Written answers

Wednesday, 15 June 2005

Department of Agriculture and Food

Milk Quota

9:00 pm

Photo of Dan NevilleDan Neville (Limerick West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 274: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food the position with regard to the provision of extra milk quota to a father and son partnership (details supplied) in County Limerick. [20169/05]

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

The persons concerned are not partners in a new entrant parent milk production partnership and in previous years quota has been allocated to the father — the quota holder — on the normal basis. No application has yet been made by the son to this year's restructuring scheme in the new entrant farming in partnership priority category. If such an application were made and the son satisfies the requirements for the category he would be allocated a provisional quota allocation which would become definitive if a new entrant parent milk production partnership, including the named persons, is registered this year.

The father concerned has made an application to purchase 45,000 litres under the milk quota restructuring scheme 2005. In this regard allocations cannot be made to both the new entrant and the parent from one restructuring scheme.

Photo of Dan NevilleDan Neville (Limerick West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 275: To ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food the outcome of an application for flexi milk allocation 2004-05 for a person (details supplied) in County Limerick. [20170/05]

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

Each year I set down criteria for the allocation of flexi milk by milk purchasers to their suppliers.

The person in question applied for additional quota from the national reserve on the grounds of animal disease in the 2004-05 quota year. The milk quota appeals tribunal examined his application in December 2004 but did not recommend an allocation on that occasion. The applicant appealed the decision, and the tribunal reviewed his case in early April, but based on the information presented at that time, his appeal was unsuccessful. However, the application has been reviewed again and based on final year figures showing a small overshoot of his quota, he has been approved for an additional allocation. Notification of this is being issued to the person and his co-op.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.