60.

Mr McWhinney: I do not have a difficulty with any part of the questions. DARD has both a good formal relationship and a good informal relationship with the Department for Social Development (DSD). During the development of the programme I consulted with the senior executives of every Department and agency involved. I also talked with Mr Cobain for an hour one morning.

61.

DARD is very much interested in rural housing, particularly through working with developing consortia to deliver capacity building. It is working with communities that live in rural housing estates and is involved in physical work on the environment of those housing estates. The developing consortium includes the Housing Executive, DSD, DARD and the Northern Ireland Office (NIO). Therefore there is a partnership interest.

62.

In demarcation terms we have also shown that we will work outside towns and villages of 5,000 people. DARD will only work in an area in accord with DSD if both Departments agree that it is appropriate to do so. Borderline cases will be discussed before deciding who takes the lead.

63.

There is also an interdepartmental rural development steering group chaired by a deputy secretary of DARD. That steering group has a representative from each of the main Departments — including DSD. The steering group offers an opportunity for matters to be discussed and sorted out at official level. Therefore we have taken most of those issues forward and I have not detected any difficulty from those I have talked to so far.

64.

The Chairperson: I am glad to hear that. The Committee session is being reported by Hansard so a copy can be sent to DSD to show that we raised the issue with you. I am happy with what you say because a representative from DARD will be the chairman of the interdepartmental steering group if ever it comes under our bailiwick.

65.

Mr Dallat: Reference was made to consultants. Is there a policy of using the Government procurement procedure when sourcing consultants?

66.

Mr McWhinney: DARD will operate within that procedure. Many of our costs are at a fairly low level and it is hoped to get that cost down. However, the Department will always use the formal procedures. The procedures differ at the cut-off levels of financial input.

67.

Mr Dallat: That is brilliant. You referred to this when you talked about the regional strategy et cetera, but the delivery of the RDP requires co-ordination and that is what we are focusing on. There is co-ordination across a range of agencies and bodies in Northern Ireland. For example, the Northern Ireland Tourist Board (NITB) is involved in natural resource rural tourism. Are suitable planning mechanisms and liaison arrangements with other relevant bodies in place to ensure co-ordinated delivery?

68.

Mr McWhinney: It is intended to use the natural resource rural tourism proposal as an example of co- ordinated and joined-up government. The Environment and Heritage Service, the NITB, the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL) and DARD are working together as a sub-committee of the interdepartmental steering group. The sub-committee will have representatives of those four departments and it will advance, under ministerial guidance, natural resource tourism management.

69.

There will be bids for partnerships, or a single partnership, in each of five targeted areas. To be successful that partnership, similar to the LEADER+ partnership, will have to show that it is representative of business interests, council interests, community interests and statutory interests. It will have to show that it is the best co-ordinated deliverer across that area. If the Sperrins is a targeted area, which takes in five or six district councils, a big consortium will have to be built. In some of the areas that we are targeting very good consortia are already shaping up, but we will have to advertise for bids. That partnership will be a critical factor in that.

70.

Mr Bradley: Previously, groups whose applications were refused by the European Fund for Peace and Reconciliation had no comeback. Was there any mechanism in place for appeal? Will it be any different next time round? I am thinking of groups who make applications for their own advantage, which are then rejected. Do they now have a line of appeal?

71.

Mr McWhinney: There will be an appeal procedure that was not there in the previous round.

72.

Mr Kane: After five years of the BSE crisis and blocked exports in Northern Ireland, how do you draw the line of demarcation between advantaged and disadvantaged rural areas?

73.

Mr McWhinney: There is substantial focus on disadvantaged areas, but there is also scope to work outside it, where necessary, for maximum impact. I do not want to give an exact percentage, but I am happy to give an indicative one of around 70% to disadvantaged areas.

74.

Mr Kane: You stated that 390 training and further education courses were completed. How many of those places were filled by people employed in the farming industry? You also said that 451 new businesses had been created. Do those businesses still exist?

75.

