Delegation to Brussels on the Subject of LEADER Liadh Ní Riada MEP
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Delegation to Brussels on the Subject of LEADER Liadh Ní Riada MEP S i n n F é i n 18 November 2014 Rapporteurs: Ryan Howard CEO, South and East Cork Area Development Conor McGuinness Political Advisor to Liadh Ní Riada MEP Dé Máirt, 26 Samhain 2014 a chairde, I would like to thank and congratulate each one of you for taking part in our delegation to Brussels on the subject of LEADER last week. I was delighted to welcome and host such a broad array of stakeholders in the field of rural, local and community development. I must commend and thank you all for your participation, your contributions and for helping to make our delegation a success. We had a fantastic opportunity to raise our very serious concerns about the future of the LEADER programme with Ms. Josephine Loriz-Hoffmann. I believe that she was impressed by our contributions, and I hope that our engagement with her will lead the European Commission take a critical view of the Irish Government’s proposed changes. I believe that together we brought significant information and analyses to her attention that had hitherto been overlooked on the Commission’s part, or kept from their view by the Department of Environment. I think this has been the major success of our delegation. I was also pleased to welcome representatives of most of the Irish MEPs to hear your concerns. I think you will agree that my colleague Matt Carthy MEP did a great job in facilitating your engagement with them. I hope that they too will take your concerns on board, and join in defending the bottom-up approach that is so central to LEADER in Ireland. The delegation is neither the beginning nor the end. I will continue to work with you, and alongside my colleagues in Sinn Féin, to push the Government to enter into dialogue with all stakeholders and to find a genuine solution that defends the bottom-up ethos, capitalises on the experience and expertise of local development companies, defends jobs and conditions of rural development workers, and puts community leadership at the centre of this vital programme. I have asked Minister Alan Kelly to meet with us as soon as possible, and will be in touch shortly with an update on that request. Is mise le meas, Liadh Ní Riada MEP 1. Roundtable meeting with Commission, Irish Government and NI Executive representatives Chair: Liadh Ní Riada MEP Attendance: Ms. Josefine Loriz-Hoffmann Directorate-General Agriculture and Rural Development Head of Unit – Consistency in Rural Development Geographic Director – Ireland Mr. Pat Fenton Permanent Representation of Ireland to the European Union Environment Attaché Mr. Brian Smart Office of the NI Executive in Brussels Deputy Head of Office 1. Experience in the 6 counties 1.1 Brian Smart, Deputy Head of Office at the Office of the NI Executive in Brussels outlined the new system for administering LEADER in the 6 counties, with the introduction of 10 new LAGs. Each will be an independent limited company, and contiguous with the new local authority structures. Each LAG will enter into a contract with its respective local authority in respect of administration support and financial services. LAG contracts will come from the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. 1.2 Damian McGenity, former director at the Newry and Mourne Local Strategy Partnership expressed the view that under the system described by Brian Smart the LEADER programme will in fact be managed and staffed by the Local Authority. He explained that there is a fear locally that the councils will shape strategy and administer the majority of investment. He also spoke of a concern that crucial cross-border investment and funding will be lost. Damian identified the possibility that these new LAGs will make decisions, which will then be brought to the Local Authority layer and from there to the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development for amendment and final decision-making, thereby disenfranchising ordinary local LAG volunteers and leadership. 2. Background to current changes in the 26 counties. 2.1 Jim Finn, chairperson of North Tipperary Leader partnership stated that there is strength in diversity and that each LAG will have different experiences, methods and priorities depending on the needs of communities in their respective areas of operation. In County Tipperary, there have been and currently are two LAGs. This represents the real on-the-ground nature of the county, where there is a pronounced difference between the realities, experiences and needs of communities in both parts of the county. 