Mr. Liam O'Keeffe:

Deputy McNamara asked how much less profit a farmer would make with a designation. That is a very difficult question to answer because every farmer has a different type of land and does a different type of farming and it is hard to put a figure on it.

To get back to Senator Ó Domhnaill's remarks on compensation, he asked how the designation was done. That is something that frustrates many farmers because they look across the ditch and see the same land they have but without a designation. It causes a lot of frustration. We have no answer to it. It is a bit of a mystery. The Senator mentioned that it would make huge difference if one body were to deal with this. Since we started, we have been trying to deal with different bodies. We have been sent from one to the other and no one seems to want to take responsibility for anything as far as we can see. If the issue is not resolved, there will be land abandonment, which would be a very serious issue.

There are already people struggling to live in severely disadvantaged areas. That must be taken into account. These people do not have very productive ground and it has been a struggle for them. As a result of farming smallholdings, higher ground and disadvantaged lands, many farmers have struggled for so long that they did not have life assurance policies, health insurance policies or pensions. Their pension was their land and now they are in a position where they cannot sell it. They might have gone into a home or had health issues. It is different to someone on productive ground who has a good pension behind them and has built up these resources over the years. This needs to be taken into consideration. It is very urgent, because of all those situations, if a farmer in those areas needs to sell land for a health issue a way can be found to do that.

Senator Ó Domhnaill also mentioned the need for agreement with farmers on the designation. Another matter that has caused a great deal of frustration occurred in November 2007 when the proposed designation documents were sent to the farmers, who got a three-month window to appeal a designation. In that three-month window, Department officials from the National Parks and Wildlife Service were coming into the communities, telling them how good the scheme was and how much money they were going to get. People accepted it. They read down through it and forestry was supposed to be generally permitted, which was an issue for many fellows. They said, "I can drown my hen harrier area and a portion of my land and I can plant another portion". As the scheme went on, they found the forestry had stopped and so did the scheme they were promised. If they had known no forestry would be allowed and there would be no compensation scheme, they would have put in an appeal. It was only fair to tell them things as they were, so that they could then make a decision on whether or not to appeal it, but they were led to believe they were going to get money and that they could still plant. However, it all fell apart.

Today we have people who lost out on a payment of €13,000 or €14,000 a year for five years. We have even come across people who paid inheritance tax of €20,000 to €25,000 to inherit a property and they now find their property is worth nothing and they did not get the schemes they were promised. That is a great deal of money for an individual to be down and find they have an asset that is worthless. That is where land abandonment will come in. They are left with a tax bill and with an asset that is worth nothing and they will walk away from it. That needs to be resolved immediately.

Deputy Willie Penrose mentioned the wind farm. As a group, we are not pro-wind farm but we find that many farmers had wind development companies interested in their land. They were being offered money either for rental or sale and they find now that it is gone. We do not expect them to be compensated for whatever money they were going to get but it is an issue. Farmers thought they had an asset and now they do not.