Helen Keogh
Ceist:13 Ms Keogh asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the plans, if any, which are being made to continue and expand the Leader programme for rural development when the present programme expires.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - EC Leader Programme.
Austin Deasy
Ceist:48 Mr. Deasy asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the position the application of an organisation (details supplied) occupied on the priority list drawn up by his Department for finance under the Leader programme; and the number of applications for funding which were successful.
Liz McManus
Ceist:54 Ms McManus asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the procedures, if any, which are in place to ensure that funds allocated under the EC Leader programme are spent for the puposes for which they are allocated, and are not misapplied or abused in anyway; the response, if any, he has received from an organisation (details supplied) to his request for the return of moneys allocated to it under the Leader programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Austin Deasy
Ceist:134 Mr. Deasy asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry if he will give details of all Leader programmes which applied to his Department for funding in the order which was recommended by the officials from his Department who vetted the application.
Ivan Yates
Ceist:168 Mr. Yates asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the proposals, if any, there are to increase the rate of grant-aid under the Leader programme to individual projects to a higher rate of 80 per cent.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 13, 48, 54, 134 and 168 together.
There were 34 applicant groups for funding under the EC Leader programme on rural development in 1991. For convenience, I will send a list of the applicants to Deputy Deasy instead of detailing them here. The business plans submitted by these groups were independently evaluated by consultants engaged by my Department at that time. The order of merit of the plans, based on the evaluation, is confidential. The Government decided to submit all the business plans, with the report of the consultants, to the EC Commission for consideration. The Commission eventually decided to select 16 Irish groups for funding under the programme.
The major features of the Leader programme are that the selected groups are funded through global grants and that the decisions on the use of the grants are taken by the groups themselves in keeping with the general development strategy in each particular group's business plan. There is a formal legal agreement between the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry and each of the Leader groups which sets out the responsibilities of the parties, including the arrangements for advance of the public funds, which are normally paid in quarterly instalments. In addition, detailed guidelines were supplied to each group by my Department in relation to the operation of the programme and in particular to project eligibility criteria.
While keeping with the spirit of the programme — in particular, that the decisions on investments in projects are made by the groups themselves — the agreement requires each group, among other things, to document its operations, keep adequate accounts, submit monthly progress reports to my Department and provide a bond to ensure that moneys advanced to it will be used only for the purposes for which they are provided. In addition, the groups are subject to periodic checks through visits by local inspectors of my Department.
In the recent Tipperary Enterprise case, some £306,000 was refunded by the group at my request in December. The request for the refund of a further £250,000 more recently following the outcome of investigations undertaken by my Department relating to the operation of the Leader programme by that group resulted in a decision of the company to wind up its affairs. As a result, I have taken steps to recover the funds under the bond.
In the meantime, I am making every effort to ensure that the balance of £2 million of Leader funds is secured for County Tipperary and that the programme can continue in the county under the management of a new group. For this purpose I met a number of the interest groups from Tipperary in the past week.
The question of continuing the Leader programme, which is an EC pilot scheme initiative outside the Community Support Framework of the Structural Fund, falls to be considered by the EC Commission in the context of the post-1993 round of Structural Funds. I have made no secret of my commitment to the Leader model and I hope to see it continue on a national basis and with increased funding. However, much will depend on the success of the current programme, not just here, but in the other EC member states.
Under the present programme, the level of grant aid that may be offered for individual projects is, on average, 50 per cent. The case for increased grant levels will be taken up in the context of the evaluation programme.
I will be calling Deputies who have tabled questions on this subject and who are present in the House.
The Minister said that 36 sets of proposals were forwarded to his Department, 16 which were recommended by independent consultants, and that the report is confidential. Does the Minister not think that, in view of the scandal surrounding Tipperary Enterprises, the report should be made public? There is a suspicion — I am simply using the word "suspicion"— that some of the projects were not among those recommended by the independent consultants. Therefore, I ask the Minister to publish the report as soon as possible so that the public will know if there was some political favouritism or patronage involved, particularly in the Tipperary Enterprises case.
I assure Deputy Deasy that all the submissions were examined in great detail by officials of the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry. They were prioritised and then forwarded to the EC Commission for final approval. I indicated in my reply that, for obvious reasons, the individual submissions, because of their nature, must remain confidential.
I should like to know the order in which they were recommended by the consultants.
I will see whether it is possible for me to convey that information to the Deputy, and if so, I will be pleased to do so.
In relation to the whole question of public accountability, is the Minister aware that because this is a new scheme there is a wide variety of programmes in operation involving different management structures and that a certain amount of assessment is required at this stage in regard to its success? It would be very useful if this information was made public. As regards the checking system and the success of these programmes, will the Minister say whether any difficulties are being experienced where areas most in need of development projects may not be able to take up the programme because they simply cannot match the 50 per cent required?
It is important that Deputies understand the nature of the Leader programme. It is a pilot scheme involving for the first time local communities who identify their potential for development, put in place business plans to initiate development and avail of funding from the European Community — it is what is known as a "bottom-up" approach. The scheme is being carefully monitored by the Department without employing extreme bureaucratic control because that would cut across the whole spirit of the scheme. Arising from what happened in Tipperary, we are reviewing the control procedures for the purpose of accountability of public funds while at the same time allowing the maximum freedom to local groups to implement their programmes with the least possible bureaucratic control.
Deputy McManus rose.
Sorry, we are behind in Question Time today, I want to get on to other important business. Deputy Yates, a final question.
I have two questions. Will the Minister review the rate of grant aid under the Leader programme with a view to increasing it? Will he confirm that virtually all payments to the Leader projects have been embargoed since the Tipperary débâcle and will he ensure that bona fide Leader programmes are paid in the normal way as soon as possible?
I accept the Deputy's point that in some instances difficulties are experienced with the 50-50 funding contribution requirement. However, as I indicated, this is a pilot programme, which is due to conclude at the end of 1993. I hope we will be able to negotiate a Leader mark II programme. In the negotiations for that programme I will bring all those points to the attention of the Commission, as well as our experiences in relation to the operation of the first Leader programme. The Deputy can take it that we will endeavour to ensure a continuation of the Leader programme with the ongoing voluntary participation of local communities and, I hope, with a degree of flexibility in relation to the level of local contribution required.
That disposes of questions for today.