COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS debate -
Thursday, 24 Feb 2005

2003 Annual Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General and Appropriation Accounts.

Vote 35 — Arts, Sport and Tourism.

Mr. P. Furlong (Secretary General, Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism) called and examined.

Chairman

Is it agreed to note chapter 7.1 of the 2002 Comptroller and Auditor General's report and chapter 9.1 of the 2003 Comptroller and Auditor General's report? Agreed. Today's business is the 2003 annual report of the Comptroller and Auditor General and appropriation accounts, Vote 35 — Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism.

There is some relevant correspondence: correspondence dated 15 February 2005 from Mr. Brian Kavanagh, chief executive, Horse Racing Ireland, concerning the corporate restructuring arrangements at Punchestown; correspondence dated 17 February 2005 from the Secretary General of the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism, Mr. Philip Furlong, replying to the committee's letter of 28 January 2005 enclosing correspondence from Mr. Seán Hennessy about the provision of funding for the Shamrock Rovers stadium in Tallaght; and correspondence dated 22 February 2005 from Mr. Jim Doherty, director of environment, South Dublin County Council, replying to the committee's letter of 28 January 2005 enclosing correspondence from Mr. Seán Hennessy about the provision of funding for the Shamrock Rovers stadium in Tallaght.

Witnesses should be aware that they do not enjoy absolute privilege before the committee. Members' and witnesses' attention is drawn to the fact that as and from 2 August 1998, section 10 of the Committees of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Compellability, Privileges and Immunities of Witnesses) Act 1997 grants certain rights to persons who are identified in the course of the committee's proceedings. These rights include the right to give evidence, the right to produce and send documents to the committee, the right to appear before the committee either in person or through a representative, the right to make a written and oral submission, the right to request the committee to direct the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents and the right to cross examine witnesses. For the most part, these rights may only be exercised with the consent of the committee.

Persons invited before the committee are made aware of these rights and any persons identified in the course of the proceedings who are not present may have to be made aware of these rights and provided with a transcript of the relevant part of the committee's proceedings. Notwithstanding this provision in the legislation, I should remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Members are also reminded of the provisions within Standing Order 156 that the committee shall also refrain from inquiring into the merits of a policy or policies of the Government or a Minister of the Government, or the merits of the objectives of such policy or policies.

Mr. Philip Furlong, Secretary General of the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism, is the Accounting Officer present. I ask him to introduce his officials.

Mr. Philip Furlong

Thank you, Chairman. I wish to introduce Ms Helen Nugent, principal officer in the sports division of the Department, Mr. Joe Timbs, finance officer, and Mr. Barry Murphy, principal officer in the arts division of the Department.

Chairman

I now call on the representatives of the Department of Finance to introduce themselves.

Mr. David Hurley

I am from the organisation, management and training division of the Department. I deal with the administrative budget of the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism. My colleague, Mr. Dermot Quigley, is from the public expenditure division dealing with programme expenditure.

Chairman

I ask Mr. Purcell to introduce Vote 35.

Mr. John Purcell

There is no chapter in the annual report on the 2003 accounts of the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism because as a result of the audit, no issue which in my opinion would merit public accountability came to light. In the normal course of an audit, we would issue a management letter on issues that arise, which are at a lower level than those which would require public accountability. I can confirm to the committee that the issues that were raised at that level have been dealt with satisfactorily by the Department.

The Vote speaks for itself. One matter that is slightly unusual in the Vote for the year in question is that it reflects the changeover in responsibility for tourism activities from Bord Fáilte and CERT, to Fáilte Ireland. That is why there are unusual variations in the outturn against the Estimate. However, it is well signalled and explained in the notes pertaining to the account.

Chairman

Mr. Furlong has indicated that he does not wish to make an opening statement as there is no chapter dedicated to the Department. The rota today is: lead questioner, Deputy Rabbitte and second questioner, Deputy McGuinness. Deputy Rabbitte has 20 minutes and Deputy McGuinness has 15 minutes.

Deputy Rabbitte

Subhead A.5 concerns work on the installation of a new financial management system. Will Mr. Furlong say a word to the committee about that system?

Mr. Furlong

We are installing a new management information system in the Department. Our commitment was to install that by the end of December 2004 but in spring of last year the opportunity of engaging in a joint service arrangement for the provision of MIS with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform emerged. We secured the approval of the Department of Finance to negotiate on that with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Over the last few months, we have been engaging with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and we are now at the point where we can sign off on a joint agreement between both Departments for the delivery of our management information system.

Deputy Rabbitte

Subhead G.5 concerns savings in respect of the completion of the National Aquatic Centre. I presume that since this report, everything has been finalised there. Does Mr. Furlong have any idea of the bill to be borne in respect of the recent damage done to the aquatic centre?

Mr. Furlong

Not at present. Following the damage, CSID arranged, via the OPW, to have its own assessment of the damage carried out to try to identify why it happened and the cost of rectifying it. At the same time, the insurers were also notified and had their own independent report carried out. CSID, the OPW and the insurers have been in contact over the last couple of weeks with a view to identifying what works need to be done, within what time-frame and what they are likely to cost. They will be consulting with, inter alia, Rocon which built the centre and also with the operators, Dublin Waterworld Limited.

Deputy Rabbitte

Do we have any idea when the centre will be functional again?

Mr. Furlong

The best estimate that I can provide at the moment is that the leisure facilities should be available in a couple of weeks but as regards the swimming pool itself, the damage will take rather longer to repair. My advice is that it is be about three months but that is simply an estimate at the moment. Until such time as the dialogue has taken place with Rocon and there is agreement on a schedule of work and the costings, it is just an estimate at this stage.

Deputy Rabbitte

Was it a surprise that such a new facility could be damaged in this way, or is it one of these things?

Mr. Furlong

Most people would probably say that it was somewhat surprising. At a personal level, I happen to live in the same area as the aquatic centre. I was in Dublin at the time of those freak weather conditions, which were very unusual. Whether they were on a scale that should have caused the damage that occurred is probably a technical issue that is being sorted out at the moment in the dialogue between the parties that will ultimately inform who will be responsible for bearing what percentage of the cost.

Deputy Rabbitte

Is the Department progressing proposals on the wider Campus Stadium Ireland idea at present?

Mr. Furlong

Yes. Late last year, we received from CSID, the stadium development company, a proposal for a phase one development to provide elite athlete facilities. That has been discussed with my own Minister who has decided to take the proposals to Cabinet and will be doing so in the next week or two. On the assumption that the Cabinet approves, the intention is that we will be able to move ahead with the delivery of that start-up process later this year.

Deputy Rabbitte

How are payments to cultural institutions such as the Irish Museum of Modern Art and the Chester Beatty Library, defined under the grant-in-aid fund? Does the National Concert Hall suggest a figure for its running costs or is it given an arbitrary grant? For example, in terms of its expectations and what it considers it might be capable of doing, does it regard itself as being adequately funded or is it living within a budgetary constraint?

Mr. Furlong

I am sure its answer to that question would be the latter — that it is living within a budgetary constraint. The context in which that number is defined for it begins with the Estimates process for the Department. When we start formulating our Estimates bid for the following financial period, we need to get indications from our cultural institutions as to the sort of funding they need to continue their operations. Clearly, they see this as an opportunity to table bids for enhancement of services. We then have to negotiate our Estimate with the Department of Finance and an overall figure is agreed for the subhead. Having been given the global numbers, so to speak, dialogue then takes place within the arts division among the officers concerned on the nature of the bids made by the individual institutions. An attempt is made to assess which are most urgent or require highest priority and recommendations are then made to the Minister. When the Minister signs off on the recommendations, the allocation is communicated to each of the cultural institutions.

Deputy Rabbitte

How much State money has been invested in the unfinished stadium at Tallaght, destined for use by Shamrock Rovers?

Mr. Furlong

We have given €2.4 million. This was supplied in three phases and the most recent payment was made in 2002. In my previous appearance before the committee I attempted to explain that we had great difficulty establishing with the football club what were its intentions and whether it had the capacity to finish the job. It became apparent that it did not possess such capacity. Deputies will be aware that, since I last came before the committee, South Dublin County Council has become involved and has been involved in dialogue with Mulden, the company to which it originally gave the original lease for the development of the stadium. It has been endeavouring to persuade Mulden that the best interests of the club would be served by surrendering the lease and allowing the local authority to complete the project. We have spoken to the county council and it is common ground between us that if the lease is surrendered we can negotiate a financial package with a view to ensuring completion of the stadium. We see that as being in the obvious best interests of the club. Attempts that have been made, particularly those in recent times, to link the funding of the club with commercial development on an adjacent property fly in the face of the clear intention of South Dublin County Council. The latter has made it clear that it has no intention of changing its development plan, which will not permit any commercial development at or adjacent to that site.

The county council has met representatives of Mulden and I understand that the dialogue is ongoing. The Department is not directly involved at this time. Until such time as the lease is surrendered, it would be impossible for us to begin discussing financial support in partnership with the county council.

Deputy Rabbitte

It is frustrating that the stadium has remained half finished for four years. Is Mr. Furlong stating that Mulden International is the obstacle in respect of the lease terms relating to the grounds?

Mr. Furlong

It might be somewhat unfair to describe the company as an obstacle, particularly as I am not involved in the negotiations. As I understand it, the five-year lease that was originally granted expired towards the end of last year. Rather than being obliged to contest a refusal to extend the lease, Mulden has been advised by South Dublin County Council that it would be in the best interests of Shamrock Rovers FC if it agreed to surrender the lease. This would allow the county council to deal directly with the club and the Department. I do not know what is Mulden's precise position at present. A series of meetings has been held and at a certain point I obtained the impression that the county council was of the view that progress was being made. However, I discovered more recently that someone else connected to the club was attempting a legal challenge to the county council's refusal to extend the lease. That seems a rather unproductive route and I do not know if the person involved remains intent on pursuing it.

