Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I am delighted that the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine has come to the Chamber. Perhaps we can clarify this issue.

As the Minister of State will be aware, considerable lands have been burnt in recent months due to the dry season. A large part of this is on commonage. In the west, commonage comprises shares in the commonage, unlike the collops in the east, and part of this is on private land. Let us accept one thing at the beginning and we need go no further on it. Anyone who purposely burned their land is ineligible - end of story. However, where a farmer is a shareholder in a commonage and someone else started a fire which damaged that farmer's land, does the farmer have to take it out of his payment scheme application, despite him having no hand, act or part in the burning and not acting illegally in any way? If that farmer takes it out and then makes a case that he should have been allowed to leave it in, since it was a force majeure case, will the Department put it back in? On the other hand, if a farmer leaves it in, the Department decides the land should not have been left in because it did not become green enough, fast enough, the Department comes after the farmer on the basis the land was not eligible, and the farmer claims force majeure on the basis that he had no hand, act or part in it and it was beyond his or her control that the land was burned, will the Department not penalise the farmer?

The regulation states to the effect that an exception may arise where a farmer can clearly show that they had nothing to do with the burning of the land in question. It is generally much harder to prove that one did not do a thing than that one did do a thing, so it is very hard for a farmer to prove that he did not burn land or start a fire. I am asking a straight question because I think we need straight answers. In the event of a farmer submitting evidence to the Department that there is no ongoing investigation by An Garda Síochána into any allegation of him burning their land, that he has not been charged with such or convicted of such in the year 2017, is that sufficient evidence for the Department that, as stated in the regulation, the person had nothing to do with the burning of the land in question?

We need clarity because between now and whatever the last date is for amending maps, farmers are being asked to make an incredibly difficult decision in that they do not know how the Department will adjudicate this. Do farmers take the land out of the application and make a case to put it back in again, which is very unlikely because if farmers do that, the Department will tell them they took it out, or do they leave it in and say they will fight the Department on the grounds that they had nothing to do with the burning and an exception to this may arise? Since we are only talking about people who did not light fires, does it arise in these cases and are they cleared when they can show, by producing evidence, that they had nothing to do with starting the fire? This is the clarity that farmers deserve because we cannot play hide-and-go-seek with them and leave them in a position where they do not know the correct decision to take. Do they take the land out of their applications and try to put it back in, which is a nonsense because I know if the land is out, the Department will tell farmers they will not get it in again because they took it out, or do farmers leave the land in and fight the Department on the basis that, according to the Department's own words, it will make an exception if the farmers have nothing to do with setting the fire? This is the burning questions in Connemara at the moment.

See this speech in context