Dáil debates

Wednesday, 1 June 2011

Adjournment Debate

Departmental Offices

9:00 pm

Photo of Timmy DooleyTimmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to ask the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to give consideration to a plea from a group of farmers in the east Clare area to retain the Teagasc office as a service provider in the town of Scarriff. As Deputies know, there are proposals, decided on in light of budgetary requirements, to close a number of Teagasc offices across the country. While we must all take into account value for money and the lesser availability of funds to provide for various services, there is a strong case to be made for Scarriff in particular.

The office serves about 1,000 client farmers in the south Galway-east Clare area. Clare and Galway are seen as an administrative area and quite a number of farmers from the east and south Galway area, with which the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will be familiar, use the services at Scarriff. The proposal by the board of Teagasc is that services to those farmers now be provided in the town of Ennis, almost 50 km away. It makes no economic sense. The proposal to close the office in Scarriff and relocate the office to Ennis will not result in any saving either from a capital or from a revenue point of view. The four Teagasc advisers will remain on the staff as they will be required to meet the needs of the farmers in the area, and there will be additional costs associated with their expenses and the loss of time resulting from their having to come from an office over 40 km away to serve that farmer base. It does not make economic sense.

The proposal is to sell the building, which is fine, but in the long term there will be an increase in costs. The capital side of the programme will require the building of an extension at the office in Ennis at considerable cost to the State. Taking all the factors into account, there is no logical reason the Scarriff office in particular should be closed.

I am appealing to the Minister to make a special case to the board and the executive of Teagasc to re-evaluate the facts with regard to the Scarriff office. It is a unique situation because of the distance involved and the economics. The cost of running the office at the moment is relatively low and it generates considerable income not just from the farming community, but also from other potential uses of the office in the evening. I believe we should facilitate the retention of this office in the heart of a rural area. The east Clare office has been the central office for the provision of hen harrier advice because of the hen harrier designation that exists there and its removal would be a loss to the region. I am appealing to the Minister in this regard.

There needs to be a complete review of the Teagasc strategy, particularly in light of the proposals in Harvest 2020 and the necessity of ensuring the utilisation of land is at a maximum to enable us to meet the output required. If we do not have advisers working hand-in-hand with farmers on the ground, we will not reach those targets. Teagasc must rethink its entire strategy, which, as the Minister of State knows, has been moving back into research and away from the provision of advisory services on the ground. That is a retrograde step. The current economic situation and our greater dependence on our export sector, particularly food exports, should be food for thought - if Deputies will pardon the pun - for the board of Teagasc, which I hope will result in a complete re-evaluation of its strategy.

The argument for the retention of the service at Scarriff stands on its own merits on the basis of the cost savings. Cost was the original reason given for the closure of the office, but when one goes through the information in detail one can see there is clearly no justification for it. I appeal to the Minister to reflect on this and seek the assistance of the board of Teagasc in reversing that decision.

Photo of Shane McEnteeShane McEntee (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. With regard to the last part of his contribution, I understand the importance of having a proper advisory service in view of the approach of the 2020 targets. It is important for anybody going into agriculture, or already in agriculture, that the best advice possible is available. Since we came into government, we have had representations about many Teagasc offices that have been closed down. I cannot comment on decisions made by Teagasc, but one wonders whether some of these closures were in the right areas. However, that is a decision for Teagasc. I cannot honestly say how it will be reviewed, but I will consider what the Deputy has said and pass it on to the Minister. I do not know whether the door is closed, but I appreciate what the Deputy is saying. Teagasc, the agriculture and food development authority, was established under the Agriculture (Research, Training and Advice) Act 1988 to provide integrated research, advisory and training services to the agriculture and food industry. The organisation's mission is to support science-based innovation in the agrifood sector and wider bio-economy so as to underpin profitability, competitiveness and sustainability.

It is the main agency responsible for delivering the Government's objectives on innovation and the knowledge economy as far as the agrifood sector is concerned. Its programmes and services are critical in enabling the sector take full advantage of the many opportunities in global markets. Delivery of these programmes and services is an operational matter for Teagasc and its board. Ministerial responsibility is confined to matters of policy in accordance with the Act establishing Teagasc and is not concerned with the day-to-day operations of Teagasc.

Each year, Teagasc receives substantial Exchequer resources to fund the delivery of first class training, research and advisory services. The allocation for the current year is €132 million. This is very substantial funding by any standards and a firm indication of the Government's ongoing commitment to Teagasc activities. Prioritisation of funding for particular services is a matter for Teagasc management to determine.

Teagasc commenced a change process in mid-2008 in order to ensure it remains fit for purpose and delivers value for public money. The Teagasc Change Programme 2009-2013 addresses both the ongoing need for change and the need for significant resource rationalisation. Implementation is resulting in the disposal of surplus assets, a significant reduction in the number of research, advisory and educational locations, the cutting of management and administrative posts and significant productivity gains by staff. On completion, the future Teagasc will be a smaller, highly innovative, efficient and focused organisation.

I understand that as part of the change programme, Teagasc has decided to concentrate the delivery of its services, including advisory services, at fewer centres. The existing network of advisory offices will be streamlined from 91 to 51 by the end of 2012. The specific criteria used by Teagasc in assessing the viability of advisory office locations included client numbers, staff numbers, distance to clients, distance to other Teagasc offices and overall cost structure. The decision to close these offices and concentrate the delivery of services at fewer locations is entirely a matter for Teagasc and its board. It should be noted that on average clients visit an advisory office 1.5 times per year. Farmers tend to gravitate much more readily to other public events such as seminars, farm walks, demonstrations and information meetings. A good example is the discussion group model where groups of farmers visit similar farms and share information and experiences in dialogue facilitated by their Teagasc adviser. I must state this is very successful and it is the way forward in all aspects of farming.

The Scariff office is one of 40 which the Teagasc board has decided to close under the change programme. Despite the closure, Teagasc is committed to maintaining a high quality service to its farmer clients in County Clare. They will continue to have access to the best possible advice delivered by highly skilled advisory staff based at Teagasc's remaining offices in Ennis and Kilrush. I understand that Teagasc is investing €200,000 to renovate and extend the advisory office in Ennis.

The Teagasc authority has stressed that when the rationalisation programme is implemented it will still have a significant network of advisory offices, research centres and training colleges located throughout the country. Therefore, the ability of Teagasc to provide its range of services will not be diminished.