Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the number of farmers that were written to in relation to stocking density on their farms under the disadvantaged area scheme; the number of farmers that sought a derogation; the number of these applications that have been decided to date; the number in which a decision was made that a derogation has been granted and the number refused; the number of those refused who have appealed this decision; the number of those who have appealed who have had their appeal decided; the number of appeals that were successful and the number refused, with the figures broken down in each case between the less severely handicapped lowland and coastal areas, the more severely handicapped lowland and the mountain type grazing areas respectively; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48449/12]

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My Department issued letters to 10,165 applicants under the 2011 disadvantaged areas scheme whose stocking density in 2011 was less than 0.3 livestock units per hectare, lu/ha. These letters informed farmers of their right to seek a derogation from the requirement of the 2012 disadvantaged areas scheme if they considered that they did not achieve a stocking density of 0.3 lu/ha or more in 2011 for reasons outside their control.

Grounds for the derogation include, among others, any of the following situations: a restriction on the stocking levels on the holding due to adherence to an agri-environment plan such as the rural environment protection scheme, REPS, the agri-environment options schemes, AEOS, or a National Parks and Wildlife Service, NPWS, plan; farming marginal land where the level of stock that can be maintained is restricted; illness or death in the family; an outbreak of animal disease in the herd; and the applicant is a new entrant to farming.

A copy of the application form was issued to all farmers written to by my Department in order to assist those applicants who wished to apply for a derogation. A tabular statement provides a breakdown of the applicants involved by the category of disadvantaged land declared, as requested by the Deputy.

To date, my Department has examined the applications from almost 7,400 of the 9,300 applications received for derogation. A tabular statement provides details of the decision made in each case broken down by category. The Deputy has the figures before him.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

To ensure that those applicants whose applications were not accepted by my Department were afforded an opportunity to appeal the decision, I established a disadvantaged areas scheme appeals committee comprising appeals officers from the agricultural appeals office and an independent chairman, Mr. Padraig Gibbons, to examine all appeals. To date, my Department has received almost 1,000 appeals and the appeals committee will shortly commence its review of all appeals. I assure the Deputy that these appeals will be dealt with as quickly as possible.

My Department is also continuing to process the remaining 1,900 applications for a derogation and applicants will be informed of the decision made in their cases as soon as their applications are processed or whether more information or documentation is needed before a determination can be made on the case.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Would the Minister agree from the figures he has given that this has, as one would have expected, impacted disproportionately on hill areas where a stocking density of 1.5, or 0.3 as required last year, is in many cases not achievable or not even allowed by the Department? Would he agree, therefore, that this retrospective decision was fundamentally unfair?

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would not. In terms of the number of farmers seeking derogation and in the context of the number who applied, there is certainly a high number in mountain-type grazing areas. However, if one looks at the number of applications, 3,497 were accepted in mountain-type grazing areas and only 639 were rejected, so we are taking on board the realities that in mountain-type grazing situations, there is often good reason stocking rates need to be lower and we have granted people a derogation in those instances. It is true to say that more farmers have been affected by the change in criteria in mountainous areas but we have been far more generous in granting the derogation for those areas.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister said he was generous in granting derogations.

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is not a question of generosity, it is a question of-----

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Three people came to see me. Two of them were over 70 years of age and one was over 80 and all of them had medical problems. The over 80 year old has very serious medical problems, details of which were provided with the application for derogation. The derogation was refused and there is now an appeal. He said he seems to have been penalised for having been born on, and inheriting, a hill farm. He said he has also been penalised for being old and ill. Surely the disadvantaged payment is just that - a payment to compensate for farming on poor land.

Will the Minister justify why this decision, which has a disproportionate impact on those living on the hills and mountains, was made? I could go on and give examples of refusals of active farmers who had REPS plans, which limited the amount of stock. One cannot be at the ceiling on a hill farm because if one goes over the ceiling, the Department penalises one for overstocking and takes all the grants away. In the case of farmers farming to an AEOS plan or a REPS plan, what tolerance is there under the ceiling so they still qualify for the DAS and the AEOS? What is the tolerance, because there does not appear to be one?

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a tolerance and that has been made clear to farmers. If one is required to have a low stocking rate, because of an environmental plan which one is required to adopt, whether a common framework plan, an AEOS plan, a REPS plan or otherwise, that takes precedence over the new criteria we set out last year for qualification. There is no lower limit on that. Whatever the commonage framework plan requires a farmer to abide by, in terms of stocking density, that takes precedence and it is taken into account in the derogation.

My understanding is that all of the farmers who were written to and who qualify for a derogation automatically, because they were in a commonage framework programme which required them to have a very low stocking rate, were dealt with quickly because there was no issue with them. If there are particular cases where farmers have been treated unfairly and do not qualify for the derogation under the qualification criteria, we have an appeals system which is independently chaired by somebody from the Deputy's part of the country. I expect that appeals system to be fair and to ensure the kind of case he outlined can be taken into account.