Written answers

Tuesday, 14 June 2005

Department of Agriculture and Food

Grant Payments

9:00 pm

Photo of Paul Connaughton  SnrPaul Connaughton Snr (Galway East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 534: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food the reason a person (details supplied) in County Galway has not been notified regarding the single farm payment; if her attention has been drawn to circumstances in this person's case; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [19376/05]

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

The records held by my Department indicate that the herd owner applied for area aid in 2000. There is no record of payment to him under the special beef premium scheme in 2000 or 2001. Ewe premium was paid to the herd owner in 2002. The herd owner concerned was issued with a provisional entitlement notice for the single payment taking account of the information set out above on 10 September 2004. I have arranged for the correspondence to be sent to him again.

Photo of Enda KennyEnda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 535: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food when a person (details supplied) will receive the balance of payment of grants for 2002 and 2003. [19377/05]

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

The person named applied for premium on 37 and 36 animals, respectively, under the 2002 and 2003 suckler cow premium schemes. He received payment in respect of 34 animals for both years, as this is the number of quota rights on record for him. However, it was found at an inspection on 8 August 2002 that five animals were non-compliant with CMMS identification and registration requirements. As a result of this his payment under the 2002 scheme was subject to a 6.64% penalty. Following a review of the case, the number of non-compliant animals has been reduced to one and, as a result, a lesser penalty now applies. His 2002 payment will be recalculated and supplementary payment should issue within the next three weeks.

Regarding the 2003 payment to the person named, an inspection on 12 Sept 2003 revealed two animals non-compliant with CMMS regulations and this gave rise to a 2.78% reduction penalty being applied. This decision was upheld following internal Department review and subsequently by the agriculture appeals office. No further payment is due under the 2003 suckler cow scheme.

Given the integrated nature of the bovine schemes, any penalty assigned under one scheme also applies to those other schemes under which an applicant has lodged applications. In the case of the special beef premium scheme, therefore, the penalties applied to the suckler cow premium scheme application of the person named were also applied to this scheme. Given the reduction in the penalty under the 2002 suckler cow premium scheme, a balancing payment is now also due under the special beef premium scheme. This payment will be made shortly.

Where it is necessary to apply a penalty to a suckler cow and-or special beef premium scheme payment, under EU regulations a penalty in the same percentage must also be applied to extensification premium where payable. In the case of the person named, respective penalties of 6.64% and 2.78% were also applied to his 2002 and 2003 extensification premium scheme payments. As a result of the reduction in penalty in relation to the 2002 scheme year, a supplementary payment under extensification will issue within the next three weeks.

The person named received his full entitlement under the 2002 ewe premium scheme. Under the 2003 ewe premium scheme the person name applied on 17 ewes. At an inspection of his flock on 21 February 2003 he presented only 12 ewes. Consequently, under the terms and conditions of the scheme he was deemed ineligible for payment. He was notified of this decision in writing on 25 April 2003 and was advised that he could have his case reviewed by submitting an appeal within 21 days to the district livestock inspector at his local office. No record of an appeal has been received by my Department. The person named received his full entitlement under the 2002 and 2003 area based compensatory allowance scheme.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.