Did you know that 75 per cent of Ireland is officially defined as disadvantaged? And further, that this is a great source of pride to the Government?
It used to be just over 50 per cent, but hard work and diligence from successive administrations over the past 25 years have brought us up to our current proud level.
I refer to the Disadvantaged Areas Scheme, a mechanism designed to squeeze money out of the EU and give it to farmers. This is part of the Common Agricultural Policy (Cap), which Taoiseach Bertie Ahern and his Government are so desperately keen to defend. And why wouldn't they be? As far as the Disadvantaged Areas Scheme is concerned, it is essentially money for old rope.
This is the month of the disadvantaged area payments bonanza, with cheques arriving in the post for over 100,000 farmers in receipt of these compensatory allowances, almost three-quarters of the total number working the land. They don't actually have to produce anything to get the money - it is paid out simply on the basis of how many hectares they own.
Over the past five years, Irish farmers have received well over €1 billion from this scheme alone. On an individual basis, it accounts for about one sixth of their income.
Good luck to them, you might say, if the money comes from the EU and doesn't cost us anything, at least directly. However, this is not the case. The Irish Exchequer contributes a substantial amount (over 50 per cent) to this scheme. During the past five years, for instance, the Irish taxpayer has shelled out around €650 million to these vast hordes of poor disadvantaged farmers.
So who exactly is this unfortunate group of individuals? Undoubtedly some of them are indeed working in difficult terrains, in mountainous areas and the like, and do need some form of support. The last time I looked, however, mountainous and inhospitable territory covered nowhere near three-quarters of all the land of Ireland. And further, given that only 70 per cent of our terrain is in agricultural use in the first place, the designation of 75 per cent of the land mass as disadvantaged becomes even more incredible.
The EU itself has expressed concern at the galloping redefinition of land as disadvantaged, or in Euro-speak, "less favoured". In a 2002 report from the European Court of Auditors, Ireland was singled out as being the most extreme example of this.
The auditors somewhat dryly remarked that "given that mountainous areas have not changed, the increases [ in less-favoured areas] are all the more remarkable given the advances in soil improvement and varietal development." Their report was a scathing criticism of the EU itself for failing to establish consistent criteria for defining disadvantage, which results in individual countries having considerable latitude in categorising their own land for these additional farmer subsidies.
The Court of Auditors also pointed out that no one had a clue as to whether the scheme was actually doing what it was supposed to. "In the absence of overall evaluation results," its report stated, "no definitive conclusion can be drawn on the effectiveness of the compensatory allowances." With red faces all around, the EU attempted to reform the entire disadvantaged areas scheme earlier this year. Abject failure was the result, with those countries benefiting most from the scheme, particularly France and Ireland, vociferously opposing any change.
It is difficult to find any recent Irish evaluation of the Disadvantaged Areas Scheme. It seems to be a case in this country of the less attention drawn to it, the better.
The Mid-term Evaluation of the 2000-2006 Cap Rural Development Programme, carried out for the Department of Agriculture and published in 2003, indicated that in the absence of detailed study, it could not say whether or not the disadvantaged areas payments scheme met its objectives.
For instance, the review stated that "it is difficult to conclude whether or not compensatory allowances have contributed to the maintenance of viable rural communities through preventing depopulation".
The mid-term review also pointed to the fact that a number of dairy farmers "with relatively high levels of income are now benefiting from the scheme", adding that "this may not be the best targeting of available resources".
Nothing, of course, has happened as a result of this. The scheme remains intact, benefiting farmers large and small, rich and poor alike, all at the expense of the beleaguered Irish taxpayer who persists in the erroneous belief that it is only EU money.
This then is a concrete example of the type of agricultural subsidy that Tony Blair in the UK has criticised so trenchantly. All we hear from this side of the water is Bertie Ahern roundly denouncing the British prime minister for seeking reform.
That, and a few self-congratulatory pats on the back for having succeeded beyond our wildest dreams in becoming so disadvantaged.