Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 23 Oct 2001

Vol. 542 No. 5

Priority Questions. - Grant Payments.

Willie Penrose

Question:

97 Mr. Penrose asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development the efforts made by his Department since June 2001 to have the EU Commission formally raise the ceiling on the national scheme for the control of farm pollution, farm waste management scheme; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that over 600 farmers are waiting for the payment of such grants; if his attention has further been drawn to the prompt payment of accounts legislation and the fact that farmers might be entitled to interest on outstanding grant payments; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [25308/01]

Éamon Ó Cuív

My Department was in touch with the EU Commission about this problem well before June of this year. A formal written application to amend the State aid approval was in fact made on 4 April 2001, some months before the ceiling for payments was reached. Since then my Department has been in constant communication with the Commission services, supplying additional material as requested and addressing the various concerns that are always present when there is any question of raising the ceiling on State aids. Officials of my Department travelled to Brussels in September to ensure that everything had been supplied to the Commission's satisfaction and were assured that this was the case and that all that remained was to process the application formally through the different levels of procedures laid down for internal and inter-service consultation. This procedure closed at the end of last week and I expect to have the formal written approval within the next day or so.

Just over 650 applicants await payment under this scheme. I have in previous replies explained that there is no provision for the payment of interest in cases like this. The Prompt Payment of Accounts Act referred to by Deputy Penrose is not intended to cover payment of grant aid which may be delayed for any number of reasons.

Mr. Penrose

This is scandalous. Is the Minister of State aware that some farmers borrowed money last autumn, carried out work over the spring and were then prevented by the foot and mouth disease problem from having inspections carried out? This was not of their own making. Now when inspections are carried out ten or 11 months later many farmers who borrowed as much as £10,000 or £20,000 are denied the grant. Does the Minister of State not consider it just and equitable that farmers in a situation not of their own making should be paid additional money because the figures on which the grants are calculated are below actual costs? In the interests of goodwill and in respect of the plight of farmers over the last 12 months should not the Minister of State ensure the grant and due compensation are paid? I know of a farmer who must pay £2,000 interest on top of the capital sum borrowed to carry out this necessary environmental work, which is lauded by all.

Éamon Ó Cuív

Payments continued to be made until the end of May when the £15 million ceiling was reached. I do not presume that Deputy Penrose suggests that we do not comply with EU regulations. We must accept that there are delays in getting permission in this matter. As soon as permission is given, cheques will be issued, as I said, in a matter of days. It is not intended and not provided for that interest will be paid in such cases. The Deputy knows that as well as I do and if he was in my position, he would give the same answer.

Mr. Connaughton

The Deputy would not have to.

Mr. Penrose

Is it the position that, as well as the 650 not paid, there are over 2,500 applications not processed? Is it the Department's deliberate policy not to grant approval to these schemes because of the embarrassing situation prevailing? Is it the case that we have no friends at EU level and cannot get approval of this simple administrative matter because we have no friends to help us move it along? Has our voice been weakened to a bad squawk in the European Union?

Mr. Connaughton

The Minister is the Lone Ranger in the EU.

Éamon Ó Cuív

To answer the second question, there are many at EU level who have a great regard for this country. That is not a problem. We have all experienced, nationally and internationally, administrative delay in questions being raised, which is the nature of bureaucracy. It was so when the Deputy was there and is so now.

Mr. Connaughton

The Minister of State has been there for 20 years.

Éamon Ó Cuív

The Deputy appears to be confused between two schemes. The answer to his first question is "No." Approval is being given as fast as possible. We sought two things, of which one was permission to pay on the national scheme. Regarding the EU scheme, which replaced it and over which the Deputy causes confusion by referring to it, we sought permission to speed up by avoiding 100% inspections because of the foot and mouth crisis. Our officials are still attempting to pass the scheme and deal with the extra workload involved arising from foot and mouth disease. To expedite the scheme, a second request was made to Brussels and in consideration of one Brussels asked questions about the other. We are trying to do all we can to speed up these payments and also approval under the new scheme.

Mr. Connaughton

It is very confusing.