Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 8 Nov 1988

Vol. 383 No. 8

Private Members' Business. - National Lottery (Amendment) Bill, 1988: Second Stage.

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time".

A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I will be sharing my time with Deputy Geraldine Kennedy.

There is a requirement that the House should agree. Agreed.

This is the third Bill in 12 months to be moved by the Progressive Democrats during our scarce Private Members' Time. We have in effect only three Private Members' periods during each Dáil session and it is our intention to use this limited time to initiate legislative change, whenever possible. For too long Private Members' Time has been wasted on merely passing useles motions of condemnation of the Government of the day. The Progressive Democrats do not intend continuing this tradition, for we believe that our primary role in Dáil Éireann is to bring about legislative reform. That is why we have always supported the right of the other parties and Deputies to have Bills published and moved.

The three Bills moved by us to date have all sought to end one scandal or another. Our first Bill which was moved 12 months ago, the Ministerial Pension Bill, 1987, tried to end payment of ministerial pensions to serving Members of the Oireachtas, the European Parliament and the Judiciary. The second Bill was the Local Government (Planning and Development) Bill, 1988, which set out to tackle the present disgraceful position in relation to the payment of compensation for failure to grant planning permission and to deal with the problems associated with unfinished housing estates.

The main purpose of this National Lottery (Amendment) Bill, 1988, is to end the appalling abuse by Fianna Fáil of the national lottery by putting in place a new and independent process for the disbursement of lottery funds. Last April I drew attention to the scandalous manner in which members of the present Government were allocating the lottery's proceeds. I said then that the national lottery was in danger of becoming a national scandal and that an independent allocation process was necessary if public trust and confidence in the lottery was not to be eroded. Unfortunately, the abuse has escalated since then and the spectacle of seeing a pipe band leading the Minister for Agriculture into a town to announce the "good news" from the lottery has disgusted and sickened most ordinary, decent people.

Fianna Fáil have engaged in the most despicable exercise in gombeen politics ever seen in this country in the way they have handled the allocations from the national lottery. The behaviour of this Government is seriously jeopardising the future of the lottery itself and leading many people to the view that Fianna Fáil see the lottery as merely a re-election slush fund. I know many people who tell me that when they buy a lottery ticket they feel they are directly contributing to Fianna Fáil party funds. I know that all Opposition parties in this House and the Independent Deputies have been critical of the Government's approach to the disbursement of lottery funds and I am also aware that each party have their own particular view of how the abuse should be ended.

Following the publication of this Bill last May I met with Opposition Deputies, including the leader of Fine Gael, Deputy Alan Dukes, to discuss the Bill's contents and to seek support for the principle of a new and independent system to disburse the lottery's proceeds. On three separate occasions since then I invited the other Opposition parties to co-sponsor this Bill or a similar Bill with the Progressive Democrats. I did so because I am anxious to ensure that we use our combined strength to ensure that the present scandal is brought to an immediate end.

Since the Second Stage vote on any Bill is a vote on the principle involved in the legislation and since the principle of this Bill being moved tonight is to change the method of disbursing lottery funds, I hope that all Opposition Deputies will unite behind it. Failure to come together on this important issue would be a total abdication of our legislative responsibility to the people. Collectively we in the Opposition will be as much to blame as Fianna Fáil for the present abuse because we now have it within our grasp to end this scandal if we come together.

The main purpose of this Bill is to establish an independent board of trustees to disburse the proceeds from the national lottery. The board of trustees will consist of a chairperson and four ordinary members. It is proposed that the chairperson would be a High Court judge or someone who formerly held judicial office. The four ordinary members of the board will consist of one representative from each of the following four areas: 1. Sporting and recreational interests; 2. Cultural interests — including the Irish language; 3. The Arts Council; and 4. Community, health and welfare interests.

Each of the above groups will nominate three persons and the Government of the day will make the appointments from among these nominations. The board would be statutorily independent in the exercise of its functions. It would be the sole function of the board of trustees to receive all applications for lottery aid and to make the allocations on the basis of clearly laid down criteria.

The trustees will be required to set out the criteria on which allocations are made and to submit annually a comprehensive report to the Minister for Finance, which shall contain the details of all applications received, particulars of applications approved, rejected or deferred and the reason for the decision. The Minister will be obliged to lay a copy of the report before the Dáil. It is envisaged that this report would be fully debated and that the board of trustees would be fully accountable to Dáil Éireann through the Public Accounts Committee.

The Minister for Finance can from time to time, with the approval of Dáil Éireann, give a special directive to the board of trustees requiring them to allocate a sum of money to a particular project. It is important to allow the Government of the day, with the approval of the Dáil, the power to have money provided for what may be a worthwhile national or community project. It would be well if Members on the Government benches listened instead of sniggering.

The Bill also provides that where any person knowingly misappropriates any money allocated by the trustees he will be guilty of an offence, carrying up to three months imprisonment, or a fine of £1,000, or both for a minor offence on summary conviction. There will be fines of up to £50,000 and imprisonment for up to five years for more serious offences on conviction on indictment. Persons found quilty of an offence will be liable to repay in full the money misapproptiated. This is one of the major loopholes in the 1986 National Lottery Act.

