Michael McNamara (Clare, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I commend the Minister on coming to the House today for this timely and important date on the issue of commonages. Today's debate is based on the report of the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine on the review of commonage lands and framework management lands. I commend the Chairman of that committee, Deputy Andrew Doyle, under whose chairmanship that review took place. The volume of work being done by that committee under his chairmanship is testament to his industry.

A number of hearings attended by various stakeholders gave rise to this report, the most pertinent body in that regard being the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. The BurrenLIFE group also gave testimony to the hearings. Obviously, commonages are as important a part of farming in Clare as they are across much of the west of Ireland and in County Kildare. However, commonages are not in any way limited to the Burren. There are many upland commonages close to where I live in east Clare which are affected by the proposals recently announced by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine.

If the evidence from BurrenLIFE taught us anything it is that a prescriptive plan from a governmental organisation, be that the National Parks and Wildlife Service or the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, does not necessarily work and often does not work. Commonages in the Burren have been farmed in a particular way for generations. Those who farm that land have a vested interest in ensuring it is farmed properly. As pointed out by Deputy Kyne, those who farm the commonages in Connemara have a vested interest in ensuring that land is farmed properly and is not under-grazed or over-grazed, and that the potential to farm it is maximised. Farmers who have been doing this for generations know best. What the BurrenLIFE project did was empower those farmers to seek a solution, which they did, that was acceptable to the Department and Europe and worked a great deal better than previous plans introduced by government officials, albeit well-intentioned and well-meaning government officials.

Like Deputies Ó Cuív and Kyne, I propose to focus on the issue of dormancy and what is proposed. The report we are discussing states that the Department was anxious to focus payments under the CFP on active farmers and so help to revitalise rural life in areas where there has been a significant fall-off in the farming population. How this is done is what is at issue. The Minister has interjected a couple of times during this debate to make the point that a commonage without livestock is not being farmed. That is only one interpretation. The Minister appeared to indicate that that interpretation is required under European Union law. I take this opportunity to point to another alternative, a Welsh model, the Glastir Commons 2014 explanatory book, which is expressly approved by the European Union in that there is a European logo and the following title displayed thereon: "The European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development: Europe Investing in Rural Areas". According to this booklet, the objective is to maintain 80% of active graziers on the contract land throughout the contract period. Active graziers are defined as commoners with rights who turn out stock to graze the common land, which is in line with the Minister's proposal; commoners who are not exercising rights of common because they have agreed to withdraw their stock under a management agreement; commoners who have recently ceased to exercise their rights of common because for example, of control measures during foot-and-mouth disease - TB would be another example in the Irish context if speaking about cattle rather than sheep; and persons who graze non-registered unenclosed land, defined within the booklet as eligible land to enter the scheme. I am not aware of much non-registered unenclosed land in my constituency. The issue then is those who have a right to the commonage but who withdraw their land as part of a management agreement and whether they can continue to be considered active graziers. The Minister appeared to indicate that they cannot. I would urge that the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine consider the Welsh model in that it would appear that under this model, which appears to have been expressly approved by the European Union, such people are still considered to be active graziers. That is not to say that the people who withdraw their stock under a management agreement-----

See this speech in context