Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 4 Jul 1991

Vol. 410 No. 4

Written Answers. - EC Court of Auditors Report.

Eamon Gilmore

Question:

24 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if he has now considered the annual report of the EC Court of Auditors for the financial year 1989; if he will outline the criticisms which were made in the court's preliminary observations of his Department's management of EC agricultural schemes and funds; if he will further outline the replies which were given by his Department on these criticisms; and the extent to which the annual report of the EC Court of Auditors took account of these replies.

Minister for Agriculture and Food (Mr. O'Kennedy)

The annual report of the EC Court of Auditors for 1989 has been examined in various EC fora in accordance with long standing procedures which culminated in the European Parliament adopting the ECOFIN recommendations granting a discharge to the EC Commission in respect of the implementation of the Community budget in 1989.

As is usual the Court visited all member states on a variety of schemes and made recommendations in regard to these schemes. In so far as the specific references to Ireland and to the work of my Department are concerned, Ireland was visited by the Court on two occasions in 1989 in respect of the co-responsibility system in the common market organisation for cereals and the system of aid for investment in agricultural holdings. The Court's comments on those two systems are contained in chapters 4 and 6 of the annual report.

Seven other member states were visited in respect of the co-responsibility scheme, while five other member states were visited in respect of agricultural investment aids.

The Court of Auditors issues sectoral letters to member states following their visits. The Department have replied fully to the sectoral letter received in respect of the 1989 visit which covered largely technical issues and demonstrated that the manner in which they were dealt with in Ireland was satisfactory. The extent to which the member states responses are taken account of is not known as it is not the practice of the Court to send draft copies of that report to the member states concerned in advance of publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

The issues raised by the Court have been and are being satisfactorily dealt with by my Department and do not call for any special action on my part.