Anomalies in farm payment sparks debate

THE revelation that 10 Clare farmers shared almost €839,000 between them last year under the Single Farm Payment Scheme (SFP) has sparked a huge debate among farming organisations concerning the proposed reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).
With additional payments under REPS, now the Agri-Environmental Option Scheme (AEOS) and the Suckler Cow Scheme, some Clare farmers received over €100,000 through the post.
The Clare Champion revealed last week that one farmer, with a combination of SFP, REPS and AEOS, collected over €130,000 in 2012. This was in sharp contrast to one farmer who received less than €82 in SFP.
Deeply concerned by the anomalies in the current system, the United Farmers’ Association has published its blueprint for CAP reform.
UFA Clare chairman, Joe Corbett, believes it is absurd to suggest the quality of land and stocking density are the reasons for the “differences between the top 10 and bottom 10 recipients of SFP in Clare”.
Citing official figures, Mr Corbett insists there is no evidence to suggest that lower paid recipients are less productive than anyone else, as they can incur far higher costs due to a longer housing period and adverse weather conditions.
He noted that 221 Irish farmers received an average payment of €1,180 per hectare for a stocking density of 1.92 compared with the lowest payment of €11.41 for a stocking density of .35, which meant the largest recipients were earning 103 times the amount of the smallest farmer.
Commenting on figures produced by IFA chairman, Andrew Dundas for a small farmer with 30 hectares with SFP of €14,500, Mr Corbett claimed this figure was 85% above the average Clare SFP, which was €8,000 in 2011.
In addition to completing a survey of its members, Mr Corbett suggested Clare IFA should be more concerned about the fact that 80% of farmers receive an average payment of over €5,000 annually.
Mr Corbett proposed new CAP payments should be front-loaded by paying €400 per hectare for the first 20 hectares and €130 per hectare for all subsequent amounts.
While stating the maximum amount of money available to any one applicant should be capped at €50,000, he acknowledged a phased payment reduction system should be considered for the highest SFP payments.
“An active farmer should not be defined by the size of farms or the amount of SFP received at present. Many, if not all, small and medium-sized farmers in the West of Ireland are highly active farmers but unfortunately don’t reap the deserved rewards, through no fault of their own.
“Their hard work is curtailed by low SFP, adverse weather conditions and poor quality land. All SFP recipients should be subject to a minimum stocking rate,” he said.
He proposed the early retirement scheme and a realistic Suckler Cow Welfare Scheme should be reintroduced.
Mr Dundas described a productive farmer as one who produced to the maximum regardless of size and stressed it is vital a realistic stocking rate of 1.0 or 1.5 should be attached to payments to ensure production doesn’t fall dramatically.
If the stocking rate is set too low, he warned there could be a scenario where a farmer was paid €400 to have one cow or sheep on 2.5 acres.
Under the existing system, he noted a farmer with 30 hectares and 40 suckler cows could secure €12,000 in total once extensification supports were included and claimed this could fall to €9,500 under the UFA proposal.
Acknowledging there were anomalies in the existing system particularly for beef producers who didn’t hold on to cattle to claim premiums during the reference years were effectively penalised in later years.
He said the majority of farmers with high SFP payments are still producing a considerable amount of milk, beef or other products, which had to be taken into account.
Former Teagasc advisor, Michael Hillery, admitted he was surprised with the glaring disparity in payments as highlighted in last week’s Clare Champion.
Councillor Hillery supports the front-loading of payments for farmers with up to 30 hectares and stressed the proposed reforms will have to redistribute money to safeguard the future of small and medium-sized farms.
He proposed the new criteria should also take into account the differences in the quality of land and production costs in the west and east of the country.