Thank you, chairman, for the opportunity to address the Committee today on the issue of the Draft General Scheme of the Agricultural Appeals (Amendment) Bill 2024, on behalf of ICSA.

Overview

As a general comment, ICSA welcomes the intent to set up an independent review panel to provide a further option for farmers affected by decisions of the Department of Agriculture to impose penalties under the various CAP schemes.  Penalties and inspections cause immense stress to farmers, and it is our view that in many cases, the severity of sanctions is way out of line with the offence. 

To be fair, the Department has introduced a new regime under the new CAP Strategic Plan, where cross compliance is being replaced by conditionality.  The changed approach involves a restriction of movement from a herd until the farmer exercises the option to remedy basic failings or errors.  This is potentially a significant improvement and should reduce the amount of cases for appeal.    

However, on the other hand, conditionality in some cases is imposing a higher standard on farmers.  We have also seen that there has been pushback at European level against standards such as GAEC 8, which requires a minimum of 4% of land devoted to non-productive areas or features.  Nonetheless, it demonstrates that standards are rising and changing all the time and it is hard for farmers to adapt to all of this change. 

Therefore, we in ICSA believe that there are many different circumstances, where farmers who are doing their best, and working very hard to produce high quality food, can fall foul of the regulations and find themselves in trouble with the Department and this is imposing serious levels of stress on farmers. 

It is also our view that the requirements on farmers to have everything 100% is not realistic.  Most farmers do not have the luxury of farming model farms like Teagasc research centres which are located in one block on the highest quality land, where hedges or areas of scrub were removed long ago or never existed in the first place.

These model farms cannot be compared to what many farmers are up against, farming fragmented holdings, with all sorts of challenges, in mountainy areas, disadvantaged lands, boglands, areas covered in scrub.  Today, that kind of land is seen as being of huge benefit to biodiversity, but it is not so easy to farm it to the same standard as a model dairy farm, which is one green open space, divided by wire.

If a Department official makes a mistake, it is just that, a mistake.  Where farmers make mistakes, they often feel like they are criminals.

Against this backdrop, it is urgent and vital that farmers get fair play and the opportunity to explain their case.  They must have the opportunity to be heard, and to ensure that they are given the same rights as anybody accused of any misdemeanour or offence by the Gardai, for instance.

That’s why we in ICSA want this legislation to be capable of delivering fair play for farmers through a review panel process that is fit for purpose.

In relation to the draft bill, we see a number of key issues:

First, the Review Panel must be seen to be neutral and be seen to assess cases on a completely fresh and open-minded way.  For that reason, we think it is not appropriate to have the Director or deputy director of the Ag Appeals office on the panel as a voting member.

Second, we believe that the deadline for submitting appeals, at six months, and at three months in the case of the Review Panel, is too short to ensure justice for farmers.

Third we believe that while oral hearings by remote electronic means might be suitable in some circumstances, it must on the explicit grounds that an appellant can demand an in-person hearing if they so wish.

Fourth, we are concerned that the grounds for an appeal are far too tight and will inevitably deny access to fair play for a lot of farmers.   We believe that the grounds for appeal should be based on a failure to take adequate account of the special circumstances pertaining to the case in addition to error in fact or law.

We have given a more detailed outline of the amendments we would like included in the document circulated to you and we would urge you to give this your close consideration.

ENDS