The Forum for Political Dialogue met between 1996 and 1998 in Belfast as part of the negotiations that led to the Good Friday Agreement.
To examine the problems being faced by farmers and fishermen in Northern Ireland, and report to the Forum by 31 December 1996. [Note that the Committee is alleged to meet every Thursday but we do not have records of their meetings. To avoid speculation on meeting dates we have only modelled sessions which we know took place.]
To see the full record of a committee, click on the corresponding committee on the map below.
[Editor's Note: The final 2 reports of this committee are presented to the Forum on this date]
Northern Ireland Forum
for
Political Dialogue
~~~~~~~~~
NORTHERN IRELAND AGRICULTURE
- PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE -
A REPORT PREPARED BY
STANDING COMMITTEE D
(AGRICULTURE & FISHERIES ISSUES)
~~~~~~~~~
Presented to the Northern Ireland Forum for Political Dialogue
on 24 April 1998
Note
DRAFT REPORTS
This report has been prepared by Standing Committee D for
the consideration of the Northern Ireland Forum for Political
Dialogue. Until adopted by the Forum in accordance with its
Rules, this report may not be reproduced in whole or in part
or used for broadcast purposes.
NORTHERN IRELAND AGRICULTURE
- PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE?Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing account for 5% of gross domestic product in
Northern Ireland and when food processing and agriculture input supply are
included, the share rises to 8%. Approximately 6% of the Northern Ireland
workforce is engaged in Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing and a further 4% in
ancillary industries. The Agri-business sector as a whole makes a significant
contribution to the production base of the regional economy, accounting for
one-quarter of the GDP from and one-third of the employment in, agriculture and
the production industries taken together. In these circumstances, Standing
Committee D (Agriculture and Fisheries Issues), being aware of the importance to
Northern Ireland of the Agriculture Industry, calls on Government to negotiate with
the European Union an Agenda 2000 package which recognises the peripherality of
Northern Ireland within the European Union, the particular problems which
therefore affect Northern Ireland farmers, and the importance to the economy of
Northern Ireland of its Agriculture Industry.
In recognition of the key importance of the Northern Ireland Agriculture Industry,
and of the need to ensure that it is best placed to meet the challenges of the New
Millennium, the Committee recommends that the Secretary of State for Northern
Ireland should without delay require the formation of an interdepartmental small
focus task force. This task force should be given responsibility for the analysis of
support mechanisms local, national and international which are, or may be made
available, for progressing the restructure of the agricultural industry and for making
relevant recommendations.
NORTHERN IRELAND AGRICULTURE
- PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE -
CONTENTS
Section Page
1. INTRODUCTION 1
2. AGENDA 2000 - FOR A STRONGER AND WIDER
UNION 5
- The Proposals 5
- The Objectives 6
- CAP Reform Proposals 8
Cereals 8
Beef 9
Milk 10
Rural Development 11
Modulation 11
3. THE UK ATTITUDE TO AGENDA 2000 13
4. NORTHERN IRELAND AND AGENDA 2000 15
5. MEASURES TO ASSIST FARMERS TO DIVERSIFY
AND ADAPT TO CHANGE 20
- Early Retirement from Farming 20
- DANI Consultation Paper on Early Retirement 23
Sector Coverage/Geographic Coverage/
Size of Farm 24
Aid 25
Structural Funds 25
Balance 26
CONTENTS
(Cont'd)
Section Page
Agri-Environmental Issues 26
Legal and Taxation Problems 27
Transfer of Production Quotas and Arable Aid 28
The Conacre System 29
Holistic Approach 30
Nature of Scheme 31
- Diversification 31
- Education and Training 32
- Planning 35
6. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS 39
ANNEXES
A Membership of Standing Committee D
B Minutes of Proceedings
C Minutes of Evidence
D Written Evidence
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 In January and February 1997, Standing Committee D arranged a
programme of visits to venues across Northern Ireland to hear at first hand
the problems and difficulties being faced by farmers. Evening meetings
were held in Enniskillen, Banbridge, Coleraine, Dungannon, Omagh,
Newtownards and Ballymena, during which farmers took the opportunity
to ensure that the Committee members present were well briefed on the
issues of the day. The Beef Export Ban and its effect were, of course, top
of the agenda. However among the other issues addressed, the most
frequently mentioned were the need to encourage young people into
farming and to provide for a farm retirement scheme.
1.2 In the course of Forum Business on 14 March 1997, the day on which the
Forum adjourned for the General Election, the Chairman of Standing
Committee D indicated that on return to business following the election,
the Committee intended to address the problem of the sons and daughters
of farmers turning away from the land, rural planning issues, and the need
for a retirement scheme.
1.3 Following the break for the General Election, the Committee met on
4 June 1997 and arrangements were made for the collection of written and
oral evidence, for visits to the Department of Agriculture for Northern
Ireland (DANI) Colleges, and for the engagement of consultants to
examine a farm retirement scheme.
1
1.4 On 16 July 1997, the EU Commission issued its strategy for strengthening
and widening the European Union ('Agenda 2000 - For a Stronger and
Wider Union'). As this strategy looked ahead to the New Millennium and
contained proposals which would affect farmers in the future, the
Committee decided to pursue this proposal and advertised for comment in
the press as well as seeking evidence from a number of persons and
bodies.
1.5 On 22 December 1997, Dr Cunningham, the Minister of Agriculture
Fisheries and Food announced that the Government intended to open early
consultations with the farming industry on restructuring in the livestock
sector. He noted that major changes in the beef sector were likely over
time, with fewer producers, but a more viable industry emerging in the
United Kingdom and in Europe. Dr Cunningham went on to indicate that
the Government would explore with interested parties whether the
European Union's early retirement scheme and other EC structural
measures, could play a part in assisting the process to change and
achieving the Government's long-term aims.
