Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 4 Dec 2001

Vol. 545 No. 4

Written Answers. - Departmental Irregularities.

Trevor Sargent

Question:

110 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources the title of the subhead debited with the £15,125 paid to a company (details supplied) for the investigation of possible irregularities in the administration of his Department's afforestation grant and premium schemes. [30567/01]

Trevor Sargent

Question:

111 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources the outcome of the investigation by a company (details supplied) into possible irregularities in the administration of his Department's afforestation grant and premium schemes; if so, when and the way in which the possible irregularities were brought to the attention of the European Commission. [30568/01]

Trevor Sargent

Question:

112 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources if legal advice was sought on the possible irregularities in the administration of his Department's afforestation grant and premium schemes which were investigated by a company (details supplied). [30569/01]

Trevor Sargent

Question:

113 Mr. Sargent asked the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources if the European Union Commission has sought his observations on the possible irregularities in the administration of his afforestation grant and premium administration schemes. [30570/01]

Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources (Mr. Fahey)

I propose to take Questions Nos. 110 to 113, inclusive, together.

On completion of its report in 1999, payment to the company in question was made from subhead A7, consultancy services, of my Department's Vote. Follow-up action on the report was taken within my Department by the internal audit unit and by the forest service. Action on the report was monitored by my Department's high level accreditation group, which had responsibility for any issues which might impact on the Department's role as a paying agency in relation to the guarantee section of the European agricultural guidance and guarantee fund.

While follow-up action is still outstanding on some individual files, there has to date been no case of suspected irregularity, as defined by European Council Regulation 2988/95, in respect of which it was necessary to make any financial correction to report to the European Commission. In those circumstances the question of seeking legal advice has not arisen.

Finally, the company employed in an operationally independent basis to certify the annual accounts of the Department as a paying agency were made aware of the report in 1999 and, arising from allegations made to the Commission in summer 2000 by a confidential source, the Commission was also made aware of the report in 2000. My Department has responded in full to all issues raised by the Commission.