I propose to take Questions Nos. 360 to 363, inclusive, together. In a letter dated 17 March 1995, the Commission services wrote to my Department proposing a 10 per cent financial correction on the EAGGF expenditure for public storage to beef-meat in Ireland in the years 1990 to 1991. In an earlier letter in November 1994, the Commission services had indicated that following their inquiry into the operation of public storage for beef-meat for the years in question, conducted under Article 9 of Regulation 729/70, a 5 per cent financial correction was considered appropriate. The reasons for the adjustment of the penalty were not outlined by the Commission services. Penalty increases were proposed in the case of the other member states concerned also.
The Article 9 inquiry provides a basis for the Commission Services to check: (a) whether administrative practices are in accordance with Community rules; (b) whether the requisite supporting documents exist and tally with the transactions of the EAGGF; and (c) the conditions under which transactions financed by the EAGGF are carried out and checked. Accordingly the Article 9 inquiry examined both the administrative systems operated by the Department and the operation of a number of individual meat plants. The inquiry involved three other member states (France, Italy and UK) and financial corrections have been proposed for these countries also.
The Department does not accept the validity of the findings of the Article 9 inquiry conducted by the Commission services, on legal, administrative and technical grounds. The Department also considers that the level of disallowances proposed is wholly disproportionate to the findings of the Article 9 inquiry.
