Vol. 470 No. 5
16 Mr. E. Byrne asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the number of cases in which penalties have been imposed in view of specific works not being carried out under the REP scheme following payment; the proposals, if any, he has to improve monitoring of this scheme and compliance with the regulations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19410/96]
A procedure consisting of prepayment spot checks is in operation for participants in the REP scheme. In addition, compliance checks are carried out prior to second year payment. Of the 2,774 participants who have so far received second year payments 266 have had penalties imposed. This represents 9.5 per cent of participants and the penalties imposed were approximately 10 per cent of the total payments made to second year applicants. In each case the participant has been penalised for failing to carry out specific works or fulfil undertakings made in the preceding year of the scheme. Penalties range from 5 per cent to 100 per cent of payment, depending on the significance of the infringement.
I am satisfied this control system is ensuring compliance with the regulations. This is evident from the results to date of the compliance checks, the level of which I will keep under review.
I am sorry Deputy Byrne could not be here to deal with this question. The information is specific. I am glad the Minister is taking such an intensive interest in the REPS area. The works being carried out under REPS is essential not just to farming but to the quality of our rivers and environment generally. It is essential that works be carried out to ensure that farming does not impinge on our environment.
The Minister referred to second year payments and spot checks during the second year. Were these checks carried out only in the second year, and was this because of concerns raised by advertisements in the paper advising farmers that they could draw down money from the REP scheme and not carry out the works?
As part of the valuation process there was a 5 per cent inspection rate during the first year in the course of which a high level of non compliance, over 40 per cent was discovered. As a result we decided to have 100 per cent checking for second year payments. We discovered subsequently that the level of non-compliance was reduced to such an extent that we are now reducing second year spot checks by 50 per cent. Farmers and planners now realise it is important that there be full compliance under this scheme. It will be EU policy in the future to encourage more extensification and environmentally friendly schemes. I am confident of the success of the REPS scheme and of its effectiveness in the future.
I am happy with the Minister's answer but I urge him to continue, if at all possible, with intensive spot checks. It is important not just to rural dwellers but to urban dwellers that the checks be continued until all the works have been completed.
Previously we paid 100 per cent up front but now we pay 50 per cent up front and the remaining 50 per cent after six months. That gives the farmer time to put a plan in place and for spot checks to take place. The second payment is an incentive to farmers to comply with the plan, and it is badly needed by them because of the challenges they face. We have been looking carefully at the question of compliance with the specification by the planners. Planners have been informed if their plans do not fully comply with the original specification. They, in addition to farmers, now realise that the scheme is being carefully monitored, that it is in their interest to comply with the specification and to ensure their clients comply with their plans.
There are a number of cases in my constituency where farmers have been penalised for doing too much of the work in the first year, for example, mistakenly cutting too much of the hedgerows. Has the Minister of State established the promised appeal system within the Department for such people?
The system has been set up and farmers can appeal decisions. There is a scale of penalties for pollution — 100 per cent for pollution of watercourses or interference with wildlife habitats or where a national monument is located on the land to which REPS applies. When the inspector visits farms he will offer advice to farmers about what they should do to rectify their plan. We have been balanced and fair in the application of REPS. However, if we are subject to EU evaluation, which we are from time to time, when auditors visit REPS farms it is important for the credibility of this scheme that it is complied with properly. The penny has dropped that this is a serious scheme and a scheme for the future. It will be continued into the future if it has the desired effect, if people comply with it and respect the philosophy behind it.
Will the Minister of State agree that when amendments were made to REPS they were not meant to have retrospective effect? I can present him with a case in which verbal approval was given by the inspector. Subsequent amendments to the scheme were made by the Department and a further inspection was made under the new regime. The farmer was found to be ineligible and was charged a penalty rather than receiving the full grant. Does the Minister of State agree it is wrong that changes made in the scheme should have a retrospective effect? Will he ensure that if people were in compliance on the date of the first inspection they will get their full grant, as should have been the case in this instance? Will the Minister of State deal with the case I mentioned?
Deputies have brought a number of individual difficulties to my attention and I have tried to deal with them as flexibly and sympathetically as possible. If the Deputy furnishes me with the details of the case he mentioned I will deal with it.
There was a significant change between the original specifications and the second set of specifications issued last May with regard to the fencing of watercourses, a costly item. Will the Minister give an undertaking that anybody who undertook that work at considerable cost under the original specifications will not have to adjust it to the new specifications? Under measure 10 in the specifications, the Minister reserves the right to insist that all farmers undertake a REPS course. Does the Minister of State intend to operate that regulation? Will he insist that all farmers who participate in REPS undertake the 40 hour course on the operation of the scheme?
The specification regarding fencing was not changed from the original. With regard to farmers' involvement in courses over the five year period, we hope all farmers will attend a REPS course. Opportunities will be made available to them to attend such courses. They will be provided on an area basis to facilitate farmers as much as possible.
Where a second inspection has taken place, a penalty imposed and the client notified accordingly, how long should elapse before payments take place? Is the Minister of State satisfied that there is sufficient finance, in view of the uptake under REPS, to meet the demand?
We are endeavouring to make payments as quickly as possible. It is important that payments are sent to rural communities expeditiously. On the other hand, we are ensuring there is maximum compliance. We have set up a special prototype in the payments section to ensure payments are made as speedily as possible. It took some time to establish and might have delayed payments initially. Now, however, payments are being paid at a rapid rate and that will continue. There should be no undue delay in any case, even where there are some difficulties.
There is adequate funding to meet the demand for REPS this year as a result of the Minister securing a large amount of extra funding through savings in the Department and following his representations to the Department of Finance. There will also be adequate funding for the remainder of the scheme.
Will the REPS courses to which the Minister of State referred be additional to the green certificate?
They have no relationship to the green certificate. They are specific courses for farmers participating in REPS. We will also establish demonstration farms. Farmers can visit those farms and learn from the owner how to comply with the REPS specifications. That has been one of the most successful aspects of initiating farmers into REPS. Visits to demonstration farms give farmers an opportunity to see how the scheme is operating and the benefits farmers can derive from the scheme. It is separate from the green certificate. There will be specific courses for farmers in addition to the demonstration farms. The demonstration farms are being established throughout the country.
