Unfortunately, I did not hear the debate yesterday evening but I understand that it covered the whole question of regional development in the Border areas, free trade, the effect of the Border on economic conditions and activities, how the Regional Fund is spent and the special allocation from the non-quota section of the Regional Fund which, as has been stated recently, has not been fully taken up. I agree with the Minister that that appears to be so in certain respects but I understand why it has not been taken up in some instances. It is said in relation to the purchase of goods in Northern Ireland, where they have a price advantage in certain areas, that we cannot do this or that because the European Economic Community says so. We should remember that, long before we joined the EEC, we had a free trade agreement with Great Britain. That was a progressive step at the time and it was a change in our attitude and outlook which heralded the approach of an era when we could become industrially competitive, modernise our structure and services and raise our standard of lving. We should not blame the European Economic Community for preventing us from reverting to restrictive practices which I do not think would serve the needs of consumers on either side of the Border.
While I welcome the free trade they have, it can only go along with fair trade. At present we have a certain freedom of trade in the Border areas but we do not have fair trade. The people on the northern side of the Border have many advantages which we do not have. I do not want to talk about the retail sector and people shopping in northern towns for some goods but we should take note of the fact that Northern Ireland has the best package of regional aids and incentives within the EEC and perhaps in any part of the world. Their economic difficulties, high unemployment and so on, cannot be blamed on the United Kingdom Government. They have given them aids and incentives which should ensure a healthy economy. Of course there are other problems there but, in that respect, the British Government have not failed Northern Ireland. That creates problems for certain industrialists and manufacturers on the southern side of the Border.
It is quite obvious if one drives from Dundalk, down through Monaghan, Cavan, Leitrim and up into Donegal, that we have failed in the whole area of gravel, stones and readymix concrete and concrete blocks. The Northern industrialists have an immense advantage over our producers in this area and they have a very big share of the market in the South while no producer in the South that I know has succeeded in selling any significant amount of goods in Northern Ireland. I do not believe that is due to a lack of effort on the part of the industrialists or the work force on the Southern side. I believe it arises from unfair advantages which the producers in Northern Ireland have and I would request the Minister to do a study on this. We cannot have free trade unless that trade is fair. The Minister should do a study not just on this industry but perhaps the provender milling industry as well.
In the agricultural sector we have the penetration of the Southern market by poultry producers from Northern Ireland. While I absolutely defend their right to sell their produce down here, just as we have the right to sell up there, we certainly cannot continue to tolerate a situation in which we on the Southern side are forced to concede our markets to people who have every advantage. The difference in the price of commercial vehicles is startling. There is a huge difference in transport costs arising out of that. The roads of the Border areas are thick with lorries. In some instances I think by some means or other they have been subsidised. Not only do they pay a low rate of tax on those vehicles but they also have, to the best of my knowledge, a cheaper means of financing their transport than is possible in the Twenty-Six Counties. It is an area at which we should look carefully. Otherwise aids and incentives being given by us and the development of structures in the Border regions will be wasted.
It is recognised that all over Europe borders are areas of less-intense economic activity. The very existence of borders and customs barriers tends to reduce commercial and economic activity and so living standards and incomes in border regions will always be slightly lower. It is a little bit worse along our Border because we have other disadvantages as well. Most of the problems we have in the Border areas do not require any special treatment apart from what I have already said about fair trade, the customs barriers and the difficulty of access to some areas. Beyond that, the Border areas are no different, in their disadvantages, from the areas away from the Border. We have a combination of a Border problem and natural disadvantages. I would not accept the idea that we need a special authority to look after this region. I think we have enough authorities to do all the development that we have plans or money to do. We can make those authorities more efficient but I do not think we need any new structures either here or in Brussels. We do not want any more administrative costs.
On the border between County Leitrim and County Fermanagh there is no access route. It is noticeable that the British authorities would not concede an official crossing beside Kiltyclogher in County Leitrim. They may have had problems of security in that area but it is noticeable that in that case the village is in County Leitrim and people from Northern Ireland would be shopping in Kiltyclogher. There is no economic disadvantage to the British side in keeping that border closed. While I am sure they have the same security problems in Ballyconnell, our Government — I think it was a Fianna Fáil Government — agreed to and co-operated in the setting up of a customs post there. I thought that was fair enough at the time and I supported the idea of putting a customs post there. In that case we were giving the advantage to the Northern side from a commercial point of view because at that customs post they take across all the gravel, stones, readymix concrete and blocks which create employment in County Fermanagh. The British were quite willing to provide the security necessary to man a customs post there where they had an economic advantage but they were not willing to do it in Kiltyclogher. Every effort we have made in this regard has been a failure. In County Cavan there is the bridge at Aughalane which was blown up some years ago and it should have been restored and normal communication resumed. The security situation in Northern Ireland has nothing to suffer from the opening of these routes. I believe our Government would give whatever assistance was necessary to ensure that those crossings were not used by terrorists or anybody seeking to subvert the system on either side of the Border. Renewed efforts should be made by our Government to open up these because every bridge that has been knocked down is an obstacle to economic development.
