asked the Minister for Finance if the issues out of the Exchequer in the month up to 31 January 1986, are in line with Government expenditure projections for 1986 as a whole; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Government Expenditure Projections.
1.
The weekly statement of issues from the Exchequer as published in Iris Oifigiúil, particularly during the early weeks of the year, does not necessarily reflect the expected pattern of expenditure for the year. On the other hand, statements of Exchequer issues published at the end of each quarter, which identify separately capital and non-capital expenditure aggregates, give a much clearer indication of emerging budgetary trends. In accordance with usual practice, I will issue at the end of March a statement commenting on the Exchequer returns for the first quarter of the year.
In addition, I can assure the Deputy that the close monitoring of departmental spending which contributed to keeping supply services expenditure within budget in each of the past four financial years will continue throughout 1987.
I was not talking about weekly returns but about monthly returns. The question relates to the returns for the first month. However, if the Minister refers to Iris Oifigiúil he will find returns for the period 1 January to 31 January 1986. In that statement it emerges that on the supply of services the increase in expenditure is of the order of 33? per cent or, up to now, £563 million by comparison with £422 million in the first month of last year. The projection for the year was 6.5 per cent. Is it not clear, then, that the 33? per cent is way out of line with the projection for the year as a whole and suggests either that the Estimates are incorrect, which I would suggest is the case, or that very severe correction will have to be undertaken.
The Deputy is jumping to conclusions at an alarming rate. These figures that are published in Iris Oifigiúil do not tell much of a story because what they record essentially are cheques that have been cashed and which could have been written at any time. They might have been written in the first quarter of this year or some time last year but the people concerned have not cashed them for one reason or another. Cheques could be cashed in January at a different rate from the rate that applied in the previous January or in any other January. Therefore, these figures have no particular significance.
On the other hand, the figures that are published at the end of the quarter, those on which the Minister for Finance normally makes a comment, are often indicative at least of what is happening. They are figures, not for cheques cashed, but for cheques written during the period in question, in other words, the actual expenditure decision of the Government as distinct from the decision of people who have received cheques as to when they will cash them. That explanation may or may not be news to the Deputy but possibly not because he does not have experience in this area. However, it should indicate to him that he is jumping to conclusions.
I assure Deputy O'Kennedy that a decision my predecessor took to introduce a new monthly system of control on issues of expenditure by Government Departments has been successful in each of those years in governing expenditure across the board and keeping it in line. This system was introduced in 1983. It involves each Department who are spending a given amount of money, setting out a profile as to what they will spend in each month out of the total for the year. If they wish to depart from that payment schedule — in this case the figures were submitted to us at the beginning of this month — they must have Finance sanction. That system has worked very well and the Deputy need not be concerned unduly about it. I appreciate that he would not wish to create needless alarm and I am sure he will not do so.
It would not be my intention to create any alarm but when we find more than a 33 per cent increase by comparison with the same period last year and when the projection is for a 6.5 increase, it is important to point to that situation.
The Deputy is wrong. The question is about payment of cashed cheques, not about cheques that have been issued.
The Minister gave a lengthy reply. He should desist from interrupting the Deputy.
Is the Minister familiar with the document I have referred to and to the heading, "Issues"? I am relying on the official publication and I take it the issues referred to are issues out of the Exchequer.
That means cheques cashed.
The Minister has indicated that some of these cheques may have been written last year and are now falling to be paid. Does that not suggest that in a period in which I acknowledge he was not Minister for Finance — incidentally I wish him well in his new office despite the burdens he must face — what has happened here is that payments which should have been made in the months of November or December would have shown up on the expenditure side and particularly on the budget deficit side for the year just ended but were postponed deliberately and emerge now in the first month of the year? That is the accountancy practice that is being pursued here to give the impression that at the end of the year we were within target and keeping expenditure down whereas the first month of this year shows that the opposite is the case. Can the Minister guarantee that we will not witness the same pattern at the end of this year, that the budget deficit will not be presented falsely as being more of an achievement than is the case?
I do not know whether the Deputy has been able to follow my explanation or whether it is a matter simply of his not agreeing with what I am saying.
The latter is the case.
The position is that when we are talking about issues out of the Exchequer we are talking of cheques cashed by other people. The Government do not have any control as to when people decide to cash their cheques against the Government account but we do have control over the rate at which we write cheques.
Few can afford to keep cheques for even a month without cashing them.
As I outlined, this is being controlled very tightly as a result of procedures initiated by my predecessor and which were not in operation either when I was in the Department previously or during Deputy O'Kennedy's term there. This procedure represents a marked improvement so far as expenditure control is concerned.
The Minister will be making a statement——
If we deal with other questions as we are dealing with this one we will not make much progress.
This is a very important question.
Every question is important.
The Minister will be making a statement at the end of three months. All I can say to him is that I hope the trend for the next two months will be a lot more encouraging than what is indicated for the month of January.