Mr McWhinney: There are always dropouts across any new start-up businesses. However, I am glad to say that the percentage of dropout in the RDP — perhaps because it is still relatively new — stands up to any scrutiny. To the best of my knowledge, it is less than the standard Local Economic Development Unit (LEDU) fallout, which over the years has recorded about 25% to 30% of new businesses failing. At present we are nowhere near that level perhaps because some businesses are just getting under way. The real evaluation will be some years down the road.

76.

Mr Kane: Can you give us a specific percentage of dropouts?

77.

Mr McWhinney: I could name businesses that have given us difficulty. There is a ceramics project in Fermanagh and a townland radio station in the Sperrins that unfortunately no longer exist. There are a few others, but no more than five or six. It is inevitable that there will be dropouts with anything new and experimental. It happens everywhere. We would not be taking a high enough risk if all businesses were working. It is a good question, but it is a year or two early to judge because many of the projects are just up and running.

78.

Mr Kane: You did not respond to the question about the number of training and further education courses completed.

79.

Mr McWhinney: I cannot answer that question specifically. It would take some detailed work — we may not even have the figures. I am sorry that I cannot say how many of those people came from an agricultural background. It was certainly a high percentage, but I would be hazarding a guess if I tried to be more specific. I will attempt to get an answer but it may not be easily found because there is such a spread.

80.

Mr Armstrong: Is the Department confident that those ultimately responsible for evaluation will be able to measure the performance of supporting activities? For example, under the heading of ‘Sectoral and Area- Based Programmes’ you say that you will stimulate awareness of the part-time job opportunities and offer practical support to potential recruits and employers. How do you envisage the success of such a supporting activity being measured?

81.

Mr McWhinney: That is mainly on the part-time approach?

82.

Mr Armstrong: Yes, monitoring to ensure that everyone has a real opportunity and that there is proper planning. If you monitor them, that will allow evaluation to take place.

83.

Mr McWhinney: Yes, we will be doing some specific work on that, largely in relation to the difficulties facing the farming sector. There is a growing realisation of the need for sons, second sons, daughters or other members of the farm family to be able to participate in something on a part-time basis. That can add to the value of the farm family as an economic unit, while the pressures in agriculture or the economic output from the smaller farms are insufficient to sustain that. That will form part of the background of what we are doing. If you are taking, for example, the LEADER+ initiative in the micro-business sector, then, between LEADER+ and our agricultural development service under the peace programme, there will be opportunities for farmers and farm families to look at diversification opportunities on a part-time basis. The monitoring, evaluation and recording of that and the indicators used will allow for testing as we go along.

84.

Mr Armstrong: Will there be good flexibility?

85.

Mr McWhinney: Flexibility is the name of the game. That is what we are trying to achieve.

86.

Mr Douglas: I am glad to see you are going to provide a flexibility framework. I am also glad that perhaps up to 40% of that money can be spent outside those disadvantaged areas. That is to be welcomed. With so much change in our rural areas and so many people leaving our agriculture sector, we currently have a difficult job in making decisions. However, no doubt there will be a place for some in the countryside. The numbers leaving the countryside will have a big effect on those who are left. Hence the shortage of employable people. There is a need for farm relief and farm management services. Does the Department agree? How do you feel that those might operate? Will there be any continuing finance, or will it be spread over a number of years? Is that indicated anywhere in the Department’s paper?

87.

Mr McWhinney: Very much so. Under the rural development regulation, the relevant section for us is article 33. One of the headings in article 33, among other things, is farm relief services. There is an opportunity to bring forward farm relief services. It can be from a community on a not-for-profit basis or on a for-profit basis. If a collective of second sons, for example, were to come up with a proposal to bring forward a farm relief proposal that would give them more work off their farm and also give relief to a hard-pressed farm family, the opportunity exists. We would be delighted to hear such a proposal.

88.

Mr Morton: It would come under either the local regeneration projects heading, which is on page 31 and 32, or under the sectoral programmes. There could be a sectoral programme across the Province, as outlined on page 33.

89.

Mr Douglas: Thank you.

90.

Mr Ford: Welcome, gentlemen. The paper speaks a great deal about capacity-building, and I am interested that the term "institutional capacity-building" has now appeared. Having worked in the general field of community development in the past, I fear that knowledge will be acquired by organisations and institutions, only for it to be lost when someone moves on. There is currently a potential problem with LEADER II groups changing and perhaps becoming LEADER+ groups. How can you ensure that the largely personal expertise developed in institutions will be made available for the next phase of the RDP?

