Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

346. To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine further to Parliamentary Question No. 16 of 25 November 2015, the evidence or information that was sought from the petitioner prior to the director of the agricultural appeals office for him concluding that the review was fair, in-depth and comprehensive; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46852/15]

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

This case is subject to on-going legal proceedings and therefore I cannot comment on the matter.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

347. To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine further to Parliamentary Question No. 16 of 25 November 2015, the evidence the officers of the Agricultural Appeals Office examined; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46853/15]

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

I am informed that Officers of the Agriculture Appeals Office examined all of the information provided to that Office by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. In addition, officers from that Office visited the land in question on 23 January 2014. Having considered all of the available evidence and having regard to the Scheme Terms and Conditions, it was the recommendation of the Agriculture Appeals Office that the findings of the Department in relation to the eligibility of this land be upheld.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

348. To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine further to Parliamentary Question No. 16 of 25 November 2015, if the director of the agricultural appeals office and one of the two members of the agricultural appeals office who conducted the review had made determinations on these lands prior to conducting the fresh and independent review on his instructions, which he has stated was a fair, in-depth and comprehensive review; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46854/15]

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

The Agriculture Appeals Office was asked by the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine to review the decision of that Department regarding the eligibility of the land in question. The review was confined to the issue of land eligibility. Previous determinations made were not in relation to the issue of the eligibility of this land under the Scheme Terms and Conditions. Having considered all of the available evidence and having regard to the Scheme Terms and Conditions, it was the recommendation of the Agriculture Appeals Office that the findings of the Department in relation to the eligibility of this land be upheld.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

349. To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine further to Parliamentary Question No. 16 of 25 November 2015, if the review he authorised at the request of the European Union petitions committee was a fresh and independent inspection as requested by that committee; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46855/15]

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

I replied in-depth to this issue on 25 November 2015 in the Houses in response to Parliamentary Question 16. I will again confirm that I am satisfied that the review which was carried out by the statutorily independent Agricultural Appeals Office was fair, in-depth and comprehensive.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

350. To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine further to Parliamentary Question Number 16 of 25 November 2015, if he or the agricultural appeals office, the competent authority lawfully authorised to carry out inspections of lands, sought permission to enter these private lands prior to conducting a review on 24 January 2014; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46856/15]

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

The Agriculture Appeals Office informed all shareholders, by letter dated 17 January 2014, that officers from the office would visit the commonage on 23 January 2014.

Michael Fitzmaurice (Roscommon-South Leitrim, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

351. To ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine further to Parliamentary Question Number 16 of 25 November 2015, if he accepts the agricultural appeals officer’s decision that inspection reports provided by his Department provide no quantification or description on which to rely for the deductions made within parcels (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46857/15]

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

In relation to what is referred to as the ‘Keelderry Commonage’, a number of commonages, including the Keelderry Commonage were selected for ground inspection in 2010 as part of a review of commonage parcels declared by applicants under the 2010 SPS and LFA Schemes. A number of inspections of this parcel of land were carried out in 2010 and 2011 resulting in a reduction of the determined area of this commonage. There was one inspection, which the claimants are seeking to rely on, which resulted in a large area of the commonage being deemed eligible for the above schemes, however, a number of subsequent inspections have resulted in a much reduced area being deemed the determined eligible area for the purposes of both Schemes. The circumstances in which the first inspection was carried out are currently the subject of litigation and, therefore, I am precluded from commenting any further on this particular inspection.

The findings with regard to Keelderry have been the subject of a number of legal actions and appeals. The appeal referred to concerns the 2012 SPS, DAS and other area based schemes of one of the claimants. The Decision of the independent official was to partially allow the appeal. However, the findings of the Appeals Officer in relation to that specific case are not a finding on the inspection criteria or that the inspectors’ interpretation or methodology cannot be relied upon.

The relevant extract from the Appeals Office decision from August 2015 states: “Both sides provided evidence at the oral hearing as to the nature of the growth that exists on parcel G30106047, and while there are obviously roadways, active turbary and quarry areas, I must rely on the inspection reports provided by the Department and those reports provide no quantification or description on which to rely for the deductions made within parcels G30106047, G30106046 and G30106057.” Most importantly the decision adds “In any event the question at appeal is whether or not these parcels met the 2012 eligibility requirement for you [sic - use] of agricultural activity as defined.” Therefore the areas of the parcels were not to be determined by the Appeals Office but rather whether the applicant carried out an agricultural activity.

Notwithstanding documentation submitted by the applicant as part of his 2015 Basic Payment Scheme application, the Department maintains its position, as the competent authority on this matter, on the eligible area of this commonage.