Another weakness in the present legislation establishing the national lottery is that it allows members of the Government of the day total discretion as to how and to whom the lottery proceeds are allocated. This is very unsatisfactory and has allowed Fianna Fáil to continue to engage in the old style "stroke politics", and we see that all over the country Ministers and TDs promising and delivering "grants from the national lottery". Fianna Fáil have politicised and upset many worthwhile community, sporting and voluntary organisations. The whole merit of the lottery fund is being perverted by this cynical party political exercise as they seek to buy votes.

The lottery is widely supported by many people throughout this country, including people of all political persuasions and those of none. It is not appropriate that this money should ever be allocated on a party political basis and it is only by establishing an independent board of trustees that it can be placed above party politics.

I am not criticising the groups who have already benefited from the national lottery's proceeds. In the main these groups are involved in very worthwhile community activity but they have been forced to exploit the present allocation system in order to get a much needed grant. It is wrong that voluntary and independent organisations are placed in this position. Everyone's application should be decided on the basis of the merits of the case and not on any other basis.

A number of the decisions made by members of this Government in relation to lottery grants raise serious questions about Fianna Fáil's sense of priorities. How can they justify refusing to give any lottery grant to the Irish Association for Victim Support — a voluntary group doing outstanding work for the victims of crime — and yet allocate £10,000 to a luxury hotel in Kerry to resurface their tennis courts? On what basis was that decision made?

The Minister of State, Deputy Frank Fahey, who I am delighted to see present in the House, has accused me of referring to golf as an elitist sport. I would like him to tell me when I said that. What I did criticise was the huge number of grants allocated to what are private clubs, when a group like the Irish Epilepsy Association got no money to assist in the building of a training centre for disabled people in Dublin. The public do not have access to private golf clubs. The lottery funds are public funds and should be applied to organisations that are either fully open to the public or deal with the poor, disabled or disadvantaged.

No private golf clubs got any of these funds.

Deputy Harney, without interruption.

Seventeen private golf clubs got funds from the lottery.

All golf clubs are private.

All are open to the public and the leader of the Progressive Democrats knows that.

If they pay their fees.

If they pay their fees and if they are not members of the female sex.

(Interruptions.)

Any golf club in the country specifies that people pay the fees.

Another weakness with the existing legislation is that there are no clearly laid down criteria for the allocation of the money. For many of the grants there is not even an application form. The present ad hoc arrangements have led to accusations that money has been promised without any correct vetting process. Fifteen of the 49 groups in County Dublin that received lottery grant approval from the Department of the Environment up to early May of this year did not make any formal application at all. These loose arrangements must not be allowed to continue.

This is not a matter that can be dealt with by way of legislation, but it is extremely important that the Government introduce a uniform vetting process for lottery aid. The criteria required for being grant-aided need to be clearly and publicly specified and all groups making an application need to know in advance the basis on which their application will be considered. Many organisations have informed me that their lottery grant applications were not even acknowledged, never mind approved. One organisation dealing with the disabled told me that despite the fact that they made an application last March to the Department of Health for lottery funds, it was not until their name was mentioned in an Irish Independent article recently that they were even contacted by the Department. Those who are not lucky enough to have the ear of a Fianna Fáil Minister or TD, or who wish to remain totally independent and not compromise themselves or their organisations by being beholden to members of Fianna Fáil, have to linger in the hope that perhaps some day they might get some crumbs from the lottery cake.

It is not possible for me in the time at my disposal this evening to deal at any great length with the huge discrepancies in the allocations made to the groups in constituencies represented by Fianna Fáil Ministers, but a short examination of the data available clearly shows that Sligo, Mayo, Limerick West and Dublin North are at the top of the lottery league.

The Minister for the Environment was given responsibility to allocate £6 million for amenity and recreational purposes. He received, in all, in excess of 2,000 applications and he made a decision to grant-aid 60 different groups. Mayo got £405,000 —the bulk of, I might add, to his own constituency of West Mayo — he seems to have known in advance what might happen to that constituency — while County Louth got a mere £43,000, Kilkenny £47,000 and Carlow £50,000. It is merely a coincidence that the Minister for the Environment represents Mayo, while Carlow, Kilkenny or Louth have no Cabinet member? The criteria the Minister for the Environment used were clearly based on his own constituency consideration and not on the basis of need. Of the 49 applications approved by the Minister for the Environment for the County Dublin area up to the beginning of May of this year, 26 went to the Dublin North constituency represented by the Minister, Deputy Burke. It would be good to think that the members of the Government could put their constituency considerations aside and make decisions in the national interest. That, however, does not seem to me to be possible for members of the Government.

I want to now deal with the division of the lottery's proceeds. The 1986 National Lottery Act does not specify the precise way the lottery fund should be divided. This is left to the Government of the day, subject to publication in Iris Oifigiúil. At the moment, 55 per cent goes to youth and sport, 35 per cent to the arts, culture and the Irish language and 10 per cent to health and welfare. These percentages were decided at a time when the lottery was expected to yield a surplus of between £10 million and £12 million per annum. I believe that in the context of this country's present problems, with 30 per cent of the population living below the povery line, high unemployment, emigration of at least 40,000 people per year and the growing crisis in the health services, we need to change the priorities for lottery aid. I suggest that the allocation to health be doubled, with particular priority being given to the development of facilities for the handicapped, the disabled and the elderly. It is time to give allocations to groups dealing with the Third World, to emigrant welfare and to other groups that are dealing with the marginalised in our society and to consider our responsibilities to the Third World. The actual division of the fund is something that could be more appropriately dealt with on Committee Stage of this Bill. It is the marginally weak in our society and not the politically marginal who should be the main beneficiaries for the lottery windfall.