91.

Mr McWhinney: There are two aspects to that. First, interim or gap funding proposals are formally under discussion. The funding and operations of LEADER+ draw to a close at the end of the financial year. However, we have agreed to accept bids for interim funding from existing LEADER local action groups, something which could potentially take them as far as September or October 2001. That will allow a breathing space to retain expertise that will help produce whatever bids come in. I cannot prejudge that, since I do not know which consortia or LEADER groups will make bids in the next round. However, we have recognised that we do not wish to lose any expertise in the interim.

92.

The first part of your question related to institutional capacity-building, which is a recognition of exactly what you say — we should capture the developing values and strengths in organisations because of the ongoing consultations. We therefore wish to be able to say that we can offer an organisation some support to help it in such matters as securing the rural voice, lobbying or the development of an idea or plan. It should feel able to bring that to us without feeling unnecessarily restricted financially.

93.

Mr Ford: Related to that, are there any plans for changing the staffing complement of the Department’s Rural Development Division, either to increase or reduce the size of your own staff on the ground?

94.

The Chairperson: What optimism.

95.

Mr McWhinney: Rural development staffing accounts for only 1% to 2% of the Department, but the responsibility is an important part of its work. It has been recognised as a growing part of the work, and we have been successful in our early applications for some expansion. That is necessary to carry forward a range of programmes for the next six years. That is underway, but it takes a while to get it up and running.

96.

Mr Ford: You cannot be any more specific than "some"?

97.

Mr McWhinney: No, I could not. We have made bids, which have been accepted in principle. However, the running costs are very tight. As one would imagine, there are many other demands owing to current pressures. We are fighting our corner with difficulty.

98.

The Chairperson: As soon as we can, we must make a response. We have asked for some time; it was requested from us three weeks ago. We are not in a position to make a response until we have an answer to some questions not asked today, of which there are at least 13. We do not want long answers, rather answers that steer us regarding the submission. If you get them to us, we shall get a response to you immediately. Is there a deadline?

99.

Mr McWhinney: The deadline is defined by the process. We must get the Committee’s clearance before taking the matter to the Executive to get it approved. We must also secure the approval of DFP — they are all links in the chain. Minister Durkan has said he expects to have the programme complements cleared perhaps by May. The deadline for your paper is 4 May. I feel that is the deadline.

100.

The Chairperson: That is in addition to our submission. If you could get us those answers as quickly as you can, we will try to get the submission in two weeks.

101.

Mr McWhinney: Mr Morton and I will take that point on board. Mr Morton is keeping me right on a matter on which I possibly went too far.

102.

Mr Morton: Mr McWhinney talked about our proposals on gap funding for a LEADER programme. The formal approval of DFP is necessary for such proposals, and we are not yet over that hurdle. I do not want the Committee to get the impression that all the hurdles have been cleared.

103.

Mr Ford: The plan has cleared the DARD hurdle; do you mean that the DFP hurdle remains to be cleared?

104.

Mr Morton: Yes.

105.

The Chairperson: Thank you for your helpful submission. If you could get the required answers to the Committee, we promise that we will get our submission to you as quickly as we can.

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE

Friday 25 May 2001

Members present: Rev Dr Ian Paisley (Chairperson)
Mr Savage (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Armstrong
Mr Bradley
Mr Dallat
Mr Douglas
Mr Kane
Mr McHugh

Witnesses:
Ms B Rodgers )
Mr McWhinney ) Department of Agriculture
and Rural Development
Mr A Morton )

106.

The Chairperson: Minister, do you want to make a statement?

107.

The Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development (Ms Rodgers): Yes, thank you, Mr Chairman.

108.

I welcome the opportunity to give evidence to the Committee’s inquiry into the rural development programme (RDP). You have already seen our formal submission. Delays in getting the structural fund programmes agreed have meant that we are not as far ahead with setting the detailed implementation arrangements as we would wish. However, I will endeavour, with my officials, to provide as detailed answers as possible.

109.

