You are here : News
 

PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL SCHEME TO REPLACE REPS UNWORKABLE UNLESS MAJOR CHANGES ARE MADE

2010-03-09

 

IFA Rural Development Committee Chairman Tom Turley said that the proposed Agri-Environment Options Scheme is unworkable unless major changes are made to the specifications used to implement the scheme. “Minister for Agriculture Brendan Smith must introduce flexibilities that allow the AEOS to be meaningful for the vast majority of the 10,000 farmers who finish their REPS 3 contracts before the mid-May Single Farm Payment application date.”
 
The IFA Chairman said that a number of changes to the scheme will help to make it more acceptable and he called on Minister Smith to take on board these changes. Farmers want the following:
-                    Retention of the whole farm payment in lowland and non-natural areas. This payment should be set at €75/hectare up to a maximum of 55 hectares.
-                    On top of this payment, the options combined with the base payment should allow the farmer to reach a payment of an average of €5,000.
-                    The flat payment would recognise previous work under the scheme and ensure the requirements of nutrient management including lime usage, is maintained.
-                    In the case of commonages and SACs, payment should be available at a rate of €150/hectare up to a maximum of 55 hectares. This is instead of the €75/hectare payment where a farmer would require 66 hectares to get €5,000.
-                    Farmers who finish in REPS 3 after mid-May should be allowed to join the scheme later in the year, with payments related to the number of months they are in the scheme in 2010, followed on by a 5-year annual payments.
 
The Rural Development Chairman called on the Minister to ensure these changes are implemented on the specification to allow flexibility, which would ensure a significant uptake of the scheme and utilise the budget available, which is two-thirds funded by modulation.
 
Mr. Turley said, “farmers would not be interested in a scheme with excessive costs and limited options in terms of scope and payments. As the scheme now stands, it will not benefit the environment or farmers. It is critical that these issues are addressed.”