2.2 Máire Uí Mhaoláin, Rural Development Programme Administrator, Comhar na nOileán Teo, spoke of the need for rural development practice to respect and acknowledge the different needs and capabilities of different areas. She explained how a project that on the mainland might not qualify as ‘innovative’ could very well be an innovative, novel and experimental initiative on an island. Genuine community control rather than centralised local authority administration allows for greater understanding of local variances and needs. Máire also mentioned the difficulty with communications faced by island communities and pointed to a potential exacerbation of these by placing control of rural development programmes such as LEADER in the hands of local authorities that are headquartered many hours away. 2.3 Stephen Walsh, chair of Clare Local Development Company gave an account of his experience as a community development volunteer and spoke passionately in defense of the ethos of LEADER and how this translates into responsive, area- appropriate and successful programme implementation. He stated that LEADER works so well in Ireland because of its from-the-ground-up approach; that someone with an idea is entertained and facilitated, and that ideas for local development often come from within the community itself. Stephen spoke of the need to empower individuals and communities, and refrain from imposing a top- down or overly structured approach. He asked if the Commission would respect the right of local groups to take the lead in local initiatives and development, and if they would be afforded equal access to the opportunity. 3. Commission Response: Ms. Josefine Loriz-Hoffman 3.1 Ms. Loriz-Hoffmann, representing the rural development unit of the Directorate- General Agriculture and Rural Development said she was well aware of the subject and that she sees the current LEADER approach as a valid approach. She states that although mainstreaming has caused challenges it is still key ‘principle’ and a model for fisheries, regional development and social policy funds. This is accepted in principle. She acknowledged that there is diversification across EU, and that there is flexibility but within guidance. The private / public partnership, the bottom-up approach still applies but that there are different ways to do LEADER, with some more prescribed than others. 3.2 Member States should select ‘fair rules and should not exclude opportunities for different systems to be considered and best one chosen, keeping in mind that the process should be open and the existing groups should be allowed participate. She also stated that there is also a need for new participants to be brought on board and she spoke of the need for opportunities for new and old to compete, creating a new mixture and new ideas. The regulation are clear in terms of the selection of projects but with the principle that the Paying Agency be allowed to look in more detailed way but not to question the strategies that are applied by the LAG or the eligibility of a project witth in the LDS. 3.3 Josefine Loriz-Hoffmann acknowledged that there is an attitude amongst some Member States to allow Public Part to take over some of the administrative tasks especially where there are a lot of ‘new’ funds and ‘new’ structures, and that for a bottom-up approach there needs also to be a top-down support to work. The LAG, she said, does not operate outside the overall vision and plans for the region and country. 4. Community-Led Local Development 4.1 Noel Giles stated that the Irish Partnership Agreement response to the Community-Led Local Development (CLLD) opportunity was not suitable for the delivery of any structural and social funds. 4.2 Josephine Loriz-Hoffmann responded that CLLD was an offer to Member States but each Member State can choose to accept or reject this offer, and that CLLD is not an obligation. She acknowledged that Ireland has taken a bottom-up approach and had experience in multi-fund approach. Member States had said that items such as Structural Fund Projects are too big for the bottom-up approach. The Rural Development Programme is the only fund that requires CLLD be in place. 4.3 5. Issues arising from Irish Government Changes 5.1 Sinn Féin Senator, Trevor Ó Clochartaigh spoke of his experience as a partnership manager and spoke of the key principle of subsidiarity. Without this key concept informing our work, and with the attitude of the current and previous governments, we may see rural regression instead of rural development. We must aim for the latter and not the former. 5.2 Senator Ó Clochartaigh stated that Irish LEADER groups had a proven capacity in leveraging funds from several other sources and operated a principle of complementarity in rural development practice, with a good local and general overview, and holistic and strategic methodology. Cohesion forms part of their remit and a bottom-up, community-led approach is critical for the delivery of social incusion elements. He juxtaposed the community, locally derived and inclusive nature of Forum Connemara with the top-down, city-based and removed nature of the new County Galway LCDC.