Martin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 388: To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the fact that an inspector (details supplied) from his Department made an initial verbal claim that a farm was in breach of animal welfare guidelines as a reason for imposing a penalty and then later on a further visit to the farm changed the nature of the complaint to one concerning good agricultural practice. [44777/08]

Martin Ferris (Kerry North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 389: To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the reason no letter stating the nature of a complaint (details supplied) was sent. [44778/08]

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 388 and 389 together.

An application under the Single Payment Scheme /Disadvantaged Areas Scheme was received in this case on the 15th May 2008. This application was selected for a cross compliance and satellite eligibility inspection. The cross compliance inspection was carried out on 10th October 2008. This inspection raised issues in relation to bovine identification and registration. Under the system for tolerance for minor non-compliances the applicant was requested to resolve the issues. The issues were resolved by the applicant and no financial penalty applied.

However, the satellite inspection raised a number of issues relating to the parcels claimed by the applicant. In accordance with normal procedure, inconclusive satellite results must be subject to a ground inspection. This ground inspection was initiated on the 21st November 2008 but due to the onset of darkness the inspection had to be abandoned and reconvened on the 28th of November. At the reconvened inspection it was found that the applicant was non-compliant with the Nitrates Directive and the provisions of Good Agricultural and Environmental Conditions on parts of his holdings.

Initial notice of the findings of this inspection was given verbally to the applicant on the 28th of November. At no point did the Inspecting Officer make reference to animal welfare issues. Written notification of the initial findings was issued to the applicant on the 5th of December. The initial findings indicate a possible 5% Cross Compliance Penalty for non-compliance with the requirements under the Nitrates Directive and the provisions of Good Agricultural and Environmental Conditions. A further penalty for over-declaration may also apply in relation to the parcels that were the subject of the ground inspection but the penalty (if any) cannot be determined until the area of ineligible features is calculated and recorded on the land parcel data base.

The applicant may, if he so wishes, forward his comments on the initial finding to the local office of my Department within 14 days. A formal written decision will issue in any event at the end of this period and it will set out the penalty if any applied. If the applicant is not satisfied with the decision, he may seek a review by contacting his Local Office. He also has the right to appeal the outcome of any such review to the Agriculture Appeals Office.