In regard to the special non-quota section of the Regional Fund, it is easy to look back now and identify what has gone wrong. When that fund was proposed we did not have any consultations whatever. I can understand the frustration that people feel about European funds. They are told that there is approximately £500 million of an advantage to Ireland annually from being a member of the EEC and that is true. They were told before we joined the Community that there would be economic advantages but they do not see very clearly how the money is being spent or how we are getting it and so in some areas they believe they are not getting their fair share. We oversold that idea in the first place because we gave our people to believe that the only reason we were joining the EEC was to get money from our friends and neighbours in Europe. That was one of the reasons but it was not the only reason. When the money comes Ministers and Governments tend to announce the allocation of funds without sufficient reference to the fact that so much of this money is provided from the European Regional Fund or the Social Fund and people do not recognise where it is coming from. The vast improvement in training facilities through AnCO that we have got from the Social Fund is not recognised even by the people working there. In places where the Regional Fund money is being spent it is not being recognised. Occasionally there are posters along the roads to say that money is being spent in this way and that has helped, but in many instances where money has been devoted to food processing and to industrial projects company directors and others have not sufficiently recognised the importance of the contribution from Europe and so we have so many people demanding to know where is the money going that is coming from Europe.
The Border areas are not getting their fair share of agricultural spending because agricultural production is not sufficiently high in those areas to give them the benefit of the Common Agricultural Policy. The Regional Fund money is being spent at the will of the Government all over the country and again the Border areas are getting less than their share. As far as the spending of the non-quota section is concerned the situation is not as bad as it appears on paper. In the area of the grants that were made available for tourist development we had to get applications, the people had to get planning permission, they had to get contractors, raise the finance and carry out the development and so the money could not yet have gone to the recipients because they have not yet completed their projects and the money cannot be paid. I understand there are sufficient projects there to take up all the money that Bord Fáilte have provided.
The local authority is a harder one to understand. I cannot understand how the local authorities did not spend it. This money was thrown out in so many directions and what went to the local authorities was just used to substitute the sort of money our own Government had to give a few years ago to maintain county roads. I know roads in which I as a member of a local authority was involved in the provision of money for their upkeep. Those roads were black topped but because the financing of local authorities has run down so much the roads have now fallen into disrepair. Now we are submitting applications to Europe for tourist amenity roads. In other words, we are just maintaining roads that county councils have failed to maintain over the years. That is not the right way to spend money of this sort and is not working in the right way within the framework of the development plan for the Border regions.
Regarding both the Regional Fund and the non-quota section I hope this £20 million over five years is not the last allocation of money we will get. It will not strain the capacity of local authorities to spend all the money. I have no doubt about that. Local authorities will take their share and so will Bord Fáilte. There are more than sufficient applications and I know very worthwhile applications which have been refused because the projected cost would be in excess of what the fund could finance. A lesser level of financing would have given us a greater number of projects and better value. The grant given for the self-catering section was quite generous and we could perhaps have succeeded in encouraging the development of 25 per cent more accommodations with the same amount of money. This House, the local authorities and the various other interests involved should have had some input. They should have been asked for their opinions and, had they been asked, the schemes would have been more carefully designed instead of the Government doing all the negotiating and then announcing a package. I think there is some sort of political objective in this. For the future we should hear far more about the planning of these various projects.
The same situation obtained with the western development fund. None of us who was involved, concerned and interested could get any information about how the fund was being allocated until the Government made an announcement. This should not happen. I would prefer to see these funds channelled into a smaller number of schemes for the development of some specific region, preferably the west and north-west, where there would be less administrative cost for four or five years and, when the project was completed, moving on to another area. Throwing the money into the Naas bypass, the Alcan project and hundreds of other schemes is purely the substitution of national money and if the fund were withdrawn in the morning one would not have the Government reducing the budget by the equivalent amount. They would budget for the same amount less the allocation Europe would make. Additionality is there all right but the reality is different. This Government should start by being more honest and open in their administration of this particular fund.
The Border region is a problem. No solution will be found in the expenditure of this comparatively small sum. I think we could have gone further with the money to resolve the problem. For instance, the Ballymore-Ballyconnell canal, which covers three counties — Leitrim, Cavan and Fermanagh — has fallen into disuse and disrepair. If it were repaired we could then plan tourism and land reclamation. A worthwhile job could be done over a five year period. I alerted the Minister and the county development team when the scheme was first proposed but because of failure of consultation the money did not go in that direction. There were no environmental hazards and it could have become a very important amenity area. There was also the question of an interpretive centre in Ballyshannon. The local authority there are very concerned because while this had been planned — it was an ideal project which could have been included rather than the maintenance of county roads — nothing was done.
