MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMITTEE FOR AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
15 DECEMBER 2000
HELD IN ROOM 135 PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS
1. Matters Arising
2. Minutes of Proceedings on 8 December 2000
3. Proposals to amend the Diary Produce Quotas Regulations
4. The use of Beef National Envelope Funds in 2001
5. Any Other Business
6. Date of Next Meeting
Present: Dr IRK Paisley MP MEP MLA (Chairman)
Mr G Savage MLA (Deputy Chairman)
Mr B Armstrong MLA
Mr PJ Bradley MLA
Mr B Douglas MLA
Mr D Ford MLA
Mr G Kane MLA
Mr G McHugh MLA
Apologies: Mr J Dallat MLA
Mr F Molloy MLA
Mr I Paisley Jnr. MLA
In attendance: Mr M Wilson
Mr P Moore
Mrs R Barclay
Miss K Hewitt
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 11.00 and declared the meeting open to the public.
1. Matters Arising
1.1. The Chairman read out a press release, obtained from the Department, regarding the Minister's decision on abolishing the 90-head limit on claims for Beef Special Premium, while exempting those claiming up to 30 animals from any scale-back if the national ceiling is exceeded. The Chairman advised members that he had agreed to the President of the Ulster Farmers' Union providing further briefing to the Committee at the end of this meeting. However, because the Minister's decision had already been taken and published, further discussion was unnecessary and he had cancelled the meeting.
Mr Douglas attended the meeting at 11.05.
1.2. The Chairman arranged for distribution of copies of a DARD press release on the outcome of the December Fisheries Council and asked members to consider it carefully.
2. Minutes of Proceedings on 8 December 2000
2.1. Resolved: that the draft Minutes of proceedings for 8 December 2000 were approved.
Mr McHugh attended the meeting at 11.10
3. Proposals to amend the Diary Produce Quotas Regulations
3.1. Two DARD officials, Mr McKibben and Mr McCracken, were invited into the meeting at 11.10.
3.2. Mr McKibben advised members that there was no immediate deadline for the Committee's response to the DARD paper, which outlined the two main purposes of the proposed changes. These were the removal of unnecessary administrative burdens and putting into effect the Minister's recent decision on the allocation of additional milk quota. He further advised that the Minister's decision would not be changed and that the appeals procedure would not allow for appeals against that decision.
Mr Ford attended the meeting at 11.20.
3.3. The two officials answered members questions on a number of topics including:
-
the effect, in terms of numbers of eligible producers, of the Minister's decision against an 'across the board' increase. Mr McKibben estimated that around 3000 producers would benefit following the Minister's decision and that 5300 would have benefited from an 'across the board' allocation. Mr McKibben undertook to provide additional statistical information to the Committee;
-
the list of 'exceptional circumstances' under which the requirement to have used 70% of quota would not be applied. Mr McKibben agreed that there may be circumstances which were not covered by the list and that DARD would consider such circumstances if they arose;
-
the effect of additional quota on small farmers' eligibility for benefits. Mr McKibben advised that, when writing to farmers, DARD would urge them to consider their personal circumstances and that DARD would not insist that a farmer accepted additional quota;
-
the situation where ownership of quota is shared by two or more families. Mr McCracken advised that if the quota was held in one name it was considered as one holding regardless of ownership;
-
the position of 'new entrants' (i.e. those who had obtained quota after the cut-off date of 1 April 1999). Mr McKibben undertook to provide information on new entrants along with the other statistics;
-
the appeals procedure. Mr McKibben advised that DARD will write to all producers and that they would have recourse to appeal to the Department and then to a Tribunal. This tribunal would have an independent chair and members both with and without direct interest in the dairy industry. The Chairman asked Mr McKibben to note the Committee's view, that there should be a mix of size of milk producer representation on the appeals panel, and he agreed to do so; and
-
costs of administering the additional quota allocation. Mr McKibben undertook to provide the Committee with a report on the costs of administering this allocation after it was complete
3.4. The Chairman advised the officials that the Committee would not pass comment on the Department's proposals until it had considered and discussed the additional information to be provided by DARD. It was not, therefore, necessary for members to declare an interest at this stage.
3.5. The Chairman thanked the officials for their attendance an drew discussions to a close at 11.40.
Mr Douglas left the meeting at 11.40.
