I thank the Minister of State for confirming the first part of my question that 39 per cent of the application collated by the appeals panel was rejected by the Commission. The Minister did not answer the other part of the question, whether an omission of this magnitude had been made on previous occasions. The Minister replied to my second question asking whether farmers would have the opportunity to have their case reopened when he said there will be no further review.
The Minister will realise that this is a central issue for many farmers because higher premium payments are paid to those in disadvantaged areas. I am sure the Minister of State is aware of the large measure of discontent and bafflement that many farmers are experiencing as to how this matter was handled. Does he agree it is quite extraordinary that the appeals panel under the chairmanship of Professor Sheehy which included the president of the IFA, Mr. John Donnelly, looked at all these areas which had been excluded up to now and submitted to the Minister the areas that should be included as a result of this review?
Will he explain why, although the Department felt that the stocking density criteria were met and submitted the application to Brussels, 40 per cent of it has been thrown out? Many farmers are trying to find out how an application under an independent appeals panel who are acquainted with the criteria of the scheme was vetted and agreed to by the Department, submitted to Brussels and rejected. Is the Minister suggesting that only 60 per cent of the application was sent to Brussels?