Mr. Seamus McCarthy:

Can I address the point made by the Accounting Officer on random reviews? It was stated that someone had been reviewed recently. It is only necessary to go back to a person who has been reviewed or had an application processed in the preceding three months if a defect is discovered in the paperwork. If it becomes apparent that not all documentation has been provided then additional information is required. For example, if information that is to be provided in a month's time is the same as that which has already been provided and found acceptable, the existing information can be taken as correct. That documentation will be placed with other correct documentation rather than in a pile for incorrect payments. There are nuances to this. In a random sample from a population of a couple of million, there could not be more than four or five such cases so I do not think random reviews present an insurmountable problem.