As I have stated on previous occasions, it would be in the best interests of ensuring completion of the stadium if the county council was free to deal with the property because it would then be able to become involved in discussions with the Minister and the Department in respect of joint funding. The estimate I possess — this may be somewhat out of date — indicates that the total investment required to complete the stadium could be of the order of approximately €5 million.

Deputy Rabbitte

Whether they be among local residents, fans of Shamrock Rovers or whomever, there are concerns that the dispute appears to have the capacity to last forever. Nobody seems to intervene decisively in order to bring the matter to a close. In the interim, damage is being done to the club because it does not have a home ground. The half-finished stadium is an eyesore. Interested parties have heard before that dialogue is ongoing and that a breakthrough is about to be achieved. Is such a breakthrough any closer in reality?

Mr. Furlong

I genuinely believe that a breakthrough is closer. Until such time as there is a definitive withdrawal from the lease issue, however, it is not possible to provide a final answer in that regard. Once the withdrawal takes place, it is my opinion that development can move ahead quite quickly. The Deputy's points about the stadium being an eyesore and Shamrock Rovers living on borrowed time are true. We have been in contact with the FAI, through its acting chief executive, and it has become engaged again in dealing with this matter. I understand it may be playing a part in terms of trying to persuade those currently involved with Shamrock Rovers that the path I have outlined is the only sane way forward for the club. I am hopeful — I am not yet confident — that progress will be made.

Deputy Rabbitte

Is Mr. Furlong stating that the Department is prepared to be financially supportive in circumstances where the county council could extricate itself from——

Mr. Furlong

The Minister has indicated that he would be prepared to help.

Deputy Rabbitte

Would that be by way of a partnership with the local authority?

Mr. Furlong

We are open to whatever arrangement makes most commercial or financial sense to us. This might involve the county council making certain provisions in respect of the development of the land and the Department supporting the completion of some of the sport or soccer-specific infrastructure. Until such time as we take a detached view of what needs to be done and estimate how much it will cost, we will be merely engaging in speculation. There is a definite willingness on our part to engage constructively — that is, by means of financial support — with the county council to ensure that the stadium is completed.

Deputy Rabbitte

I had another brilliant question for Mr. Furlong but I have forgotten it. However, does he have any information about the suitability of the structure that is in place at present? Is it safe and would it survive in a refurbishment and completion process?

Mr. Furlong

It probably would do so. When the grants were paid to the club three years ago, the Office of Public Works inspected the facility. The OPW was perfectly satisfied with the construction standards used on the project. Unless these have deteriorated to an enormous extent in the intervening period, I would like to believe they would provide an appropriate or useful starting point for moving ahead. However, until we can get in and carry out another architectural assessment, I am not 100% sure about it. The OPW told us at the time that the work had been done satisfactorily in a professional manner.

Deputy Rabbitte

To what extent is the financial viability of the club a factor in these discussions?

Mr. Furlong

Not at all because we do not support running expenses in any sports agency. We are concerned with the viability of capital investment.

Deputy Rabbitte

Therefore, it is a facility as far as the Department is concerned.

Mr. Furlong

Providing a facility like this will obviate the need for the club to spend money on rent to other clubs and training facilities. The club will have an opportunity with its own clubhouse and location to engage in more effective fundraising.

Deputy McGuinness

I refer to the local urban and rural programme. The appropriations-in-aid estimate is €10.3 million. How is that distributed?

Mr. Furlong

Our estimate was based on recoupment rates agreed in the context of the Community Support Framework 1994-1999. The total owed in respect of the operational programmes was €9.85 million. This breaks down under three headings. The operational programme for urban areas came from the Social Fund and it amounted to €1.6 million. That related to a time the Department, in its previous incarnation, had responsibility for local development. Local urban and rural development, LURD, had three elements — the ESF, €4.5 million; the Regional Fund, €2.4 million; and under the PEACE programme, €1.35 million.

We had great difficulty recovering money from Brussels. We completed the paperwork and processed it through the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, which had significant difficulty getting the machinery in Brussels to approve payment. We got a total of €1.6 million in 2003 and last year we got ERDF funding of approximately €2.4 million. We are owed €4.5 million in the current year in respect of spending incurred three or four years ago, €4.5 million for local urban and rural development and €1.35 million for the PEACE programme. We have been assured by officials in Brussels that they do not have a problem with the claims and there is no reason we should fail to get the money but it is taking inordinate time to get the money. We are assured the outstanding sum of €5.85 million will be paid this year or next year at the latest.

Deputy McGuinness

I am interested in the time lapse between making the application and receiving payment. Mr. Furlong said there was no shortfall in the Department regarding paperwork but there is an inefficiency in Brussels regarding payment. Is that correct?

Mr. Furlong

Whatever the reason, it is taking a long time to get the payment processed in Brussels. There may be internal difficulties. I do not know what they are and I do not want to speculate. Those appropriations-in-aid are important to us because if they do not materialise, our capacity to spend is reduced. We have put a great deal of pressure, through the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and, ultimately, the Department of Finance, on the system in Brussels. Our experience of slow payment is not confined to us. Several other Departments have the same experience. I do not know whether people have difficulty with the standard of the paperwork provided as there may be a higher test level in Brussels but no one has come back to us to say, "you have given us information that is problematic and, therefore, we cannot pay you".

Deputy McGuinness

When will it be paid?

Mr. Furlong

I hope sooner rather than later.

Deputy McGuinness

I refer to the Punchestown issue. I tabled a parliamentary question to the Minister for Agriculture and Food about the legal agreement, which was the cornerstone of the outcome, according to the committee's work on the issue. It was felt that at least a legal agreement would be achieved to protect the State's investment in the facility. However, the Minister in reply to my parliamentary question stated she was satisfied with the progress on the matter but that is not an adequate answer. Mr. Furlong's Department has responsibility now for the centre. What progress has been made on the legal agreement sought by the committee to protect the funding provided? With whom is the agreement being made? Will Mr. Furlong comment on the reported disagreements within the corporate structure at the event centre? How will the Department finalise the matter?

Mr. Furlong

The legal agreement issue with which the committee was concerned related to the events centre. However, the events centre is not the responsibility of my Department and it remains the responsibility of the Department of Agriculture and Food. There are a number of issues around Punchestown, which relate to the deteriorating relationship between the Kildare Hunt and HRI. My Department is concerned because four years ago when Punchestown hit serious financial difficulty, the Irish Horseracing Authority, the precursor to HRI, got involved in a rescue package, which was secured on the lands at Punchestown. That, as far as we were concerned, provided all the security required for the IHA to release grant and loan funding to Punchestown. The management was reconstructed with serious expertise provided by HRI and what was a loss making operation in 2001 and 2002 is operating at a profitable level. Annual profits are €300,000.

The Kildare Hunt issue is complicating matters because of a belief within the hunt that the initial agreement in the late 1990s governing the management of Punchestown racecourse was not agreed by all members of the trust and, therefore, people in the hunt are challenging it. I am sorry but this is complicated and I will try to make it as simple as I can. That caused concern to HRI in terms of relying on the claim it had over assets to cover the loan and the grant to Punchestown racecourse. It wrote to the chairman of the Kildare Hunt. The chairman of the hunt has indicated that irrespective of the resolution of the issues currently troubling the hunt in its relationships with HRI, it will stand over the securities it had given. I am speaking all the time in relation to the racecourse, not to the events centre.

HRI is also involved in trying to assist the Department of Agriculture and Food in getting the security for the events centre, with which the committee is concerned. I do not know how that is progressing. It is complicated and I apologise if I am not being as clear as I ought to be.

Deputy McGuinness

The committee was presented with a corporate structure. It is a question of which Department is dealing with it, be it the Department of Agriculture and Food or the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism. There is an issue about how the State's interest is protected. There is a constant reference to disagreements within the various bodies which are under the Punchestown heading.

Mr. Furlong

I agree there were differences there.

Deputy McGuinness

There is also the issue of the Revenue Commissioners which is mentioned in a letter the committee received from Horse Racing Ireland. It seems to trundle on with no finality in sight. I hope it does not get lost between two Departments and that both Departments are working on the general issue arising from the concerns expressed at this committee and that there will be a final line whereby the State's interests are protected.

Mr. Furlong

I can give the Deputy an unconditional assurance that such is the case, as far as my Department is concerned. Nothing the Department does will be done at the expense of any parallel security that would be required for the events centre.

Deputy McGuinness

I wish to ask a general question about the costs associated with attendance figures for museums. It was reported in a newspaper article last year that visitors to the National Archives cost the State €87 per visitor. Demands are being made by some regions for the regionalisation of museums in order to display artefacts found in the region. For example, there has been a debate in the south-east region in Kilkenny about a museum. Artefacts found during the course of the River Nore scheme are now stored in Dublin. Who pays, when one considers the cost to the State of visitors to museums?

Will the delegation comment on the cost of storage of artefacts that are of interest but are not on public display? These artefacts are boxed and put away. Is such storage costing the Department money? Could these artefacts be better used by being on view to the public and perhaps generate money from their display rather than costing money by being stored?

