asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will state why a large number of applications for farm improvement grants were rejected, although they were made within the prescribed period.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Farm Improvement Grants.
One of the conditions of the scheme is that applications are dealt with in the order of their receipt up to the limits of the money available. An intimation to this effect was also made in the Press advertisements. This procedure has been followed. When applications sufficient to absorb all the funds available had been accepted, there still remained a number which had, in the circumstances, to be rejected.
Is the Minister aware that a number of people who applied within the prescribed time were disappointed as their applications were rejected? Will the Minister give an assurance now that these people will be given priority in future schemes?
It is true that the applications of some of those who applied in time were rejected but only of those whose applications came in within the last two days of the expiration of the time specified. I can give the Deputy an undertaking that they will get prior consideration in future schemes.
Would the Minister be prepared to say that in future schemes a sufficient amount of money will be voted to ensure that all applicants will be fairly met?
The number of applications was unexpectedly heavy and we did not anticipate that such a large sum might be required. Of course it entails something more than the mere provision of money. It also entails the provision of more staffs.
Would the Minister not think it desirable, in order to ensure that there may not be a similar breach of faith with the applicants in future, that a Supplementary Vote should be sought in order to meet the demands of all applicants?
There was certainly no breach of faith because it was made perfectly plain that the applications would be considered.