Mr. J.P. Mulherin:

I will respond to some of the comments that were made on LEADER. Deputies Cahill and Martin Kenny mentioned the level of spend on LEADER. We acknowledge that compared to the other schemes under the rural development programme, it does appear to be a low level of spend. That is the nature of LEADER. It was the nature of LEADER under the last programme and in other EU member states. We are fairly consistent with the level of delivery in other member states. Under LEADER a period of time is required to work with potential applicants, to animate the programme, engage with them, develop their applications and see them through. The pace of delivery this time around is not dissimilar to the last programme.

In terms of coming towards the end of 2020, payments under the last programme would have been made in 2014 and 2015 and, likewise, under this programme, payments for LEADER will be made in 2021 and 2022. It is not a case that all of the funding has to be spent by the end 2020 but we certainly will have all of the funding allocated by then.

All of the speakers mentioned the bureaucracy and some frustration with the delivery of the programme. That is something we have to recognise when these points are made to us. I would like to emphasise that it is something we are heavily focused on as well to try to simplify the programme as much as we can. We do acknowledge that there is a degree of paperwork involved for applicants but we have done a lot of work with a lot of the stakeholders over the last 18 months to two years to try to reduce the requirements on applicants. In a lot of cases these are community bodies that are trying to access this funding for the benefit of their local areas. We have introduced a standard application form and substantially revised the procurement requirements for the programme, which were a real issue under the last programme. We have reduced the number of administrative checks that are required under EU regulations. There used to be two of them but we are doing them as a one-stage process and have reduced the number of questions as part of that check. We are continuously working with all the local action groups to see where we can improve the programme. The reality now is that the requirements for an applicant under LEADER are less onerous than they were under the last programme. That is a message that we need to get out. It is something we are working on with our colleagues in the National Rural Network to try to highlight the good work that is done under LEADER, the good examples of projects that are delivered, so that people do not have that fear factor when it comes to accessing the funding. It is a unique and beneficial opportunity for rural areas.

We acknowledge that there is still more to do. We continue to engage with all of the local action groups to see if there are areas where we can improve. Only this week, there were suggestions made to us about assessing the tax status of applicants, which we are looking at and which we can further simplify. We will continue to do that, particularly in the context of the next programme. During consultation on the next programme over the next months, we will be listening to see if there is more that we can do. We would welcome any suggestions from any members of these committees as part of that process.

Deputy Martin Kenny mentioned the new structures involving the local authorities and the local community development committees. With every new model it takes time to bed down and deliver. There are a few things that are important to remember as part of the new process. The local development companies or LEADER companies, as everyone would know them, are still delivering the programme on the ground. They are still the ones engaging with potential applicants when they come in to access LEADER. The county councils are now involved but rather than seeing that as a negative, I would see it as a positive in a lot of areas. They are working with potential applicants in areas where they have expertise, such as in procurement. There is something that the local authorities can bring to the party and I think they are doing that in a lot of areas. When we look at the average level of approvals across the country, at the end of last year it was around 38%. There were 15 local action groups that were above the average in terms of money allocated to project, and all of them were the new model of the local community development committees. Those figures demonstrate that it can work and is working. Like everything else, it is a work in progress and we continue to engage with all of the local authorities and local community development committees to improve the delivery of the programme where we can.