Mr. Furlong

There is no admission charge for visitors to the museum, the National Gallery or the National Archives. The museum in particular is open to entering into arrangements with local museums for display of material, particularly of material owing its provenance to that region. The museum would wish to make certain that the display arrangements are of an order to guarantee the safety of the artefacts on display. One of the reasons material goes directly to the National Museum is that many of the finds require intensive conservation. There is a highly professional conservation operation in the museum. This would restore artefacts found in the raw at particular locations and given to the museum. I am aware the museum makes artefacts available on loan to particular locations. If local museums wish to pursue that matter with the director of the National Museum, I am sure he would be happy to respond.

An initiative taken by the museum in recent years was the museum of country life at Turlough Park near Castlebar. This has been a great opportunity to showcase artefacts that tell the story of that particular region in the 19th century. I will facilitate local museums in any way I can.

Deputy McGuinness

I wish to know the cost of storage.

Mr. Furlong

Storage is something of a problem. Most museums and the gallery do not have adequate display space. The Deputy is correct in stating that the conditions under which some artefacts are stored are far from ideal. The museum policy is to create additional storage space at Collins Barracks which is the property allocated to the National Museum of Ireland about ten years ago. Display space is being expanded there. My Department and the Office of Public Works have been in discussions with the three collecting institutions, the museums, the gallery and the Chester Beatty Library, about having a common off-site state of the art storage facility for material which is of interest but cannot be displayed due to shortage of space. It is hoped that a proposal will emerge to ensure that all material is stored in appropriate conditions and that the best material is available, whether it be in Dublin or at regional locations. The director of the museum is very well disposed to facilitating this proposal. The concern will be obtaining guarantees that when material goes to a particular locality, it will be protected and conserved and come back in the same condition.

Deputy McGuinness

Mr. Furlong did not cover the point about the centralisation of these artefacts and their storage. Does this storage continue to cost the State or is the storage on museum property?

Mr. Furlong

In the case of the museum, as they are being stored on museum property, it is not costing the State anything.

Deputy McGuinness

Is there not a cumulative cost every year?

Mr. Furlong

The museum is commissioning additional storage space at Collins Barracks which will enable it to put material on display that would otherwise have been stored.

Deputy McGuinness

Under the heading of "Expenditure" in the subheads, the figure for Sports Campus Ireland is €2.3 million. A number of cultural projects such as cultural development, international cultural exchange, show an underspend. The figures are €6.6 million in one case and €1.3 million in another. The Department has set out what it estimates will be spent in the course of the year. What is the reason this figure has not been reached?

Mr. Furlong

The capital projects are promoted by voluntary bodies and local groups. The condition under which they receive direct grant support from the Exchequer is that they have obtained planning permission for whatever they are doing, that local funding is available and that tax clearance certificates are available. It has been our experience that many of these voluntary bodies underestimate the length of time it takes them to meet requirements under all those headings. It is for that reason spending does not take place as rapidly as they had anticipated.

On a project-by-project basis we attempt to produce a year-by-year cash flow based on the information we are given. We then aggregate that, which represents the demand for spending on capital projects in culture, for example. Even in those circumstances assurances given that a project will proceed at a particular rate very often do not materialise and we find ourselves, in effect, having to carry that over to the next year. We are helped in this regard by the initiative of the Department of Finance in providing multi-annual capital envelopes in that we can factor into the capital envelope the total cost of these projects. Therefore, the fact that money is not spent in the year in which it was written into the Estimates does not mean that it was lost. If, on the other hand, we find that people who had been allocated money and told us they intended to go ahead provide no evidence that they are ready to go, we raise the issue of withdrawing funding altogether and allowing that funding be reallocated to other projects.

Deputy McGuinness

Will Mr. Furlong comment on the heading of "International Cultural Exchange"?

Mr. Furlong

Under international cultural exchange we——

Deputy McGuinness

From where do the applications come?

Mr. Furlong

In 2003 the main element in the Estimate for international cultural exchange was the bilateral cultural agreement with China. We had a commitment to have a major cultural exhibition in China followed by a return visit by the Chinese Ministry of Culture. It was due to go ahead late in 2003. However, because of the SARS epidemic, it needed to be deferred until early in 2004. It took place in 2004 and the total expenditure on the exchange was approximately €2.1 million or €2.2 million.

The other items under that heading would be support, for example, for the old CRC — the cultural relations committee, which belonged to the Department of Foreign Affairs and which provided relatively modest support for Irish artists travelling overseas to perform or for the attendance of Irish artists at cultural festivals abroad. Today, as it happens, my Minister is announcing the establishment of Culture Ireland, which is a body being set up under the chair of Mícheál Ó Súilleabháin of the University of Limerick, to showcase Irish culture overseas, to take over the role of the CRC, to become proactive in the development of bilateral cultural relations and to in effect re-energise the entire process, which was so successful during the Irish EU Presidency in giving a high international platform for Irish arts and culture.

Deputy McGuinness

How do the Arts Council and the Irish Film Board account to the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism in the context of the schemes they administer and the grants they give? Do they account for each scheme?

Mr. Furlong

They do not. In 2003 the Arts Council had a separate Vote with a separate Accounting Officer. However, as part of the process of reforming the structure of the Estimates volume, the Arts Council from 2004 onwards became a grant-in-aid subhead in the Vote of the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism. The allocation for the Arts Council is agreed more or less on the same basis as I discussed in the case of the smaller museum.

Deputy McGuinness

How much is the allocation?

Mr. Furlong

In the current year it is approximately €61 million and last year, I believe it was approximately €52.5 million. It is a grant-in-aid subhead. It seeks extra funding from us and sets out why it is looking for it. It is discussed and the Minister determines what is available within the overall resources available to him. At that point the Minister backs off because of what is known as the arms length principle, which means that in its individual funding decisions the Arts Council is totally free of any interference.

Deputy McGuinness

Does the same apply to the Irish Film Board?

Mr. Furlong

The Irish Film Board is not a direct granter in the same way. The board will provide limited capital funding for major projects attracted to this country. Again, it is free in terms of the decisions it makes.

Deputy McGuinness

What amounts of money would the Irish Film Board handle in a year?

Mr. Furlong

It is allocated €12 million, of which approximately €10 million would be capital.

Deputy McGuinness

Therefore, up to now the Arts Council got €61 million, which it dealt with itself. The Irish Film Board continues to get approximately €12 million. Neither of them has been directly accountable and only the Arts Council will be accountable from now.

Mr. Furlong

The Irish Film Board will get funding from our Department. There is a separate subhead in the Department's Vote for the board and it is accountable to the Department for that.

Deputy McGuinness

The Arts Council will be accountable from this year onwards.

Mr. Furlong

Yes. We cannot second-guess it in its funding decisions.

Deputy McGuinness

I understand that.

Mr. Furlong

If it gets funding from us, it needs to show cause.

Deputy McGuinness

I am interested in the breakdown of how the €61 million for the Arts Council is spent and the type of grants it makes or projects it funds or supports. What is the scope of its interests and what areas is it supporting? Likewise with the Irish Film Board, while I do not want to second-guess it, I would like to know what it is funding. Where does its €12 million go? What percentage goes to groups within the country that promote the film industry? How much goes to marketing and attracting films from abroad or creating Ireland as a destination for producers? Does Mr. Furlong have such a breakdown?

Mr. Furlong

I do not have it with me, but I can get it for the Deputy.

Deputy McGuinness

I would like to have it, please.

Chairman

Mr. Purcell advises me that the Arts Council and the Irish Film Board have separate Accounting Officers.

Deputy McGuinness

To whom do they account?

Chairman

They are audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General and we can call them in if the Deputy would like to do so.

Deputy McGuinness

I did not realise that. I thought the Arts Council was now under the Department.

Mr. Furlong

I was saying the Arts Council is now under the Department.

Mr. Purcell

In a sense it was always operating within the aegis of the Department and that really has not changed. It produces and will continue to produce separate accounts for which the council takes responsibility. I audit those accounts and produce an audit report. The council can be called before the committee as any non-commercial State-sponsored body, which receives grant-in-aid from any Vote. In recent years witnesses from the Arts Council have appeared before the committee. To the best of my recollection I do not believe witnesses from the Irish Film Board have been here. However, they could be called if there was a reason to call them.

Deputy McGuinness

Once I receive the information I requested, we can make that decision.

Mr. Furlong

I will provide that information for the Deputy.

Deputy Curran

I welcome back Mr. Furlong. I would like to follow on from the matter Deputy McGuinness just discussed. When Mr. Furlong appeared before the committee last year we asked him some questions about the FAI. He said the funding for the FAI does not come directly from the Department but from the Irish Sports Council. On more than one occasion witnesses from the Irish Sports Council appeared before the committee. At that point we were disappointed with the implementation of the FAI's Genesis report and particularly the weakness in the appointment of a financial director. Following that the CEO resigned and there was some disagreement between the Irish Sports Council and the FAI, which resulted in the withdrawal of funding, etc. Ultimately, the Minister intervened and the FAI agreed to fill the vacancy at CEO level publicly.

The committee was concerned at that time that the position of financial director, which is of equal importance, had not been filled. I understand that an official from the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism is loosely involved in overseeing the entire operation. Can Mr. Furlong give the committee an up-to-date analysis of the relationship between the FAI and the Department? Does he consider that the two parties are putting their business in order?

Mr. Furlong

As the Deputy stated, there was serious dissatisfaction about the way the FAI was running its affairs. Even though the Department had no direct funding relationship with the FAI, the Minister felt obliged to call in the president and management board of the FAI, which is an indication of the widespread nature of that dissatisfaction. The Minister made it clear to the FAI that there was a general impression that it was not in control of its business, especially as it had lost a chief executive for the third time in approximately 18 months. It was suggested at the time that the FAI was neglecting the Genesis agenda because of other internal issues within the association.