The RDP 1994-1999 came in for some criticism from the Public Accounts Committee. We have endeavoured to take those criticisms on board when drawing up the new RDP for 2001-06. You have already seen the proposed rural development strategy and are aware that the new RDP aims to create a flexible framework that will provide a broad range of opportunities for rural people to contribute to the regeneration of their areas. That includes farmers and their families, community and sectoral groups.

110.

The main components of the new RDP include the strengthening of rural communities, sometimes called capacity building, to continue to help rural people gain the skills and experience to allow them to engage in economic, environmental, social or cultural activities. Local regeneration projects and programmes, which can be on a non-profit or a for-profit basis, are also included.

111.

A further component are sectoral projects and programmes to provide support, which can be best tackled on a regional or area-based approach. Support for microbusiness, through LEADER+, and natural resource rural tourism (NRRT), a special programme targeted at disadvantaged rural areas with underdeveloped tourism potential related to their natural resources, will also be incorporated into the RDP.

112.

The programme overall will be financed through structural funds. The projected expenditure is around £75 million. It should lever out an additional £25 to £50 million spend in rural areas. Hence, the total value of the RDP to rural areas will be over £100 million. Work remains to be done on the detail of measures and in conjunction with the programme monitoring committees. Unfortunately there have been substantial delays in the formal negotiations with the European Commission. However, I am pleased that our proposals have been well received in the Commission and elsewhere. I look forward to good proposals coming from rural communities, individuals and representative groups.

113.

The Chairperson: The Northern Ireland Tourist Board (NITB) suggests that projects under the initiative will be more effective if they are based on market need, rather than perceived need, of those living in a rural environment. One of the RDP’s guiding principles is that the programme will be locally driven. Do you see a conflict developing before the initiative is under way?

114.

Ms Rodgers: No. We can complement each other’s work. The NITB will be a partner in our work. I accept that we need to look at marketing.

115.

The Chairperson: We must consider the issue of perceived need versus marketing need before we start. We need to resolve any existing conflict there.

116.

Ms Rodgers: The baseline need will be assessed with the co-operation of the NITB. It will be important that this work takes actual market demand into account rather than perceived market demand. We have learned lessons from the past about the need for co-operation.

117.

The Chairperson: The NITB suggests that any tourism development taking place in the absence of sound market intelligence and visitor demand is inviting failure. Therefore it advocates a formal cross-departmental management team to deliver the natural resource programme and any other tourist-related part of the rural development strategy. What is your reaction to these points?

118.

Ms Rodgers: The formal structure for co-operation with the NITB is in place already through the rural development steering group.

119.

The Chairperson: Therefore you are already negotiating with the NITB.

120.

Ms Rodgers: Yes.

121.

The Chairperson: Will the Department be able to give details of that when it makes its final reply?

122.

Ms Rodgers: Yes.

123.

Mr Douglas: You said that participation in the sectoral initiatives in the RDP is likely to increase. How will specific initiatives target the critical groups?

124.

Ms Rodgers: There is a publicity campaign which will aim to bring the RDP to the attention of all rural dwellers. Public relations consultants will be preparing easily understandable documents to guide project promoters to the appropriate lead body. Additionally the three rural development co-ordinators will form liaison groups of delivery agents at local level and seek to develop a uniform "one-stop shop" response to help applicants. It is a system that is complicated due to the separate EU funding lines. In the past people have found it difficult to know where to go in order to access funding. Consultants will ensure that this is simplified so that people know what is available and how to access it.

125.

Mr Armstrong: We note that you are employing a professional public relations firm to look after publicity. Is there a danger that while this may look good on paper it will do very little to tackle the real problems in the rural community?

126.

Ms Rodgers: I do not accept that. We have employed public relations consultants to simplify the procedures and make them more accessible to communities as a response to requests from those communities to do so. There was a feeling last time that some people were not aware of what was available or did not have expertise or understanding of the projects. The consultants will ensure that this time the RDP will be made more available and more easily accessible.

127.

Mr Kane: Throughout section 7 of your submission, which relates to participation in the RDP, you are quite defensive of your position regarding the previous RDP. Do you not accept the Northern Ireland Audit Office (NIAO) criticism of the previous RDP and do you not envisage that improvements are necessary to increase general participation?

128.

