Andrew Doyle (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank my colleague, Deputy Martin Heydon, for stepping in at the beginning of the debate and all Members who spoke for their kind words. Our committee has demonstrated that committees can work in unison and be productive. There is not much point in being here unless one can be genuinely productive. I commend all of the members of the joint committee and thank them for their co-operation through many reports.

The report before the House was published in July 2013. The CAP had just been agreed and we had started our work before that. Pillar 2 and the rural development programme had not, however, been agreed at that stage. We did our work against a backdrop of draft guidelines from the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht which we believed would not achieve their intended outcome - better commonages in better condition. We set about identifying the reasons and concerns and coming up with a set of solutions by way of recommendations to achieve the intended outcome. Where we have got with what we have so far today is an attempt to do this which is better and more practical.

The report's recommendations note that a one-size-fits-all approach does not work. We have achieved a solution in so far as each commonage will be dealt with under a commonage management plan. It will be a laborious process, but rather than have a diktat from a central authority, we have a minimal stocking rate for the minimal payment, after which it will be up to each plan and the participants therein to agree matters. It is very important. We recommended that commonages be managed by output driven schemes. GLAS is an output driven scheme and being fine-tuned to make it effective and workable for as many people as possible and to be acceptable to the European Commission. It is worth bearing in mind that the submission has not, to the best of my knowledge, been signed off on finally by the Commission, although one hopes it will be.

We identified the BurrenLIFE scheme as a model. It shows that one size does not fit all as under the REPS, the requirement to have all stock off the land for the winter - bovines in that case - would have damaged the environment. We became aware of this famously with regard to hazel overgrowth on the Burren. People reacted in that case. There are plenty of other examples around the country and things will take a bit of work. I have seen this myself. Deputy Martin Heydon is interested in doing something on the Curragh, a landscape that is unique in Europe. Certainly, that is worth considering, although I caution the Deputy that a great deal of hard slogging and knocking of heads together is required. Issues such as burning and, in County Wicklow, the deer culling season and how they are managed are important. Practical changes must be made to place commonage in good agricultural and environmental condition and beyond.

I welcome what the Minister said at the end of his contribution to the effect that he is open minded. His intention and that of his officials is that this will be a two-way street. It is certainly the feeling I got last night from the departmental officials who were in Glendalough. They took on board some of the concerns raised. I highlighted two earlier, including terms of leases of national park land and how ineligible land that can be made eligible can be included in year one. This debate has raised further matters for consideration. As a joint committee, we could bring in Mr. Joe Healy from the implementation group following on from this process to outline his position. It would be a good idea to do so. I have met him a couple of times and he is considered to be an objective and fair person. He must be because the microscope will be on him. Certainly, that would be a worthwhile process in which to engage.

The joint committee has made its recommendations and we can all take some satisfaction from the fact that much of the reflection in the meantime in devising a rural development programme with the commonages aspect to it has taken on board much of what we said. In particular, the idea that one size does not fit all has been acknowledged. We could not have implemented a commonage plan on a national basis. Every commonage is different and has different dynamics and personalities and must be dealt with in a certain way.

An issue that came up and which was raised in this debate involved planners. Teagasc has advertised for planners and it will not have enough. Where there are three farmers on a commonage, two with Teagasc and one with a private planner for the AEOS, there must be a coming together. It may be the case that Teagasc will sub-contract out where people can agree and assign planners. That might make matters simpler. It might be a small issue, but it could delay getting plans off the ground. I also note that if 25,000 or 30,000 applications are accepted next year, more than that number will be submitted.

I am not sure if the Minister has an idea as to a closing date for applications under GLAS, but on a practical level, a mid-year closing date would be difficult. At the same time, getting everything processed and approved by the end of the year to enable some payments to be made by the end of next year will be a challenge.

There is a good deal of work to do. We need to get sanction first from the Commission, but if there is anything the committee can do with regard to GLAS or the locally led environment schemes, the members will be more than happy to do that.

I thank the members. We were drawn on this almost a year ago but the sub-committee was on a fact-finding mission the same day. We are delighted that we had the opportunity to present the report.

See this speech in context