The Minister said that the time when the FAI should begin the process of reform had passed. He made it clear that the association needed to advertise the posts of chief executive and financial director before the end of December. He said he was not interested in delays of any kind in that process. He appointed an official from the Department to the group that liaised between the FAI and the Irish Sports Council on FAI business. The group will meet again next week. The Department and the FAI have closer contact than once was the case and the dialogue between them is more productive.

The process of filling the FAI vacancies has started. I am subject to correction, as I do not have the precise details, but I believe approximately 40 people applied for each of the two posts which were advertised. The applicants are being screened, a process of short-listing is ongoing and an interview board is being formed. The interview board will comprise an independent chair, a representative of the Irish Sports Council, a representative of the Department and two representatives of the FAI. I understand that the process of interviewing the short-listed candidates for the position of chief executive will commence shortly, after which the other post will be considered. The Minister has made it clear in words of one syllable that the Genesis report is the agenda and he is not interested in other agendas at this stage.

Deputy Curran

The committee identified significant difficulties this time last year. There was a lack of confidence in what the FAI was doing. Does Mr. Furlong consider that the Department is beginning to regain confidence in the FAI's structures?

Mr. Furlong

It will take time for that to happen, but we are heading in the right direction. The Department is satisfied that its major concerns about the FAI as a partner in the Lansdowne Road stadium project have been allayed. There is regular dialogue between the Department and the FAI on UEFA licensing issues, for which some funding was made available through the sports capital programme. That is why that particular dialogue took place.

The FAI is engaged at all levels in the process of developing soccer as a sport in Ireland. It accepts fully that further disharmony or public dispute would be to the detriment of the sport and would cause the association to lose the support and encouragement of the Minister. There have been some positive developments. For example, sponsorship and broadcasting agreements have been renewed on terms which are acceptable to most people. The Irish team's main competitive international soccer matches will be broadcast on free-to-air television channels. The Department is happy with developments to date.

Deputy Curran

The process has not been completed, by any means.

Mr. Furlong

No, it has not. The implementation of the Genesis report is the main part of the agenda. The Department can address the issue in a way it could not in the past because it is now directly involved in the liaison group. The next meeting of the liaison committee is scheduled for next week, but I suspect it will be mainly concerned with the modalities of the appointment of the chief executive.

Deputy Curran

I assure Mr. Furlong that the committee will keep an eye on the implementation of the Genesis report. I would like Mr. Furlong to elaborate on a point he made earlier before I discuss Shamrock Rovers. He said that the Department's fears and concerns about the FAI and the Lansdowne Road redevelopment project were allayed. Can he update the committee on the progress of the project?

Mr. Furlong

The FAI and the IRFU have established a joint committee to oversee the Lansdowne Road redevelopment project. A legal agreement is in place to govern that. The organisations report on their progress to a steering group, which is chaired by me. They have had to provide assurances about their capacity to raise their shares of the overall cost of the redevelopment.

The process of recruiting a design team and a project manager, in which the two bodies are engaged at present, is nearing completion. The applications for the positions, which were received on foot of advertisements placed in the EU Journal just before Christmas, are being evaluated at present. I assume the bodies will make a selection in the next week and the design work will begin thereafter. There is a design concept in existence for a stadium with an all-seated capacity of 50,000, which will be the same capacity as the present stadium.

A liaison arrangement has been established, involving the project's development management committee and local residents, to keep people in the picture about what is going on. The liaison process is at an early stage, but it has been positive so far. It is important that the local community should be kept fully abreast of developments as they occur, in order that they do not have to read about them in the newspapers, for example.

Deputy Curran

I do not know the relevant figures. Mr. Furlong mentioned that the relevant stakeholders, the IRFU and the FAI, are making a financial input into the project. We discussed earlier the failure of Shamrock Rovers to complete its new stadium. How confident is the Department that the IRFU and the FAI will be able to meet their financial commitments to ensure that the project is completed in a timely fashion?

Mr. Furlong

The Department is pretty confident about that. The Exchequer will contribute €191 million of the project's total agreed cost of €292 million. The FAI and the IRFU have committed to contributing the remaining €101 million. The Department has been given bank guarantees in respect of the contribution of each agency. The basis for the Department's high degree of confidence that the sports bodies will be able to raise the money is their plans to arrange the advance sale of corporate boxes and seats in the stadium. The Department considers that receipts from such sales alone will be enough for the bodies to underpin their financial commitments.

Deputy Curran

Will the €101 million be divided equally between the FAI and the IRFU?

Mr. Furlong

I would prefer not to discuss that matter, because it relates to the relationship between the bodies. I can inform the Deputy that the division of the funds will not be equal.

Deputy Curran

Do I have time to ask about Shamrock Rovers?

Chairman

Yes.

Deputy Curran

Like Deputy Rabbitte, I am interested in Shamrock Rovers because it is in my local area. I have driven by the site of the club's proposed stadium. The Shamrock Rovers affair has been continuing for about ten years. Planning permission for the development at Tallaght was first granted seven years ago, but nothing has been constructed on the greenfield site other than the frames of what would be two considerable stands. The site has been lying idle for a number of years. Is the Department satisfied at this point that the State's investment to date is fully secure?

Mr. Furlong

Yes. I made inquiries on the matter before my appearance here. The Department has confirmed with the Office of the Chief State Solicitor that we have a guarantee or deed of covenant which is legally enforceable.

Deputy Curran

While I have not counted them, it appears a couple of hundred organisations received grants under the 2003 sports capital grants programme amounting in total to €60 million. Since Shamrock Rovers first received its grant, how many other clubs have received grants and what has been their value?

Mr. Furlong

In the six year period from the beginning of 1999 to the end of 2004, grants totalling €323 million were allocated to approximately 4,000 projects.

Deputy Curran

Of the 4,000 projects, how many have ended up in circumstances similar to those in which the Shamrock Rovers club finds itself?

Mr. Furlong

I am hard pressed to think of even one example and recall that there were very few. The problem with the Shamrock Rovers project was that it was phased. It is generally the case under the sports capital programme that a complete project is supported which means the release of funding is not authorised until all of its elements are in place. Such elements include planning permission, tax clearance certificates and the local financial contribution. As the Shamrock Rovers project was phased, we have ended up in the current situation. We have withdrawn grants over the five-year period in question of approximately €11 million from clubs which were unable to draw down approved funding within a reasonable time.

The Shamrock Rovers club has been treated with a fair degree of understanding. There is a degree of impatience not just at local level or even within the club, but in the Department also. We had a great deal of trouble obtaining information from the club and it is evident from my contacts with the manager of South Dublin County Council that he is also on the point of indicating that the remaining option must be chosen or the opportunity will disappear.

Deputy Curran

I have read the correspondence from the manager of South Dublin County Council in which he indicates clearly that it remains the objective of the local authority to provide a football stadium at which Shamrock Rovers can play soccer. The company in which the lease is vested, Mulden International, is not one and the same as Shamrock Rovers Football Club per se. If Mulden International were no longer in the equation in the morning, how long would it take to complete a soccer stadium for Shamrock Rovers?

Mr. Furlong

I do not have the answer to that. It would depend on how soon the local authority could repossess the site.

Deputy Curran

If they had it in the morning, what would happen?

Mr. Furlong

The authority would talk to us and we would arrange for the OPW to carry out an architectural assessment of the site. The club would have to engage on its plan to complete the building with the Department, the FAI and South Dublin County Council. The stadium will not be designed by the OPW but will have to be locally designed. The sooner the issue of freeing up the site is dealt with, the sooner we and the county council can engage with the club to put a project together. The club will have the support of the FAI in doing so.

Deputy Curran

As I said at the outset, the project has been ongoing for ten years. Planning permission was granted in January seven years ago. I feel sorry for the supporters and players of Shamrock Rovers who have been without a home for a long time. It was unfortunate to lose a home in Milltown and it would be very careless of the club's management if this project were not commenced shortly. The management has certainly been afforded every possible opportunity. A substantial site was made available by South Dublin County Council and almost €2.5 million has been provided in grant aid by the Government. A further €500,000 was made available as grant aid by the FAI. Substantial funds and efforts have been invested.

Having listened to Mr. Furlong's comments and read the correspondence from the county council, it is abundantly clear that the only way Shamrock Rovers will play soccer in Tallaght is if Mulden International relinquishes the lease and enters into an agreement with South Dublin County Council. Is that a fair assessment?

Mr. Furlong

Yes. Direct and early engagement with the county council is the only way forward.

Deputy Boyle

Can Mr. Furlong provide clarification on Punchestown? Mr. Furlong explained in response to Deputy McGuinness that responsibility for the national equestrian and events centre remains with the Department of Agriculture and Food while the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism has responsibility for the racecourse through Horse Racing Ireland. Does Mr. Furlong's Department have any influence on the sport's use of the events centre given its promotion as an equestrian and events centre? It was recently announced that the national eventing weekend due to be held at Punchestown had been cancelled. Given that the event was of the type it was intended to support with the infrastructure in question, does the Department have a view on the way public money has been used for sports events?

Mr. Furlong

If we had a view, it would relate to a greater extent to tourism than to sport. We are very clear that our sporting involvement is in the running of Punchestown racecourse, which is part of the HRI brief. We are not directly or indirectly involved with the events centre. The events centre can attract prestigious overseas competitions and events for whatever reason in the encouragement of which Tourism Ireland would have an interest under its international sports promotion programme. The loss of a major event would be considered disappointing from the perspective of tourism if it meant the potential loss of overseas visitors. I do not know if the event to which Deputy Boyle referred was significant.