1.6 At an early stage in its deliberations on Agenda 2000, the Committee
identified the need to discuss the issues on this topic with the Department
of Agriculture for Northern Ireland (DANI). While DANI is responsible
for Agriculture matters in Northern Ireland, it is the Ministry of
Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) which negotiates in Europe on
behalf of the United Kingdom as a whole. Despite efforts by the
Committee to arrange a meeting with MAFF officials a refusal was
obtained with an indication that DANI was best placed to answer the
Committee's questions. This refusal was in contrast with the agreement of
2
Mr John Bensted-Smith of Commissioner Fischler's Cabinet to brief the
Committee on the Agenda 2000 CAP proposals. Accordingly, a
deputation of Committee Members visited Brussels on 22, 23 and
24 January 1998 and not only received a very full briefing from
Mr Bensted-Smith, but also had the benefit of a short meeting with the
Agriculture Commissioner, Commissioner Fischler at which the
opportunity was taken to lobby him on the Beef Export Ban. During the
visit, meetings were also held with Members of the European Parliament
and with the Northern Ireland Centre in Europe. The particular thanks of
the Committee go to Mr Jim Nicholson MEP who arranged the meetings,
to Mr Bensted-Smith for the time he took to give the Committee
deputation such a full briefing and to Commissioner Fischler for taking
time out of a very busy schedule to meet with the deputation.
1.7 On 18 March 1998, the European Commission announced the Common
Agricultural Policy (CAP) Reform proposals which were covered in the
earlier Agenda 2000 papers. On the same date the Department of
Agriculture for Northern Ireland circulated a consultation document
seeking comments from the agriculture industry on a range of measures
which might be implemented to improve the structure and viability of farm
businesses in Northern Ireland.
1.8 The Committee, at a meeting held on 26 March 1998, agreed to prepare a
report which would address the inter-related topics of Agenda 2000, the
encouragement of young people into farming and the introduction of a
retirement scheme in Northern Ireland.
3
1.9 On 30 March 1998, the European Union Council of Agriculture Ministers
met and debated the CAP Reform proposals announced on 18 March 1998
- and rejected them.
1.10 The Committee wishes to express its gratitude to all those individuals and
bodies who assisted the Committee in the preparation of this Report.
4
2. AGENDA 2000 -
FOR A STRONGER AND WIDER UNION
THE PROPOSALS
2.1 Agenda 2000, the European Commission's detailed strategy for
strengthening and widening the European Union in the early years of the
21st century, was presented to the European Parliament by President
Jacques Santer on 16 July 1997. The document assesses the preparedness
of the 10 applicant countries from Central and Eastern Europe and
indicates that negotiations will be opened with some of these countries in
1998 with the first accessions occurring in 2001 or 2003.
2.2 Agenda 2000 indicates that enlargement will entail substantial additional
costs for the existing 15 members of the European Union - although it is
likely that these costs will be spread over a lengthy period of time. The
Commission pointed out that there will be no need to raise the current
expenditure ceiling of 1.27% of Member States gross national product.
2.3 The three stated challenges posed by Agenda 2000 are as follows:
- how to strengthen and reform the Union's policies so that they can deal
with enlargement and deliver sustainable growth, higher employment
and improved living conditions for Europe's citizens;
- how to negotiate enlargement while at the same time vigorously
preparing all applicant countries for the moment of accession;
5
- how to finance enlargement, the advance preparations and the
development of the Union's internal policies.
2.4 The Agenda 2000 document is some 300 pages long and contains a
detailed exposition of the European Commission's proposals. A shortened
version is attached at Annex D. While the document addresses a large
number of issues which will affect the agriculture industry in Northern
Ireland - there are some which are of particular interest:
- the proposal for the reduction of the seven Objectives (comprehensive
programmes for regions which are lagging behind) to three;
- the introduction of stricter enforcement of the qualifying criterion for
Objective 1 status - ie that a region's per capita gross domestic product
must be below 75% of the European Union Average;
- further reform of the CAP, the main producers affected being cereals,
beef and milk;
- a more prominent role for agri-environmental measures, eg organic
farming and maintenance of semi-natural habitats.
The Objectives
2.5 As mentioned earlier, it is planned to reduce the number of Objectives
from seven to three, ie two regional Objectives and one horizontal
Objective devoted to human resources. It is foreseen that by 2006,
6
Objective 1 and 2 areas will cover between 35% and 40% of the Union
population, against 51% currently.
The Future Objectives
Objective 1
2.6 For those less developed regions which are eligible, a strict
application is proposed of the GDP criterion by which assistance
will only go to regions whose per capita GDP is less than 75% of
the Union average. While levels of support will reflect population
size, the gap between regional wealth and Union average, and
national wealth, additional support will be granted to regions with
very high unemployment. A phasing out mechanism will be
developed for those regions currently eligible under Objective 1
which come out above the 75% threshold.
Objective 2
2.7 All regions faced with major economic and social restructuring
needs will be covered by a new Objective 2 classification - this will
include areas affected by change in the industrial, service or
fisheries sectors, rural areas in serious decline because of lack of
economic diversification and urban districts in difficulty because of
a loss of economic activities.
7
Objective 3
2.8 This classification will apply to regions not covered by Objectives 1
and 2 and will promote activity in four areas - economic and social
change, education and training systems, active labour market
policies to fight unemployment and combating social exclusion.
CAP Reform Proposals
2.9 On 18 March 1998, Mr Santer unveiled the European Commission's plans
to revolutionise farm policy and to impose drastic cuts on regional aid.
Many of the proposals were contained in the July 1997 package.
Mr Santer indicated that over the next year, negotiations with Ministers
and Heads of Governments would be tough as all would be reluctant to
make sacrifices, despite their commitment to EU expansion. The details
of the EC's initial proposals are summarised in the following paragraphs.
Cereals
2.10 The proposal is that the intervention price will be reduced by 20%
in one step in the year 2000. This will be offset with direct
compensation payments which will be increased from 54 ECU to
66 ECU per ton. Continued set-aside will be available but it will be
set at a zero rate. Voluntary set-aside will be maintained at the
same level of support as at present and will be guaranteed for a five
year period.
8
Beef
2.11 A cursory examination of the Agenda 2000 proposals for the Beef
and Dairy sectors confirms the EU Commission's intention to bring
commodity prices down to world levels. In the Beef sector, support
will be reduced by 30% in three equal steps commencing on 1 July
2000 and from 1 July 2002 the present intervention system will be
replaced by a private storage regime. To compensate for this
suckler cow and beef premiums will be increased, and a new direct
payment will be introduced for dairy cows. Member States will be
afforded flexibility which will allow them to allocate part of the
increase in direct payments (the "National Envelope") to their own
particular priority which will allow them if they so decide, to
include premium for heifers. The direct support will still remain as
outlined in the original Agenda 2000 proposals, but will be
sub-divided into a community wide basic payment. The basic
payment levels (2002) will be as follows:-
Bulls - 220 ECU
Steers - 170 ECU
Suckler Cows - 180 ECU
Dairy Cows - 35 ECU
2.12 These basic levels conform to pre-reform levels plus a 50% increase
in total premium. When all resources are assessed with basic
premiums and top-up the final level of payment could be as high as
310 ECU for bulls (on a one payment principle) with 232 ECU for
steers (paid twice as at present). The top premium for suckler cows
9
could be as high as 215 ECU per year, with dairy cows getting a top
of 70 ECU per head.
