Dáil debates

Wednesday, 2 March 2005

Other Questions.

Common Agricultural Policy.

3:00 pm

Photo of Olwyn EnrightOlwyn Enright (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 73: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food her plans to review the [i]force majeure[/i] procedure for the single farm payment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6804/05]

Gay Mitchell (Dublin South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 83: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food if she has satisfied herself with the [i]force majeure[/i] procedure for the single farm payment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [6800/05]

Photo of Mary CoughlanMary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 73 and 83 together.

My Department implemented The force majeure procedure for the single farm payment scheme in accordance with the provisions of Article 40 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1782/2003. Eligible applicants under this measure can have their entitlements based on an average of one or two years during the reference period — 2000, 2001 and 2002 — or the alternative reference period — 1997, 1998 and 1999. If the revised average for applicants eligible on the grounds of force majeure or exceptional circumstances is less than the average for the three years of the reference period, as happens in some cases, the applicant in question retains the higher three-year average. In such cases, it would be detrimental to the applicant to benefit from the provisions of Article 40.

To give farmers ample opportunity to avail themselves of this measure, my Department introduced a scheme in December 2003 for the submission of applications regarding force majeure or exceptional circumstances. The scheme was extensively advertised in the national and local press, with an initial closing date of 23 January 2004. Owing to the high level of interest in the measure and difficulties being experienced by certain applicants in obtaining documentary evidence, my Department extended the closing date to 6 February 2004 to give farmers every opportunity to submit an application. We received in excess of 15,000 applications, of which 98% have been processed to finality.

Provision was made whereby any farmers dissatisfied with the decision of my Department in respect of their application under force majeure or exceptional circumstances had the right to appeal. In that regard, the single payment appeals committee, comprising an independent chairman, Mr. John Duggan, and four appeals officers from the Agriculture Appeals Office, was established. I am satisfied that this appeals mechanism provides farmers with an effective means to have their applications reviewed in an independent, fair, comprehensive and efficient manner if they are not satisfied with my Department's decision in their case.

Following the issue of statements of provisional entitlements in September 2004, my Department granted farmers who had not already done so a further opportunity to submit applications regarding force majeure or exceptional circumstances. We have received in excess of 3,000 such applications. The deadline for submission of applications under this phase of the scheme was 29 October 2004. All unsuccessful applicants will continue to have a right of appeal to the independent single payment appeals committee.

I am satisfied that the timescale provided for submission of applications and the procedures introduced for processing applications under force majeure or exceptional circumstances regarding the establishment of entitlements under the single payment scheme are comprehensive, effective and fair.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I presume the substantial number of farmers who have not yet received notification of the single farm payment can still apply for the force majeure payment when they eventually get the single farm payment notification. Despite that such a process is in place, there appears to be a huge variation throughout the country in terms of success rates. For example, the lowest success rates are in the Minister's county, Kerry and Laois——

Photo of Mary CoughlanMary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

No political interference there, Deputy.

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——compared with a success rate in my own county of almost 26%, 25% in Sligo and 32% in Meath. Those were the figures available to me at the time; I am sure they have changed since. In general, the majority of cases have been unsuccessful. Is it not the case also that almost 99% of the cases that were appealed were unsuccessful, yet we still have this variation throughout the country, which gives rise to questions about the fairness of the system? Will the Minister comment on that?

Photo of Mary CoughlanMary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I evaluated that because it is something I heard from my own back bench colleagues. The Deputy is talking about a 22% success rate overall. The number of cases received at the time was 15,288, nearly all of which have been processed. The number of successful applicants was 3,331. When independent appeals took place, 10% were found in favour of the applicant.

A number of issues arise. The regulation is quite strict and there are only a number of categories in which one can be considered — death of a farmer, long-term professional incapacity, a natural disaster, accidental destruction of livestock, buildings and holdings or an episodic disease affecting all or part of a farmer's livestock. The regulation is fairly restrictive. People who have a genuine need have the opportunity to appeal. I appreciate that not everyone will get through the scheme. People who have not been dealt with so far still have an opportunity to go through the system. There would be those also, as the Deputy is aware, who would not have a hope in hell of getting through the system. They have as much attachment to the land as the man on the moon but they will still try to get their single farm payment. That is to the detriment of genuine applicants because a considerable amount of resources were required to evaluate those applications. My Department officials are doing their utmost to be as fair as possible in the confines of the articles and terms and conditions to which they have to adhere.