The Progressive Democrats are pleased that the national lottery has been successful and we very much regret that this Government have so abused it as to seriously undermine public confidence in it. Is it any wonder that the national lottery had to spend substantial funds taking out full page advertisements in all the national papers last weekend, telling us where exactly the money was going?

That is because of the crap the Progressive Democrats have been giving out.

It is because of the way the Minister——

That is unparliamentary language from the Minister.

Most unparliamentary.

The Progressive Democrats are trying to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

It is because people like the Minister have been running around the country trying to buy votes with public funds.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

Let the Minister try to defend the substantive claim.

Acting Chairman

Let the Deputy continue without interruption.

On a point of order, is it in order to use language such as the Junior Minister has now just used? I am asking for a ruling. Is it in order for him to describe this as crap?

We are convinced that the establishment of an independent board to disburse the funds will ensure that all groups are treated fairly. We do not want ministerial control over the allocations to continue. We want to ensure that the lottery funds go to the most needy and that they are efficiently managed. I might add, as the Minister, Deputy Fahey is in the House, that perhaps he could justify to me why the Port-marnock area is to be given £300,000 for a sports hall when it already has a very comprehensive and well used sports hall which was given £166,000 by ment in 1980 and a further £66,000 by the Dublin County Council? Why should Portmarnock, a very small area, justify a need for two sports halls? I should like the Minister to tell me why he made that decision.

I will do that.

I am pleased to know that in two recent opinion polls up to 70 per cent of the electorate support that concept of an independent board to disburse the funds and that even the supporters of Fianna Fáil, by a two to one majority, favour this system. I know that other members of the Opposition do not share our view that a board of trustees, as suggested in the Bill, is the ideal solution. We all agree that the present abuse must be brought to an end and, therefore, our first step as Opposition Deputies, is to ensure that we unite together at the Second Stage vote. I appeal to all Deputies to do so. While we are committed to the principle of establishing an independent board, when we come to Committee Stage we should come together and reach a common approach on how lottery funds should be disbursed. While we, the Progressive Democrats, are committed to the principle of an independent board, we are entirely open to suggested changes in its composition, terms of reference and powers. I want to build a consensus in favour of an independent board, but at the end of the day there will be no change unless the law is amended, and that can only be done if the Bill passes the Second Stage on Wednesday night of next week.

A motion urging change or resolving that there should be change achieves nothing. Just as the Private Members' procedure has been used very effectively to initiate change in the law of marriage breakdown, so it can be used to bring about change in the law relating to the lottery. Faced with overwhelming public support for the change, in my view, there is no question of an election arising out of a win for the Opposition parties should the Government seek to oppose the Bill.

However, we are coming to the end of this Government and the bleak days are beginning to set in. I notice that the Minister for the Environment is conspicuous by his absence tonight——

That is unfair to a very busy Minister——

As my colleague Deputy Quinn said earlier, there is a certain smog over Deputy Flynn and his colleagues today.

Is that in order?

There are many people who believe that by proposing to remove the allocation of lottery funds from politicians we are demeaning ourselves. I believe that, unfortunately, the blatant abuse and politicising of the lottery allocation system by Fianna Fáil has demeaned politics and politicians. There are certain areas in which politicians need not be involved. It was the response to the controvesy surrounding the planning appeal procedure that led the 1973-1977 Coalition Government to courageously establish An Bord Pleanála under the chairmanship of a High Court judge. I believe that the same independent process is now necessary to disburse national lottery funds.

Members of Fine Gael seem to dislike the notion of an independent board being chaired by a Hugh Court judge. I am not totally hung up on the notion of a judge chairing this board of trustees, but I do believe that someone of this calibre generally commands widespread public trust. In the past, High Court judges were appointed by all Governments to head An Bord Pleanála, recently the Broadcasting Commission — without any opposition in this House — the Constituency Revision Commission and so on. If they were acceptable for these important tasks, I cannot understand why they are not appropriate now.

The question of accountability in relation to lottery funds is something members of this Government have continuously referred to. They have said there is accountability. Recently the Minister for Finance, Deputy MacSharry, said all allocations are made and that the Government are accountable to the Dáil. If that is so I wonder why, on 10 May, column 769 of the Official Report, the Minister for the Environment refused to give me a list of the names and addresses of the people to whom he had made the 550 grant approvals. He refused to give me this information because he said it would take too much time to compile it. Yet, three or four days earlier all newspapers, including provincial newspapers, and Fianna Fáil Deputies, as well as several other people were able to get this list and I was able to secure the list privately. Yet, when I raised the matter in the Dáil I was not given the information. They did not want this list to go on the record.

A great service is provided by many of the provincial newspapers. I could show some lovely headlines which would embarrass some of the people opposite, drawing people like Sister Consilio into a nasty political row in West Limerick between Ministers Noonan and Collins. She is one of many who have been dragged into unseemly rows by members of the Fianna Fáil Government as they jump on the gravy train trying to buy support.