2.13 It is also proposed to maintain the Deseasonalisation Scheme at
similar levels but the calf processing scheme will be abolished. The
total number of animals qualifying for special suckler cow premium
will be limited to two livestock units per hectare. However,
producers with less than 1.4 LU per hectare and practising
extensive production methods (animals grazing on pasture land)
may qualify for an additional payment of 100 ECU per premium
granted. It is not yet clear that if heifers receive premium they will
become part of the calculation of the livestock units for each farm.
Milk
2.14 The price of intervention butter and skim milk will be reduced by
5% in four different steps and the amount of direct support to each
producer will be based on the number of premium units which will
be determined by dividing individual reference quantity by the
average community milk yield of 5800 litres per cow. This is
designed to target support for the producer who has leased quota.
Milk Quotas will be maintained until 31 March 2006, with an
overall increase of 2% in each national quota's total reference
quantity in four different steps which will then be distributed to
particular categories of producers who need special support.
10
Rural Development
2.15 Support will be given to areas such as investment in agricultural
holding, training of young farmers, the early retirement scheme
(with extra support in less favoured areas), agri-environmental
activities, further support for processing, marketing, forestry and
other related areas. The proposed support is designed to assist
farmers to diversify and adapt to change and bring together for the
first time all measures relating to the countryside which were
supported by the EAGGF and is designed to complement the
proposed reform in market and price policy. These proposals are
said to allow greater flexibility and local control. Current eligibility
criteria for support in less favoured areas will be modified to create
environmental controls in rural development policy.
Modulation
2.16 Member States may be allowed in certain circumstances to
modulate direct support per farm within certain criteria relative to
employment on each farm. To avoid excessive payments to one
farm, it is proposed to implement a digressive overall ceiling on
direct payments between 100,000 ECU and 200,000 ECU which
will have a 20% reduction and a 25% reduction above that amount.
2.17 The Committee notes that these proposals announced on 18 March were
debated by the European Union Agriculture Council of Ministers on 30
March and were rejected. The Agriculture Ministers agreed only that the
Agenda 2000 proposals to reduce price support and production subsidies,
11
replacing them with compensation payments and environmental incentives
by the Millennium, would not work.
2.18 At the Council of Ministers' meeting, the UK representatives welcomed
the proposals as a good basis for negotiation, but condemned a key
element to put a ceiling on direct aid payments which would hit some of
Britain's largest producers.
2.19 It is clear that the EU Agriculture Commissioner must now return to the
drawing board and amend his proposals. More than a year of negotiations
and debate lie ahead.
12
3. THE UK ATTITUDE TO AGENDA 2000
3.1 The Agriculture Minister, Dr Jack Cunningham in November 1997 stated:
"The European Commission's proposals in the 'Agenda 2000' document,
for an integrated rural policy which combines economic development and
a sustainable environment, point reform of the Common Agricultural
Policy in the right direction, and I welcome them."
He went on to say:
"Reform of the CAP is in everyone's interest, including farmers. The CAP
as it is presently constructed is unsustainable - especially as we face the
prospect of a further round of WTO negotiations and enlargement of the
EU. I want to establish a Community framework that encourages farmers
and other rural entrepreneurs to be more competitive so as to create wealth
and provide jobs in rural areas whilst preserving and enhancing our
countryside ........ We must focus on two areas. Firstly, replacing
production support with rural development measures that will enable those
living and working in the countryside to adapt to changing circumstances
whether within or outside farming. Secondly, environmental measures to
maintain and enhance our countryside."
All these measures may be geared to ensuring that the Agenda 2000
proposals are given a fair wind by the USA at the WTO negotiations in
1998.
13
3.2 At the Oxford Farming Conference held in early January 1998,
Dr Cunningham, in his first major policy speech to a farming audience,
underlined his opposition to modulation, describing it as 'perverse
nonsense' and pledging UK opposition to its introduction as part of CAP
reform. He confirmed that even if it were applied at Member State level,
as the Commission planned, he would still have major concerns about the
concept.
14
4. NORTHERN IRELAND AND AGENDA 2000
Objective 1 Status
4.1 The radical changes in regional funding brought about by the admission of
new Members, many from Eastern Europe will mean that the total funding
for the existing 15 Member States will be reduced - at 1997 prices the
structural operations budget for existing Members is forecast as follows:
1999 - 34.3 bn ECU
2000 - 34.2 bn ECU
2002 - 34.2 bn ECU
2004 - 32.1 bn ECU
2006 - 31.2 bn ECU
4.2 This means that the amounts available to Northern Ireland will become
smaller, and in view of the changes in relative prosperity within the 15
Member States, Northern Ireland will no longer be in the most needy
category.
4.3 While 65% of the structural funds will go to Objective 1 regions, 35% will
go to newly defined Objective 2 regions, including Northern Ireland.
Northern Ireland will therefore be in competition with a much larger
number of regions for what will clearly be a much smaller sum of money.
However, in the early years of change, it would appear that Northern
Ireland, among others, may benefit from a transition formula which will
phase the change.
15
4.4 Northern Ireland is at risk of losing European Union status as an
Objective 1 region - ie a region which attracts the highest allocation of
funds from the European Regional Development Fund, the European
Social Fund and the Agriculture Guidance Funds. In 1994, Northern
Ireland was granted a special concession, as it had been in earlier
negotiations, to remain as an Objective 1 Area.
4.5 On this occasion, it is envisaged that Northern Ireland may not be able to
meet the more stringently applied rules for the achievement of Objective 1
status. The draft proposals indicate that:
"The current Objective 1 areas that no longer qualify for the list will
have their assistance phased out gradually. It will end on
31 December 2005 for the ERDF but will be extended to
31 December 2006 for those areas that meet the eligibility criteria for
Objective 2."
4.6 Commentators have suggested that an assault on the Commission and the
Council of Ministers which simply argues that the regulations and
decisions are unfair is a poor tactic. The argument, it is said, is likely to
be rejected as an unjustified form of special pleading. Other alternatives
have been suggested, including the fragmenting of Northern Ireland into
areas, some of which will qualify for Objective 1 status.
