Brian Ó Domhnaill (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the officials here as it is an opportune time to discuss the CAP reform proposals.

At a European level, it is critically important that there is a tie-down, as quickly as possible, on the availability of funds for the programme. There are many excellent proposals coming from the Commission which must be supported. In particular, I welcome the proposals for young farmers. What work is being done by the Government to introduce a retirement scheme in tandem with the proposals for young farmers? This is particularly relevant in view of the fact that 5 million farmers across Europe will retire during the lifetime of the new CAP. Incentives must be created to enable young people to get involved in farming. It is not enough to have a programme for young farmers without having a retirement programme in place as well.

Much has been said here about rates of payment, and it is fair to say that those rates are historical, based on 2000, 2001 and 2002. A farmer who was 26 in 2000 would have invested an enormous amount of money in bringing his or her farm up to standard and buying in stock. That same farmer will be 40 in 2014 but will not qualify for the young farmer incentives under the CAP. That should be looked at again. Some degree of flexibility should apply for those who can prove they were farming actively in the reference years.

Much has been said about the levels of payment in the media, and rightly so, because it is taxpayers' money. The money comes from Europe but is essentially taxpayers' money. If €1.25 billion is being spent in this country to promote agriculture and the agri-food sector, it is right that questions are asked, such as why 40% of the money coming into Ireland goes to only 10% of farmers, why the top 2% of farmers are in receipt of 10% of CAP payments and why 70% of Irish farmers receive less than €10,000 a head. These are legitimate questions. If we are to be honest with ourselves we must admit there are farmers in the west of Ireland who are producing lambs and calves and sending them on without receiving single farm payments to which they should be entitled.

Let us take for example, during the reference years, a farmer with an entitlement of 400 ewes or 60 livestock units. He or she would get a single farm payment of approximately €11,200. Another farmer with an entitlement of 100 heifers or 60 livestock units would receive approximately €8,000. Now let us take another example, which baffles everyone, of a farmer with an entitlement of 100 bullocks or 60 livestock units. He or she would be entitled to a payment of €31,000, which is almost four times the payment received by the heifer owner. I do not see the logic or fairness in that. Why should payments over the next six or eight years be based on historic privilege in 2000, 2001 and 2002? I do not see the incentive in that for any young person to enter farming, to develop an enterprise or to stay at home and help a parent or uncle and to inherit the farm at a future date. We must change the current rates of payment. I know hundreds of young people from farm families in Donegal who are leaving to go to Australia and Canada. If the option was available to them to get a higher single farm payment to make the enterprise more viable they would stay at home. They would add to the production sector and would add to the objectives of Food Harvest 2020. There are a number of farm enterprises in places like County Meath where individuals are directors of farming companies and are receiving over €500,000 in payments. That is not right and it is not the best or fairest way to allocate our money.

The Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine is supposed to represent all farmers, not just the elite, not just those who could afford to develop their enterprises over the past six to eight years because they were in receipt of higher single farm payments than others. Farmers who are in receipt of very high single farm payments can rent land for five times the going rate and are ultimately preventing smaller farmers from renting additional land. According to EU state aid rules, that is a distortion of the market but that is exactly what is happening with the current single farm payment structure. It would not be allowed in the private sector, if, for example, Enterprise Ireland gave a grant to a retail outlet to set up in competition with a similar outlet across the street. We must be very careful here. We need to go back to the drawing board and really think this through. If we continue going in the current direction we will drive thousands of individuals who live along the western seaboard off the land. We will end up with marginal land being abandoned. That is not what the Commission wants and the Commissioner has been been very clear about that. We often question the Commission and its motivation but we must take a very close look at what is being proposed. It is not good enough to simply support the proposals because some of the farming organisations support them. There are farming organisations which support the Minister's stance and they have a legitimate right to do so. However, I believe they are wrong in doing so. They are letting down the small farmers who are members of their organisations. We must go back to the drawing board.

It is my view that the funds that were available to this country under pillar 2 have not been utilised effectively. The rural development fund, under Leader, is under the remit of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government but the governing Department, in my view, is the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. Why has a large proportion of the funds available to this country, which have to be drawn down by the end of next year, not been drawn down yet? There are two reasons, the first of which is the eligibility criteria attached to those funds by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The second is the lack of flexibility given to Leader companies across the country. We are going to end up in a situation where a couple of hundred million euro will not be used, even though it is available to this country and to small indigenous businesses. That money will go back to the European Union. What steps, if any, have been taken by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine to liaise with the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to ascertain why those funds are not being drawn down and who is responsible? Is the European Commission at fault here and, if so, what steps have been taken to consult with the Commission? How many meetings have taken place and how can we rectify this situation in time to allow those funds to be drawn down and to be available to rural businesses all over the country which are currently struggling for cash? We could create hundreds of jobs if individuals were allowed to draw down those funds. I have spoken to many representatives from local rural development companies who have told me that they have many applications for funding on their books but they are not allowed to approve funding because of the criteria linked to the scheme. Something should be done about this promptly. An extensive campaign should be fought, up and down the country, to ensure that people apply for the available funds and that such funds are released.

I wish to ascertain from the Secretary General the view of the Department regarding any upper cap that might be imposed on the single farm payments. Is a figure being knocked around in the Department? Has the Minister indicated a figure which might be acceptable?