Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the farming representatives bodies. They are up bright and early and I know they have other things to do. It is good to see them here early. We have read all of the submissions. They are circulated to us in advance and we consider them in detail, individually and collectively. As the Cathaoirleach said, the Minister will come before the committee next week.

Programme for Government: Our Shared Future states on page 65 that the Government will seek to establish an independent agricultural appeals review panel in legislation as its priority and ensure that a panel will include participants with practical knowledge of and experience in farming. The Government is coming to the end of its term, and needs to be held to that. That is an important and recurring point in all of the submissions.

No farming representative body here today has opposed that proposal; rather, they have recognised it. That is important. I am always conscious that in this room we are on Oireachtas television and many of the highlights of the meeting will be dealt with in the Irish Farmers Journal and Agriland I always think of both sides when we are in these meetings. We have an opportunity to put on the public record our perspectives on this matter. We need to be loud and clear that farming organisations and their representative bodies are in favour of a significant appeals process. That is very positive.

I will share some takeaways and ask one question. Clearly, everyone wants an independent board and chair. That is all fair and reasonable. People possibly want an independent vice chair. People with practical farming experience should be involved. In the case of the Seanad agriculture panel, it is clearly stated that people must have practical farm experience. The witnesses might take a look at that. We will work collaboratively in this forum and in the Dáil and Seanad to ensure that is carried through to the Bill.

I want to touch on some of the issues. The IFA spoke about treating farmers fairly and with respect, dignity, professionalism and efficiency. All of that makes absolute sense. It could not be said more quickly, better or more concisely. That is a big thing for me.

The word that keeps echoing with me today at this meeting is "simplification". All of the witnesses know what that means. There are many schemes and the system is complex. We need to make everything simpler and have a common denominator. Farmers want to comply and need guidance. They do not need a guy coming in and whacking them over the head; rather, they need encouragement and support. There is a major issue in respect of the simplification of all agricultural schemes so that people fully understand them. If they fully understand them, they are more likely to be fully compliant. That is a fair observation. We need to be proactive in engaging with farmers in all schemes. That is important.

There is a complexity about schemes that is very hard to get your head around, and it is something we need to address.

The recurring theme, of course, is the level of ongoing monitoring of farm activities, which must be proportionate, simple, transparent and communicated. I find it very hard to understand. I equate this to sending a car into a garage for a service. You do not want to go away and, two days later, a fellow rings you up and says it is €6,000. You want to know what the problem is before the car is left in. The problem with the schemes is that the inspectorate comes in and they know nothing about it, and people are sometimes waiting weeks. There needs to be a very tight timeframe. The IFA suggested that before the inspectors leave, the farmer would have an idea of what the problems were. That might be too simplistic or too hard, and there is the question of what medium of communication to use. However, to have a very short, appropriate and reasonable timeframe is important.

We want to help farmers. This should be about helping farmers to be compliant, which is the key issue. Again, farmers must be treated fairly and respectfully and there must be fair procedures and a well-established and understood code of conduct with regard to what is expected. It is about mutual respect. It is not a one-sided trick; it is about everyone being respectful to everyone else. Everyone has a job to do, which is important to recognise.

The IFA suggested that the Department should provide a written summary of the findings and final notice of the breaches found before the inspectors leave the farm. I think that is too much to ask for, given the practicalities. In an ideal world, it would be fantastic, but I would rather say “in a timely manner”. It has to be done in a timely and fair manner.

We have the Farmers’ Charter of Rights 2015-2020 but it has not been updated. I will be making an ask of the witnesses today. Many of the issues that they have raised with regard to the panel and the appeal are important. We need a farmers’ charter of rights. It is outrageous that we have had no update of the farmer's charter of rights since 2020, given it is now 2024. If we talk about dignity, respect, engagement and consultation with farmers and their representative bodies, and fair procedures, protocols and a code of conduct, all of this was in the charter and it needs to be updated. They are talking about schemes that are non-existent, so it is not fit for purpose. My ask of the witnesses is that they should go back to their respective bodies and associations and then lobby the Government, as they are all very capable of doing. They should not get into fringe negotiations but proper negotiations with a timeframe. They should say, “We want to see an updated, current, new farmers’ charter of rights for our farmers, the people we represent.” These are not mutually exclusive and they go hand-in-hand. I think that would particularly address this issue and give the farm organisations another layer of comfort and support.

Well done to the witnesses on the submissions, which are important and crystallise the issues well, and there is a commonality in all of them. There is support for a system, which is positive. I am convinced that we can work collaboratively with the Minister next week in the Dáil and Seanad to get all of those asks over the line because they are all reasonable asks. The witnesses might respond on the farmers’ charter in the context of this Bill and where they understand it to be, how they see the charter going hand-in-hand with the Bill and how it is essential with regard to protecting their members. The issue of respect, dignity and professionalism is a two-sided coin, and we need to emphasise that too. Perhaps the president of the IFA could respond first.