Last week the Leader of the Progressive Democrats launched a six point policy priority programme for this party. One of the six points to which we believe priority must be given in Irish politics is the question of decent standards in public life. This Bill is about the issue of public confidence in political standards and it is far too important an issue to be funked. Anyone who thinks that a majority Fianna Fáil Government would be good for this country has only to observe their antics in relation to the national lottery. Anything left to their discretion is abused and when one sees the way they allocated the £71 million from the lottery one must wonder what they would do if they had full control over the nation's finances.

This minority Government need to be kept on a tight rein at all times and I am appealing to my colleagues on the Opposition benches, of whatever political persuasion, to bury our differences, to abandon our own ideal solutions and to vote together for the principle of change.

I want to acknowledge the support which Fine Gael have indicated they will give the Second Reading of this Bill and also the support the Labour Party and The Workers Party are to give the Second Reading. I am appealing to the Independent Deputies because we have it within our grasp to end this abuse. There is no point complaining unless we all vote together when it really matters. The people did not give Fianna Fáil a majority in the last election. The onus is on us, particularly when we have a minority Government, to come together and to use our strength to bring about change, to ensure that there are decent standards in public life and that the needy and most deserving cases benefit from the lottery. If we come together we will succeed in ensuring that the proceeds of the national lottery will go to the most deserving cases, the lottery will be fully supported and will have the confidence and trust of all our people.

I rise to invite the other Opposition parties to co-sponsor this proposal with us or, failing that, to support us in the principle of stamping out the blatant political abuse of the funds of the national lottery by members of this Government.

At the outset, I believe that it is of fundamental importance to realise that there is a demonstrable demand for lottery reform and that the public will not thank the Opposition parties if they fail to bring about real change as distinct from partisan posturing.

It is for this reason that I, as Chief Whip of the Progressive Democrats, wrote to the leaders of all the Opposition parties and the Independent Deputies in this House earlier this week seeking their support for the reform, in principle, of the means of allocating national lottery funds in future.

The reason we elected to put a Bill, rather than a motion, before the House in our Private Members' Time is that a Bill is the only way the National Lottery Act, 1986, can be effectively amended and altered to provide for the allocation of lottery funds by independent means. A motion, which was requested and preferred by Fine Gael, would be non-binding, debated in three hours, and would preclude another discussion on the same issue for six months without alleviating, in any way, any of the anomalies and abuses which have given rise to this problem.

Furthermore, as I have pointed out to the other Opposition parties, experience has shown us that, over the last 18 months, this Government have responded more urgently to Bills introduced in Private Members' Time to change the law rather than to motions of exhortation passed against the Government. To give a few examples: the two Private Members Bills moved by us to date in this Dáil have brought an end to abuse of one form or another. The Ministerial Pensions Bill resulted in a new mandate being given to the Gleeson Committee which produced a new recommendation for change, however inadequate, in ministerial pensions within a few months. Our second Bill — the Local Government (Planning and Development Bill — which tried to stamp out the menace of cowboy builders who depart leaving housing estates unfinished, and tried to deal with the complex issues of compensation, resulted in a commitment from the Government to bring forward their own legislation. The Government's Planning Bill, inadequate though it is, has been published and is part of the Government's draft legislative programme for this session.

Other parties have also seen the wisdom of this approach if a real attempt is to be made to change the law. The Fine Gael Party obviously believed that they would change the law in relation to marriage separation more effectively by the introduction of the Judicial Separation and Family Law Reform Bill, 1987, rather than by introducing a Dáil motion, and their Bill will be debated again in the Dáil later this month. Fine Gael also moved the Criminal Law (Amendment) (Genetic Fingerprinting) Bill, 1988, two weeks ago. The Progressive Democrats supported both of these Bills.

This debate on the Progressive Democrats' National Lottery (Amendment) Bill is taking place within this context tonight. We have been prepared to go more than half way to secure all-party agreement for the principle and the method of administering national lottery funds in the future. We have invited all Opposition parties to co-sponsor and support the Bill in the Dáil this week and next. We expect that this support will be forthcoming.

The most important feature of our Bill, as Deputy Harney pointed out is that it embodies the principle of an independent board to administer lottery funds rather than leaving them in the hands of the Government to be used as a political slush fund. So strong is public disquiet on this issue that the idea of an independent board is supported by up to 70 per cent of the public in the latest opinion poll. I want to be quite categorical on this point: if our particular independent mechanism does not meet the approval of other parties or Deputies, we are entirely open to suggested changes in its composition, terms of reference and powers once the principle of allocating lottery funds through an independent agency, free from ministerial abuse, can be achieved. That is our aim in introducing this Bill.

We believe, in effect, that we can best meet the reservations of other political parties about our particular method of providing an accountable administration of the lottery funds by allowing our Bill — like the Judicial Separation and Family Law Reform Bill, 1987 — to go in to a special committee after Second Stage where the views of all parties, including the Government, on a new and independent means of disbursing lottery funds can be discussed in detail and agreed.

At the same time, I am quite aware that Fine Gael, at the weekend, stated that our method of disbursing lottery funds is flawed. If it is, indeed, flawed, we are inviting Fine Gael, by putting this Bill before the House, to join with the other Opposition parties in formulating a new and independent structure to allocate lottery funds on Committee Stage of the Bill. I welcome Fine Gael's change of heart on this issue, announced after their parliamentary party meeting today.