Ms Rodgers: The Department has taken on board the NIAO criticism. The NIAO made the point that it accepted the RDP as a very valuable tool in regenerating rural communities. One way that we hope to improve participation by under-represented groups is through sectoral programmes — for example, the Rural Development Division is already working closely with rural women’s groups to carry out a needs analysis. The intention is that this will identify opportunities for a sectoral programme specifically targeted at women. We will be looking for opportunities to use sectoral programmes to assist other under-represented groups as proposals come forward from various interested parties and as identified by rural development staff in the field.

129.

We will also be targeting farm families under the LEADER programme. We will be ensuring that the projects are as flexible as possible and that they will respond to what is coming from the communities in a positive way.

130.

Mr Kane: I am sure farmers will appreciate that.

131.

Mr Savage: Minister, we note that for the projects up to £50,000 a simple appraisal pro forma is sufficient. That is a very broad band, and the upper limit of £50,000 is significant expenditure. Are you confident that the standard pro forma appraisal is sufficiently robust to tease out the full business case? How does this band compare with other EU programmes or assistance packages from the Government with regard to project appraisal?

132.

Ms Rodgers: For smaller projects of £50,000, it would not be viable to go through the complicated procedure that is required. Department of Finance and Personnel (DFP) guidance provides for a pro forma approach to be taken for small projects defined as those with up to £50,000 non-promoter funding. The pro forma addresses all the main issues set out by the Treasury and DFP guidance, and the Department’s economists oversee the whole appraisal process. All staff involved in completing pro forma appraisals, including those employed by the LEADER groups, and so on, have received, and will continue to receive, appropriate training. Our regime is as robust as that in other Departments.

133.

Mr Savage: Do all those applications go through the rural development committee? How does someone apply for such schemes?

134.

Ms Rodgers: For all the schemes?

135.

Mr Savage: For the scheme that we have just been talking about.

136.

Ms Rodgers: The £50,000 one?

137.

Mr Savage: The £50,000 one.

138.

Ms Rodgers: They apply in the normal way to the appropriate delivery mechanism. You are highlighting the need for people to know because there was confusion last time.

139.

Mr Savage: That is exactly what I want to avoid.

140.

Ms Rodgers: That is why we will have public relations consultants to simplify matters and point people in the right direction. There will be a process that will make it easier to enter all of the schemes. The last time it was not as easy for people to know where to go, and the consultants will be dealing with that.

141.

Mr Savage: People in the farm and countryside development scheme do not know where to apply.

142.

Ms Rodgers: I take the point, and that is the way we are dealing with it.

143.

The Chairperson: Is the whole RDP cleared by the EU, or is it by individual applications?

144.

Ms Rodgers: The RDP is cleared, but the detailed complements are not, and that is what is holding it up at present. We have to have the detailed complements.

145.

Mr Bradley: Is there not a danger that the appointment of public relations professionals to publicise the scheme may look good on paper but will do very little to tackle the real problems of involving the local community?

146.

Ms Rodgers: Public relations consultants are experts trained in helping people to access information. In this case the PR consultants will clarify what needs to be done. The difficulty the last time was that the process was too complicated — there were so many different funding agencies that people were unaware what schemes were available and how they could access those. That point was put to the Department. As a result of the problems that people encountered the last time, the remit of the PR consultants is to work out a clear and simple way of allowing people to access those schemes. That will make it easier for people to access the funding.

147.

Mr Dallat: You referred to the public auditor’s report and its criticism of past events. The public auditor also acknowledged the worthwhile work achieved by rural development projects. I would like an assurance that the Department will continue to strongly influence events in rural communities and that it will not be overshadowed by the NITB, who are not my number one friends at the moment.

148.

Many of the past problems related to the ad hoc appointment of consultants. In future will consultants be subject to normal Government procurement practices? Will consultants who are chosen for projects be scrutinised by the Government and by the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD)? Can we be certain that there will be no reoccurrence of some of the past mistakes that were attributed to that Department but were due to poor consultants?

149.