4.7 In any case the EU proposals are just that - proposals, and therefore
capable of negotiation. The Committee recommends that Northern
Ireland elected representatives, farming unions and agriculture industry
16
representatives should press for the retention of Objective 1 status for
Northern Ireland.
Cap Reform
4.8 Having examined the proposals for CAP Reform announced by the
European Commission on 18 March 1998, the Committee shares the
attitude of the European Union Council of Agriculture Ministers which
totally rejected the proposals at a meeting held on 30 March 1998.
However, the Committee comments on the proposals (which are set out in
Section 2 of this Report) in the following paragraphs.
4.9 In general, the Committee considers that within the CAP Reform
proposals the compensation levels stated will not offset the projected fall
in farming income in Northern Ireland. In any re-examination of the CAP
Reform proposals, the Committee recommends that the European
Commission should amend the proposals and provide for full
compensation to meet the projected fall in farming incomes.
4.10 With regard to cereals, the Committee shares the view of the Ulster
Farmers' Union that voluntary set-aside should be retained, and that with
regard to modulation, it is essential that producers in Northern Ireland are
not disadvantaged. The Committee commends the Union's Seeds and
Cereals Policy set out in its letter dated 17 December 1997.
4.11 Within the proposal for the Beef sector, the Committee supports the plans
to afford flexibility to Member States, flexibility which will allow them to
17
allocate part of the increase in direct payments (the National Envelope) to
their own particular priority which will allow them, if they so decide, to
include premium for heifers. The Committee recommends that the
Government should as part of any negotiated CAP Reform agreement,
introduce a Beef Heifer premium.
4.12 Within the Milk Sector, the Committee notes and supports the proposal to
maintain Milk Quota until 31 March 2006. As part of any negotiated CAP
Reform agreement, the Committee recommends that the Government
should seek to ensure that an allocation of Milk Quota is made available to
enable new entrants to come into the dairy industry. This issue is also
addressed in Section 5.
4.13 The Committee is strongly of the opinion that Rural Development
proposals within CAP Reform are most important for Northern Ireland.
The provision of proposals which will enable Northern Ireland farmers to
diversify and adapt to change are addressed in Section 5 of this Report.
The Millennium Bug
4.14 In the course of discussion with the representatives of the Northern Ireland
Banking Association (NIBA) on Wednesday 4 February 1998, the
attention of the Committee was drawn to the effect which the New
Millennium will have on computers. The NIBA representatives pointed
out that many computer systems will be affected by the advent of the New
Millennium and that DANI should be listing those which will impact on
agriculture. Mr Michael of NIBA indicated that he had raised this
18
problem with DANI at the highest level, to be told that not enough staff
are available to convert all these systems between now and the New
Millennium and that while the vast majority of farmers will be unaffected,
others will be. He indicated that he would not want farmers to get it
wrong, and went on to say:
"They (DANI) consider it to be something that can be dealt with very
simply somewhere down the line; but that is not the case. The
Government will probably make more of an issue of this over the next
few months."
4.15 The Committee shares the view of the NIBA, and recommends that
DANI should take action now to ensure that farmers who use computer
systems are given the information needed to prepare for the New
Millennium. Further, the Committee is alarmed to hear that at a high level
in DANI, it has been indicated that not enough staff are available to
convert all the computer systems which impact on agriculture before the
New Millennium. The Committee places a great deal of importance on
this and therefore recommends that DANI should act now to ensure that
the necessary conversions are completed before the Millennium deadline.
19
5. MEASURES TO ASSIST FARMERS TO
DIVERSIFY AND ADAPT TO CHANGE
5.1 Within the Agenda 2000 proposals, the concept of rural development is to
be enhanced. It is proposed that support will be given to such things as
investment in agricultural holding, training for young farmers, the early
retirement scheme (with extra support in less favoured areas) and
agri-environmental activities. Further support will be given to marketing,
processing and forestry. All these proposals are geared to assist farmers
to diversify and adapt to change.
5.2 The Committee, having examined the proposals for CAP Reform, wishes
to see measures taken to ensure that the Northern Ireland agriculture
industry is well prepared for the changes which will occur in the New
Millennium. Some of these measures are addressed in the following
paragraphs. In making its recommendations within this section of the
report, the Committee acknowledges that at this stage, the CAP proposals
made under the Agenda 2000 heading have yet to be agreed by EU
Agriculture Ministers, must be acceptable as part of the World Trade
Organisation negotiations in 1999, and are therefore open to negotiation
and change.
Early Retirement from Farming
5.3 A scheme of Early Retirement from Farming is one of the accompanying
measures to the CAP Reform agreed in May 1992. Under Council
Regulation (EEC) No 2079/92, Member States may institute a community
20
aid scheme for early retirement from farming, jointly funded by the
European Union and the National Exchequer.
5.4 While not mandatory, early retirement schemes have been implemented by
many European Union countries including Belgium, Denmark, Germany,
Greece, Ireland, Italy and Spain. However the UK Government has not
implemented a Scheme, as it was sensitive to the fact that any European
Union contribution to the funding of such a scheme would reduce the
amount of rebate paid back to the United Kingdom by the European Union
(the Fontainbleau Agreement).
5.5 On 6 June 1997 after the General Election, the Chairman of the
Agriculture and Fisheries Committee of the Forum announced to the
Northern Ireland Forum that the Committee had expressed concern about
young people in rural areas opting for careers outside farming and that the
Committee had therefore decided to take evidence from the farming
community and other interested persons and bodies on this issue. The
Chairman also indicated that at an early date the Committee would explore
the merits of a farm retirement scheme - a method of helping young people
on to the land.
5.6 Since 1992 there has been pressure from the Ulster Farmers' Union, Local
Authorities, MPs and MEPs for the introduction of an early retirement
scheme in Northern Ireland. The Ulster Farmers' Union in particular have
pressed successive Ministers and in 1996 submitted proposals for a
regional scheme, allowed under the Commission Regulation. On
17 June 1997, Lord Dubs, Northern Ireland Minister for Agriculture and
the Environment wrote to the Union indicating that the Scheme was not
21
affordable and that funds would not become available until a lower priority
area which could be sacrificed could be identified.
5.7 Evidence on this topic was sought from a wide range of interests and
minutes of oral evidence and copies of written evidence received are
attached at Annexes C and D.