The basic issue which we are putting before each party and each Deputy in the House tonight is as follows: there is blatant abuse of the national lottery funds. That is beyond doubt. We have seen the spectacle of the Minister for the Environment, Deputy Flynn, going on national television to account for the Government's handling of the lottery — incidentally, the first occasion on which a Minister was prepared to be confronted on television alongside an Opposition spokesperson in recent months and heard him saying that his constituency of Mayo merited funds. I am quite sure that it did, so does my constituency and so do the constituencies of every other Deputy, but the funds given to any constituency, just as in the case of Dún Laoghaire, should not be determined by the strength or weakness of the representation of the Government party of the day. The distinction which the Minister failed to make was that, as a member of the Cabinet, he is responsible for the whole country, not just shoring up special projects in County Mayo.

In brief, we are seeking the support of all Opposition Deputies for the principle of changing the law on the Second Stage of our Bill next Wednesday night. We invite all parties, including the Government, to sit down together with us on Committee Stage of this Bill to formulate an agreed independent mechanism for allocating lottery funds and removing ministerial abuse.

When the history of this Dáil comes to be written years from now, the distinctive feature of the 25th Dáil will be the extraordinary consensus that exists in this House. This consensus, unlike what many people believe, is not limited exclusively to restoring the public finances to a sound footing, but rather its principal purpose is to provide for better Government and to restore public confidence in political life. I and some other members of my party came into politics for this reason. I believe that this Bill will go a long way towards achieving that aim. I do not believe that it is realistic to expect this Fianna Fáil Government can be trusted to end their abuse of the lottery and to mend their ways, because in addition to the gross abuse of the national lottery funds, this Government have deliberately in relation to Dáil gerrymander in relation to Dáil constituencies aimed at marginalising the voice and role of the smaller parties like the Progressive Democrats, and they have also attempted to stage-manage events so that Government Ministers can avoid any serious questioning of their performance on television or radio. Therefore, I believe that by proceeding by way of a Bill, instead of a motion, this minority Goverment can be prevented from wilfully disregarding or prevaricating on the real issue of impartial responsibility in the allocation of lottery funds. This Bill is the only mechanism which will come before this House, in this session of the Dáil, to stop abuse of the national lottery. I ask each Deputy to bear this in mind. They will have no other opportunity for the next six months to voice their criticism and it is for this reason that I call on each party and each Independent Deputy to vote for our proposals next Wednesday night.

At the outset I wish to apologise for the non-availability of a script due to circumstances beyond my control. It has not yet arrived and I ask the Members of the House to accept my apologies.

The Bill now before the House proposes the setting up of a board to disburse lottery funds comprising a judge and four others, from the sports, culture, art, health-welfare areas. This Bill, in effect, is an attempt to cast a slur on the Government, to undermine public confidence in the Government and implies misappropriation of lottery funds. Let me make it quite clear that the Government have adhered to the criteria as laid down by this House under the 1986 Act. That Act was devised, compiled and introduced by the previous Government. That remains a fact whether the Progressive Democrats like it or not. As I said, the Government have adhered to the criteria as laid down by the House under the 1986 Act which was devised, compiled and introduced by the previous Government, a combination of Fine Gael and Labour.

(Limerick East): A major success.

Did the Minister read what she said on that occasion?

Decisions on lottery allocations are arrived at at the Cabinet table. Before Ministers may subsequently disburse these funds for schemes and projects, the criteria and conditions for the schemes must first be submitted for examination and approval by the Minister for Finance and his officials. It is only following the approval of the Minister for Finance that the Minister can allocate grant aid and only strictly in accordance with the regulations as laid down by the Minister for Finance. This procedure is identical in these respects to the procedure adopted in the case of projects funded by the Exchequer. The Bill is being brought forward by Deputy Harney on the grounds that the lottery funds are not being properly allocated. I would like to take this opportunity to demonstrate to the House and to the general public that this view is outrageous and without foundation. I will show that these allegations are spurious.

With regard to sport, my Department were allocated the following funding for 1988: current expenditure, £6.640 million; capital expenditure, £10.5 million.

With the House's permission I will show how and where the funding for these areas are being allocated.

This year the 73 national governing bodies of sport will receive £985,000 in their annual grant for coaching, equipment and administration. This sum represents an increase of 22 per cent over the 1987 allocation. For 1988 also I am providing an extra £210,000 for the appointment of new administrators for these bodies to improve their management and coaching structures. A further £97,000 is being provided for the purchase of large items of equipment and for attendance at international meetings.

Further grants of £273,000 are given to enable sports persons to compete in international competitions and for the organisation of international competitions at home. A sum of £182,000 was allocated for development officers, while £100,000 was granted for the subsidisation of the cost of hurleys. A sum of £120,000 is being granted under the grant scheme for outstanding sports persons, while the Olympic Council of Ireland received £500,000. Funding is also given to Cospóir to enable it to develop Sport for All and other programmes.

Other new projects being grant-aided from the lottery are: the provision of office units for sports bodies in a house of sport; the establishment of the Irish Coaching Bureau; the appointment of a recreation development officer under the Institute of Leisure and Amenity Management for the better use of recreational facilities; sports research and sports injuries and funding for the Physical Education Association of Ireland for the development of national projects.

