Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

The budget will not make a massive difference to any particular sector of society. It was modest and that is very much the result of where we are at in our economic recovery and a reflection of available finances. My colleagues have laid out this well during the debate. The influence of the confidence and supply agreement in setting the direction of the budget, in particular, with regard to the 2:1 split in expenditure and taxation is evident. That was important in ensuring the budget was fair and that budgetary policy continues to be implemented fairly. It should assist those on low and middle incomes but, most important, it should improve public services and ensure they are available to those who depend on and need them. It must be ensured those services are not cut. This has been the hallmark of Fine Gael in government and, indeed, the Labour Party previously.

I do not need to go over all of Fianna Fáil's successes and influences as a result of the confidence and supply agreement but I refer to the €55 million allocation to the NTPF, the 800 additional gardaí, the reduction in the pupil-teacher ratio to 26:1, cuts to the USC for low and middle income earners; and importantly, the €5 increase in the old age pension, carer's benefit, disability benefit and various unemployment benefits. These are small but important increases, which we worked hard to influence and to bring about. We will continue to hold the Government to account from the Opposition benches for its failure on a number of policy fronts, in particular, health and housing. The Government has flattered to deceive over and over again.

I refer to my portfolio of agriculture, food and the marine in the same context. While budget measures are exceptionally important and yesterday's announcements in respect of agriculture were significant, it has been my experience in my role as spokesperson that the Government's greatest failure has been the inability to deliver and follow through. Payments to farmers under a number of schemes have been totally mishandled by the Department and the farmers have been put under massive pressure. In addition, the Minister and the Government have failed to properly fund and to follow through on promises and commitments relating to the rural development programme, GLAS, the beef data and genomics programme and Leader. We were furnished with evidence in recent weeks when, in reply to parliamentary questions, the Minister informed us that in 2016, he returned €106 million to the Exchequer from the Department's budget. That is unacceptable and an indictment of his handling of the Department and the Government's approach to agriculture. Delivery is crucial and I will hold them to account over the coming weeks and months.

I welcome the ANC funding increase of €25 million. We pushed hard for it because it is important. It will assist up to 100,000 farmers. We will push for that funding to be directed mostly towards those who experience the highest level of constraint on their lands. We will try to start the process whereby this is reflected in the three payment rates - there is also an island rate - for hill land, more severely handicapped lowland and less severely handicapped lowland. However, there is only a difference of €15 between the payments for hill land and more severely handicapped lowland, yet there is a massive difference in the constraints and profitability of farming land in both categories. It is important that the ANC payment does what it is supposed to and that this is reflected by providing assistance to farmers who are trying to make a living on that land.

We also welcome the funding in the budget for Bord Bia, the agency primarily responsible for developing new markets and for ensuring that we are well placed to make the best use of the potential to expand the market base for our tremendous agrifood products, particularly in light of the Brexit challenge and the need to batten down the hatches with regard to the British market. Over the last year I have been emphasising the failure of the Government to resource Bord Bia properly in that regard. It had not been happening and it should have happened long before now. The €4.5 million allocation in the budget is welcome and must be delivered quickly so there can be feet on the ground and we can ensure Bord Bia is working at maximum capacity. It is also important that this happens alongside increasing resources in the market access unit in the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine to work on the same objective.

It is disappointing that there is nothing for the suckler cow and beef data genomic programme. The sector is under massive pressure and will need intervention if it is not to be eradicated over the next number of years. The roll out of the beef data and genomics programme, BDGP, has been too slow and underfunded. There must be additional specific funding. Fianna Fáil policy in that regard is to provide a €200 suckler cow payment.

It is exceptionally disappointing that there has been a failure to follow through on, and implement, the proposals put to the Minister relating to income stabilisation tools. The same happened last year when the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the Minister for Finance baulked when it came to their delivery. I note that, in his press release afterwards, the Minister said he would continue to engage and explore further taxation measures with the Minister for Finance for income stabilisation. There were very good proposals before him this time last year and he had a full year to examine them, but there is still no delivery. It is unacceptable and there is no excuse for it.

The other issue is stamp duty and how it applies to agricultural land. There appears to be massive confusion between the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the Minister for Finance as to how this came about and its impact. It is crucial that the Ministers listen to the farming representatives regarding the concern about the increase to 6% on agricultural land. That must be considered further between now and the Finance Bill. It impacts on those who are selling land in particular, but it also has an impact on those who are transferring or inheriting land. Currently, there are two exemptions. One is for young trained farmers under the age of 35 years. The other exemption is for consanguinity and confines stamp duty to 1% where land is being transferred to family members. However, the consanguinity exemption is confined to situations where all of those involved in the transfer are under the age of 67 years.

When the consanguinity exemption was introduced in 2012 it was allowed to apply regardless of age in the first year. In the following year the 67 years of age threshold was introduced. This absolutely must be re-examined, particularly with regard to transfers. When somebody is inheriting a farm and is going to continue farming it is unacceptable of the Government to slap a 6% stamp duty on them. The Minister must re-examine that and look at what was done previously.

The other point relates to the young farmer's scheme. The exemption applying to young trained farmers sets an age threshold of 35 years. However, other schemes in agriculture and the EU definition of a trained young farmer refers to those under 40 years. There is a contradiction in the Government's approach to who qualifies as a young farmer generally and to who qualifies as a young farmer in respect of the stamp duty exemption. That, too, must be examined. This issue has been handled very poorly and the impact on the farming community has not been considered. The Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the Minister for Finance must engage with farming representatives to consider how the situation and its impact can be addressed.

See this speech in context