EU rural schemes are prone to confusion

THANK you for giving me the opportunity to alert people to the changes in the Leader programme (Letters, October 23).

However, Jack Roche (Letters, October 27) claims my information was inaccurate.

As it came from the section of European Commission that provides the funding — people who head Leader schemes on the existing (old) programme — and the official Leader programme website, it is hard to see how this is possible.

I think the discrepancy comes from widespread confusion over various rural development programmes, funds and schemes.

I was referring specifically to the EU-funded Leader Plus programme’s proposed new main management structure.

I can understand this confusion because it takes a good bit of digging to try to get an accurate picture of what is happening with rural development funding and programmes in Ireland.

On the issue of voting for an increase in rural development funding, which was also mentioned by Mr Roche, we have a ‘rob Peter to pay Paul’ situation. The increases in rural development funding are largely coming from the decrease in funding to agriculture.

The speed and rate at which funds will be diverted from agriculture to rural development are already set out in a European strategy. The vote to accelerate this transfer of funding came at a time when there was great uncertainty about the future of the single farm payment and ongoing uncertainty about the future of Irish agriculture in general. I make no apology for voting against the proposal to accelerate the process of diverting funds from agriculture.

It is important to spend money on rural development, and I have consistently given my support to both rural and regional development, but I am also aware that, in Ireland, we will not have sustainable rural communities without farmers who are the backbone of the rural economy.

Kathy Sinnott MEP

Ballinabearna

Ballinhassig

Co Cork