Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Bill. In everything we do in this area, our concern is that there be fairness for farmers. It is also about bringing the enjoyment back into farming. The Minister knows all about the various schemes, the associated bureaucracy and everything that has happened over the years. I accept completely that there must be proper governance of everything that is done. However, the weight of bureaucracy attached to some of the schemes is sucking the joy out of farming. That is certainly the case for many farmers in Mayo, particularly small farmers who are getting a limited return for the really good and valuable work that is being done.

As the Minister said, this Bill is a step forward. I commend the work done by the agriculture committee under the chairmanship of Deputy Cahill. The pre-legislative scrutiny work done on the Bill was really valuable. It included bringing in the farm organisations, which have direct links with farmers on a daily basis. That type of engagement adds to the richness of what we do here. I acknowledge the contribution of the farm organisations. As I said, they are very active in their communities and among farmers.

My colleague Deputy Kerrane makes an important point regarding the independence of the board and that the appointment of the chair should be up to the members. The appeals panel must be of the highest integrity. I ask for consideration to be given to Deputy Kerrane's suggestion. She also spoke about the cost of taking cases to the High Court. Farmers in my constituency could not afford to go to the High Court.

It is important that farmers have the option to have their hearings heard online or in person. In many areas, there is no proper broadband service or connectivity. In addition, some farmers are not comfortable using digital devices and other technology. The option for an in-person hearing must always be there. The increase in the number of ordinary panel members from three to five is really important. The provision to allow hearings to take place by electronic means should not see any pressure being put on people in that regard. I welcome the timeframe of six months from the date of the appeals officer's decision for revisions to be made. I also welcome the proposals for farmers to be allowed to have someone in the room to support them. Some people will not feel comfortable speaking or being examined. It is important that farmers be facilitated in giving evidence.

The Minister will not be surprised by the other issues I am raising. The first concerns the national fertiliser register, which I raised with him previously. I welcome the developments in this regard. However, the process will be based on soil sample returns and the advice as to the correct fertilisers to use to avoid breaching the legislation. That will take a lot of consultation between farmers, within the Department and between the advisers. Farmers have already bought fertiliser for this year. I ask the Minister for leniency on this matter. We need to get this right and ensure farmers are familiar with the changes. A one-day course, similar to that provided for participants in the agri-climate rural environment scheme, ACRES, should be available to help people get their head around the new regulations. It is important hat we avoid decisions going to appeal if we can. We need to eliminate as many mistakes as we can out of the system. That should always be our aim.

Farmers are still waiting for their ACRES payments. I welcome the Minister's announcement that the payments will commence. However, the details are missing from the announcement. ACRES has been beset by poor organisation, IT problems and numerous false dawns and promises. Farmers who joined ACRES tranche 1 in late 2022 were advised their lands would be scored in the summer of 2023 and payments would issue last November or December. All of that was done under the constant threat from the Department that if deadlines were not met, serious penalties would be imposed on the farmers concerned.

The one deadline the Department itself had to comply with was to get the payments out by the end of 2023. I welcome the interim payments made in February. That happened after the Minister took the unprecedented step of borrowing money from the State to make payments of €5,000 to farmers. Following the local and European elections, the Department has said it is about to start the payments process for ACRES. Many people will have to wait. For people who were due to get the maximum payment of €7,000, a remittance advice was posted online to their account and the supplementary payment was made to them. However, if a farmer is due to receive €3,000 per year and previously got the interim payment of €5,000, the €2,000 has to be clawed back. Will the Minister look at how this process works? It is totally wrong to do it in the way it is being done. It is not farmers' fault that deadlines were not met by the Department in order for the correct payments to be made.

A major issue farmers have is that when the remittance statement is issued, there is no indication of how the money was calculated. The farmer needs to be issued with a breakdown of the field scores as soon as possible. Most advisers would have indicated to farmers the scores for their fenced lands. However, the scores issued for commonage lands by departmental staff have not been released. Those scores should have been issued with the remittance advice. Commonage lands form a major part of farmers' payments, especially along the western seaboard, including in Mayo. The scores accumulated for those lands are of vital importance to the viability of a holding.

The Department advised at the start of the scheme that if the commonage lands scored badly, at less than four out of ten, no payment for those lands would issue. The Department further stated that commonage shareholders in that situation would be advised at meetings on how to improve their scores in future years. However, the co-operation teams have been advised that none of those meetings can take place until the commonage scores have been revealed to the farmers involved. We are more than a year and a half into the scheme. Realistically, this means two years of payments will have gone by without any chance for farmers to improve the scores of commonage lands. Farmers need full disclosure of the scores for their lands. That is vital if they are to be able to do what they need to do. The recoupment of payments without farmers having that information is not a fair way to treat them. Workers in no other sector would be treated in this way. Why must farmers continuously bear the burden of Government incompetence and a lack of transparency in regard to these payments?

See this speech in context