5.8 In August 1997, the Committee appointed CAPITA, a consultancy firm to
research the background to the early retirement schemes operated within
the European Union and to develop a workable scheme for Northern
Ireland farmers. The company made a presentation to the Committee on
13 October 1997 (see Annex D) which identified the main problem to be
the cost of implementation, which would have to be found from within the
financial resources available to DANI. Having taken evidence from DANI
representatives who had indicated that the benefits accruing from a
retirement scheme in Northern Ireland would not justify the cost (£56m),
the Committee asked CAPITA to meet with DANI and to assess the
situation prior to moving to the second stage of the consultancy operation -
the development of an early retirement scheme for Northern Ireland.
Following this meeting, it was clear that DANI was not disposed to find
the necessary money - other priorities taking precedence - and the
Committee reluctantly decided not to proceed any further with the
consultancy exercise.
5.9 It was therefore with some surprise that the Committee noted the
announcement made by Dr Cunningham on 22 December 1997 regarding
the Government's intention to open early consultations with the farming
industry regarding restructuring of the beef sector. Dr Cunningham
22
undertook to explore with interested parties whether the European Union's
early retirement scheme and other structural measures would play a part in
assisting the process of change and achieving the Government's long term
objectives.
DANI Consultation Paper on Early Retirement
5.10 On 18 March 1998, DANI wrote to a number of interested bodies (see
Annex D) inviting comments on a range of measures which might be
drawn up to improve the structure and vitality of farm businesses. It is
pointed out by DANI that the consultation exercise is without commitment
as to which of the measures addressed might be implemented, and that the
Government will have to take into account CAP reform developments
following publication of the Agenda 2000 proposals.
5.11 The DANI consultation paper seeks comment on the following:
- should an early retirement scheme be extended beyond the sheep and
beef sectors?
- would specific conditions regarding size or geographic location of
farms be appropriate?
- for how long should the scheme be open?
- are there any disadvantages to the lump sum scheme?
- any other issues?
23
Sector Coverage/Geographic Coverage/Size of Farm
5.12 It is clear that the Government wishes to see restructuring in the
beef industry, and it is therefore a foregone conclusion that the beef
sector will be included in any scheme. The DANI paper also points
to the sheep sector and indicates that many of the most vulnerable
beef and sheep farms are found in designated disadvantaged areas.
In addition the Committee notes that under the Agenda 2000 CAP
reform proposals, extra support will be made available under the
early retirement scheme to farmers in less favoured areas. The view
of the Young Farmers' Clubs of Ulster was that eligible applicants
should be accepted regardless of farm type or geographical location.
5.13 The Committee therefore recommends that any early retirement
scheme for farmers should regardless of size of farm or
geographical area, be open to all farmers in all sectors of the
industry. In deciding other eligibility criteria, the Committee also
recommends that the Government should take account of best
practice and experience gained in the European Union countries
where an early retirement scheme has been introduced.
5.14 The Committee recommends that any retirement scheme should be
open for a period of five years to enable farmers to plan for the
future and to remove any rush to make decisions.
24
Aid
5.15 The Committee recommends that aid payments should be in the
form of lump sums only, rather than drip-feeding the aid. Such an
arrangement, while administratively convenient, will provide
farmers with a sum sufficient for investment.
Structural Funds
5.16 The Committee notes that Dr Cunningham announced that the
Government would explore "other EU structural measures" in the
context of restructuring, and that DANI points out that this is not
appropriate for Northern Ireland as Structural Funds are fully
committed up to the end of 1999, when new funding will be
negotiated. This situation concerns the Committee, because of the
possibility of Northern Ireland farmers being treated differently to
their counterparts in other areas of the UK. The Committee
therefore recommends that in introducing an early retirement
scheme, the Government should ensure that any arrangements are
applied equally throughout the United Kingdom. If this proves
impossible because of commitment of Structural Funds, the
Committee recommends that the Government should defer the
introduction of any early retirement scheme until the necessary
Structural Funds are available across the United Kingdom.
25
Balance
5.17 The Committee considers that support for the agriculture industry
must not only be addressed from the economic standpoint. While
farmers maintain the environmental beauty of the countryside, the
population at large and tourists enjoy the countryside. It is
therefore important that shortcomings in the agricultural industry
must be addressed in the light of the economic and social benefits to
be gained by the farmers, however attention must also be directed
towards the environmental benefits and the benefits to the country
as a whole of maintaining our farmers in the countryside and on the
land. The Committee therefore recommends that in developing an
early retirement scheme, the Government should take account not
only of economic issues but also of social and environmental issues.
Agri-Environmental Issues
5.18 The European Union has indicated that agri-environmental activities
will be given additional support and DANI seeks comments on this.
The Committee has given much thought to this particular issue and
therefore recommends that farmers should be offered an
"environmental audit" under which the farm would be visited by
DANI and a report prepared identifying environmental problems
needing attention. The Committee further recommends that
grant-aid should be provided to enable the farmer to undertake
necessary work identified in the environmental audit. In addition to
this, the Committee recommends that consideration should be
26
given to the creation of schemes which would address the following
environmental farming areas:
- hedgerow retention and planting;
- repair and restoration of old/traditional farm buildings;
- tree planting.
Legal and Taxation Problems
5.19 With regard to succession on farms in Northern Ireland, there is a
strong patrimonial concept which entails the equal division of
agricultural property. In addition, there is also the fear on handing
over the property to a son and daughter that divorce could lead to
the break up or loss of a farm which has been in the family for
generations. In its evidence to the Committee, the representatives
of the Young Farmers' Clubs of Ulster stressed the need for careful
consideration of the financial issues and of legal hurdles which
would hinder uptake of the scheme. These issues were also
highlighted by CAPITA in their presentation to the Committee -
particular mention being made of Capital Gains Tax and Inheritance
Tax, and also of the problems posed by Land Tenure Law. In its
paper 'Young Farmers and the Problem of Succession in European
Agriculture' (COM(96)398), the European Commission highlights
the problems of inheritance law and suggests that where other heirs
have to be compensated, it would be preferable if this compensation
could be paid over several years in order to ensure continuity of
farming without shortage of finance, or to prevent the young person
actually giving up the farm. With regard to taxation, the paper also
27
suggests that Member States look into the possibility of granting
exemptions or tax reductions on the transfer of farms, pointing out
that the survival of a larger number of enterprises means fewer
businesses and jobs lost and a source of tax receipts and social
security contributions preserved. Legal forms of partnership are
also suggested to make it possible for the parent farmer to involve
the intended successor in the management of the family farm. The
Committee therefore recommends that the Government should,
before implementing an early retirement scheme, address the legal
and taxation problems which will affect both parent farmers and
successors to make the scheme a viable and attractive proposition.
