Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ensuring farmers get the service they are entitled to from the Department and in terms of the schemes we run is something I take very seriously. The CAP programme last year and all of the schemes operated in a good manner, with payments made on the dates we set out, with the exception of ACRES. ACRES has been a challenge but the other schemes have worked. For the first year the CAP worked remarkably well in terms of payments. We did set dates which were between two and four weeks later than what would have been the norm under CAP. The reason for that was because we wanted to make sure we set a date we could deliver on and, in fairness, within the Department that was delivered on.

The challenge has been with ACRES, which is the most complex scheme within CAP. I have worked to try to make sure the issues that arose with ACRES are being addressed in the best way possible to try to support farmers, but there have been real challenges. A big part of that has been the payment delays and the associated administrative challenges. For example, farmers did not get their scores when they should have, and those administration delays were a frustration for all farmers in the scheme.

Taking a step back from it, it is important to break it down and look at it. For a significant majority of farmers in ACRES, it is working out reasonably well in terms of their payments. The average payment is where we predicted it would be, at €5,100 to €5,200. Obviously, for farmers who have got the payment they expected, ACRES is working as they would have hoped. When you break it down between the general and the co-operation streams, two thirds of farmers are in the general stream and it is working pretty well. Obviously, farmers have been affected by the delays in delivering scores but they are being given top-ups now. In terms of the actual farmer experience of the practicality of the scheme at farm level, feedback is good for those in the general stream, by and large, and the experience has been good. The co-operation stream has been much more challenging. For more than half of farmers, it is working out similar to what they would have expected in terms of their scores, but for a good minority it is not. Their scores are not what they would have expected and payments are, therefore, much lower than expected.

I want to see ACRES work for and benefit everyone and to see everyone being able to participate in it in a strong way. That is why I intervened, which I think is the first time ever to have happened, in order that everyone who applied got accepted in tranche 1 and tranche 2. That had not happened previously with environmental schemes. Also, when there were payment challenges with ACRES because of the administrative challenges, in March I directed that any farmer at that point who had not got an advance payment of 85% would either get a €4,000 or €5,000 interim payment. That meant everyone who took part in ACRES, bar those who might have had a conveyancing issue or something like that with their land parcels, would have got either their advance payment or a €4,000 or €5,0000 interim payment by the end of March, and then balancing payments and scores issued over the summer. I absolutely accept the scores were late and that must be addressed by the next year of the scheme. That has created challenges in respect of giving farmers line of sight of their scores, what they would be, and time this year, for example, to improve on them. Over recent weeks and three or four months, farmers would have got their scores and balancing payments, and between 2,000 and 2,500 farmers, or 5%, await their balancing payment.

Now that we have reached the point where farmers, by and large, have their scores and there is clarity on what their payments are, and on the fact that, for a significant minority, the CP scheme is not working out the way they, or certainly I, would have liked to see it work out for them, I have initiated a review with the specific targeted objective of trying to identify how we can make the scheme work for all farmers, particularly those who have ended up with lower payments than what they might have been expecting, and maybe in some cases lower payments than what they might have been getting under GLAS. I want to see what we can do now and I have put in place a timeline of the end of the year for that review to be completed. I specifically asked and directed that, as part of that review, I want to see potential options that can be taken to enhance the score and payments for those for whom the co-operation stream is not working out in the way we would all like it to work out.

It is important to say that for the two thirds in the general stream, the experience at farm level has been pretty good by and large. The co-operation stream has been much more challenging. The payments for a good majority of those in the CP are working out along the lines they would have hoped, but it is not for a significant minority, and I want to see how we can address that.

On NPIs and landscape actions, it is important that farmers do get those approvals. Again, that has been affected. The scheme is complex and more complex than it should be. There are no two ways about that. There would have been engagement, discussion and consultation on how it would be framed. We do not have a clean sheet on this either because we must work within the results-based structure of the current CAP, which is more complicated than the previous one. We have to make sure we make the scheme work as well as possible. Overall, the outcome and objectives behind the scheme are very good. It is just the complexity, especially the complexity of administration and IT challenges associated with it. I will consider how we can address these matters.

On TAMS, the approvals and payments have been issuing in good numbers over recent months. I will look at the specific issue the Deputy has raised. If there are a certain number who have indicated their views to him, he might pass on the details to me and I will look at it. Certainly, the scheme took a bit of time to get motoring but it is motoring pretty well now in terms of approvals and payments and we need to ensure that momentum is sustained.