Deputy Boyle

While I accept what Mr. Furlong said about tourism, I argue that the Department has a number of roles to play as equestrianism is a sport and sport is one of its responsibilities. Public money was made available for the provision of infrastructure to assist a sport. If events are not occurring at the infrastructure, questions are raised about the way public money was used in the first instance. According to the committee's investigations, the Punchestown centre does not appear to be suitable for such sporting purposes. As the Department has a direct role in Punchestown, I am interested to know its opinion. Eventing has all taken place outdoors as show-jumping cannot occur within centre itself. It appears the only equestrian use the centre has been put to in recent years is stabling and moving horses to the outside racecourse. Is the facility a national equestrian centre or not?

Mr. Furlong

Again, I will probably not help the Deputy or answer his question directly. Our entire focus has been on the management of the sport of horse racing. That is the responsibility which was assigned to the Department in 2002 when the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism was established. For that reason, the Department operates within its Horse Racing Ireland brief for the management of the sport of horse racing. Horse Racing Ireland is not responsible for equestrian sport. There is a lack of clarity on this issue and I will need to check the position. However, my understanding is that the Department of Agriculture and Food retains responsibility for some aspects of equestrianism.

Deputy Boyle

As a sport.

Mr. Furlong

Yes. As I recall, again I am subject to correction and will follow up on the issue, the Department does not support the horse show in any way.

Deputy Boyle

The Department appears to have full responsibility for Horse Racing Ireland. The support given by Horse Racing Ireland to Punchestown racecourse and the Kildare Hunt prior to the building of the events centre was substantial and related to the construction of a viewing stand, catering and ancillary facilities and office accommodation which formed part of the development. What was the total amount of support provided by Horse Racing Ireland?

Mr. Furlong

During the period from 1997 to 2002, the Irish Horseracing Authority, the precursor of Horse Racing Ireland, provided a total of €5.8 million for Punchestown. In 2001, due to problems related to the drainage of the racecourse at Punchestown which were so bad they necessitated the cancellation of the spring festival, the Irish Horseracing Authority provided further funding amounting to €4.07 million, of which €2.4 million was in grants and €1.67 million in loans. Repayment is due to commence in 2007. This funding was secured on the property at Punchestown by way of a first charge on 12 acres of development land and a second charge on the entire property.

Deputy Boyle

Total funding amounted to approximately €10 million, consisting of €8.5 million in grants and €1.5 million in soft loans.

Mr. Furlong

Yes, that would be close to the figure.

Deputy Boyle

The reason I ask is that the information provided indicates that Punchestown racecourse has been profitable in recent years. Given that a joint venture company has not been established for the events centre, how are these profits retained? Do they go to Horse Racing Ireland or are they retained by the Kildare Hunt?

Mr. Furlong

They are not retained by the Kildare Hunt but by the company running Punchestown. When it was set up following the rescue package of 2001 the company inherited a loss-making operation which it has converted into an annual profit of the order of €300,000 to €350,000.

Deputy Boyle

To all intents and purposes it is a joint venture company. It hired outside expertise.

Mr. Furlong

Horse Racing Ireland put in its own people and others connected with Horse Racing Ireland. I could give the Deputy one or two names.

Deputy Boyle

Members of the Kildare Hunt are still involved in the company.

Mr. Furlong

Yes, they include the chief executive of Punchestown, Dick O'Sullivan, who was then the senior steward of the Irish National Hunt Committee, Ray Craig and Michael Osborne who chairs the company. The company has been very successful and attendances have grown by 22% and sponsorship by 28%. It is estimated that Punchestown, between the racecourse and the events centre, brings approximately 300,000 people into the Kildare area annually.

Deputy Boyle

I will move to a second area, namely, grant assistance and national policy on the provision of local swimming pools, largely administered by local authorities. I understand the scheme in place allows for capital assistance for 50% of the cost of a swimming pool, provided the other 50% can be met in the relevant local authority area. Does the Department give this money directly to local authorities or separate companies established by local authorities or does it allow for the participation of public private partnerships?

Mr. Furlong

The scheme is not confined to local authorities. To go back a little, we are working off applications under a scheme which closed in the middle of 2000. Fifty-five applications were submitted and they had to be received and processed prior to 31 March 2000. Projects can be either local authority or private projects supported by a local authority. There is no point in doing something if it does not enjoy local support. Public private partnerships are available as an option. My advice, however, given the procedures involved in setting up and administering a public private partnership, is that for a PPP to be viable the minimum capital investment must be of the order of €20 million. My understanding is that most swimming pools cost well below that figure.

A flat maximum rate of grant is payable, amounting to €3.8 million. Recognising that a scheme which closed in mid-2000 is still not capable of responding quickly enough to the 55 applications received and that other local areas and communities are continually identifying the need to develop swimming pools, we are engaged in a process of carrying out a fairly detailed expenditure review of the existing swimming pool programme, following which we hope to be able to produce revised proposals for a programme. However, we would have to obtain Department of Finance and Government approval for any such programme.

Swimming pools do not come cheap. A total of €32 million is allocated for swimming pools under the Department's Estimates for the current year, most of which will go towards to honouring commitments to projects already under way. Of the 55 projects, 15 have been completed, ten are under construction or will shortly be under construction, two are out to tender and the remainder are at various stages in the preliminary process.

Deputy Boyle

I presume Mr. Furlong is aware that the position of local authorities on whether to participate in the provision of public swimming pools as a public service varies. It seems changes are afoot in terms of the ownership and management of many swimming pools. While local authorities own most of them, some local authorities have established stand-alone companies or entered joint ventures. It is possible that public facilities will be transferred fully into private ownership. I am concerned that money granted in the past or funds that may be made available under the current scheme could be used to develop public facilities which would shortly afterwards become private enterprises. Are controls available under the current scheme to prevent this from happening in the near future?

Mr. Furlong

At present we are carrying out an expenditure review. We are looking at all aspects of our swimming pool programme; control, financing, design and so on. As far as I am concerned, there is an open agenda. Clearly our bottom line concern is that if we make a significant investment of public funds, we must ensure we have security in place to control it. For example, there has to be a deed of charge if one is talking about a private venture. The money is significant and we need to protect it.

Deputy Boyle

I am not sure whether that type of response engenders any confidence. A review might prevent things happening in future but is there nothing in the present system of controls to protect money given to local authorities for developing or redeveloping swimming pools and to prevent those facilities subsequently coming into private ownership? An example in my constituency is the Gus Healy pool and there is also the Churchfield pool on the north side of the city.

Local authorities all over the country appear to have a marked reluctance to become involved in the provision of such a public service. If the State is providing money for redeveloping facilities, what guarantee is there that it will remain a guaranteed public service in the short term?

Mr. Furlong

That is the purpose of having the deed of charge. The Deputy stated that the deed of charge is inadequate in some way.

Deputy Boyle

My understanding is that the deed of charge only applies to the application of current funding as the development or redevelopment takes place. Once the work has been completed, what is to stop it passing into private hands?

Mr. Furlong

Again, if public funding is involved, they can only do that in circumstances where our approval or agreement has been given.

Deputy Boyle

Mr. Furlong has misunderstood me. I speak of what can happen when public money has been spent. What will stop the transfer happening in the short term?

Mr. Furlong

When we make a commitment it is monitored by a charge running over 15 years. If people are acting in breach of the basis on which funding has been provided, in theory at any rate, a 15-year period is available within which it is open to us to pursue recovery of all or part of that grant. I am not trying to be obtuse. I will follow up the point and I will be happy to receive separate information if the Deputy wishes to pass it on.

Deputy Boyle

I thank Mr. Furlong. We will see how the theory works out.

Deputy J. Higgins

Perhaps Mr. Furlong would tell me whether Sports Campus Ireland, subhead C.5 in the Vote, is the same as Campus Stadium Ireland?

Mr. Furlong

Yes.

Deputy J. Higgins

I will follow on from Deputy Rabbitte's earlier questions in regard to the national aquatic centre. In terms of the possibility of contingency costs to the public purse, the suggestion has been made that Dublin Waterworld Limited, which has the tenancy and management of the National Aquatic Centre, is threatening legal action against Campus Stadium Ireland because of the length of the closure of the centre. It has been suggested that it is losing €100,000 a week and may pursue Campus Stadium Ireland, which would ultimately mean the public purse, for that amount.

Mr. Furlong

I have read that particular story. I do not know its status. I do not know how accurate it is. I am not too sure that any proceedings have been initiated against Sports Campus Ireland. All I can say is that the overriding concern of Sports Campus Ireland in this case is to ensure safety. It will not permit, reasonably in my view, the facility to be reopened if doubts remain about the safety aspects of that investment.

As I said to Deputy Rabbitte earlier, I gather that the leisure part of the facility is easily remedied and can be available in a matter of a couple of weeks. It is the intention of CSID to facilitate that.

Deputy J. Higgins

I agree that safety is paramount but it would be of interest to the taxpayer if a potential liability will arise as a result of any unnecessary delays in restoring as many of the services as possible. I also want to express concern for the 80 or so staff who have been off work for seven weeks with a corresponding loss to them.

Again, in regard to Sports Campus Ireland, I take it that the main outturn in 2003 was in regard to the National Aquatic Centre. Has the Department made any calculation of funding invested from the beginning of the Abbotstown project's original concept that will not apply to any facility that may be in place on the site in future? Reference has been made to a sports campus. Has any overall calculation been made on the cost to the taxpayer in regard to that which has gone down the Swanee?