Transfer of Production Quotas and Arable Aid
5.20 The Committee identified at an early stage in the taking of evidence
that there was a need in any early retirement scheme, to make
provision for successors to have access to production quotas. If
such arrangements are not made, the Committee is convinced that
successor farmers will be unable to achieve viability. In discussion
with Dr Stewart of United Dairy Farmers the Committee canvassed
the idea of a national reserve of milk quota which could be applied
to young people who wished to start up in dairy farming.
Dr Stewart was supportive of such a measure. The Young Farmers'
Clubs also supported the transfer of production quotas to successor
farmers to overcome a major entry barrier. The Young Farmers
suggested that the person transferring the quota or the right to
production should receive perhaps 50% of the market value of the
quota to encourage him to transfer it with the land. Such action
28
would in the view of the Young Farmers ensure that rather than
going on to the open market to an established farmer, the quota
would be taken over by the successor farmer. The Committee is
aware that certain quotas - eg suckler cow and sheep quotas, can be
transferred from farmer to farmer, however in such cases, it is
understood that a proportion of the quota is taken by the
Government for allocation to the national reserve. Such an
arrangement where a quota is being passed from father to son or
daughter as part of an early retirement scheme would be
unacceptable to the Committee. The Committee therefore
recommends that the Government should introduce measures to
provide successor farmers with full quotas or rights of production
to enable them to run a viable business. With regard to the transfer
of land registered for arable aid, the Committee, being aware of
difficulties within this scheme, recommends that the Government
should take action to widen the scope for the transfer of such aid
from one part of a holding to another.
The Conacre System
5.21 In an evidence session with the representatives of DANI on
9 October 1997, attention was drawn to the fact that an early
retirement scheme could have important side effects on land tenure
practice in Northern Ireland, particularly the conacre system. It was
pointed out that 225,000 hectares of land are available to rent under
this system to those who wish to expand their business, and that
under current market conditions conacre offers fewer risks to the
29
farmer than the longer term commitment of buying or leasing land.
It was also explained that the conacre system is a tradition in
Northern Ireland and is widely used by older farmers as a means of
securing an income without having to sell off the family farm or
land. In the event of an early retirement scheme being introduced,
the Committee recommends that DANI should take whatever
action is necessary to ensure that the conacre system of leasing is
enabled to continue.
Holistic Approach
5.22 The Committee considers that if the agriculture industry in Northern
Ireland is to have a future, an injection of new blood is necessary.
The Committee is convinced that an early retirement scheme on its
own is not the answer. The Committee therefore recommends that
an holistic approach should be adopted which addresses:
- the provision of agricultural training and education;
- the provision of a retirement scheme for those who wish to use
it;
- the provision of financial assistance to the young farmer who
takes over the family farm, financial assistance which includes:
- capital and other grants for the development and
modernisation of the farm;
30
- setting up and investment aid;
- the provision of EU quotas where necessary as an aid to the
young farmer.
Nature of Scheme
5.23 The Committee acknowledges that the EU early retirement scheme
requires that land released as a result of the retirement must
normally be amalgamated with other land to produce a larger
holding, or if non-viable, go to non-agricultural use; the farm cannot
simply be transferred to another owner and then farmed as a
self-contained unit. Such an arrangement does not allow for family
farms to be taken over by young farmers. As the Agenda 2000
CAP reform proposals contain references to the early retirement
scheme, the Committee recommends that DANI should engage the
Government with a view to the negotiation of an early retirement
scheme which will reflect the requirements of Northern Ireland
where the age structure of farmers is particularly high, and permit
young people to take over viable holdings on the retirement of their
parents, without the requirement of expanding the farm size.
Diversification
5.24 The Committee notes that commentators have not only highlighted the
drift to part-time farming in Northern Ireland, but have also stressed that
part-time farming will become the norm in the New Millennium. In these
circumstances, there will be a move away from the land, particularly of
31
educated young people who wish to pursue lucrative careers outside
farming. It is for this reason that the Committee wishes to see recognition
of the need to encourage young people to remain in rural areas, and
therefore recommends that the Government should seek through the
European Union to foster diversification on farms - eg arts and crafts, bed
and breakfast accommodation, home-based businesses, the provision of
renewable energy through the growing of willow biomass etc. Renewable
energy is a topic on which the Committee hopes shortly to complete a
Report for adoption by the Forum. The Committee further recommends
that the Government should provide grant-aid schemes where necessary to
assist diversification in rural areas and to keep the rural community in the
countryside. Further recommendations under the heading of Planning and
Education and Training are made later in this Report, recommendations
which, if implemented, will assist diversification.
Education and Training
5.25 The primary aim of the Agri-Food Development Service, which includes
the DANI Colleges is to improve the economic performance of the
agri-food sector by developing the competence of people engaged in the
industry. The Service works closely with the agriculture industry to
identify the necessary education and training needs and to deliver courses
and programmes to meet these needs.
5.26 Greenmount, Enniskillen and Loughry Colleges provide a wide range of
full-time, part-time and short courses in agriculture, horticulture, equine
studies, food technology and communication for people entering and
32
already in the industry. Full-time courses are provided at the main
campuses while part-time and short courses are provided at out centres
across Northern Ireland, as well as at the main campuses.
5.27 The Colleges vigorously promote their courses through schools, local
offices of the Training and Employment Agency, Departmental Advisory
staff and other contacts. Quality promotional materials are widely
distributed and extensive press publicity is regularly secured.
5.28 A counselling and careers advice service is provided to help people
choose appropriate courses and secure employment in the industry.
5.29 The Colleges have been successful in recruiting increased numbers of
young people on to full-time and part-time courses leading to recognised
vocational qualifications. Other College programmes help mature farmers
and others working in the industry to develop competence and values
related to business management, countryside management, marketing and
the adoption of new technology.
5.30 A summary of the work being undertaken by the DANI Colleges to
encourage younger people to come into or stay in the Industry is set out at
Annex D which also contains details of Course provision and numbers of
students enrolled.
5.31 The Committee met with Mr Kirkpatrick and Mr Titterington of the
Agri-Food Development Service on 11 September 1997 during which the
operation of the Colleges, education, training and support to the industry
33
were discussed. The Minutes of Evidence of this meeting are included in
Annex C. The Committee found this meeting to be most informative.
