Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The same goes for the Senator. I appreciate and it is worthy noting that the Minister has had a particularly busy time. There was the fodder crisis, the horsemeat difficulties, the CAP negotiations and the Irish Presidency of the European Union. It is generally accepted that the Minister is very much on top of his brief and hard-working. This is something we recognise and it is important that we acknowledge it. Nevertheless, we are disappointed by the outcome of the negotiations on the new farm payment scheme. Sinn Féin argued for a cap on the high payments received by a small number of individuals and companies not directly involved in farming. We also proposed radical redistribution of payments to recipients to increase the viability of lower income farm households. The unfairness of the payment scheme is illustrated in the following figures. If one takes those who receive more than €100,000, 243 recipients received between them €32,840,000. For those in receipt of between €50,000 and €99,000, some 1,804 recipients received between them €118,368,000. If one compares these figures with those for recipients who receive less than €5,000, 52,193 recipients received between them €125,399,000. We believe there can be no defence of a scheme under which less than 2% of recipients at the top receive more than the bottom 40%. We, therefore, ask for a fairer redistribution for those who receive the lower amounts.

Much of the defence of the current single farm payment was based on the claim that it rewarded more productive farmers. However, statistics for stocking density prove there is little evidence to support this claim. Farmers with an average payment of €282 per hectare in 2010 had an average stocking density of 1.47. That compares with a stocking density of 1.92 for those with average payments of €1,180 per hectare. It is difficult to see how this can be justified. For the present we must accept conservative parameters agreed to by Ministers last June which allow for a degree of flexibility. We would argue for the greatest possible flexibility in the interests of those on lower payments.

Sinn Féin supports the use of 2% under the national ceiling for the young farmers scheme, which would amount to €24.3 million in 2015. We would retain a figure of 3% as a national reserve, which would amount to €17.5 million in 2015. We support the application of a redistributive payment, amounting to the maximum possible percentage under the national ceiling allowable. We agree with the definition of "active farmer" that would exclude from payment non-agricultural land such as airports, golf courses and so on. We also support the exclusion of agri-business the main activity of which is not actual farm production.

Sinn Féin called for an immediate cap of €100,000 on individual payments. Given that this has been ruled out, we now support the lowest possible cap under the agreed format. We support the allocation of payments to farmers who receive no single farm payment but who can produce evidence of being involved in active farm production in the reference year. Under the agreed framework, we support the maximum possible redistribution of payments. We believe the minimum payment ought to be the national average per hectare payment. We support the application of the lowest maximum per hectare payment allowed under the agreed framework. Sinn Féin does not support the reintroduction of coupled support schemes. We support the introduction of a small farmers scheme, with the inclusion of all farmers with annual payments of less than €1,250.

I welcome the reopening of the sugar production facilities which will be a very welcome element and offer an opening for farmers throughout the country. I note there are serious concerns in the farming community about the suckler cow herd and future production capacity. Perhaps the Minister might like to comment on this issue.

I have a particular interest in Leader funding supporting rural communities. There is a great deal of concern on the part of companies dealing with this funding about the alignment process. They believe the county councils are trying to get their mitts on the money and taking control of the way funding will be spent. There is a serious concern that there will be a lack of democratic involvement by local communities in the boards of these companies. I call on the Minister to speak to his colleague, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Phil Hogan, on that issue. It is important that local decision-making be kept local.

I am also conscious that many coastal communities are dependent on income from a number of sources - fishing, farming and perhaps some other work. It is important that we try to maintain this. As the Minister also holds the brief for fishing, it is important that quotas and their redistribution nationally, from a fishing perspective, are fair across the island of Ireland and that we do not see certain geographic areas benefiting to the detriment of others. It is also important to state we are concerned about the cuts to rural services, including transport services, the closure of Garda stations, etc. These are dragging people from local communities that are already suffering heavily from emigration. Farming and fishing, particularly in rural areas such as Connemara, have been the stalwarts in keeping people in communities. It is all linked with the funding and support given under the likes of the Common Agricultural Policy. I realise the Minister has a very difficult remit in trying to balance all of the different vested interests, but coastal communities must be given special consideration, as must communities in mountainous areas such as those in north Connemara which have a particular difficulty when it comes to farming and fishing.

I will leave these thoughts with the Minister whom I thank once again.