James Breen (Clare, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A part-time farmer who has applied for installation aid cannot get time off from his employer to go through the processes involved. Could that farmer apply under the force majeure procedure to have his installation aid restored without doing the examination or will the Department consider putting a mechanism in place to help people like that gentleman and several others who cannot get time off from their employers? Perhaps they could do the course on an evening or weekend.

Photo of Mary CoughlanMary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is a different issue because it is does not concern entitlement. The Deputy is talking about access to a specific installation aid which supports young farmers who want to get into farming. It is like the case of somebody who took up the farm retirement scheme but now wants to go back to farming. There may be issues with regard to having the opportunity to participate in education.

The larger farming organisations would be of the view that only those who participate in full-time education should have that entitlement of progressing to installation aid. We are evaluating the educational requirements from a young farmer's perspective but, as the Deputy knows, the pull is between farming organisations that only wish to support those in full-time farming and the many part-time farmers who we want to support. With regard to installation aid, it would not be a force majeure case because such cases are mainly based on illness and death.

Photo of Billy TimminsBilly Timmins (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister said that some people would not have a hope in hell of getting aid because they have no attachment to the land but does she agree that a small number of people never claimed any type of payment and now, through no fault of theirs in terms of the farming practices they adopted, their land has devalued dramatically as a result of this new policy? Has the Minister considered that small group of people and, if not, will she consider assisting them in some manner? Many widows have lost out dramatically and, when the land comes up for rent, its value will be reduced dramatically in the year ahead.

Photo of Mary CoughlanMary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I was being facetious when I spoke earlier, although some people will chance their arm like anybody else. There are people who have particular reasons for not applying, including widows and so on, and it may be considered within the force majeure process, perhaps under the national reserve. I am trying not to go beyond the 3% threshold because that means that whoever gets their entitlements will have to give back to the national reserve a certain amount of entitlements, and none of us would like to face the farming fraternity if that were the case. Having said that, there are particular hardship cases and we try to do our utmost, on an individual basis, to determine if something can be done for them. There are those who just never bothered to apply. They may have had their own reasons for that. We may have a situation where some people will not take up their entitlements. They will revert back in that case.

We are restricted by the article and the terms and conditions but if the Deputy is aware of a particular case involving hardship, we will try to support those people if it is at all possible. I cannot guarantee anything because the person had to be in the scheme at the time of the reference years. We went back to the 1980s on the basis of destocking, particularly on the sheep side of which the Deputy will be aware. We have looked at permutations and the division by one, two and three as to what can be done, but if the Deputy wants a particular case examined or if he has further information, we will try to facilitate those who are suffering hardship.

Photo of Seymour CrawfordSeymour Crawford (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is the Minister satisfied that all those cases applied for under health reasons have got a fair hearing? I have come across some cases I understood would have come under the force majeure process for genuine health reasons but were told they did not have a hope. They are appealing but it is depressing for somebody who suffers from depression not to have their situation taken into account.

Photo of Séamus KirkSéamus Kirk (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We must move on to Question No. 74.

Photo of Seymour CrawfordSeymour Crawford (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Minister not want to reply?

Photo of Séamus KirkSéamus Kirk (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not recollect a question being asked but the Minister may reply if she wishes.

Photo of Mary CoughlanMary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Hardship issues are not considered within the European Commission or the Union. We try to facilitate hardship issues as best we can. As much medical information as possible must be put forward and it must be such that the person is not physically in a position to carry out a farming enterprise within the reference year. That is the problem. Someone could break a leg but still be able to farm.

All of us in the farming fraternity must address the issue of depression. Unfortunately, depression is very difficult to deal with from a clinical point of view but if additional information from a psychiatrist were part of the appeals process, I would hope that would support the applicant. I appreciate that from a clinical viewpoint it is very difficult to determine whether depression would restrict a person, within the reference years, in their farming practice.

Written answers follow Adjournment Debate.