5.32 In the course of this meeting, the Committee was invited to visit the
Agriculture Colleges and in due course visits to Greenmount (on
1 October 1997) and to Enniskillen (on 12 November 1997) took place.
The Committee was most impressed with the facilities available at the
Colleges, with the enthusiasm and expertise of the staff, and with the high
calibre of the students.
5.33 The Committee has noted that the Rural Development component of the
Agenda 2000 CAP proposals contains an indication that particular support
will be given to training for young farmers. The Committee, having
already addressed the need for an holistic approach to the encouragement
of young farmers, recommends that the Government should take
advantage of any financial support measures made available by the
European Union for the education and training of young farmers.
5.34 In addition, the Committee has noted the additional resources which have
been made available by the Government to the Health and Education
budgets in recent months. The Committee was alarmed to learn that the
Agricultural Colleges had not benefited from this policy decision. The
Committee was advised that if any increase in the allocation of financial
resources to the Agricultural Colleges was to be made, such an increase
would have to come from savings elsewhere in the DANI budget. The
Committee regards this situation as most unfair - agriculture education is
no different to other spheres of education. The Committee therefore
34
recommends that the Secretary of State should make the necessary
arrangements to ensure that Agricultural Colleges receive a fair share of
the additional resources being made available to education.
5.35 While the Committee is concerned to ensure that young people are
encouraged to remain on the land or to take up farming, and that they
receive the highest quality training and education to prepare them for the
future, the Committee is also aware of the need to provide programmes of
training for mature farmers and their families. Such programmes should
develop competence and values related to business management,
countryside management, marketing and new technology. The Committee
therefore recommends that additional resources should be allocated to
mature learning facilities at the Agricultural Colleges to enable the
provision of courses and training opportunities for mature farmers,
particularly in Information Technology. Further, the Committee
recommends that additional resources should be provided for courses for
farmers who wish to diversify their business.
Planning
5.36 In the course of its examination of the measures needed to assist young
people to stay on the land, the Committee identified that one of the
reasons for young people leaving the land was difficulty in obtaining
planning permission for dwellings. The Committee therefore invited the
Planning Service of the Department of the Environment to give evidence
on this topic. A copy of the Minutes of Evidence and of the Written
Evidence on this topic is attached at Annexes C and D.
35
5.37 The Chief Executive of the Planning Service, Mr Stewart, explained that
within the Service's Planning Strategy for Rural Northern Ireland, account
was taken of Northern Ireland's traditional and distinctive pattern of rural
settlement. It was explained that proposals for single dwellings in the
countryside constitute an important element of the Agency's development
control workload - some 2,500 to 3,000 new dwellings being approved
each year, representing 80% of all applications received for such
development. The Chief Executive also explained that in considering
proposals to build houses in the countryside, the Agency balances
community needs and aspirations with environmental concerns by seeking
to persuade developers to choose sites capable of absorbing a dwelling
satisfactorily and designs compatible with the rural scene.
5.38 The Committee noted that under the Planning Strategy for Rural Northern
Ireland, Policy Hou 9 - "Farmworkers' Houses" it states:
"Exceptionally, where a son or daughter of a farmer works mainly on
the farm holding, permission may also be granted for a new house,
even though it may not be strictly necessary on agriculture grounds for
a farmworker to live on the holding. In some cases, particularly where
the labour requirements of the farm are small, it will be appropriate for
the parent to seek permission for a dwelling house based on retirement
from farming ........
Farmers' sons and daughters who only work part-time in farming and
have their main employment elsewhere are unlikely to fulfil the
requirements of this policy."
36
5.39 The Committee questioned the Planning Service on this topic in some
detail and raised a number of other issues, including diversification, areas
of special control, increased man hours, area plans, environmental studies,
fee structure, radio masts.
5.40 The Committee sought some degree of flexibility from the Planning
Service representatives. The Committee Chairman pointed out:
"Our main concern is for those, particularly in the severely
disadvantaged areas, but not exclusively, who are perhaps farming
50 acres but who cannot afford to employ their son or daughter full
time. Despite the fact that that son or daughter is going to inherit the
farm and wants to remain in farming, he or she cannot remain on the
holding because of planning restrictions. Is it not slightly odd that you
can put up a 60ft cattle house without permission but cannot put up a
bungalow for your son or daughter who are not working full time
because the farm cannot justify two or one and a half full-time
workers? Is there not room for consideration where there is that
genuine need - and I stress the word genuine? Could the Planning
authorities not consider granting permission but enforcing where the
house was sited? In other words, what if a farmer, in order to prove
genuine need, sites the house in the farmyard or adjacent to an existing
house so that it is perfectly obvious that it is not going to be desirable
for resale? I know you have occupancy clauses which in themselves
cause problems. But if it is clear that a case is genuine and that a
house is sited in such a way that it fulfils the desire of the next
generation to stay on the holding or fulfils the need for them to be there
to help with calving or milking, is there not some way in which your
37
policy could be developed to be more flexible? Do you accept that
there is a need for more flexibility?"
5.41 In response, the Chief Executive of the Planning Service explained that
there does need to be flexibility. However he pointed to the fact that when
the Planning Service suggest that dwellings be integrated with a farmyard
this is not wanted. What is wanted, he said, is separate access (with
attendant roads and other problems) and some separation to ensure that
separate social activities are maintained.
5.42 The Committee did not receive any reassurance that the Planning Service
will, in future, be any more tolerant of planning applications from farmers
or their sons and daughters for farm dwellings. If the proposal for an early
retirement scheme for farmers is implemented, it is possible that there will
be an increasing number of planning applications for permission to
construct dwelling houses on the farm for sons and daughters who will be
taking over the working of the farm. It will be essential in these
circumstances for the Planning Service to exhibit the flexibility needed to
meet this demand. The Committee therefore recommends that if the
Early Retirement Scheme which is being proposed is to succeed, and if the
need for diversification in rural areas (mentioned earlier in this Report) is
to be met, it will be necessary for the Planning Service to be more helpful
to young farmers or their parents seeking planning permission for a farm
dwelling.
38
6. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
NORTHERN IRELAND AND AGENDA 2000
6.1 The Committee calls on the Government to negotiate with the European
Union an Agenda 2000 package which recognises the peripherality of
Northern Ireland within the European Union, the particular problems
which therefore affect Northern Ireland farmers, and the importance to the
economy of Northern Ireland of its Agriculture Industry. In recognition of
the key importance of the Northern Ireland Agriculture Industry, and of
the need to ensure that it is best placed to meet the challenges of the New
Millennium, the Committee recommends that the Secretary of State for
Northern Ireland should without delay require the formation of an
interdepartmental small focus task force. This task force should be given
responsibility for the analysis of support mechanisms, local, national and
international which are, or may be made available, for progressing the
restructure of the agricultural industry and for making relevant
recommendations.