4. The use of Beef National Envelope Funds in 2001
4.1. Two DARD officials, Mr Jordan and Mr Thompson, were invited into the meeting at 11.40. Mr Jordan made a short statement to the Committee and Mr Thompson reminded members that a Committee response was sought to allow the Department to announce and advise its decision to the European Commission by 31 December 2000.
4.2. The Chairman stated that this effectively meant that the Committee should agree its response during the meeting and that members should therefore declare any interest they may have.
4.3. Messrs. Savage, Armstrong, Bradley, Kane and McHugh declared an interest in the subject.
4.4. The officials answered questions from members on a number of issues including:
· the numbers of potential beneficiaries (i.e. numbers of suckler cow and beef producers). Mr Thompson gave figures of 15,500 for suckler cows and 17,213 Beef Special Premium applicants. He reminded the Committee that a higher number of eligible animals would mean a lower amount per animal;
-
the use of the term 'eligible animals' in the DARD paper. The officials assured the Committee that this was a technical term and that there were relatively few suckler cow animals that did not already attract premium;
-
DARD's inability to deliver quality improvements through the use of these funds in 2001. Mr Jordan advised that there would be an opportunity in 2002 address the quality issue. He did not have any information on how the recently announced Beef Quality Initiative would impact on the use of these funds
4.5. The Chairman thanked the officials for their attendance and drew discussions to a close at 12.10.
4.6. The Committee deliberated.
4.7. Motion:
That the Committee recommends to the Minister that the additional Beef National Envelope funds, which become available in 2001, should be allocated, on a 50:50 basis, to both Slaughter Premium top-up for heifers and Suckler Cow Premium top-up.
[Mr Kane]
4.8. Amendment:
Replace "50:50 basis" with "one third/two thirds split"
[Mr Ford]
4.9. Members voted on the amendment by a show of hands. The result was three for the amendment and four against and the amendment therefore fell.
4.10. Members voted on the motion by a show of hands. The result was four for the motion and none against. The motion was therefore carried.
4.11. Resolved: that the Minister should be notified of the Committee's decision.
5. Any Other Business
5.1. Members noted a letter from the Chairman of the Procedures Committee regarding the review of the legislative process in the Northern Ireland Assembly. Resolved: that the Committee would consider a draft response at their first meeting in the new year.
5.2. Members noted a letter from Mr Oliver Gibson MLA which enclosed correspondence from a constituent regarding BSE and the transfer of material from the Republic of Ireland. Mr Kane said that he had received similar correspondence and had brought it to the Minister's attention. Resolved: that this was essentially a constituency issue and one on which the Department should respond directly to Mr Gibson. If that response demonstrated that there was a general policy issue to be pursued then the Committee may wish to take action at that point.
5.3. Members reconsidered proposals to visit the Elm Farm Research Centre in Berkshire and the Plant Testing Station at Crossnacreevy. Resolved: that it would not be appropriate to visit Berkshire but that the Clerk should make arrangements for a visit to Crossnacreevy when the weather was more suitable.
5.4. Members considered an appropriate date for their proposed visit to Enniskillen College. Resolved: that 31 January was suitable for most members and that the Clerk should notify the Department to allow officials to make appropriate arrangements.
5.5. Mr Armstrong mentioned that he read the NI Audit Office report which had been critical of the Loughry Food Business Incubation Centre and that he wished to record that he had been impressed, during the Committee's recent visit, with how the facility was being managed now.
5.6. Members noted the Clerk's response to a verbal request by Mr Proctor to meet with the Committee and were advised that Mr Cochrane's request for a meeting with the Committee (on the Countryside Management Scheme) had been replied to, seeking information as to the nature of his concerns.
5.7. The Chairman took delivery of a fax from the Ulster Farmers' Union, in which they made an amendment to their position regarding the use of Beef National Envelope funds, and read it aloud to members. Resolved: that the Committee's earlier decision remained unchanged.
5.8. Mr Kane advised the Committee that he had as yet received no reply to his request for a profile of Vision Group members. Resolved: that the Clerks should remind the Department about this request.
6. Date of Next Meeting
6.1. Resolved: that the next meeting would be the informal meeting with the Vision Group on 9 January 2001 with a Committee meeting (forward planning) to be held on 12 January 2001.
The Chairman brought the meeting to a close at 12.35.
Ian R K Paisley
Chairman