Michael Creed (Cork North West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I could argue that point. Everybody has to have a fair crack of the whip and that includes the Department and the State. Obviously, people who are dissatisfied with the outcome of an appeals process have recourse to the Ombudsman's office as well. The Department may ask the director to review a decision of the appeals office but there are extremely rare cases. It is only in cases where the consequences often have policy implications far and beyond the individual case. One could probably list on one hand the number of times that has happened. The outcome of that is nonetheless independent. It is at an arm's remove from the Department.

If the Senator were to reflect on the suggestion that the Department should not have that recourse, she should bear in mind that everybody must have a fair crack of the whip in terms of policy implications, budgetary implications and compliance with Common Agricultural Policy rules. A situation may arise where the Department is strongly of the view that there has been an error and that is why that opportunity exists and it is provided for by law. We are only implementing a system that is provided for in statute. Some of the recommendations may require changes to the law and I am not ruling that out at all, but it is a very good report. I emphasise that the appeals office works well and it works well for farmers. If they feel aggrieved about a decision, they should be encouraged to use the appeals option.

Senator Feighan commented on the fodder scheme. I covered that issue in my earlier comments. I hope I have dealt with all the points that were raised.