Vol. 451 No. 2
13 Mr. H. Byrne asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the number of applications to date for dairy hygiene scheme grants and control of farmyard pollution scheme grants; the number of approvals to date; the percentage of the total number of applicants approved to date; the reasons for the delays being experienced; the steps, if any, he intends to take to expedite payments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [6441/95]
139 Mr. B. Smith asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the progress, if any, which has been made in relation to the issue of approvals under the control of farmyard pollution scheme, the dairy hygiene scheme and REPS in view of the unacceptable delays in having applications processed. [6545/95]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 13 and 139 together.
Since being launched on 1 September 1994 a total of 11,754 applications have been received under the control of farm pollution scheme and 2,883 under the dairy hygiene scheme. A total of 2,779 and 535 approvals respectively have issued. This represents 23 per cent of the total applications received to date.
Applications under the various schemes are dealt with in order of receipt subject to good operational practices. The average processing period for the rural environment protection scheme is five to eight weeks. Because of the volume of applications received under the pollution and dairy hygiene schemes processing is of the order of 16 to 18 weeks.
To date claims in respect of works completed under CFP totalling £1.6 million have been paid. A further £400,000 will be paid in the next two weeks.
Every effort is being made within the resources available to process applications as quickly as possible and I am at present reviewing the situation in regard to the investment aid schemes to see how the processing of applications can be expedited.
Will the Minister of State indicate why no applications have been accepted since 12 December last?
What practical use are the promises of the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, Deputy Yates, of an improved departmental service if at the beginning of this month 80 per cent of all applications were pending? The position has not improved much since. Will the Minister of State comment on the position in some areas where farmers are being told they will have to wait until next year for approval of a CFP grant?
I am not sure how the Deputy came up with the date of 12 December last. I understand that was the date his colleague, the former Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry, suspended the FIP programme.
I referred to the CFP scheme.
There is no embargo, of which I am aware, on the receipt of applications for grants in any office. If an embargo is in place in some offices, I would appreciate the Deputy informing me which offices are involved. I accept there is a large number of applicants. The Department is under pressure owing to a shortage of clerical staff and the processing of applications in some offices has been delayed. The personnel section of the Department is endeavouring to resolve the problem. Because of a shortage of field staff the rate of approval of applications in some counties is slower than normal. The staffing problem is being addressed by the personnel section and should be resolved shortly. This scheme has been successful and has aroused a good deal of interest but departmental staff cannot cope with the large number of applications being received. There is no question of refusing applications at this stage or of any embargo. Applications are being accepted in the normal way.
I beg to differ with the Minister of State on that. However, I stand to be corrected and perhaps he will check the facts. Will he admit that the real reason the Minister and his Department are on a go-slow in respect of payments under these environmentally vital schemes is that he is effectively using the funding for the schemes as an interest free loan at the expense of farmers in order to make ends meet in the Department? What the Minister, Deputy Yates, delicately referred to as "strategic management of grant scheme funding" is effectively the use of money that should be in farmers' pockets to fund his publicity-driven political agenda. Will the Minister of State indicate if the farmers will be paid what is rightfully theirs? I agree that a great number of people have shown an interest in those schemes, but a corresponding number of grants have not been paid out under them.
The Deputy's comment is ludicrous and there is no foundation for it.
I hope the Minister of State can tell me the reason for the present position.
There is no such delay in the Department. Under both schemes more than 3,314 approvals have been issued to date with a grant commitment of £21.966 million, representing a gross investment of £39.7 million.
Eighty per cent of applications are still pending.
There is no question of farmers' money being retained for anything else.
The Minister of State may fool the farmers, but not us.
The Minister of State please, without interruption.
I have listened to the Deputy on several occasions trying to shout down other Ministers. Overall this scheme has been successful and that is probably why we are suffering as we received such a large amount of applications. We will do our best to ensure that applicants' applications are processed as soon as possible and if there is a shortfall in money, which may occur, as these schemes are likely to be oversubscribed, we will have to secure more funding for them from the reserve in 1997 when it will come up for review.
So there is a shortfall of money?
There has not been a slowing down in processing applications.