Ms Rodgers: The Department will take a different approach to the appointment of consultants for the next RDP. The funders, not the project promoters, will appoint any consultants who are chosen to complete economic appraisals. That should result in a more independent appraisal system, and it will allow for more direct monitoring and control of the quality of appraisals that are produced. The procedures for the new RDP that is currently being drafted will set out the requirements for economic appraisals. Those will refer to the appropriate Treasury and DFP guidance. In the next round we will work in partnership with the NITB and the Environment and Heritage Service.

150.

Mr Dallat: I welcome that. Many successful projects would not be there were it not for the initiative shown by DARD in cutting red tape and taking risks. That may occasionally become a criticism in a public auditor’s report, but nevertheless it cannot be totally cast aside because of that risk.

151.

Ms Rodgers: It is important to understand that the RDP was new and was meant to regenerate rural areas and those areas to which private entrepreneurs were not prepared to go and take risks, but risks had to be taken. As a result of that there was some criticism. We have tightened procedures considerably as a result of the constructive criticism that was made. There will always be an element of risk; nothing can be guaranteed, even in the next RDP. If we were to leave the matter solely to private entrepreneurs who are reluctant to take any risks — particularly in those rural areas that need regeneration — the purpose of the RDP would be defeated.

152.

The Chairperson: The important thing is access and accessibility for the people that are looking for these schemes. They should know where to go, the people to talk to and how to put in their applications. That must be made easy for them. Everyone knows that under the last schemes a lot of people fell down because there was no clear direct line of communication. I welcome the fact that there will be public relations officers who will be available to deal with the general public. Those people will be trained for that type of position. It will not be like talking to a civil servant who perhaps has a groove along which he runs. People will be talking to someone who is practical.

153.

A civil servant is not a public relations officer; let us be fair. A public relations officer will know how to do the job. I have found — and all my Colleagues around the table would say the same — that when people come to me I want to be able to give them a name, address, number and say "That is the person to go to".

154.

Ms Rodgers: Yes, I accept that.

155.

The Chairperson: That was not easy under the last scheme.

156.

Ms Rodgers: I accept that. I hope that the Committee and public representatives in general will help people to bring forward good projects, because there will be flexibility. We will be looking for good projects coming from local areas which are viable and which can generate what we are trying to create, which is the regeneration of the rural communities. It will be important that people — as you have already said — know what is available and have a clear line to follow to get to it. It will be equally important that the local communities in conjunction with private enterprise or with the councils come forward with really good projects. The best projects will get the funding, and the weak projects will not. So it is important that people have good projects and are preparing them even now.

157.

The Chairperson: They would need to be preparing them now.

158.

Mr McHugh: I agree with some of what has been said in relation to the appraisal process. However, as we know, the appraisal process was not carried out correctly either by individual promoters of projects or by the Department, which was proved in the Public Accounts Committee report. We hope that that will all change the next time round for everybody’s benefit. Projects need to be appraised so that they can be sustained.

159.

One of the difficulties that rural areas will have in trying to get projects going in an area which is designated a tourist area, such as Fermanagh, is that they will hit the planning problems quite early on. Farmers or those in the more rural parts will especially find considerable planning difficulties, even with what seems like a good project. Perhaps there is a need therefore for you to go across Departments to see that those things do not come up or that at least there is enough flexibility. They would also give policies to us so that we can not move on them, so where do we go? How are we going to enact your programme if we are faced with that even in a few instances? However, I think it would be a considerable number rather than a few.

160.

The other question is in relation to councils. You said that there are going to be no area based strategy action groups (ABSAGs); certainly at present they are not considered. The councils will probably be the delivering body or part of the delivering body to which those people will go in the next round. Therefore, considering that councils in many instances are looking for a considerable amount of control over the funding and have followed pet projects of their own, who will decide which are the best projects and which are the weak ones? We have many instances where there was not the best of relationships between people working on projects and the Department, and others. So there are a plethora of difficulties all interspersed, and we want to see this moving forward smoothly rather than with difficulties.

161.

Ms Rodgers: In relation to the planning difficulties I am very aware — as most people around the table will be — of the planning difficulties that crop up when, for instance, diversification projects conflict with the planning laws. I have already spoken to Minister Foster about that issue, and you will be aware that we now have rural proofing in the Programme for Government. Clearly that will be one of the areas to look at to see how the need to regenerate, diversify and do all of the projects in rural areas are being, in some instances, frustrated by the planning laws. That is an area that will need to be looked at, and there also must be proper planning. We are going to have to look at the areas where there are difficulties.