I would ask the House to indicate where grant-aid has been mis-applied by the Government. In fact, despite the generous increases given this year we still have many organisations who could do with more money. All of the groups who have received such allocations are subject to the rigours of proper accounting through the submission to my Department of audited accounts on an annual basis. The schemes in respect of which the moneys have been allocated have all been approved by the Departments of Finance and Education. Any Member of this House can obtain copies of the schemes in question.

On the capital side, the provision of a national sports centre on a site immediately below the site for the Custom House Docks Financial Services Centre will satisfy a great longing among our people for such a facility. The centre, which is estimated to cost £35 million — whose configuration will be capable of accommodating a six lane 200 metre running track — will be multi-purpose and will include also a 50 metre swimming pool. The House will be glad to know that the first stage brief for distribution to design and developer groups interested in competing for the project will be available shortly.

Major regional facilities will be provided by the Government in the main urban areas in Cork, Sligo, Galway, Athlone, Limerick and Waterford. Lest Deputy Harney would seek to impute to me the reason that facilities are being provided in Athlone, about which I am very pleased, I should say that a decision by Cospóir in 1986, under the previous Government, identified the six regional centres. Major funding is also being made available for a basketball centre and a badminton centre in Dublin. Active consideration is being given to the development of a major outdoor stadium. The development of Morton Stadium is one of the options under serious consideration in this context.

Works is well advanced on the provision of a 400 metre synthetic track in Waterford. In the case of Cork, Sligo, Galway and Athlone the local authorities are in the process of initiating preliminary planning. The tender procedures have been completed for the badminton centre in Baldoyle and commencement of the work is imminent. Much preparatory work has been completed by the Irish Basketball Association for their major centre at Tallaght.

The full construction cost of the regional sports facilities will be met by the State from the lottery. A sum of £100,000 is being provided for the completion of the badminton centre and a total of £800,000 for the Irish Basketball Centre on a £ for £ basis.

A national coaching and training centre will be provided in Thomond College of Education with total funding from the lottery.

Furthermore, major facilities will be provided in 18 provincial centres throughout the country. These centres will provide for a range of sporting activities based on priorities locally identified.

For 1988 I have also provided a sum of £4 million for the provision of facilities under the recreation facilities programme. Approximately 270 grants have been sanctioned for schemes all over the country. As an indication of the enthusiasm of sports and other organisations to provide these much needed type of facilities at local level, I have received, in addition to the 270 successful applications, about 700 further applications for grant assistance under the scheme.

According to press reports this scheme has come in for some criticism. Deputy Harney herself has complained about the availability of grant-aid to golf clubs in particular. A total of two golf clubs have been given grants under this scheme that is the recreation facilities programme. Kilrush Golf and Sports Club and Slade Valley Golf Club, County Dublin, have received grants of £5,000 and £15,000, respectively. The total of £20,000 represents 0.05 per cent or one-twentieth of 1 per cent of the total of £4 million allocated. Therefore the allegation that substantial funding is being given under this programme to well-heeled, élitist sports clubs is just not sustainable. Kilrush Golf and Sports Club also caters for a cross-section of the local rural community while Slade Valley Golf Club also caters for a good cross-section of the urban community. Therefore, I have no problem in justifying a grant for these two clubs in the same way as I would for, say, GAA clubs which are just as likely nowadays to contain disproportionate numbers of high, medium or low incomeearning individuals. Might I say in this respect that the golf clubs that have received grants are participating in a programme devised by my Department to allow the public, especially women working at home, retired people and unemployed young people, to learn to play golf at a minimum cost. When we put it to them that these grants would be given subject to eligibility they were very anxious to put forward ideas.

Furthermore the House will be aware of the provision of £0.5 million from the national lottery for the commercial development of sport. The concept here is to attract foreign tourists to Ireland by offering them activity holidays such as walking, pony-trekking, sailing and golf. As part of the development my Department have given pump-priming grants to sports and other organisations in five designated tourist areas — west Kerry, Shannon region, Wexford, Connemara and west Donegal. In all a total of 49 grants, totalling £368,500 were sanctioned. Of the 49 grants sanctioned I find that seven were sanctioned for golf. The total amount of the grants sanctioned was £99,000. Obviously, through a misunderstanding, Deputy Harney confused the two grant schemes. There is first the grant for recreational purposes, which I have outlined, and, second, that designated and announced publicly by the Government, for tourist and employment purposes.

The golf clubs in question are located at Gweedore, Portumna, Ceann Sibéal, Connemara, Cruit Island, Oughterard and Portnoo. They are situated in tourist areas. I might reiterate, that the grants given are for the purpose of attracting foreign tourists and generating local employment. I make no apology for making grants for such worthy purposes.

While the purpose of these grants is to make sports facilities more attractive to foreign tourists, the primary motive is to generate employment by the development of tourism. Golf itself is a sport which attracts many visitors to Ireland and contributes substantially to our economy. I feel strongly that there should be no objection to pursuing the generation of employment through making golf or any other sport more attractive.

The House will not disagree with me when Deputies reflect on the developments in sport which are being grant-aided and on the methodology being used for the allocation of the grant-aid. But for the lottery we would, sportswise, be in a static position financially. The Government's policies and strategies, based on sound and fair consideration of requirements, will provide attractive facilities for our people. Society as a whole can only benefit socially and culturally. While criticism is part of human psychology, while it is only right that there should be critical debate on the lottery, I contend that such criticism should be objective, fair-minded and not slanted for purely political reasons. The lottery is here to stay. I am personally confident that our people will continue to support the Government's control and administration of the lottery funds, especially as they will see the physical and other results of the investment in sport.

