Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The witnesses are welcome. I am going to be pretty quick and there will be sharp questions. Going by the ACA's presentation, there is a problem with farmers getting information on nitrates that was promised by the Department. When was that information to be given in case farmers went over their nitrates limit each year? From the presentation, that was not given to agricultural consultants on time. Will one of the witnesses elaborate on that?

The Department gave out a contract to agricultural consultants which seemingly was not paid. Will the witnesses elaborate on that? My understanding is that taxpayers are paying for all of the research by another group. The guide to how to do nutrient management plans, NMPs, is available but the members of the ACA have to pay for it and it is costing them €300,000 a year. Why is that?

ACA members are assisting farmers with their applications for all of the schemes, including the nitrates derogation, TAMS, BISS, and the complementary redistributive income support for sustainability, CRISS, scheme. ACA members are doing at least 50% of applications and up to 68% in some schemes. Is the Department engaging with them on a constant basis? Has the ACA a central fund for training and things like that?

In relation to water quality, which way do the witnesses see that going? What way to we need to go forward on it? We know the amount of amount of funding that goes to other planners such as Teagasc. We know what taxpayers are giving. As for the ACA members' fees and those of other groups - we will not call them competitors because everyone is looking after farmers - are they in line, even though they are getting substantial funding?