Mr. Furlong

This is the information I have here and I assume it is accurate. Expenditure on the campus project from June 2000 to December 2003 was €85 million of Exchequer money. Of that, €71 million related directly to the construction of the National Aquatic Centre with a further €11 million relating to the administrative and ongoing running costs of CSID, most of which would relate to the National Aquatic Centre, project management, consultancy costs, VAT and so on. The balance of the €85 million, which is about €3 million, is in respect of survey work, preparation and development of the entire campus site at Abbotstown. On the assumption that the Government approved the proposal for going ahead with phase 1 of the campus development, most of that residual spending of €3 million would be legitimately chargeable against the campus project. I do not know if it would be fair at this stage to say that there has been a waste of taxpayer's money. I hope that answers the Deputy's question.

Chairman

I remind members that there is a Dáil vote.

Deputy J. Higgins

As I do not think the fate of the Government will hang on this particular vote, I will continue. I will have an unofficial pairing with Deputy McGuinness.

Chairman

Two for the price of one.

Deputy J. Higgins

I do not know any Fianna Fáil member who is worth two. That is a joke.

Does the sum of €85 million include the cost of the reorganisation or removal of the public bodies and semi-State agencies, or whatever would be their correct designation, that were on that site?

Mr. Furlong

No, it does not. My understanding is that the State Laboratory, which moved to Backweston, was in need of investment in any event. The HighPoint-Rendell report in November 2001 estimated the total cost of that at €179 million. The OPW more or less agreed with that estimate. The budget estimate for the relocation of the Marine Institute to Galway was approximately €38 million.

Deputy J. Higgins

If those two entities had stayed put, substantial investment or reinvestment might have been needed in any case. Perhaps the officials from the Department of Finance could shed light on this. Has an audit been done to determine the savings that would have accrued if the entities had not had to move from Abbotstown?

Mr. Furlong

I understand that the condition of those research facilities was such that they were no longer sustainable in their current condition and would have required wide-scale investment, whether it was to be on the Abbotstown site or, as it was decided subsequently, at an alternative location. Irrespective of the location, that sort of money was going to have to be spent. At this stage, I am addressing the issues regarding which I am accountable to the committee, namely, those concerning the aquatic centre and the sports campus.

Deputy J. Higgins

It seems that there has never been a full, rounded-out analysis of this scenario even though its many different parts have been analysed time and again. Does the Department of Finance believe substantial sums of taxpayer's money were spent unnecessarily?

Mr. Hurley

I concur with Mr. Furlong's response that substantial investments had to be made in any event regarding the laboratories, not just the State Laboratory but also the several agricultural laboratories at the location. The conditions they were in varied but they definitely required renovation and renewed investment.

Deputy J. Higgins

Let me refer to the horse and greyhound racing fund. It would be correct to say that both Horse Racing Ireland and Bord na gCon have their own accounting officers, who have attended meetings of this committee. Nevertheless, I take it that Mr. Furlong's Department has overall responsibility for the money allocated to these organisations. How was the €65 million allocated in 2003 divided between the horse and greyhound sectors?

Mr. Furlong

The total figure for the year was €64.19 million. Horse Racing Ireland got €51.35 million of that sum. Of that €51.35 million, €6.06 million was spent on capital development, €25.58 million was for prize money and €19.71 million was used to meet administration and other costs. Bord na gCon was allocated €12.84 million in 2003, of which €5.37 was for capital development, €5.52 million for prize money and €1.95 million for administration.

Deputy J. Higgins

Many taxpayers would find it extraordinary that in one year, €30 million of their funds was spent solely on prize money for horses and greyhounds. Has the Department or the relevant Government agency carried out any audit to justify the substantial funding invested in these sectors, making reference to the numbers working, the quality of the jobs, the pay of the workers and the gate receipts that accrue in both sectors on a yearly basis?

Mr. Furlong

Absolutely. First, when the fund was renewed last year a detailed investigation was carried out by Indecon International Economic Consultants. The proposal for the renewal of the fund went to Government and it decided on the renewal on the basis on which it now exists. That is the basis on which we are operating.

Let me provide the committee with some statistics on greyhound racing — I do not know if I have those concerning horse racing readily available. In 2002, for example, the total attendance at greyhound race meetings was one million. In 2003, it was 1.12 million and in 2004 it was almost 1.4 million. The rationale behind the investment was clearly to enhance facilities. Let me consider the rationale behind the investment in prize funds. The purpose of increasing prizes to an acceptable level, as perceived by both Horse Racing Ireland and Bord na gCon, was to create a better racing experience, increase numbers and enhance the quality of horse and greyhound racing.

That kind of analysis was verified in the Indecon economic analysis of the impact of the horse racing fund on the horse racing sector. I believe Indecon estimated that the total annual contribution of the breeding sector to the economy is approximately €330 million and that the thoroughbred breeding sector makes a gross tax contribution of €37.5 million per year. In the breeding industry, 2,400 are employed in the stallion sector and 2,300 in the brood mare sector. Additionally, the horse racing sector provides employment for approximately 7,700 people. The associated betting sector employes in the region of 4,200 people. Between all the sectors, total employment is in the order of 16,500. I am told that this figure — I am repeating Indecon numbers — was viewed as a floor figure based on the most prudent estimates of part-time and full-time equivalents.

Deputy J. Higgins

The humblest part-timer, whether he be a stable lad or otherwise, must pay his full taxes, while the owners of the prize stallions, whose stables I am sure are worth more than the houses in which the stable lads live, do not pay anything. Would it not strike ordinary taxpayers, most of whom do not attend race meetings of the hounds or horses, as questionable to see horses, be they thoroughbreds or old nags, running away with a total of €25 million of their money? It seems a bit high.

Mr. Furlong

All I can do is point to the numbers. There is no doubt that support for both sports is growing, as reflected in both on-site attendances and the growth in betting. Totaliser betting in greyhound racing, for example, increased by almost 50% between 2002 and 2004, from €31.5 million to just over €46 million. Clearly, those who support the two sectors have a positive experience.

Deputy J. Higgins

Will Mr. Furlong bring us up to date on the hunt for a site for the Abbey Theatre. I raise the matter because it will involve substantial funding. Coláiste Mhuire and adjoining property were identified as possible sites but because of the price being demanded for the adjoining property it was decided not to proceed. What was the price demanded which was unacceptable?

Mr. Furlong

I am in a difficult position because I do not have the information myself. The negotiations with the property owner were carried out through the Office of Public Works. The OPW took a view of what would be an appropriate valuation on that plot of land, given the use we had in mind for it, and it seemed we were close to agreement on it. However, just before the point of concluding agreement was reached, the owner perhaps made a judgment that because we needed it so badly we could afford to pay much more and upped the ante very considerably. It was not a matter of a couple of hundred thousand euro; a reasonably substantial sum of money was involved. In those circumstances it was not possible for us to proceed and deal with the matter on that basis.

Following that disappointment in the closing weeks of 2004, we had also wondered if it might be possible to use the Colásite Mhuire site itself without the add-on we had sought. The brief for the Abbey Theatre required a footprint of 4,700 square metres. The Coláiste Mhuire site on its own would have given us 4,000 square metres, leaving a shortfall of approximately 700 square metres. The OPW sought advice from architects skilled in conservation as to whether it would be possible to accommodate the requirements of the Abbey Theatre on the slightly reduced site. The very clear message which emerged was that to attempt to do so would interfere with the line of the buildings along that side of Parnell Square which would be unacceptable on planning and conservation grounds. That option has therefore been closed off.

We have heard nothing more from the developer. I had hoped that perhaps having allowed the hare to sit a while, wiser counsel might prevail and negotiations could resume on a more reasonable basis. However, that has not happened. The OPW has continued to talk to other interests about the possibility of identifying a suitable centre city site for the Abbey Theatre. In very recent weeks, it has been in talks with the Dublin Docklands Development Authority. Whether anything will come of that, I do not know. It is very frustrating for all concerned, not least for the Abbey Theatre, that an issue on which we had been working for a number of years seemed so close to delivery towards the end of last year and then at the last moment was dashed from our lips.

However, the Minister has given a commitment to stay with this issue and pursue it as relentlessly as he can to try to achieve an objective which I gather is shared by virtually everyone, namely, to provide an acceptable location for the Abbey Theatre as it begins its second 100 years.

Deputy J. Higgins

I concur that the taxpayer should not have been held to ransom even for such a necessary and noteworthy project. We are now paying for the continued failure of the Government to tackle the speculation in building land. Is the decision not to redevelop at the current location irreversible given the difficulties which have arisen?

Mr. Furlong

To use a cliché: "Never say never". However, the existing footprint is too small. Therefore, to develop at the existing location would have entailed acquiring properties between the theatre and the river. As I recall, something like 15 separate properties are involved, necessitating 15 separate negotiations and costly acquisitions. We were not prepared to travel that route.

Chairman

I have held the view for some time the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism should encourage participation in sport rather than being concerned with the maximum size of the audience which attends sports events. The side on which one comes down on that matter is fundamental to everything one does. If one wants people to participate in sport, the use of the €60.9 million of the national lottery fund is vital. To a very large extent it is grant in aid to clubs all over the country and the facilities are for those who participate; they are for the teams and particularly the children.

Without getting into the argument, we all know about the benefits of good health and lifestyle, fighting obesity and encouraging young people to participate in sport. The figure of €60.9 million, ranging from €4.6 million for the Finglas sports centre, down to Castlemartyr GAA Club with €514, in general terms is to encourage participation.