162.

In relation to the councils and the working of the councils, we will be looking at local strategic partnerships to take an overview of how best to have projects on a strategic basis in an area.

163.

I am aware that under the EU peace money councils have worked very well in partnership with local community interests. That has worked — I know that in my own area of Craigavon it has worked extremely well — and I do not see any reason why it cannot work again. The best way forward is to have public representatives, the local community and, indeed, private enterprise all working together, and that is how I hope to see the thing developing. I know that when these things happen there is always a certain sense of people defending their own turf — that is human nature and is natural. Nevertheless, we want to see strategic local partnerships developing which will benefit the whole community.

164.

Mr McHugh: Regarding the partnership alliances that are building up, it would be important that officials from your Department try to have an impact on how they draw up their proposals with former partnership boards. Local partnerships have been very good in delivering and at building relations in all directions. We do not want to see these people pushed to one side in the future.

165.

Ms Rodgers: I appreciate your remarks about our own people, and our co-ordination teams will be working with the partnerships very closely — that is the idea.

166.

The Chairperson: Planning is very important, as there are going to be a lot of redundant office buildings in the country. Some years ago, under direct rule, one of the Ministers did a wise thing and eased the planning for small industries to be able to start in the country. I was at a local industry in my own constituency yesterday, where the man started in an old used cabin at the Cullybackey railway. He is now in a £1 million building and is sending much of his produce to the United States. This is now a big business, which resulted from a very small beginning. For a time they gave him the opportunity to use that building and the business has gone from strength to strength.

167.

We should have an easement in planning. These office buildings that are no longer used are there and should be made available to people for small indigenous industries. We are not going to have people coming in here saying that they are going to employ 1,000 people. If we are going to regenerate the rural industry, it will be small indigenous industries in those areas who have already a say and want to have a bigger say in their own industries.

168.

Ms Rodgers: This time the RDP will have more recognition of local need, which, as you say, is precisely what is needed. We do not need rules and regulations that are too hard and fast, and actually stunt development.

169.

The Chairperson: Even if they can get an agreement to get into a building for a period and get cracking, it would be very helpful to them.

170.

Mr Douglas: My question is on staffing. You state that the deployment of staff will be very similar to that during the 1994-99 RDP. Is it the case, therefore, that consultation and evaluation feedback on the last RDP reported a clean bill of health on staffing structure?

171.

Ms Rodgers: There were no comments to suggest that the present structures were not working. The central policy and financial management units deal with all policy aspects of the RDP and co-ordinate the implementation of the RDP. The three regional area co-ordination offices at Ballymena, Newry and Omagh will continue to interface directly with project promoters and co-ordinate local delivery. This will be through interaction with the Rural Development Council (RDC), the Rural Community Network (RCN), LEADER+ groups, the NRRT partnerships, other Departments, agencies, and private sector interests involved in local rural regeneration.

172.

Mr Savage: You talk about manuals that will contain the information on appraisal guidance, and we note that these are still at the draft stage. When will they be available, and can you provide assurances that they will provide consumer-friendly technical assistance which people can understand? I take your point that projects are coming forward. I was at a meeting recently — I think you know where. They told me that the applications must have substance. We will all have to stand over the successful applications in the future if rural development is going to be brought forward.

173.

Ms Rodgers: The procedure manuals are being drafted, and they will be available to staff in advance of the new programmes being launched. However, it will not be before early autumn.

174.

The Chairperson: Members must stick to one question so that everyone gets a chance to speak.

175.

Mr Armstrong: Minister, we understand that you must take cognisance of all EU requirements, but do you consider that you have gone far enough in clarifying the RDP and making it simpler for potential rural development applicants?

176.

Ms Rodgers: Public relations consultants were employed to ensure that the process is simplified and made more accessible. I am happy that that will happen and that people will find it easier to know where and how to apply this time round.

177.

Mr Armstrong: It is a problem that consultants have had to come in to clarify procedures to the applicants. Would it not have been simpler if the consultants had not been employed?

