Written answers

Wednesday, 11 May 2005

Department of Agriculture and Food

Grant Payments

9:00 pm

Photo of Denis NaughtenDenis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 232: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food , further to Question No. 129 of 4 May 2005, the reason her Department deems up to 27% of animals ineligible even though it has paid moneys out on all animals; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15629/05]

Photo of Mary CoughlanMary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy will be aware that I decided to estimate the quota overshoot reduction in order that balancing payments could be made under all of the bovine premia schemes to farmers who had applied for special beef premium in respect of more than 25 animals.

The calculations involved in the interim balancing payments under the 2004 special beef premium scheme involved reducing the rate of aid rather than the number of animals. This process did not have any impact on the amount paid to individual farmers. On establishing the definitive position regarding the quota overshoot, a full recalculation of payments due to all scheme applicants will be carried out by my Department. This recalculation will involve a reduction in the number of animals rather than reducing the rate of aid, which was an interim measure to facilitate early payment.

Photo of John PerryJohn Perry (Sligo-Leitrim, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 233: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food if her attention has been drawn to the difficulties encountered by a person (details supplied) which have been outlined in correspondence in relation to the new single payment scheme and the national reserve; the avenues this person should pursue to ensure that their application is successful; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15632/05]

Photo of Mary CoughlanMary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

An application for consideration under the force majeure-exceptional circumstances measure of the single payment regulations was submitted by the person named in early February 2004. The person named has been notified that the circumstances outlined by her do not satisfy the criteria for force majeure-exceptional circumstances under Article 40 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1782/2003.

The person named has been advised that she can appeal this decision to the independent single payment appeals committee who will carry out a full review of the circumstances outlined. No such appeal has been received to date.

The person named also submitted an application to the 2005 single payment scheme national reserve under category B which caters for farmers who made investments in production capacity between 1 January 2000 and 19 October 2003.

My Department is at present processing in excess of 16,500 applications already received and the closing date for receipt of completed applications has been extended to 16 May 2005. In view of the number of applications received and the documentation submitted, it will be some time before a decision is reached on whether the person named is entitled to an allocation from the reserve. The person named will be notified of the outcome as soon as all applications are processed.

Photo of Seymour CrawfordSeymour Crawford (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 234: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food when a person (details supplied) in County Monaghan will receive the balance of cattle premiums and any other moneys due to them under the headage or premium area. [15635/05]

Photo of Mary CoughlanMary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The person named has received his full entitlement under the 2004 area based compensatory allowance scheme.

The person named lodged three applications under the 2004 special beef premium scheme, in respect of a total of 28 animals. The first application, in respect of 23 animals, was lodged on 28 May 2004, the second application, in respect of four animals, was lodged on 6 December 2004 and the third application, in respect of one animal, lodged on 20 December 2004.

The 60% advance payment of €2,070.00, in respect of the first application, issued on 18 October 2004. Having been selected by the computer based risk analysis programme, the herd was the subject of a field inspection, which was carried out on 17 February 2005. The inspection results having been finalised on 22 April 2005, the outstanding payment will issue in the coming days, that is, the 60% advance payments in respect of the second and third applications, together with the interim balancing payments for the three applications.

Two animals eligible under the 2004 slaughter premium scheme were slaughtered under the herd number of the person named. The 60% advance payment of €96.00 issued on 20 October 2004. The balancing payment due will issue immediately following the special beef premium scheme payments mentioned above.

Photo of Paul KehoePaul Kehoe (Wexford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 235: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food further to an appeal in 2003 made by a person (details supplied) in County Wexford, if this case will be reinvestigated; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15637/05]

Photo of Mary CoughlanMary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This appeal was received in the agriculture appeals office on 27 May 2004 and the appeals officer issued a decision on 13 August 2004 to disallow the appeal. The decision of the appeals officer is final and conclusive, except in the following circumstances: an appeals officer may change a decision where there is new evidence, new facts or a relevant change in circumstances but the appeals officer considers that no new evidence has been provided that would warrant a change in the decision; the director of agriculture appeals may revise a decision where there has been a mistake made in relation to the law or the facts of the case, but the director has reviewed the file and is satisfied that there are no grounds for revising the decision of the appeals officer; and a case may be appealed to the High Court on a point of law.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.