained on a county-by-county basis through parliamentary questions in this House shows this to be the case, with higher penalties in some counties. This is why the Minister must proceed immediately to introduce a new charter of rights involving the following: proper and fair notice of inspections; a reduction in overall inspections; increased tolerances; a yellow card system with reduced penalties; and an improved payment deadline. These discussions have been ongoing for some time and need to be satisfactorily concluded now by the Minister, Deputy Simon Coveney.

In conclusion, the IFA wants a satisfactory outcome to the issue of eligible land. There must be no retrospective penalties applied on farmers, as they have tried to do their best to determine whether their land is eligible. Information must be provided so that farmers can be assured their payments will not be affected under the various schemes applying, whether it is the basic payment scheme, GLAS or the areas of natural constraint scheme. This issue is too important, as direct payments make up such a significant part of farm income.