However, when one turns to the horse racing and greyhound racing funds, the Department paid out €64.19 million. This means that €4 million more than was granted in national lottery funds was paid by the Department in order to encourage horses and greyhounds and improve the experience of those who attend race meetings and greyhound tracks. It is arguable that the Department is placing an emphasis on the comfort and experience of those who provide the audience at race meetings and greyhound meetings rather than those who participate in sport. The horses and dogs participate but that is not the object of sports policy.

Mr. Furlong replied to Deputy McGuinness's query that under no circumstances would the Department grant-aid the running costs of clubs such as Shamrock Rovers and that it was a grant-in-aid for a capital facility. However, when it comes to the €64.19 million for the horse racing and greyhound industries, the Department grant-aids day-to-day running costs. What are the figures for this?

Mr. Furlong

The administration costs for Horse Racing Ireland were €19.71 million in 2003 and for Bord na gCon, €1.95 million.

Chairman

Are these ongoing day-to-day costs?

Mr. Furlong

Yes.

Chairman

Are these the only sports for which the Department is providing grant-in-aid by covering part of the administrative running costs?

Mr. Furlong

No. As part of the overall structure of supports, the Irish Sports Council is putting funds by the Department. The Irish Sports Council provides fairly significant funding for the major and not so major national governing bodies of sport to support their administration. It does not provide administrative support for the GAA, the FAI or the IRFU, but to the smaller bodies such as Swim Ireland, Basketball Ireland and so on. They receive a contribution towards their running expenses each year via the Irish Sports Council scheme of grants for national governing bodies.

Chairman

Is that part of the programme for developing elite sportspersons?

Mr. Furlong

No, not at all. This is support to enable these 14 governing bodies, which are almost entirely voluntary, to continue to operate. Within the Irish Sports Council there is also a range of supports for sport and for elite athletes through the carding system.

All I can say is that what is being done under the horse and greyhound fund is being done on the basis of authority conveyed by the Oireachtas. We are implementing the law as the Oireachtas has it. I have attempted in replying to Deputy Joe Higgins to present the wider economic justification for support for two significant sectors of economic activity. People can make value judgments but that is not for me to do so.

Chairman

I do not want to drift in the area of policy either but it is worth comparing the figures. On other comparisons, the second highest grant in 2003 from the national lottery was given to Croke Park — €1,908,537. What cumulative grant aid has Croke Park received in recent years?

Mr. Furlong

It has received a total of €109.8 million. In the 1994 budget, €6.4 million was allocated. In the 1998 budget, there was a three year commitment totalling €25.4 million. In 2003, it received a grant of €19 million for the hosting ceremony for the Special Olympics. In 2002, €19 million was granted for phase three of the Hogan Stand and in September 2004, the final allocation of €40 million in respect of the development was made. Overall, €109.8 million has gone into supporting an investment which cost the GAA in total €260 million. That is the relationship between the grant from the sports capital programme and the total cost of the project.

Chairman

Have all commitments been fulfilled or are there ongoing commitments to the capital project?

Mr. Furlong

Not in Croke Park, no.

Chairman

Was the €109.8 million all unconditional?

Mr. Furlong

The only one for which I can speak with direct experience was the grant in 2004 and there were no conditions attached to that.

Chairman

It is a stadium that every GAA member and the general public are proud of. I am trying to establish the figures. You are committed to €191 million funding for Lansdowne Road.

Mr. Furlong

Yes.

Chairman

You have also stated that this will be paid for out of national lottery funds.

Mr. Furlong

Out of the sports capital grant subhead, yes.

Chairman

What else is in the sports capital subhead apart from the national lottery funds?

Mr. Furlong

The sports capital programme includes the grant to individual clubs annually. On top of that, the grant to the GAA for the development of Croke Park and the grant to Lansdowne Road when it has to start spending money come from that subhead. Last year there was a grant of between €500,000 and €1 million to the Irish Olympic Council for the acquisition of a new headquarters in Howth.

Chairman

What proportion of this is paid for out of national lottery funds?

Mr. Furlong

In essence, it is all Exchequer money. Subheads are identified as national lottery funded but all of the lottery surplus is paid directly into the Exchequer and then the Department of Finance, in setting the Estimate allocations for the year, would acknowledge the availability of that funding. Although the funding allocated to the sports capital programme has all of the characteristics of Exchequer funding and must be accounted for in precisely the same way as any other form of Exchequer funding, to make the visible connection for people who support the lottery and individual projects it is the practice to designate subheads as lottery funded. There is, however, no separate channel coming directly from the national lottery into the sports capital programme.

Chairman

Are you saying that the €60.9 million spent on 1,000 clubs throughout the country in 2003 is not necessarily national lottery money at all and that it could be money topped up by the Exchequer?

Mr. Furlong

No, I am saying that all of the money in that subhead is identified as money that ultimately exists because of the national lottery. Perhaps colleagues from the Department of Finance could help me in that but in publishing the revised Book of Estimates each year, in addition to publishing details Vote by Vote, the Department of Finance includes a summary table at the beginning of the volume which identifies the various subheads throughout the Estimates volume which have been designated as lottery funded. They are totalled and then identified and matched with the national lottery surplus surrendered by the lottery company to the Exchequer at the end of each year. I hope I have got that right.

Mr. Purcell

It is practically right but there is a step in between. There is a national lottery fund account into which the surplus goes and it keeps a float of €40 million or €50 million to take account of any fluctuations in the revenues from the lottery. There is a transfer from that lottery fund to the Exchequer. After that, Mr. Furlong is quite right, it takes on the character of Exchequer money but there is that intermediate step.

Chairman

Coming back to my question on the €191 million for Lansdowne Road, is that lottery money?

Mr. Furlong

It will be when it is spent but that will not be for four or five years.

Chairman

Is there a profile of that expenditure going forward?

Mr. Furlong

We have a rough one and we will revisit it with the company. Lansdowne Road in 2005 will receive about €6.3 million, in 2006, €13.3 million, in 2007, €37 million and at present the figure for 2008 is €6.7 million. The construction phase for Lansdowne Road is likely to be at the end of 2006 and in early 2007 and it is estimated it will run for almost two and a half years. Therefore, much of the big construction spend will take place in the later years of the decade.

Chairman

Do you have any thoughts about spending €191 million in grant aid for Lansdowne Road and spending €60 million in 2003 on small clubs around the country? Can we take it there will be a shortage of money for the small clubs all around the country in the middle years of the construction because the commitments are worth about three years of the total disbursed to the 1,000 clubs around the country in 2003?

Mr. Furlong

The funding that was allocated in 2003 is available. The funding allocated in 2004 to the clubs was €55 million or €56 million, and that will remain available. The amount to be committed under the sports capital programme in 2005, for which applications are being received and processed, has not been settled. It involves a negotiation between the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism following which the latter will decide on allocations.

The Government does not want the funding of the two stadia projects, namely, Croke Park and Lansdowne Road, to interfere in any significant way with the kind of annual funding available to clubs. This year, for example, we have approximately 1,350 applications. We received a similar number last year, of which we approved approximately 400. The number will probably be similar this year. Our estimate subhead is cash-based. As we know we have made approvals, we have an a priori basis for estimating that if we make approvals in a particular year they should translate into requests for drawing down cash in the subsequent two or three years. That is the basis for the estimate of likely exposure, or requirement for cash and will continue to be the case.

The sports capital programme will continue to be advertised. I am reasonably certain that the level of funding will continue at, or about, its present level but ultimately that is controlled by my Minister and the Minister for Finance. Funding those major capital projects does not put at risk the continuation of substantial funding for the clubs and groups that do so much for community development at local level.

Chairman

That is helpful. There was a report in The Sunday Business Post of 3 October 2004, to the effect that one of the last acts of the former Minister for Finance was to bring ministerial orders into the Dáil, as a joint decision between himself and the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism. These would raise the greyhound racing fund from €254 million to €550 million. Will Mr. Furlong explain that further?

Mr. Furlong

It involved legislation. A proposal to increase the fund was made initially to the Government, which approved it and legislation was introduced to increase the fund. It required amending the Horse and Greyhound Fund Act 2001. The Oireachtas referred this to a sub-committee which examined and signed off on it. The Dáil then voted on, and approved, it. Those are the facts.

Chairman

I know the facts but has the Department earmarked the expenditure? Is the increase intended for capital expenditure or will it be for administration and prize money, as Mr. Furlong has described to the committee?

Mr. Furlong

Following our discussions with Horse Racing Ireland, it is clear that it intends to support significant investment at some of its major racetracks. There is something in contemplation for the Curragh and Leopardstown. The chairperson of Horse Racing Ireland announced two or three months ago the broad direction of the organisation's multi-annual capital investment strategy under the next phase of that fund. This would entail a much higher level of spend on facilities than was the case under the first phase.

Chairman

I read somewhere that the amount was in the region of €45 million for Leopardstown. Does Mr. Furlong have figures?

Mr. Furlong

That might be right, or it might be higher. That will not all come from the fund. The project might cost something in that order and moneys would be generated by the board of the track. Horse Racing Ireland does not directly own all the tracks. It supports development plans put forward by the track owners.

Chairman

It would be helpful if Mr. Furlong could supply any projected figures. I am exploring the argument put by some people who support sport that the Department favours certain sports. I want to know the capital spend for comparative sports.

There is a big commitment to Lansdowne Road for rugby and soccer, and to Croke Park, and to clubs around the country for GAA, rugby, soccer, water sports, rowing clubs, community centres and all sorts of things covered by 1,000 or more clubs around the country that received grant aid in 2003. The horse racing and greyhound industries look out of line from the perspective of a neutral observer. Is this because they are regarded more as industries than sports, or is there another reason? The field games which receive significant support are either directly involved with facilities for participants, or, in the case of Croke Park, make every young fellow with a hurley or a GAA jersey proud and bring young people out to participate in the games. The same could be argued for Lansdowne Road.

