Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 23 Apr 2002

Vol. 552 No. 3

Written Answers. - Rural Environment Protection Scheme.

Pádraic McCormack

Question:

82 Mr. McCormack asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development if, in the rural environment protection scheme, there have been instances where agri-environmental plans have been identified by his Department as invalid; if so, if they have been returned to the planner and to the applicant; if his Department imposed sanctions on a planner following a deficient agri-environmental plan or planner error; the sanctions his Department imposed on planners in REP schemes, following a deficient agri-environmental plan or planner error; and the number of instances where the REP scheme appeal committee reduced or waived penalties applied to REP scheme participants following a planner error. [12315/02]

Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development (Mr. Walsh)

All new scheme applications are subject to a series of administrative and technical checks by my Department. A proportion are subject to detailed audit, including a more in-depth examination of the agri-environmental plan. Where new applications are found to be invalid, both the plan and the application are rejected and returned to the applicant. The planner is notified that the application is rejected.

In addition, the agri-environmental plans of a proportion of existing scheme participants are selected for audit each year. If a plan is found to be invalid or deficient, my Department will take appropriate action depending on the nature of the problem uncovered. Usually this will mean requesting an amended plan to address deficiencies. In a small number of cases, however, participants are found to have been ineligible and it is necessary to terminate their REPS contracts and recover all payments.

Where an agri-environmental plan, either of a new applicant or an existing participant, is found to contain serious deficiencies or where major eligibility problems are found to exist, my Department may impose sanctions on the planner and/or planning agency who prepared the plan. Such sanctions may take the form of a formal warning or in certain circumstances may involve the suspension of the planner or planning agency from the Department's approved list. Examples of deficiencies which may lead to the imposition of a warning or suspension have been published by my Department in conjunction with the REPS 2000 documentation. Currently, more than 100 planners have received warning letters and a small number face suspension.

Due to the manner in which the proceedings of the REPS appeals committee are recorded, it is not possible in the time available to determine the number of instances where the committee has reduced or waived penalties because of planning errors. The committee considers each case on its own merits and takes all relevant facts, including planning errors, into account in reaching its decisions.

My Department has approved more than 700 planners to prepare REPS plans. The great majority of planners consistently produce work of a high standard. My Department, in consultation with Teagasc and the Agricultural Consultants' Association, which represents private planners, is engaged in an ongoing process of consultation to clarify and explain the requirements of the scheme so as to minimise the number of cases in which difficulties arise.