Charlie McConalogue (Donegal, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

That is one of the challenges of a results-based scheme. I want to give farmers as much certainty as I possibly can in terms of the schemes I put in place. For example, with the suckler and calf schemes, I gave farmers a very clear task to carry out in order to get paid, whether it be weighing, clipping or dipping. We give as much certainty as we can. The environmental scheme must be results based under the new CAP and therefore it is dependent on scores. Like the farmer, I do not know what the score might be. There is uncertainty in regard to the first year. While overall the averages have worked out as expected, there are differences within them. That can also impact on the interim payment, which I gave because I wanted to get money to farmers as quickly as I could. If a score is low, there may be an overpayment. I put in place as much facilitation as I could so that the overpayment would be deducted from future ACRES payments. As soon as we know what a farmer's payment will be, there is an obligation to communicate that to them, not to demand that they would pay it but to bring clarity for them and also to give their balancing payment, if one is due, or else if there is an overpayment to give them the option to have it deducted from their next ACRES payment rather than any other payment. I want to be as flexible as I possibly can, but there is no taking away from the fact that the CP schemes in particular are score based and there is uncertainty about them in the first year. I want it to be a positive experience for every farmer.

See this speech in context