Mr. Sean McNamara:

I thank the Chairman for the opportunity to address the committee today on the issue of the draft general scheme of the agricultural appeals (amendment) Bill 2024, on behalf of the ICSA. As a general comment, the ICSA welcomes the intent to set up an independent review panel to provide a further option for farmers affected by decisions of the Department of agriculture to impose penalties under the various CAP schemes. Penalties and inspections cause immense stress to farmers and it is our view that in many cases, the severity of sanctions is way out of line with the offence.

To be fair, the Department has introduced a new regime under the new CAP strategic plan, where cross-compliance is being replaced by conditionality. The changed approach involves a restriction of movement from a herd until the farmer exercises the option to remedy basic failings or errors. This is potentially a significant improvement and should reduce the number of cases for appeal. On the other hand, conditionality in some cases is imposing a higher standard on farmers. We have also seen that there has been pushback at European level against standards such as GAEC 8, which requires a minimum of 4% of land to be devoted to non-productive areas or features. Nonetheless, it demonstrates that standards are rising and changing all the time and it is hard for farmers to adapt to all these changes.

Therefore, we in the ICSA believe that there are many different circumstances, where farmers who are doing their best and working very hard to produce high-quality food can fall foul of the regulations and find themselves in trouble with the Department, and this is imposing serious levels of stress on farmers. It is also our view that the requirement on farmers to have everything 100% is not realistic. Most farmers do not have the luxury of farming model farms like Teagasc research centres which are located in one block on the highest quality land, where hedges or areas of scrub were removed long ago or never existed in the first place. These model farms cannot be compared to what many farmers are up against as they farm fragmented holdings, with all sorts of challenges, in mountainy areas, disadvantaged lands, boglands or areas covered in scrub. Today, that kind of land is seen as being of huge benefit to biodiversity, but it is not so easy to farm it to the same standard as a model dairy farm, which is one green open space divided by wire.

If a departmental official makes a mistake, it is just that, a mistake. When farmers make mistakes, they often feel like they are criminals. Against this backdrop, it is urgent and vital that farmers get fair play and the opportunity to explain their case. They must have the opportunity to be heard and to ensure they are given the same rights as anybody accused of any misdemeanour or offence by the Garda, for instance. That is why we in the ICSA want this legislation to be capable of delivering fair play for farmers through a review panel process that is fit for purpose.

We have a number of key issues with the draft Bill. First, the review panel must be seen to be neutral and be seen to assess cases in a completely fresh and open-minded way. For that reason, it is not appropriate to have the director or deputy director of the Agriculture Appeals Office on the panel as a voting member. Second, we believe that the deadline for submitting appeals, at six months, and at three months in the case of the review panel, is too short to ensure justice for farmers. Third, we believe that while oral hearings by remote electronic means might be suitable in some circumstances, it must be on the explicit grounds that an appellant may demand an in-person hearing if they so wish. Fourth, we are concerned that the grounds for an appeal are far too tight and will inevitably deny access to fair play for many farmers. We believe the grounds for appeal should be based on a failure to take adequate account of the special circumstances pertaining to the case in addition to error in fact or law.

We have circulated to the committee a more detailed outline of the amendments we would like included and we urge members to give it their close consideration.