The second area of activity for which my Department are responsible — under the 1986 National Lottery Act — is that of youth. Due entirely to the national lottery I was able to increase the allocation to the youth service from some £3.7 million in 1987 to £10 million in 1988. This increase in funding is unprecedented in the whole history of the State's involvement with voluntary youth organisations and youth work services. Some £4.68 million has been allocated towards the support of programmes and services for disadvantaged youth. It is the disadvantaged and marginalised young people to whom the lottery funds have been addressed. A full £4 million of this allocation is going towards new or additional services for the young homeless, young substance abusers or young people generally at risk. Applications for assistance from the special fund for disadvantaged youth, established in my Department from the proceeds of the national lottery, were considered by an inter-departmental committee on disadvantaged youth. This committee were required to draw up a programme of support for disadvantaged young people from the very many individual applications received across a wide range of services. Priority was given to projects which, heretofore, had received no support or for new services provided by existing grant-assisted bodies, particularly in the following areas; young homeless, substance abuse and special youth work services. It is fair to say that the basis for a concerted attack upon the problems affecting many of our least advantaged young people now exists.

The interdepartmental committee were representative of the Departments of Education, Health, Labour, Environment, Social Welfare, Justice and the Gaeltacht. The committee examined projects which were nominated by individuals Departments or their agencies such as health boards, vocational education committees, or by voluntary youth organisations.

In the case of disadvantaged youth projects grants were announced by me at a press conference organised in consultation with the National Lottery Company on 5 May 1988.

The youth service is founded upon a well organised and highly developed voluntary movement of adults. I make no apology for the fact that the State commitment to the voluntary youth service was greatly strengthened by the allocation of national lottery funds. Grants totalling some £3.63 million were awarded to voluntary organisations on the basis of pre-determined criteria under the youth service grant scheme. The organisations which receive funding under the scheme all have educationally sound programmes which hold up under scrutiny. They are all deserving of the support they have received.

The balance of the funds available to me in 1988 have been devoted to supporting complementary schemes and programmes in the area of youth exchange, in-service training, youth information,. public relations and programme development. I have also sanctioned the establishment of some nine local voluntary youth councils. These councils will facilitate the collective voice of volunteer youth providers in their areas. Their role is to survey what needs to be provided and to draw up an appropriate plan of action. I also accept that the statutory sector has an important role to play in providing essential back-up to the work of the volunteer in the field and must be accommodated in an appropriate manner in plans for local youth service development.

I was at great pains to see that the description of how the moneys allocated to my Department under the criteria established by the National Lottery Act in 1986 would be laid on the record of the House tonight. If I had seemed pedantic in going into figures it is because the spurious allegations made, not just in the House tonight but by the spokesperson for the Progressive Democrats over the past number of months, needed to be nailed very firmly and with great accuracy and to be shown for what they are, spurious and false allegations, made with the prime purpose of demonstrating that they — and they alone — had the God-given right to do everything which is correct. Quite obviously, the Progressive Democrats are greatly out of touch with urban and rural Ireland. I do not speak to Deputy Harney in a personal sense but as spokesperson——

Do not lecture me, we are not at school.

The Deputy should have heard herself. Boy, was she preaching? Deputy Harney gravely insulted the many groups who applied for and received lottery funds. I take particular exception to what she said about the marginalised in our society when I know the work which has been started — and which will be continued — under the programme for disadvantaged young people. I refer especially to homeless young people who have been subjected to substance abuse through no fault of their own but because of the environment in which they came to puberty and maturity. The allocation of money to those people is now being called into question under the banner of propriety and other banners behind which the Progressive Democrats have chosen to parade. The scandal does not lie on this side of the House but quite fairly and squarely on Deputy Harney's party, the members of whom came in here tonight to show that they alone have a monopoly of feeling.

Many sporting and youth organisations have benefited from lottery funds and I freely acknowledge that the Government would not have been able to allocate such funds but for the lottery. These funds have been freely given by the people and disbursed to the areas of greatest need. Many of the clubs and organisations who benefited are deeply upset by the slurs and imputations which have been cast on them by the Progressive Democrats. I wish to thank you and the House for the hearing I got tonight. My Department's record in disbursing lottery funds can stand up to any scrutiny and will continue to do so under any Minister. The Government have strictly adhered to the criteria laid down by the House under the 1986 Act which was devised, compiled and produced by the previous Government. To say otherwise is a serious slur on the Government.

An excellent performance, Minister.

(Limerick East): With the permission of the House, I wish to share my time with Deputy Deenihan.

Acting Chairman

Is that agreed? Agreed.

(Limerick East): I felt sorry for the Minister for Education as I listened to her because I do not think she intended to indulge in such a shameless performance. The fault does not lie particularly with her because she is not at the forefront of this scandal. The young man beside her carries far more responsibility in that regard.

Hear, hear.

(Limerick East): The Minister's colleagues in Government who put her in tonight to take the flak, hiding behind her and hoping that she would put a brave face on attempting to defend the indefensible, are also responsible. Where is the Minister for Finance?

