Paddy Burke (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I wish the Minister well with the Bill. We spoke here at great length over quite a number of meetings with the Minister and two Ministers of State. As has been said, this is new territory for the Minister and for everyone in circumstances where we are closing down a business. There is no problem with that across the floor of the House, but there is a problem with the way people have been treated by the Department. There is a lot of mistrust, which was spelled out by various Senators on all sides. I hope that the assurances that were given to us by the Minister of State on the previous occasion and that the Minister will give to us again today that when it comes to compensation that the farmers and workers will be happy when it all comes to a conclusion.

The appointment of an assessor will be very important. Whoever the successful assessor will be, he or she should be acceptable to all sides. The farmers should have a say in who the assessor is and find the person acceptable. Previously, we saw in disputes with various Departments or local authorities that a former county manager or someone of that nature was appointed. In this case, I hope there will be some input from the farmers when the person is appointed as assessor. The person will be appointed by the Minister after a panel and interviews. This is a big blow to the farmers and to their workers. They are losing their livelihood and the farmers are losing very lucrative businesses that they have built up over many generations, as the Minister has outlined. We must be very fair to them and to the workers. The two week statutory redundancy is all that the farmers have to pay. The Department, through the assessor, must make sure that four, five or six weeks are paid to the workers and that the farmers are recompensed for handing over that or making sure that the workers get it.There will also be problems with the disposal of asbestos. That must be taken into account. It seems the Grant Thornton report was not carried out on the ground at all but was done using Google, from what I am led to believe. That does not give a fair reflection of what happens under the roofs of buildings. It does not reflect what has been built and the amount of effort and cost that have gone into putting buildings in place. I hope the assessor will carry out a thorough investigation of the three farms. It is not a big ask to visit all three farms.

There was an issue about whether the compensation would be based on three years' income or five years' income, while the farmers were looking for ten years. The Minister of State, Deputy Heydon, said that three years is the norm but the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine is going for five years. Why should it not be ten years? If a company takes over another company, the company being taken over will more than likely get a chance to build up and make itself profitable and to flush its sales or whatever else. In this case, those farmers had no opportunity to do that. Had they known this was coming down the tracks, they probably would have changed tack and may well have increased sales over the past five years, cut down on costs or made their farms more profitable. I ask that the assessor looks at the ten-year proposal from the farmers. I hope the Minister will look at all of those issues.

It is a sad day for the farmers and workers who are here. It is the end of the line for some of them. Some may never work again. It is a sad day for me, as a Member of the House, to say we are closing businesses. I have never before seen legislation that closes businesses pass through these Houses. We know the reason those businesses are being closed and there have been no objections from anybody in this House.

I wish the Minister well with the legislation. The appointment of the assessor will be important and I hope the Minister gives some say to the farmers on that appointment.