Seanad debates
Wednesday, 6 November 2002
Agriculture and Food: Statements.
The present level of bureaucracy is grossly excessive. In many cases the penalties being applied are totally disproportionate to the nature of the infringement. I will quote a few examples from my home county, Longford. Farmer A had a 100% penalty applied to his REPS payment because he obliged a local football club by allowing the removal of a few metres of dangerously rusty barbed wire fence which was replaced by a beech hedgerow, thereby greatly enhancing the local environment. Is that fair treatment? Farmer B was penalised because an arm of the State, the Office of Public Works, broke a branch of a tree while cleaning a river running through his land. He was required by an inspector from the Department of Agriculture and Food to obtain an officially stamped letter from a senior official of the Department of Finance before part payment of his REPS grant would be considered. The most ridiculous example was that of farmer C who had a 100% penalty applied to his suckler cow grant because he did not replace a cow in April 2001 when the same Department was operating a total ban on the movement of animals during the foot and mouth disease crisis. The farmer concerned was informed of this penalty by registered letter. This unfair behaviour by the Department of Agriculture and Food must stop and a more human approach to farm inspections adopted. I appeal to the Minister to eliminate the current excessive penalties.
No comments