Michael Lowry (Tipperary North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

300. To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will examine the legality and fairness of a farm inspection in County Tipperary in 2012 (details supplied) in view of the fact that the person was never notified of the inspection and was not present on the farm at the time of the inspection; if he will reconsider the penalties imposed arising from this inspection; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42984/13]

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In the context of delivering the Direct Payment Schemes my Department is required to carry out on-the-spot inspections on a number of farms covering such issues as eligibility under the Scheme, compliance with EU legislation in the areas of the environment, food safety, animal health and welfare and plant health and ensuring that the farm is maintained in good agricultural and environmental condition. These inspections are mandatory and there are certain minimum numbers and types of inspections that must take place annually.

Rules regarding the advance notification of inspections are clearly laid down in the governing EU regulations and must be adhered to by officials in my Department. In general, all inspections should be unannounced. However, the regulations allow my Department to give up to 14 days notice for land eligibility and cross-compliance inspections involving SMRs other than those related to animal identification and registration, food, feed, and animal welfare. For checks involving cattle identification and registration the maximum advance notice is 48 hours. For SMRs dealing with feed, food and animal welfare no advance notice may be given and these inspections must take place on an un-announced basis. Where it is considered that the purpose of any type of inspection may be jeopardised by giving notice, the inspection will take place on an un-announced basis. In determining the type of notice to be given for an inspection a number of factors are considered so as to ensure that the inspection process is not jeopardised.

These notification procedures are in accordance with those outlined in my Department’s Farmers’ Charter and Action Plan.

The person named was selected for a ground eligibility and cross compliance inspection in 2012 and having examined the 2012 application it was determined that the inspection should be un-announced. This is as permitted within both the EU governing legislation and my Department’s Farmers’ Charter and Action Plan.

The eligibility inspection involved the inspection of lands declared in counties Clare, Limerick, Roscommon and Tipperary. This inspection identified discrepancies between the area declared and area found, resulting in an intentional over-declaration in area of greater than 20%. Based on the Terms and Conditions of the Scheme this resulted in no payment in respect of the 2012 scheme and the application of an administrative fine to be offset against any future EU payments. The person named was notified of this decision on 19 November 2012.

The cross compliance inspection identified breaches relating to requirements applying to Special Areas of Conservation and sheep identification and registration requirements, resulting in a 5% penalty. The person named was notified of this decision on 19 November 2012.

The person named sought a review of both inspection decisions. As part of this review process the person named was afforded the opportunity to provide any new evidence and supporting documentation for consideration by the reviewing officer. The outcome of this review was to uphold the original inspection decisions and the person named was notified of this decision on 12 February 2013.

Following representations to the Department’s Quality Customer Service Unit, senior inspectorate officials met with the person named on 4th March 2013 to discuss the procedures and outcome of the inspections.

The person named has appealed the inspection decisions to the independent Agriculture Appeals Office. As part of the appeal process an oral hearing took place on 18 September 2013 where the person named was afforded the opportunity to seek clarification on any issues relating to how the inspections were carried out and their findings and also to present any additional information in support of the appeal. A decision by the Agriculture Appeals Office is pending and the person named will be notified of this decision in due course.