178.

Ms Rodgers: The consultants are experts in public relations, and it is their job to make it easier for the public to relate to what is happening. Applications require a lot of detail and the idea is to make the application as simple as possible and to let people know how to access the RDP.

179.

Mr Kane: Minister, you state that the selection criteria have not been finalised. When will that be prepared and how will it be communicated to the agriculture industry? Are you confident that by not applying a weighting criterion in favour of the critical groups you are not making your job much more difficult?

180.

Ms Rodgers: There are groups that we feel need to be targeted — women, the unemployed, farm families and young people. That is a response to the long consultations that we had in preparing the plan, and there was a need to target those people. Ultimately there will be a selection criteria, and nobody will suffer as a result of that. The idea is to help groups who were under-represented in the past, to target them and to ensure that they are represented and avail of the available opportunities that are there.

181.

Mr Bradley: What assistance or guidance is available for those people who have an idea for what may become a project in the future?

182.

Ms Rodgers: People, communities or groups who have ideas should talk to the local rural development co-ordinator. That will start them off on getting whatever help is needed. They would then be channelled in a suitable direction and given the required advice. However, initially they should talk to the local co-ordinator.

183.

Mr Bradley: Minister, you mentioned the four groups. What is the definition of a group? I have already sent a letter to Mr McWhinney on this matter. Can a group comprise of a group of residents in a lane, for example?

184.

Mr McWhinney: Therein lies the problem. The Minister will write back on that. There are non-profit- making groups and profit-making groups. A non-profit- making group is one which ploughs its profits into the community, and that would be handled through the RDC. The Department does not state what size a group must be, whether it should be a formal co-operative group or one that has been created to bid. It is the idea that is critical. Is it one that will bring forward a good proposal for rural regeneration that can be hung on one of the hooks in the RDP?

185.

We are not saying that a group should consist of five people or 10 people. It will need to be formally constituted, and it will need to be able to display the skills to deliver the project. However, we are not being prescriptive as to size or scale.

186.

The Chairperson: How can people find out the name of the local co-ordinator?

187.

Ms Rodgers: They can contact the Department.

188.

Mr McWhinney: They can phone the Department’s helpline which is quite well known. That information will also be published as part of a PR exercise.

189.

The Chairperson: So if people ask us for the name of a co-ordinator can we refer them to the Department?

190.

Ms Rodgers: Yes, the Department will give them the name of the co-ordinator in their area.

191.

Mr Dallat: I am of the notion that most civil servants are intelligent people who are not stuck in grooves. My past experience has been that the role of field officer or co-ordinator is critical. I note that you have gained approval for extra staff in the Rural Development Division, and I welcome that. How far have you liaised with the RDC and other development bodies in planning your human resource requirements for the delivery?

192.

Ms Rodgers: The RDC put proposals to us, and we are working with them. An internal review which was carried out by the Rural Development Division identified the need for 21 additional staff to ensure the orderly closure of the last RDP and the implementation of the new one. This is in addition to the 48 staff working in the division in the 2000-01 financial year with a running cost of £1·4 million. Approval has been given to fill the 21 new posts.

193.

Mr Dallat: Can you ensure that they will filled by intelligent people?

194.

Ms Rodgers: I will do my best.

195.

Mr McHugh: Fermanagh has had a successful programme of targeting women in agriculture. Can this programme help further progress their strategies and can it be taken up to help other women who have not been involved in any of the groupings so far?

196.

Ms Rodgers: We are spending £20,000 on a scoping exercise for the needs of rural women. I am aware of the progress that has been made in Fermanagh with women’s groups and the Fermanagh Women’s Network. If they bring forward projects in the next rural development plan, they will be assessed in the same way that every other project is assessed. Women are also very good at networking. They have learnt that skill in recent years thanks to a lot of training by women’s groups. I am sure that the Fermanagh women will network with other women and encourage them and help them.

197.

Mr McHugh: Can the programme be widened to include the rest of the counties?

198.

Ms Rodgers: I expect that the women will come up with a programme themselves. That will also be an aspect of the scoping exercise.

199.

The Chairperson: Minister, we will write to you if we have any further questions. Thank you.

<< Prev       Next >>