Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators for their contributions. There is a clear recognition that the State has decided to close down this industry and as a result of that is impacting on three farms and the livelihoods of those farmers as well as their employees. The objective has always been to be fair and reasonable in recognition of the impact of what we are doing. There has been ongoing engagement with fur farmers in that regard. We also commissioned Grant Thornton Ireland to put together an independent assessment of the processes and procedures and reasonable ways to compensate for closing down businesses to inform how we go about it. We have to have a verifiable process and evidential system for making decisions on what is appropriate compensation for the farmers and what is appropriate expenditure on behalf of the State. That is important. It has to be evidential. It cannot be what a view is or a subjective opinion; we have to have an evidential basis on which to do it. That is why we commissioned Grant Thornton Ireland to do that.

This is a big decision. It is a very significant one for the fur farmers. I welcome the two representatives here today. The third farm, which is not represented here, is based in my own county, in Glenties. It is very challenging. This is something that is no fault of theirs. They have run their businesses entirely in accordance with the law. They established their businesses in most instances very much with the encouragement and backing of the State, as a new industry back in the 1960s or 1970s when it first kicked off. It was a much more significant industry over those years. The number is now down to just three farms but there were many more farms in the past. This is a Fianna Fáil policy. It is not happening because of the Green Party. I put it in my manifesto before the public in the most recent general election. Fine Gael may have had the same policy, although I am not sure. The Green party had that policy. This is agreed among the three Government parties and is a reflection of the fact that this is an industry that has moved on and is now no longer appropriate to the times we live in. That is no reflection on the farmers at all because they have run their establishments and their farms to the highest standards that were always required and requested of them, and, indeed, provided employment to rural communities as well.

The objective here is to ensure that we are fair in what we do. We have to have an objective and evidential basis for how we proceed. I met with the farmers and their representatives three or four weeks ago regarding the outstanding issues. I asked that there would be further engagement between the farmers and my officials, and agreed that I would meet them further to that as well. I will do that because the regulations that this legislation will enable us to put the finer detail in place. That finer detail is not inserted in primary legislation. It is a matter for regulation and that is what the legislation provides for.

In regard to the amendments, one of the amendments for example talks about repurposing buildings instead of demolishing them, which is eminently sensible. The focus of the legislation as it stands in this area has been on demolition and clean-up costs for buildings that do not have a further use but repurposing those buildings can provide them with a future use. This suggestion is being made to my Department, and I am satisfied that it is possible, to use the demolition cost heading for repurposing instead if that is the wish of the businesses concerned and provides for a future use. I will address this in the regulations. Costs for repurposing a building that do not exceed the possible costs for demolition will be covered in the regulations. That is what I will do. This level of detail is not appropriate for primary legislation so I do not propose to accept the amendment. It has been ruled out of order but it is entirely sensible. If a building can be turned into something useful instead of spending money on tearing it, the same money can be used to repurpose it, which makes entire sense. I will provide for that in the regulations.

The other issue I have been reflecting on during our deliberations is support for employees because a number of employees on the three farms will be impacted. A number of Senators have raised this issue and a number of Deputies raised it in the Dáil as well. It is a matter which is to be finalised as part of the regulation. I discussed this with the farmers when I met with them three or four weeks ago and I have reflected further on it. The legislation provides for statutory redundancy. That is what the law of the State provides for but there is capacity within the regulations to reflect other costs and the impact on employees. I will reflect this in the regulations and take it into account. I will engage further with fur farmers on this but the legislation provides for that to be accommodated under the regulations. I am very conscious of the issue. These are employees in rural Ireland who will no longer have the jobs they have worked at. It is something I will engage further on and provide for additional financial supports for the employees as appropriate in the regulations. I will engage with the fur farmers directly on that as well.

Where there are other issues that Senators want to bring to my attention and want to have considered, I will consider them. My core objective is to be fair and reasonable, and to properly reflect what we are doing and the impact it will have on the farmers and on their employees. We also must be prudent and reasonable in how we spend public money but it has to be fair to the farmers as well. There will be further engagement between my officials, the farmers and their representatives. As I said to them when I met them recently, I will meet them again to discuss it further. I received a letter after the latest meeting from the fur farmers who were not particularly happy with the meeting that we had. I felt it was a productive meeting. We did not agree, but the fact we did not agree on issues did not mean that the meeting was not useful. What I said that day was that there would be further engagement with officials and I would meet with the farmers again. I made that very clear. I fully respect the position the farmers are in. I want to ensure the final outcome is fair to them and I want to ensure that is accommodated in the regulation as well. There will be further engagement on it. As I have said, it is about balancing what is appropriate, fair and reasonable for the farmers - and we have different views on that with regard to the negotiations so far - with what is prudent from the point of view of the State. The appropriate way to do that is through finalising the regulations after further engagement between me, as Minister, and the farmers with a view to being fair to them, which is the outcome I have wanted to ensure from the outset. That is the way in which we are doing the legislation. It will enable those regulations to be finalised.

It is appropriate that there be engagement between myself, as Minister and on behalf of the Department and the State as public money is spent, and the farmers themselves. It is important that we do not do this in a way that puts the Seanad or the Dáil in the middle of those negotiations and where every detail of the ultimate outcome of those negotiations is reflected in legislation. If that were the case, you would have the Minister negotiating with the Oireachtas and asking whether something is enough and whether other things should be included and the Seanad or Dáil being the forum for negotiation. While many people would like to be in the middle of negotiations and making those final decisions, the appropriate place for that to happen is in engagements between me and the farmers, with the results to be finalised in regulation.

With regard to engaging further with Senators and taking on board their views, I am happy to do that. I will certainly also have further meetings with the farmers. I very much acknowledge the responsibility I have as Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine to try to get the right and fair outcome on behalf of the State. A balance has to be struck. It is an important balance. It is a big responsibility, particularly with regard to being fair to those who are to be affected and whose livelihoods will no longer be available to them after we pass the legislation and introduce the regulations to make fur farming illegal.