One cannot say the same for the racecourses and greyhound tracks, yet comparatively they seem to do better than the field games. There is a constraint on all of us here not to discuss policy but this is apparent from looking at the numbers. That is why I am pressing Mr. Furlong for figures for the forthcoming investment in the country's main racecourses, Leopardstown, Fairyhouse, the Curragh.

Mr. Furlong

I can access the Horse Racing Ireland statement on capital investment plans for its tracks over the next phase of the horse racing fund. I will make that available to the Chairman.

To put this in context, the Chairman referred to the economic argument in support of what was done. In replying to Deputy Joe Higgins, I attempted to provide some of that justification. They are serious arguments and there is no doubt that horse racing enjoys a unique status in this country. This will be obvious in two to three weeks' time when the annual exodus to Cheltenham takes place and offices close for the afternoon to watch the races on television.

The industry makes an economic contribution, supports employment and improves the quality of our bloodstock. People may have comments about the distribution of money but in overall economic terms these things are not insignificant. I have tried to explain that investment in other sporting activity is not being neglected. For example, over the past six years total investment under the sports capital programme was of the order of €320 million to €330 million. That has a significant trickle-down impact on local communities.

It is our intention that this level of funding and support for local communities as they develop will continue. The Minister is about to embark on a review of the strategy of the provision of sports facilities, ensuring better targeting, identifying needs and continuing to target the significant funding to areas where it will do most good. I am uncomfortable with one aspect. The horse and greyhound fund is impairing our ability to do this.

Chairman

I can see Mr. Furlong's difficulty. I wonder if Enterprise Ireland should be running the horse and greyhound fund.

Deputy McGuinness

Regarding the statement about one particular group versus another for funding and grant aid, I was arguing the same point with the Arts Council and the Irish Film Board. Will the information on who applied, who was successful and moneys allocated be supplied to the committee? I am interested in establishing a profile of what community groups are successful in the draw-down of funds available to them.

Last week, the Minister for Arts, Sports and Tourism spoke about appointing an ambassador to Hollywood. Will this proposal go ahead and if it does, when? While I am not criticising it, the efforts made by community groups involved in indigenous film production, such as the Young Irish Film-makers, come to mind. The problem arises with how both sides are funded. I understand the logic of appointing a movie ambassador against section 481. However, a case must be made for those in the home industry and those involved on a non-profit basis for community purposes. They cannot get funding from the Irish Film Board or the Arts Council. The Young Irish Film-makers is an example of a group coming up against the stone wall of bureaucracy and the direction the Department has taken.

Will the Department of Finance supply us with a letter, straddling both the Departments of Agriculture and Food and Arts, Sports and Tourism, outlining how it will protect the State's investment in the Punchestown events centre? The Department has a role to play in this matter. I am anxious to learn the Department's view on the centre's corporate structure and its role in reporting to the State.

At what stage is the proposed national conference centre? How many bidders are involved? Have any withdrawn?

I have an issue with national lottery grants and funding being made available to tourism products to expand beyond normal tourism centres, such as Kilkenny city and into the county. Returning to the issue of funding for community groups, the Castlecomer Demesne project was knocking on the door of Departments, local government and, particularly, national lottery funding. It ran into the difficulty of whether fishing, an element of the project, qualifies as sport or tourism. If that question can be answered, others on the competition for funding will be answered too. I believe the project is a community-driven one but it is also a product for the tourism market. Does it qualify under any grant structure for tourism? Does the fishing end qualify for a grant? This is part of the wider debate on grant structures.

Deputy Boyle raised the issue of public private partnerships in developing swimming pools. There have been delays in the conclusion of some projects. At what stage is the Kilkenny project? Will the Department supply a list outlining the priority of projects to the committee?

It might not be appropriate to raise the issue of exceptional performance money as earned by departmental officials, considering reports on Members' performances and expenses. I am not questioning whether they qualified for it. However, under the heading for exceptional performance in the accounts, 23 individuals qualified for total payments of €30,000. What is exceptional performance? Underneath that heading, it states one individual was paid €28,000 for overtime. Is that a once-off matter or is one individual involved?

Mr. Furlong

The national conference centre is a public private partnership and is fairly complicated. Three bidders were short-listed and tender documentation was sent to each of them before Christmas. A process of clarification meetings are taking place between the Office of Public Works, the contracting agency, and the bidders. It is now clear that one of the bidders will no longer be participating in the project. The other two are pursuing their interests vigorously. We are hoping to have the final bids in eight weeks' time.

Fáilte Ireland operates the tourism product development scheme, which is intended to provide support in the sector. Initially it was an EU scheme that was intended to provide support for local initiatives designed to encourage tourism. Several high profile announcements were made on this in the last six months, the Cliffs of Moher scheme being one. I do not know if that scheme is closed or not. It would be worthwhile for the group referred to by the Deputy to engage with Tourism Ireland to see if support is available. I am subject to correction on this, but in terms of tourism this is not an issue designated as lottery-funded. As I said in reply to the Chairman, the distinction between lottery funding and Exchequer funding in a sense is artificial because we are talking of funding which has all the characteristics of Exchequer funding.

The sports capital programme is reasonably catholic in terms of the sort of projects it will accept and it takes a very broad view of sport. I cannot recall if it was in the 2003 accounts but I recall some group involved in throwing horseshoes being given support. I do not know when, but I recall seeing something like that. If there is something with a genuine sporting context it is worthwhile having that pursued by the applicant under the sports capital programme.

I have difficulty in understanding the nature of a project which would have fishing as the basis for an application. If it is something which will provide enhanced facilities for people who are fishing, it is possible that would comply and be eligible. Tourism Ireland has been looking at what it perceives as a falling-off in numbers of people coming to Ireland to fish and that organisation would be very interested in supporting viable projects in the fishing area.

With regard to Irish Film Board support for the sort of person mentioned, a small but creative local film-maker, all I can do in that area is to urge the Deputy to get in touch directly with the board to establish with it how far it can assist him, whether it be through training, marketing support or whatever. It is not that the board in any way is focusing on the overseas project to the exclusion of the domestic film-maker. In fact the board would claim that some of its major successes have been in getting people who started out in a very small way of business up to a point where they achieve international recognition. My advice, therefore, is for the Deputy to urge the person in question to make direct contact with the board through its chief executive, Mark Woods.

On the question of the Kilkenny swimming pool, I understand that it is one of a number of projects at preliminary report stage and under consideration, but I gather that one of the problems involved there is that local authority support required could cost in the order of €7 million and that it would be looking for loan support for that.

We have found in recent years that local authorities wishing to come up with money to support Department of Arts, Sports and Tourism grants for swimming pools and investment in cultural infrastructure are subject to an overall ceiling on local authority borrowing which is part of the public sector borrowing requirement. The amount of funding for increased borrowing by local authorities is strictly controlled by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. In effect there is a double lock on projects. One could have a project which meets all of the characteristics and criteria of our scheme but the promoters would also need to be able to establish that they have borrowing approval from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. That may well be a difficulty in the Kilkenny case.

Reference was made to exceptional performance awards. I must make it clear at the outset that Secretaries General do not get any. Was the Deputy referring to the level of overtime payments?

Deputy McGuinness

There are two lines in the account which refer to exceptional performance regarding 23 individuals and a sum of €30,950. I was asking what is meant by the term "exceptional performance". I see that one individual got overtime payments of €28,000. Is that a once-off payment or is it ongoing?

Mr. Furlong

Coming up towards the end of each year, there is a very small sum available in the overall pay budget of the Department. It might be of the order of 2% or 4%. I am not sure. That is for distribution to people who are judged by their peers and by Departmental management to have performed particularly well in a particular year. The payments on an individual basis are generally small, averaging about €1,000. This is token recognition but it is felt that it is a good thing that people who are seen to have taken initiative, to have shown leadership and to have been supportive of colleagues should be given some modest recognition. For this purpose we have a group which operates at assistant principal level in the Department which invites departmental staff to submit recommendations for merit payments. It has worked reasonably well. The sums involved are very small and the people who get them are generally quite happy to have been acknowledged in that way.

Deputy McGuinness

Would it apply to the committee?

Mr. Furlong

I am reminded by my colleague that the payments are taxable. Looking at the accounts, there were 23 individual awards of the order of €750. There were also group awards where people felt it would be invidious to identify particular individuals but rather small groups. Those awards ranged from €450 to €1,950.

Regarding overtime, I will check on this matter and if I am wrong I will come back to the Deputy, but I suspect the figure is to do with overtime spending in one of the cultural institutions where at times, given starting pressures, people may occasionally have to work very long hours.

The Chairman asked at the outset about the Hollywood ambassador. When the Minister was away the week before last, promoting film-making in Ireland, while visiting ten or 11 film studios he was repeatedly told by the studio executives that Ireland was losing out because it did not have a presence there while other countries had a continuing presence and were in and out of the studios keeping the executives enthused about what was going on in their particular jurisdictions. Following on that, the Minister asked the Irish Film Board to develop a relevant proposal and it is currently doing that.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Furlong and his officials. Is it agreed to note Vote 35? Agreed.

Next week we will meet on Wednesday rather than Thursday, at 11 a.m., to consider the 2003 annual report of the Comptroller and Auditor General and appropriation accounts: Vote 32 — Department of Transport. Deputies Curran and Joe Higgins will be the first two questioners.

The committee adjourned at 3.30 p.m. until11 a.m. on Wednesday, 2 March 2005.