The Minister of State will be aware from agricultural journal articles in recent weeks that serious concern has been raised about the administration of these two schemes. He is aware that eligibility for REPS is not available until those schemes have been processed. We have talked about the importance of environmentally sensitive farming and the availability and importance of REPS but, on the admission of the Minister of State, two schemes contingent for eligibility purposes for REPS are not being processed in a manner satisfactory to him.
We heard in the first flush of enthusiasm about the need for a farmers' charter and so on, all laudable aspirations, but we are now getting to the crux of the issue. The Minister of State said the schemes are successful, farmers are interested in them and have applied under them, but the Department is not providing the resources or personnel to adequately complete inspections, approve applications and arrange for payment. Is that not the position on the admission of the Minister of State? His admission was honest. It is welcome to hear Ministers admit there are problems in the administration of sections of their Departments. These two schemes, in which there is great interest, are not being adequately administered for a number of reasons. However, the bottom line is that approvals are not being made because inspections cannot be carried out as adequate resources are not being made available by the Department to allow staff deal with the huge workload which we, having talked to personnel in local offices dealing with this matter, are all aware exists. While we do not expect the overall position could be improved overnight we would expect the Minister, having acknowledged that a serious problem exists, to inform us what precise plans he has to improve it? Has the Minister of State or the Minister, Deputy Yates, any plans to relocate staff temporarily to carry out these inspections? These are all critical questions. While we all agree that the scheme is successful, that people are interested, we want the Minister to state what administrative arrangements he will make to cater for this huge interest because the Department cannot accommodate the present interest in these schemes.
As I pointed out, due to clerical shortages, application approvals in some offices have been delayed.
Is the Minister doing anything about them?
Yes, the personnel section of the Department is endeavouring to resolve the problem and hope to augment the number of field officers available. Deputies Cowen and Hugh Byrne referred somewhat cynically to the charter of farmers' rights, in respect of which additional field officers will be required to investigate applications to ensure farmers will not have to wait too long for investigation. Everything possible will be done to have applications under this scheme investigated as soon as possible so that applicants will not be subjected to undue delays. This is not the first time there has been a delay in grant application approvals.
I have no intention of trying to shout down the Minister of State. Neither Deputy Cowen nor I were cynical. We are questioning promises given by the Minister of State and his senior colleague, Deputy Yates. We want to know precisely what is happening. What the Minister of State said will give farmers little solace. He was asked precisely what his Department is doing and, as far as I can ascertain, he does not propose to do anything other than request existing personnel to carry on with the task already assigned them. If the Minister will not do anything about approving applications for this vital environmental scheme, what will he do to redress the balance in my county, where two out of 57 dairy hygiene grants and 55 out of 231 control of farmyard pollution scheme grants were approved recently? We all agree there is tremendous interest in the scheme but because of scarcity of departmental personnel and probably because the public generally do not believe in ministerial promises, private companies are now being established to prepare such plans. Will the Minister say whether these companies are being harassed by his Department, to put them out of existence, or are they being encouraged? I should like a straight answer to that question.
We inherited the staffing arrangements that Deputy Hugh Byrne's Government put in place over a period of seven years.
The Minister of State's party had all the answers when in Opposition, but now they are in power, they have none.
It totally decimated the Teagasc service in 1987 and ran down other services so that we must now endeavour to restore a credible support service for farmers, whether in the farm development sector or within the remit of Teagasc. While we have been in office a mere ten weeks, we are endeavouring to do so.
The time for talking has finished.
If the Deputy will give us seven years, he can come back and criticise us but we are endeavouring to undo the damage done by his Government having attempted to destroy all the services for our farming community.
That is an awful slur on Teagasc.
It is quite true as the record will demonstrate. We will endeavour to restore a proper service, in the field and on clerical assistance and back-up support services for these schemes. At the end of the day, I am confident these schemes will be successful.
Which day is the Minister of State talking about?
I have absolute confidence in our departmental personnel in the field and in our various offices in ensuring the proper administration of these schemes. In addition, the personnel section of the Department is examining the numbers of personnel and services and, if extra staff is required, I am convinced they will respond positively so that all applications will be processed as quickly as possible.
The Minister did not respond to my question about private companies.
I answered the question but the Deputy obviously was not listening.
Does the Minister of State favour the private individual?
I said I am convinced that our existing departmental staff are well capable of coping with all applications submitted.
The figures do not substantiate that contention.
