Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine to the House again.

Lorraine Higgins (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for attending to discuss my issue. I refer to the need to make the agriculture appeals process more open and transparent in order that those availing of it have certainty about the board's findings, as they apply.

The EU Common Agricultural Policy outlines the direct payment programme in which farmers may receive payment provided that certain requirements have been met. That includes inspections of farms, concerns on which I have raised on a number of occasions in the House. In my opinion sometimes inspections have been carried out illegally but that is based on information that has been given to me and is a separate matter.

The inspections, as the Minister of State will know, relate to animal welfare and hygiene regulations, cattle and sheep tagging inspections and land eligibility inspections. The system of inspections uses satellite technologies in some cases in addition to ground inspections in order to ensure farmers are in compliance with the direct pay schemes. If a farmer fails to comply with the schemes there are significant associated monetary losses. A farmer found to be non-compliant will have his or her direct payment reduced by 5%. If there is deliberate non-compliance the penalty will be increased to at least 20% of the original amount that he or she might have been awarded under a scheme, which is quite onerous. Alternatively, the farmer may not receive any of his or her direct payment as has happened in some cases that I have dealt with as a public representative since I entered Seanad Éireann.

A farmer has an opportunity to appeal any decision made by the Department that he or she disagrees with regarding the direct pay and other schemes. The Agriculture Appeals Office is an independent committee that was established by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine to handle such appeals. A farmer must submit evidence to the appeals board and may elect to have an oral hearing if he or she so wishes. When a decision is reached, a written copy articulating the decision and reasoning will be delivered to the appellant and the Department is subsequently notified.

The appeals office was established to assist in the protection of farmers' rights. It is not technically a court and the process is more informal than a court hearing. The role that the committee fulfils is quasi-judicial. Therefore, a similar level of transparency should be afforded to farmers as is their right. Case precedents must be made available to farmers undergoing the process so they have certainty about what happened in a similar case in the past. Obviously the individual appealing should be afforded anonymity. He or she could be referred to by an initial, as in family law cases and refugee law that are also sensitive cases. However, judgments should be published for public access to allow farmers to know and have some degree of certainty when going before the agriculture appeals board. The provision would ensure continuity in terms of decisions made by the office.

Publication of the decisions made by the Agriculture Appeals Office will promote increased transparency and clarity in the justice system. In 2011, Transparency International conducted a survey and concluded that 21% of Irish citizens believe that there is corruption in the justice system. Last year the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine took the initiative to make the Agriculture Appeals Office an independent entity which I welcome. Previously there was a system of internal review. It is a step in the right direction but it is not enough and we could go further in terms of giving farmers' additional rights.

The freedom of information policies currently offer a method through which the public can obtain information and files maintained by the Government but there are significant fees and roadblocks. The judgments made by the Agriculture Appeals Office should be published and made accessible to the public at large. The measure would protect farmers' rights and establish a sense of openness, certainty and transparency as I highlighted during my speech. I look forward to the Minister of State's response on the matter. We must seriously examine the matter and I hope that such a scheme will be implemented.

Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to deal with the issue. I thank Senator Higgins for giving me the opportunity to highlight the work carried out by the Agriculture Appeals Office.

The Agriculture Appeals Office is an independent agency established in 2002. The office provides an independent appeals service to farmers who are dissatisfied with decisions of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine concerning designated schemes. The office has a statutory basis as set out in the Agriculture Appeals Act 2001 which, along with the Agriculture Appeals Regulations 2002, clearly set down the functions of the director and the appeals officers. The Act also sets out the decisions that can be appealed and the procedures to be followed.

The procedures followed by the Agriculture Appeals Office provide for each appeal to be dealt with on an individual, case-by-case basis. One of the main features of the office is the right of an appellant to an oral hearing. This is where an appeals officer brings together the appellant and officials from my Department in an informal setting to hear both sides of a case and ask questions. Following consideration of all the facts of a case, comprehensive decision letters are issued to both the appellant and my Department.

Each decision is made on its own merits and is specific to the particular individual appeal. A wide variety of often unique, individual situations and circumstances are covered.

Decision letters aim to clearly set out the reason for the decision made in each individual case in an open, transparent and understandable way. The decision of an appeals officer is binding on my Department, although such decision may be revised if new evidence is received. The director may revise an appeals officer's decision but only if it is found that an error was made in law or in fact. It also remains open to appellants who remain dissatisfied to bring the matter to the Office of the Ombudsman or to the High Court on a point of law.

The Agriculture Appeals Act 2001 also provides for the publication of an annual report by the appeals office. The 2012 annual report, published within the timeframe set down in legislation, is available on the agriculture appeals office website. This report sets out the main developments during the year and provides a statistical breakdown of the office's annual work. The agriculture appeals office received 1,036 appeals in 2012, a 40% increase on 2011. Some 886 appeals were received in 2013. Oral hearings were held in every county in Ireland during the course of 2013. Conscious of the need for efficiency, where possible, the agriculture appeals office aims to hold oral hearings in a convenient location for the appellant. The majority of appeals dealt with in 2012 and 2013 related to the single farm payment, rural environment protection, suckler cow welfare scheme and agri-environment options schemes.

The agriculture appeals office annual reports also contains details of a variety of cases across a number of schemes dealt with during the course of the year. The identity of the appellant and identifying features of the appeal are excluded. In the 2012 annual report, this includes cases related to the single farm payment, rural environment protection and agri-environment options schemes and non-valuation aspects of the TB and brucellosis eradication schemes. Examples of decisions made to allow, disallow or partially allow appeals are included. These cases were carefully selected to provide useful examples for both farmers and officials. The report contains key findings for my Department. Information on common errors by scheme applicants that lead to penalties is also included.

The 2013 annual report is currently being prepared. This report will also contain examples of a variety of cases across schemes. These cases will relate to decisions made during 2013. The 2013 annual report will be presented to my colleague, the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Coveney, and made available on the agriculture appeals office website within the prescribed timeframe.

Lorraine Higgins (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am not satisfied with the response provided by the Minister of State this evening. In my opinion, an annual report does not satisfy transparency and consistency requirements. The suggestion that it does means we are focusing on the general rather than specific incidences of appeals by farmers. At the end of the day, farmers in this country are entitled to access to decisions which are being made under natural and constitutional law. That is fundamental. It must be remembered that family law proceedings, which are very sensitive, are reported. The decisions of appeal boards in refugee law cases are reported and published, yet Irish farmers do not have similar rights.

I ask that the Minister of State make this issue a priority during his term in office.

Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It would be hard for me to prioritise something with which I do not agree. I agree on the need for openness and transparency in respect of appeals in relation to all schemes. Tomorrow morning we will be dealing with a case that has been dragging on for nearly four years. I know that the farmer concerned would not want his concerns made public.

Lorraine Higgins (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Provision could be made for anonymity of individuals. In reports of refugee and family law proceedings the initial letter of the surname rather than surname is used, as would be the situation in most legal cases.

Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not think anybody wishes to hide anything. We are speaking in this regard about money drawn down from Europe, which is taxpayers' money. I will take on board the Senator's point in regard to ensuring transparency in the process. However, I believe it is important that individuals are protected.

Lorraine Higgins (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I agree with anonymity. The use of the initial letter of a surname is the way around that.

Tom Hayes (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will take a look at that.

Lorraine Higgins (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State.