Deputy Eamon Ó Cuív:

I only gave that as a sample I happened to have because I am working on it for the person in question but I have endless similar examples.

Many of these people received a redigitised map with small corrections a few years ago and they presumed it was correct. Now they have received another digitised map. I understand the Ombudsman is examining the retrospective action the Department took in 2011 on disadvantaged area payments. I have no doubt the Ombudsman will state the process being followed here is unfair and we will test it all the way to the Ombudsman. It seems to be tying up many of the Department's resources.

Recently somebody who had overdeclared came to me with one of these maps. The person had not realised a garraí had been left out which far exceeds the overdeclaration on what was included. We must find out from the Department before a case is made whether the person will be penalised on the double for not declaring all the land. People are human.

Suppose for argument sake the Department examined cases where it is clear and obvious the person is defrauding the Department and penalised them. Suppose then the Department considered other cases involving 0.1 ha or 0.3 ha on land which is very difficult to measure, such as that which contains rocks and scrub, and calculated the overpayment by Europe was €10 million and paid it back to Europe. Would the Department still be fined? Rather than taking money from the farmer the Department would take it from the Exchequer but would avoid a fine by paying back the overpayment. It would mean effectively the Department disallowed European payments because it was paid out of Exchequer resources.