asked the Minister for Economic Planning and Development if he will take steps to ensure that the limited funds being made available under the regional fund from the EEC are applied exclusively to projects in the west which would not otherwise be funded by the Government.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Regional Fund Application.
15.
As the Deputy is probably aware, the whole country is accepted by the Community as one single qualifying region for EEC regional fund assistance.
To limit, as the Deputy suggests, our assistance from the fund to projects in the west would be counterproductive. The exclusion of the rest of the country from fund assistance which this would entail would in time only encourage our Community partners to press for a reduction in our national quota from the fund as quotas were decided by reference to a number of criteria such as population, which in our case was the size of the national population.
Our receipts from the fund, which I agree are limited, nevertheless are useful in financing a higher level of investment and job creation than would otherwise be possible. In view of my responsibilities for regional development, I have paid particular attention to ensure that as many projects as possible in our areas of greatest need such as the west are approved for regional fund assistance.
Arising out of the Minister's reply, while it may be theoretically so that the country is designated altogether as a single region, would the Minister not agree that the basis for this fundamentally arises from the disparity between the lack of prosperity in the western region of the country as against the rest of it? That is fully recognised, but I would ask the Minister to consider that this is the underlying situation. I have asked the Minister further to go back to the time of the decision to go into the EEC and consider whether in fact, to the voters of the western half of the country, it was not this promise of the regional fund benefiting them and their area particularly that carried that decision so very decisively in that part of the country?
The Deputy should ask a question, please.
Let the Minister answer that question and then I will ask another one.
I would not agree that the regional fund is the only vehicle by which the disadvantaged areas of the country benefit from EEC membership. I point to the fact that many of the poorer areas of the country, including the areas to which the Deputy refers, have benefited greatly from the influx of new investment for example, and of course there are other Community funds from which these areas would benefit such as the operation of the social fund. Therefore, while I recognise that there is a need to pay particular attention to the problems of these areas—and I said so in my reply to the question—I do not accept that we should modify our existing arrangements in the direction which the Deputy suggested.
Then I can take it that the Minister has no intention of rectifying the situation so far as the western regions are concerned? I would also ask the Minister whether he does not accept that the latter part of my question has not been answered? In other words, I would now ask the Minister to admit to this House that the regional fund, wherever it is being used, is not being used for projects that otherwise would not have been funded by the Government. This is really the basis of my entire question and complaint about this matter.
I do not accept the Deputy's suggestions. I have already made it clear that, while I would reject the suggestion that we should modify our use of the regional fund along the lines he proposes, I am not rejecting the suggestion that there are special developmental problems in the western areas and that there is a need to deal with these developmental problems but they can be dealt with through a number of other instruments.
I would like to ask the Minister a question arising out of one thing the Minister said in his reply. If I heard him properly, the Minister did say that if the pattern of application of the funds which Deputy Blaney wants was followed here there would be complaints from our Community partners. Is the Minister seriously telling us that our Community partners would complain if the Dublin Government applied the funds in the way they thought best to the areas which they thought needed them most?
I did not use the word "complain". The relevant fraction of my reply was that in time it would only encourage our Community partners to press for a reduction in our national quota as quotas were decided by reference to a number of criteria. My point was that I do not see why it is necessary to leave ourselves in any way vulnerable to any proposals for change which might arise at some future date from other member states.
Would the Minister not agree that the amount in total provided in each of the years since our accession to the EEC is niggardly and too small and that, to compound the problem there, that the Government have not been spending it on projects in the areas in most need and which would not have been provided for otherwise by the Government? In other words, it is being shoved into the budget and being spread around and the west is getting no benefit out of it and the Minister knows that.
(Interruptions.)
I would not so agree. A significant fraction of the fund is spent on the west.
Well, the Minister is not long enough around then. That is all I can say.
(Interruptions.)
Order, please.
We spent ten minutes on a circus. Surely we can spend a few minutes on the regional fund.
(Interruptions.)
Other Deputies are asking questions and they have the right. Does Deputy Kelly wish to ask a question?
I just want to put it to the Minister that I thought he said something about a complaint but apparently he did not. Surely the Minister would agree that if a course of action on the part of the Government in Dublin were to lead to any pressures from our Community partners that is the same as a complaint? Would the Minister not agree that it would be right to resist any such pressure if it amounted to denying a national Government the right to apply the regional fund in the places which they thought needed it most?
Before the Minister replies, I want to point out that we are getting into the habit of putting a lot of argument into our supplementary questions which is totally disorderly and not permissible. In order to make progress I must deal with it in a different manner.
I do not accept the Deputy's suggestions. I believe that the problems of these areas can be dealt with in a very effective manner through the appropriate combination of policies and instruments and that it is therefore unnecessary to look for a revision in the operation of the regional fund along the lines suggested in the question.
I would like to ask one final question. Is it not a fact that the whole purpose of the concept of the regional fund and our entry into the EEC is to try to bring the economies of all members as nearly as possible to the same level and that within the countries concerned it is even more vital that the prosperity and the economy of the various parts of it should be the same. Is that not the purpose of the whole exercise?
That is debate.
It is not being done either as a country or within the country. The gaps grow wider.