Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 18 Nov 1998

Vol. 496 No. 7

Written Answers. - Division of Holdings.

Ulick Burke

Ulick Burke

Ulick Burke

Question:

121 Mr. U. Burke asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the reason a farmer with separate farms in Counties Galway and Meath is only entitled to 90 ten month and 90 22 month beef premia while Teagasc is entitled to claim 90 ten month and 90 22 month premia in each county; the reason for the inequity in view of the fact that the management, ownership and accounts are not separate in either case; the number of farmers with multiple herd numbers who have had to repay his Department due to this rule; the amount of money involved; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24015/98]

Ulick Burke

Ulick Burke

Ulick Burke

Question:

122 Mr. U. Burke asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the number of farms in County Galway split since 30 June 1992; and if any of these circumvent individual limits on eligibility for premiums. [24016/98]

Joe Walsh

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 121 and 122 together.

Since the CAP reform measures were introduced in 1992 restrictions are in place in a number of EU funded schemes which limit the size of the claim or restricts eligibility to certain categories of farmer. These limits and restrictions arise from policy decisions within the framework of reform of the Common Agricultural Policy.

Article 2.2 of Commission Regulation 3887/92 provides as follows:

Member states shall take the measures necessary to avoid that the conversion of existing holdings or the creation of new holdings after 30 June 1992 leads to the patently improper avoidance of the provisions relating to the individual limits on the eligibility for premiums .

Effectively this requires that the Department must satisfy itself that where new holdings are created after 30 June 1992 they are in fact legitimate entities managed separately from existing holdings and that holdings which existed prior to 30 June 1992 were not split into two or more holdings for the sole purpose of avoiding individual limits on eligibility for premiums. All applications lodged are processed by reference to the underlying principle defined in Article 2.2 of 3887/92.
If the Deputy wishes to provide details of an individual case I will be happy to have it examined. However I will assure the Deputy that all cases are examined and processed in a fair and equitable fashion and a decision is taken by individual deciding officers based on the merits of each case from the information available.
It is important to point out that headage and premia schemes have been the subject of audit each year and based on these audits it is accepted that the type of checks and the inspection rate on applications lodged in this country give reasonable assurance that applicants are complying with the terms and conditions of the schemes and as a consequence with EU regulations.
It would not be possible to put a figure on the number of farms split in County Galway since 30 June 1992. Figures available to date in relation to the processing of the 1997 marketing year schemes show that there was no applicant in Galway in that year who was regarded as dividing a holding in order circumvent the defined limits.
Ulick Burke

Ulick Burke

Ulick Burke

Question:

123 Mr. U. Burke asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food the EU regulation, if any, which prevents the subdivision of a holding for the purposes of eligibility under the REP scheme; and if so, if he will provide a copy of this regulation. [24017/98]

Joe Walsh

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh)

There is no EU regulation which prevents the subdivision of a holding. However, Part II, paragraph 3(b)(ii) of the scheme document states that "farming units which have, in the opinion of the Minister, been created for the purpose of claiming or increasing payments under the scheme shall be excluded from the scheme".

Share