6.2 The Committee recommends that Northern Ireland elected
representatives, farming unions and agriculture industry representatives
should press for the retention of Objective 1 status for Northern Ireland.
(Paragraph 4.7)
6.3 In any re-examination of the CAP Reform proposals, the Committee
recommends that the European Commission should amend the proposals
39
and provide for full compensation to meet the projected fall in farming
incomes. (Paragraph 4.9)
6.4 The Committee recommends that the Government should as part of any
negotiated CAP Reform agreement, introduce a Beef Heifer Premium.
(Paragraph 4.11)
6.5 As part of any negotiated CAP Reform agreement, the Committee
recommends that the Government should seek to ensure that an allocation
of Milk Quota is made available to enable new entrants to come into the
dairy industry. (Paragraph 4.12)
6.6 The Committee recommends that DANI should take action now to ensure
that farmers who use computer systems are given the information needed
to prepare for the New Millennium. Further, the Committee is alarmed to
hear that at a high level in DANI, it has been indicated that not enough
staff are available to convert all the computer systems which impact on
agriculture before the New Millennium. The Committee places a great
deal of importance on this and therefore recommends that DANI should
act now to ensure that the necessary conversions are completed before the
Millennium deadline. (Paragraph 4.15)
EARLY RETIREMENT FROM FARMING
6.7 The Committee recommends that any early retirement scheme for farmers
should regardless of size of farm or geographical area be open to all
farmers in all sectors of the industry. In deciding other eligibility criteria,
40
the Committee also recommends that the Government should take
account of best practice and the experience gained in the European Union
countries where an early retirement scheme has been introduced.
(Paragraph 5.13)
6.8 The Committee recommends that any early retirement scheme for farmers
should be open for a period of five years to enable farmers to plan for the
future and to remove any rush to make decisions. (Paragraph 5.14)
6.9 The Committee recommends that aid payments should be in the form of
lump sums only, rather than drip-feeding the aid. (Paragraph 5.15)
6.10 The Committee recommends that in introducing an early retirement
scheme for farmers, the Government should ensure that any arrangements
are applied equally throughout the United Kingdom. If this proves
impossible because of commitment of Structural Funds, the Committee
recommends that the Government should defer the introduction of any
early retirement scheme until the necessary Structural Funds are available
across the United Kingdom. (Paragraph 5.16)
6.11 The Committee recommends that in developing an early retirement
scheme, the Government should take account not only of economic issues
but also of social and environmental issues. (Paragraph 5.17)
6.12 The Committee recommends that farmers should be offered an
'environmental audit' under which the farm would be visited by DANI and
a report prepared identifying environmental problems needing attention.
41
The Committee further recommends that grant-aid should be provided to
enable the farmer to undertake necessary work identified in the
'environmental audit'. In addition to this, the Committee recommends that
consideration should be given to the creation of schemes which would
address the following environmental farming areas:
- hedgerow retention and planting;
- repair and restoration of old/traditional farm buildings;
- tree planting. (Paragraph 5.18)
6.13 The Committee recommends that the Government should, before
implementing an early retirement scheme, address the legal and taxation
problems which will affect both parent farmers and successors to make the
scheme a viable and attractive proposition. (Paragraph 5.19)
6.14 The Committee recommends that the Government should introduce
measures to provide successor farmers with full quotas or rights of
production to enable them to run a viable business. With regard to the
transfer of land registered for arable aid, the Committee, being aware of
difficulties within this scheme, recommends that the Government should
take action to widen the scope for the transfer of such aid from one part of
a holding to another. (Paragraph 5.20)
6.15 In the event of an early retirement scheme being introduced, the
Committee recommends that DANI should take whatever action is
necessary to ensure that the conacre system of leasing is enabled to
continue. (Paragraph 5.21)
42
6.16 The Committee recommends that an holistic approach should be adopted
to the introduction of an early retirement scheme which addresses:
- the provision of agricultural training and education;
- the provision of a retirement scheme for those who wish to use it;
- the provision of financial assistance to the young farmer who takes
over the family farm, financial assistance which includes:
- capital and other grants for the development and modernisation of
the farm;
- setting up and investment aid;
- the provision of EU quotas where necessary as an aid to the young
farmer. (Paragraph 5.22)
6.17 The Committee recommends that DANI should engage the Government
with a view to the negotiation of an early retirement scheme which will
reflect the requirements of Northern Ireland where the age structure of
farmers is particularly high, and permit young people to take over viable
holdings on the retirement of their parents without the requirement of
expanding the farm size. (Paragraph 5.23)
6.18 The Committee recommends that the Government should seek to foster
diversification on farms - eg arts and crafts, bed and breakfast
43
accommodation, home-based businesses, the provision of renewable
energy through the growing of willow biomass etc. The Committee
further recommends that Government should provide grant aid schemes
where necessary to assist diversification in rural areas and to keep the
rural community in the countryside. (Paragraph 5.24)
EDUCATION AND TRAINING
6.19 The Committee, having already addressed the need for an holistic
approach to the encouragement of young farmers, recommends that the
Government should take advantage of any financial support measures
made available by the European Union for the education and training of
young farmers. (Paragraph 5.33)
6.20 The Committee recommends that the Secretary of State should make the
necessary arrangements to ensure that Agricultural Colleges receive a fair
share of the additional resources being made available to education.
(Paragraph 5.34)
6.21 The Committee recommends that additional resources should be allocated
to mature learning facilities at the Agricultural Colleges to enable the
provision of courses and training opportunities for mature farmers,
particularly in Information Technology. Further, the Committee
recommends that additional resources should be provided for courses for
farmers who wish to diversify their business. (Paragraph 5.35)
44
PLANNING
6.22 The Committee recommends that if the Early Retirement Scheme which
is being proposed is to succeed and if the need for diversification in rural
areas (mentioned earlier in this report) is to be met, it will be necessary for
the Planning Service to be more helpful to young farmers or their parents
seeking planning permission for a farm dwelling. (Paragraph 5.42)
45
ANNEX A
MEMBERSHIP OF
STANDING COMMITTEE D
(AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES ISSUES)
46