Vol. 464 No. 2
2 Mr. Cowen asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry the number of farmers who have been paid the first instalment of the REP scheme payment; when the second instalment became due for payment; and the number of farmers that have been paid the second instalment of the REP scheme. [7835/96]
To date a total of 13,019 applicants have been approved for payment of a total of £45.82 million in respect of the REP scheme. Of this some £29.56 million was paid in 1995, £840,000 in 1994 and the balance in 1996. The second instalment would normally become due for payment 12 months after the commencement date of the agri-environmental plan. Due to the high level of deficient plans submitted during the first year of the scheme more detailed checking of applications is now being carried out before first and subsequent payments can be made. As a result, no second year payments have yet been made.
I appreciate the Minister's confirmation that not one of the approximate 13,000 second year payments have yet been made. Does he agree that many farmers have been waiting up to five months for those payments? Will he also confirm that this is an important payment for those involved in non-intensive farming? In order to delay payment further — probably due to a lack of funds — there will be further monitoring of what the Department claims were deficient plans. How many inspections have taken place of those plans? It is my understanding that no such inspections have taken place.
When I took over the running of the scheme approximately 300 plans had been approved by the Department and due to a series of public meetings, press advertisements and general promotions, the scheme exceeded all expectations, with the result that approximately 13,000 applicants have been approved. As a result of the success of the scheme, the monitoring process may not have been adequate. We examined the normal EU sample of 5 per cent of plans submitted and discovered that some 40 per cent of them were defective. As a result we had to carry out an overview of the system. The REP scheme is very important, particularly in view of the recent promotion of environmental awareness and practices on farms. I am sure, therefore, the Deputy would agree that we would not be thanked for putting in place a defective scheme, particularly as farmers have to repay money to the banks. Those who submitted defective plans will have to resubmit plans to ensure they meet with specifications. Also, in respect of second payments we have asked planners to confirm that farmers comply with their plans and we propose to introduce a number of spot checks on farms before second payments are made. I hope these spot checks will commence some time during the next two to three weeks. The money is available and I do not want to hold up payments to these people. It was important to take an overview of the entire scheme because while it has been successful and the philosophy behind it is good we must ensure that the specifications are complied with, that farmers realise this is not a handout and will have to farm in an environmentally friendly way as required under the REPS.
The Minister confirmed the importance of the scheme, yet admitted that the resources are totally inadequate in terms of the payments due and the spot checks and monitoring which have been imposed as a further condition for qualification for the second payment. This is a further indication that the level of administration in the Department is not up to scratch. It seems the Department supports schemes for which there is not a large take up but that payments are not made in the case of schemes for which there is a demand from the farming community, for example, REPS, the control of farm pollution scheme or other environmental schemes which have been acknowledged by the Minister as important. In addition, the spot checks announced some time ago have not begun because of a lack of resources and personnel. Will the Minister agree that it is time certain political decisions were taken and responsibility for the maladministration of the scheme in terms of funding, implementation and administration lies with him and his Department?
We had to put in place a monitoring system which the Fianna Fáil Minister failed to put in place when he initiated the scheme.
There were 300 applicants.
The scheme did not work.
The Minister should be factual, the scheme had just begun.
Let us have one voice, please.
One must have a monitoring system before one initiates a scheme. That was not done in this case and we are now putting such a system in place. The same happened in regard to area aid. The Deputy was in office and he knew since 1992 that this would happen, yet he did nothing about it.
The Minister of State has been in office for 20 months.
When we came to office in 1995 we had to put the system in place. The Deputy should look at the records.
The Minister should take responsibility for what he is doing.
Unlike other EU countries we paid the money without any inspection when we received the applications. We wanted to give the money to the farming community whom we thought would comply with the specification. However, some farmers did not comply with it. We were ahead of many other EU countries where it can take up to 14 months for farmers to receive a first payment under environmental schemes.
I assure the House this scheme will be properly resourced and successful and will have the necessary impact. I have total confidence in the procedures we are now putting in place.
A scam to delay payment.
