ICSA demands an end to payment penalty on farmers of marginal land
The ICSA is calling for an end to the 100% penalty rule for farmers who have a “farmable land” over-claim in excess of 20%.
In light of the land parcel review process, the ICSA says the penalty is excessive for people farming a bio-diverse landscape including trees, furze, and heather.
“It is an outrage someone with 75% eligible ground is getting such a devastating blow, which could put them out of business,” said ICSA rural development chairman, Billy Gray.
“There can also be cases where a dual claim on rented ground causes problems and where the farmer is not to blame. It is, however, the land parcel review that now brings this issue to the fore. Some 400 farmers are in serious trouble.
“Typically the cases relate to farmers with a high proportion of marginal or hill ground.”
The ICSA, a large proportion of whose members are farming marginal land, argues that there is considerable ambiguity and subjectivity around what is eligible.
The group also argues that many farmers do not have had the technology for precise measurement that is now being used by the Department of Agriculture.
The ICSA is calling upon Agriculture Minister Simon Coveney to push the European Commission to deliver a more balanced solution to over-claim cases. Some farmers are looking at seeking justice and fair play via a legal route but this can be solved by negotiation, the farmer group says.
ICSA suckler chairman Dermot Kelleher said both retrospective penalties and the 20% calculation of penalties are totally unacceptable. At the very least, he said, ICSA is calling for a system with less devastating impacts than a 100% penalty.
“We are not talking about intentional over declarations; we are talking predominantly about farmers getting a highly subjective penalty for farming the same way that they always have,” said Mr Kelleher.
The Cork-based spokesman said the over-claims issue was mainly a problem for low-income suckler and sheep farmers on marginal land.
“I cannot understand how the minister and the EU seem so unconcerned about farmers who already face the biggest challenges in terms of marginal land,” said Mr Kelleher. “Worse, it beggars belief that the EU is actually sending a signal that any form of bio-diverse landscape is not acceptable and that trees and bushes should be destroyed.
“It needs to be acknowledged that a farmer with a 100% penalty is actually facing a potential 500% penalty if the fines are imposed retrospectively.
“In some cases, farmers had on-farm inspections over the years and were never told that there was a problem by the department officials.”
Meanwhile, several TDs made appeals in the Oireachtas in the past week on behalf of individual farmers whose farm scheme applications are either under review, or which have had penalties applied to their claims. Not all related to over-claims on ineligible lands.
Joe Carey, Fine Gael TD for Ennis, asked Mr Coveney to make a statement on the outcome of the appeal on single farm payment and disadvantaged area payment in respect of one farmer, whose details were retained by the Oireachtas.
Mr Coveney said: “An application for single farm payment/disadvantaged areas scheme was received from the person named on June 28, 2013. As the closing date for receipt of applications was May 15, 2013, a 100% late penalty was imposed, as per the terms and conditions of the schemes.
“The person named was informed on July 3, 2013 of this decision. He responded to this notification on July 24 seeking a review of the decision.
“He was informed on August 12 that the decision was upheld following review and of his right to appeal to the Agriculture Appeals Office.
“The person has made such an appeal and has been informed on April 29, 2014, by the Agriculture Appeals Office of the decision to disallow his appeal.”
