Vol. 408 No. 9
7 Mr. Nealon asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern being expressed by persons who have applied for grants under the agri-tourism scheme and who now find that because of the criteria laid down, they are ineligible for consideration; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
11 Mr. Carey asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern being expressed by persons who have applied for grants under the agri-tourism scheme and who now find that because of the criteria laid down, they are ineligible for consideration; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
18 Mr. Crowley asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern being expressed by persons who have applied for grants under the agri-tourism scheme and who now find that because of the criteria laid down, they are ineligible for consideration; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
20 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern being expressed by persons who have applied for grants under the agri-tourism scheme and who now find that because of the criteria laid down, they are ineligible for consideration; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
22 Mr. Bradford asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern being expressed by persons who have applied for grants under the agri-tourism scheme and who now find that because of the criteria laid down, they are ineligible for consideration; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
25 Mr. G. Reynolds asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern being expressed by persons who have applied for grants under the agri-tourism scheme and who now find that because of the criteria laid down, they are ineligible for consideration; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
30 Mr. Belton asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern being expressed by persons who have applied for grants under the agri-tourism scheme and who now find that because of the criteria laid down, they are ineligible for consideration; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
34 Mr. McCormack asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern being expressed by persons who have applied for grants under the agri-tourism scheme and who now find that because of the criteria laid down; they are ineligible for consideration; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
45 Mr. Creed asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern being expressed by persons who have applied for grants under the agri-tourism scheme and who now find that because of the criteria laid down, they are ineligible for consideration; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
46 Mr. Farrelly asked the Minister for Agriculture and Food if his attention has been drawn to the serious concern being expressed by persons who have applied for grants under the agri-tourism scheme and who now find that because of the criteria laid down, they are ineligible for consideration; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 7, 11, 18, 20, 22, 25, 30, 34, 45 and 46 together.
The criteria which must be satisfied to qualify for the benefits of the scheme on agri-tourism are aimed at encouraging people in rural areas to supplement their income by providing local facilities for tourists.
I do not accept that the criteria are unduly restrictive or that they militate against the success of the scheme. However, if the Deputies have cases in mind I will have them investigated on receiving the details.
The scheme which is operated by Bord Fáilte and Shannon Development on behalf of my Department will be reviewed after one year's operation.
Will the Minister agree that the Teagasc inspectors who are dealing with these applications find that 90 per cent of applicants will be ineligible because of the criteria laid down that only 40 per cent will be allowed for the development of their homes and that there is not sufficient funds available or a sufficient return on the investment to ensure that the majority of these applicants will be successful? In other words, we will lose quite a substantial amount of the money made available.
I do not accept Deputy Farrelly's assertion because the scheme is designed to encourage tourists into rural areas. This is laid down under different headings and, as I said in my original reply, it is intended to review the scheme after it has been in operation for one year. If the Deputies have specific difficulties they are quite free to give details to the Department of Agriculture and Food for consideration.
Will the Minister give a commitment to the House that he will contact the Teagasc officials dealing with this scheme in each of the counties experiencing the difficulties which I outlined in the House today? The majority of those people believe it is a mickey mouse scheme because it does not allow the numbers of people which the Minister and the Minister of State had been saying——
I want to help Deputy Farrelly elicit information but he must conform to the procedures governing Question Time and do so by way of relevant supplementary questions.
Will the Minister give a commitment to the House that he will set up an independent appeals procedure for unsuccessful applicants?
I told the Deputy that if there are difficulties in relation to the scheme he is welcome to submit details for exmaination.
That would apply to 90 per cent of the applicants.
I do not accept that. I am looking at the range of activities eligible for grant aid, which is quite extensive, and there is a great need for that kind of development in rural areas. I was disappointed to hear Deputy Farrelly calling it a mickey mouse scheme.
They are the words of some of the people carrying out the Minister's instructions, not mine.
It is clearly a very worthwhile scheme in the whole process of rural development. It is a change of focus and there is obvious potential for development. As I said, if constituents of the Deputy have difficulties in regard to the scheme he is quite welcome to submit them and we will have them examined.
Will the Minister acknowledge that, after a lot of ballyhoo in 1989, only 26 grants were paid? How many grants were paid last year? I agree with Deputy Farrelly that the terms of reference of the scheme are so grandiose they are well beyond the qualifying limits of the vast majority of people who should be the beneficiaries? Like many other EC schemes they are a PR exercise with more sham than substance.
I do not have the specific information which Deputy Higgins requested but I will forward it to him. However, I do not accept the remarks in realtion to the scheme and I am surprised at the number of questions tabled in relation to it because we regard the scheme as being very worthwhile.
It applies to fewer than one person per county.
All Deputies have a role to play in the general promotion of the scheme and encouraging people to participate in it.
Will the Minister accept that the biggest problem facing the agricultural community in rural areas is survival? Thousands of farmers are on small — or no — quotas. Dry stock farmers are going to the wall and thousands are leaving agriculture every year. Does the Minister think that this agri-tourism project, the LEADER project and the programme for rural development, will stem the flow of people leaving the land? It will not and the Minister and the Government have failed abysmally to tackle the problem of people leaving rural Ireland. These projects will do nothing to resolve the problem.
I fully accept that there is a process of change and rationalisation within the agricultural industry but the Minister for Agriculture and Food, and the Government, have brought forward positive and definite proposals for development in rural areas. The areas with potential for development have been identified and when they come on stream which I hope they will, because of their labour intensive nature, we will come to terms with our difficulties because of lack of employment opportunities on our farms.
Will the Minister agree that much damage could be done to the scheme because of the difference between the terms of the 1989 scheme and the present one? Under the 1989 scheme only 20 per cent could go towards providing accommodation but now, in disadvantaged areas it can go as high as 50 per cent. It is important not to mix the two, it would give the scheme a bad name as it has been modified and changed to benefit the provision of accommodation.
Deputy Leonard's observations on the scheme clearly underline the political wisdom existing in County Monaghan in relation to those schemes and he has clearly seen their potential and possibilities. I am sure he actively encourages people in his constituency to participate in them.
In view of the criteria laid down, is there not sufficient take-up of the £7.5 million allocated under the scheme? If so, does the Minister propose to change the regulations to allow for a greater number to participate in it? It could be very beneficial for many people in rural areas to participate in it but they are eliminated by the criteria.
I said in my original reply that the scheme will be reviewed after 12 months and all these matters will be considered.
Following the disquiet in regard to this scheme by this side of the House, will the Minister set up an independent appeals procedure for unsuccessful applicants?
I told the Deputy that we would look closely at problem cases if he submits them to the Department for examination.
Will someone be specifically appointed to examine the problems?
We have a unit in the Department dealing with a range of rural development schemes and we will ask them to look at the problems.
