Relevant Matter
Legislation
Public Policy Area
Agriculture
Period
1 Jan, 2024 to 30 Apr, 2024
Specific Details
Agriculture Appeals (Amendment) Bill 2024
Intended results
To highlight that the establishment of an Independent Agricultural Appeals Review Panel was one of the key recommendations included in the Review of the Agriculture Appeals Act, 2001 and operations of the Agriculture Appeals Office, completed and published in December 2017 which is well over six years ago now.
This Independent Review group was established in response to the genuine concerns of farmers about the appeals system, most particularly around its independence and efficiency. These concerns are as relevant today as they were back then.
To point out that the current structure, whereby the Director of Appeals, who is appointed directly by the Minister for Agriculture and reports to the Minister, can hardly be considered fully independent. This is a similar structure used in the Forestry Appeals Committee. Similarly, most of the Appeals Officers came from the Department of Agriculture.
- In the current appeals structure, they are asked to make important decisions on cases where farmers are appealing decisions made by former colleagues.
- While we would acknowledge that the appeals officers in general do a good job the perception of farmers is that they are effectively Department staff.
- The establishment of an Independent Agricultural Appeals Review Panel offers potential to ease some of these concerns.
To challenge the proposed construct of this legislation which falls well short; it lacks clarity with regard to certain operational aspects, and overall, it is very similar to the existing model.
- The recommendation of the Independent Review Group to appoint an Independent Chair has been overlooked and instead, as with the Director of Appeals, it is left to the discretion of the Minister to appoint the Chairperson of the Review Panel.
To propose that an independent board should be established with independent members, who in turn should select an Independent Chairperson. Similarly, the IFA proposal for having at least one farmer representative on the Independent Review Panel (and any Division thereof) has not been specifically provided for in the draft legislation. This is a missed opportunity and should be revisited.
- Farmers must have confidence in the system that their cases will be dealt with fairly, impartially and efficiently. The provision for an Independent Chair and greater farmer representation would certainly give more confidence to stakeholders.
To emphasise that the Independent Agricultural Appeals Review Panel needs to be established as soon as possible, its scope extended to all appeal cases, not solely those in relation to the law and/or new facts being presented. During the last Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) programme (2015-2022), over five thousand (5,185) appeals were lodged to the Agricultural Appeals Office, with the 10-year average 668 appeals per annum.
To highlight that the new Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), spanning 2023-2027, is fundamentally different to its predecessor.
- There are numerous new schemes and concepts which bring considerably more complexity, administration and bureaucracy for all stakeholders involved.
- Most particularly the transition from a compliance-based system to a results-based system. This will increase the potential volume of associated inspections, penalties and appeals relative to previous levels.
- The same is true for many nationally funded programmes and Department administered schemes and programmes that farmers participate in.
- This new reality, combined with an increased reliance on third parties (farm planners/advisors etc.) and the emergence of a new monitoring infrastructure (AMS) – which across Europe has been shown to increase significantly the number of ground inspections required – will likely increase the volume of reviews / appeals.
To highlight that the reality is that some of the penalties being imposed by the Department are higher than would normally apply in a court of law. The consequences for individual farmers are huge. The whole process must be robust and be seen to be fair and transparent. The importance of farm payments, particularly for small-scale farms and those within the vulnerable drystock sectors, to sustain farm operations is well known and documented.
That in addition to the need for greater independence and farmer representation, as previously mentioned, there are a number of elements / proposals within this legislation that require some clarification.
To propose that sufficient funding and resources must be allocated to facilitate implementation of the National Strategic Plan for Sustainable Aquaculture Development and all recommendations of the Aquaculture licensing review - this includes resources for Aquaculture Licence Appeals Board (ALAB).
This body must have sufficient technical and administrative resources to deal with appeals in a speedy and efficient manner.
The Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine (DAFM) and the ALAB should agree a Service Level Agreement and make available the adequate funding to ensure ALAB is sufficiently resourced to process any appeal it receives.
Name of person primarily responsible for lobbying on this activity
Francie Gorman IFA President, John Curran IFA Rural Development Chair, Shane Whelan Senior Policy Executive
Did any Designated Public Official(DPO) or former Designated Public Official(DPO) carry out lobbying activities on your behalf in relation to this return? You must include yourself, and answer Yes, if you are a current DPO or a DPO at any time in the past. (What is a Designated Public Official?)
No
Did you manage or direct a grassroots campaign?
No
Was this lobbying done on behalf of a client?
No
Lobbying activity
The following activities occurred for this specific Subject Matter Area.
Designated public officials lobbied
The following DPOs were lobbied during this return period on this specific Subject Matter Area. These DPOs were involved in at least one of the Lobbying Activities listed above, but not necessarily all of them.
As returns are specific to a Subject Matter Area the above Lobbying Activities may be associated with multiple returns.
Brian Leddin
TD (Dáil Éireann, the Oireachtas)
Claire Kerrane
TD (Dáil Éireann, the Oireachtas)
Denis O'Donovan
Senator (Seanad)
Jackie Cahill
TD (Dáil Éireann, the Oireachtas)
Joe Flaherty
TD (Dáil Éireann, the Oireachtas)
Johnny Mythen
TD (Dáil Éireann, the Oireachtas)
Lynn Boylan
Senator (Seanad)
Michael Collins
TD (Dáil Éireann, the Oireachtas)
Michael Fitzmaurice
TD (Dáil Éireann, the Oireachtas)
Michael Ring
TD (Dáil Éireann, the Oireachtas)
Paul Daly
Senator (Seanad)
Paul Kehoe
TD (Dáil Éireann, the Oireachtas)
Tim Lombard
Senator (Seanad)
Victor Boyhan
Senator (Seanad)