Denis O'Donovan (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Phil Hogan.

Michael Mullins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I, too, welcome the Minister, although I understood the Minister of Agriculture, Food and the Marine was to take this matter. I want to make it clear that the issues I am raising predate his appointment as Minister, but obviously he has inherited the problem.

I want to discuss the findings of departmental officials with regard to the forage area of commonage lands in Keelderry, County Galway, which are similar to thousands of hectares of land from County Donegal to County Kerry. The land in question is located in a special area of conservation for birds and being farmed in compliance with the commonage framework plan, the REPS and National Parks and Wildlife Service guidelines.

An inspection involving an officer of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and a supervisor took place on 14 October 2010. In his report dated 15 October 2010 the officer states he found no forage and the supervisor agreed with his conclusion. This was in spite of the fact that the same officer had granted a forage figure of over 90% on similar land nearby. A point to note about this area is that the adjoining commonages all have a forage reference area in excess of 95%, and this land is no different. The last line of the official's report states he concurs with the findings of two colleagues who did not write their reports until one week later, 21 and 22 October 2010. The Minister will agree this is impossible and evidence of a conspiracy and a vendetta by departmental staff.

In the reports it is acknowledged that there were horses grazing on the land, yet the forage area was given as nil. The question then arises as to what the horses were grazing on. In February 2011 an area superintendent reinspected the land and allowed a forage area of 10%. There are no varying degrees of agricultural activity in the terms and conditions of the scheme concerned and it is incredible that they could not understand this at the time. It was only in July 2011 that staff in the Galway office discovered this and, as a result, all staff were called to a meeting to clarify the position. In a mix-up of geographical work areas, two other officers who were on a temporary transfer from another section were instructed by their supervisor to carry out an inspection on the same lands. The results were dramatically different. All independent advice clearly confirms that these officers carried out their inspections as per the 2010 commonage inspection guidelines and their findings are correct.

I understand that following a freedom of information request in May 2011 two senior officials visited the place of work of these two officers. The purpose of the visit was to coerce them into agreeing that they had carried out an unauthorised inspection in order that their file would not be released in response to the FOI request. This they refused to do. I compliment them on their integrity and honour in taking this action.

The Department persisted in withholding this part of the file, although it was subsequently released after the intervention of the Ombudsman. As the Minister is aware, this is a criminal offence and I call on him to have the matter investigated. I understand that when the issue was raised with him by Deputy Noel Coonan, he ordered an investigation. However, one member of the investigation team is the same area superintendent who has already made a decision in this matter and is desperately trying to uphold it, even though it totally contradicts the terms and conditions of the scheme. I put it to the Minister that, in breach of fair procedures, natural and constitutional justice, the Department failed to perform an independent investigation by allowing an area superintendent - as well as staff from his own section within the Department - to investigate his own work, thereby depriving the applicants and the staff who were on a temporary transfer to his section of a fair and reasonable investigation. The only parties who have been subject to investigation are the officers who carried out an authorised inspection and produced an accurate report.

This raises the question of how staff members who are unable to recognise forage land, who acknowledge that stock are grazing on the land, yet confirm the forage area to be nil, can justifiably continue to carry out work of this nature, given their clear inability to understand the meaning of the terms and conditions of the scheme. In a desperate attempt to deflect attention away from the core issue of forage availability, the investigation has been extended to the grants paid to the farmers concerned for buildings and under the REPS and other schemes in the past ten years. These actions and omissions by the Department's staff represent an abuse of power, harassment, intimidation, bullying and deliberate embarrassment of legitimate applicants and members of its own staff. A number of the landowners have never received any communication from the Department, while others received no replies to letters of query. An appeal was lodged with the independent appeals office in July 2011 but has met with frustration, delay and unjust impediment, the result of which is that the appeal has not been heard in an expedient manner, as the applicants are entitled to. I put it to the Minister that the reason for this behaviour on the part of his Department is to prevent the appeal from being heard, which results, again, in a deprivation of natural justice for those concerned.

At this late stage I emphasise the urgency and importance of rectifying the behaviour of the Department which amounts to an attempt to pervert the course of justice by its staff. In the light of this, I urge the Minister to take immediate action to rectify this unconscionable behaviour by members of his Department in manipulating the appeals process to prevent dignity, integrity and justice from reaching the applicants. Many farmers have lost huge amounts of money as a result of this action. I ask the Minister to have the matter investigated and brought to a satisfactory conclusion as a matter of urgency.

Phil Hogan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am taking this Adjournment matter on behalf of the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Simon Coveney, who apologises for his inability to attend.

As the House is aware, the Agriculture Appeals Office is an independent agency established to provide an appeals service for farmers who are unhappy with decisions of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine regarding their entitlements under certain schemes. The Agriculture Appeals Act 2001, with the Agriculture Appeals Regulations 2002, sets down the functions of the director and the appeals officers, the decisions that may be appealed and the procedures that must be followed in respect of agriculture appeals. The Agriculture Appeals Act is specific in outlining the powers conferred on the appeals office and its officers. Specifically, appeals officers are independent in the performance of their functions; they are not confined to the grounds on which the original decision was made, rather they decide as though the matter was being decided for the first time; oral hearings which are held where the appellant so chooses are in private, with the appellant being free to be accompanied by whomever he or she wishes, be it a family member, farm body representative, legal representative or someone else; appeals officers are authorised to administer oaths and take evidence under oath; and decisions of appeals officers are binding on the Department.

The aim of the appeals office is to provide an independent, accessible, fair and timely service for scheme applicants and deliver that service in a courteous and efficient manner. This is the manner in which the appeals office has worked in practice. The Department's officials have ongoing regular contact with the appeals office in matters relating to a wide variety of schemes operated by the Department. This allows the process to run smoothly from the point of view of the Department, the appeals office and the appellants. Since the establishment of the office, the number of cases processed has run into the thousands and, in all the interlinked dealings necessitated by these cases, at no stage was the independence of the office called into question. Both parties take their legal responsibilities in the consideration and processing of appeals with the appropriate regard expected under the regulations.

It is understood the Senator may have raised this matter with reference to a specific ongoing case. I can inform the House that the case in question was initially the subject of an informal internal investigation within the Department, but it is now subject to a formal investigation. Therefore, while this formal investigation is ongoing, it is not appropriate that any appeal on the matter under investigation be considered by the appeals office. This does not in any way interfere with the ability of those concerned to pursue their case with the appeals office on the conclusion of the formal investigation, should they so choose to do so at that stage.

Michael Mullins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Some of the issues I have raised are certainly worthy of investigation. I urge that this matter be brought to a satisfactory conclusion.