He is in Brussels.

He was here a minute ago.

He is just back.

(Limerick East): I hope he will come in before the debate is over and explain the allocations in his constituency.

On a point of order and of correction, I am no front for anybody. I stand for myself.

On a second point of order, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle——

(Limerick East): I have upset the Deputies already.

The Deputy had better substantiate the allegation that he has just made about me before he proceeds.

There is nobody behind my skirts.

Acting Chairman

The Deputy should be allowed to continue.

(Limerick East): I got marvellous value for the first two lines. I wonder where is Deputy Flynn, having organised the lottery funds for his constituency? Is he now in the process of scoring a more notable own goal against his party colleagues, against the interests of the Government and against the interests of the country? I wonder where are Deputy O'Kennedy and Deputy Smith tonight?

We cannot all talk together.

(Limerick East): Where are those——

Where are all your people?

(Limerick East):——two great dispensers of the national lottery funds in County Limerick, the two security Ministers, Deputies Collins and Noonan? There was a danger on the back roads of west Limerick over the past couple of months as Ministers with their full security retinue negotiated the potholes on the back roads of the county to be first at the village hall to announce the good news. If one were in a different country one might think it was a NATO exercise that was in progress. It was an absolute shameless performance.

That is not good coming from the Deputy as a former holder of that office.

(Limerick East): There is no doubt that the disbursement of lottery funds is now a national scandal. I would advise the Minister for Education and her Government that they had better change because it has reached scandalous proportions. The question is now being asked — Deputy Alan Dukes asked it directly at the Fine Gael Ard-Fheis and I will quote him — why is it, when Fianna Fáil finds a way of spending money that is not directly accountable pound by pound to the Dáil, that the “stroke” mentality breaks out. “Briseann an dúchas trí shúilibh an chait”, he said. If they play fast and loose with the national lottery's £70 million, what would they do if they had an overall majority and if we gave them a free hand with the national finances?

We in the Fine Gael Party are proud of the national lottery. We brought in the legislation to set it up. If my memory serves me correctly, Fianna Fáil voted against it. When we introduced it we underestimated the yield from it, in common with everybody in the country. We expected it to yield in the region of £10 million or £12 million. In the legislation we laid down a procedure for the use of the funds. In the 1988 Book of Estimates there is £60 million on the current side in the Vote of the Department of Finance and on the capital side there is a further £33 million. That totals £93 million, much of which is being spent properly but a large section of it, particularly on the capital side, is being used now as a political slush fund by the Fianna Fáil Party, and particularly by the Ministers in the party, both senior and junior. Not only are they using the political funding to disadvantage Deputies on this side of the House but they are using it to add point to the competition between Deputies on their own side of the House. There are constituency colleagues in the Fianna Fáil Party who are trying to score advantage over each other by being the first to make an announcement when lottery funds are being disbursed.

I feel sorry for the Minister for Education because she was sent in here tonight to defend that. In fairness, many of the decisions made in the Department of Education are subject to accountability but there are others that are not.

What others are not?

(Limerick East): I do not think anyone suggested that the Minister for Education led the charge in this scandal but the people whom I have mentioned, her colleagues in Government at a very senior level, are bringing the Government, their positions as Ministers and this House into disrepute as they continue with this scandal. As Deputy McGinley has pointed out, it has now reached the stage where they are damaging the lottery.

The damage is done.

(Limerick East): I have met innumerable people who said they will buy no further lottery tickets or they will buy from the alternative lottery——

Who has damaged it?

(Limerick East):——because they are not happy with the way the funds are being disbursed.

Who is promoting that?

(Limerick East): Deputy Geraldine Kennedy talked about Fine Gael having a change of heart. Deputy Kennedy, as Whip of her party, knows we did not have a change of heart. We sought, for the past ten days or so, to get agreement with all the Opposition parties in the House to a motion which would have intrinsic to it the principles of accountability and independence. We know we have different individual policies on the lottery and we are entitled to our individual position as are the Progressive Democrats, the Labour Party and The Workers' Party, but we sought to achieve common ground. In the absence of achieving common ground, because the Progressive Democrats unlike the other Opposition parties refused to go down that road, we are now using the only vehicle that is available to us, the Bill that is before the House.

In voting that this Bill should get a Second Reading we are not saying we are in agreement with the Bill but it is the only opportunity we have in this House to show the Government, both by word and by action through voting, that we deplore what they are doing now. They are in the process of wrecking one of the best schemes ever introduced to provide funds for objectives which we all share. They should consider the position between now and next week. They should agree to give this Bill a Second Reading and bring in their own proposals subsequently if necessary.

Our position on this Bill is, as I have said, that we are prepared to support the Bill put forward on Second Stage. We have serious reservations about some central aspects of the Bill. We believe it is important that this Bill be discussed on Committee Stage so that necessary changes can be made. At that stage the Fine Gael Party will be putting forward a detailed series of amendments which are currently under discussion at parliamentary party level. We hope that other parties will also contribute in the same manner, and we include Fianna Fáil in that.

The Progressive Democrats' Bill is intrinsically flawed. The suggestion that a High Court judge should play the key role here is a major flaw and misinterprets the role of High Court judges. The role of the courts is defined in the Constitution. High Court judges have chaired certain committees outside of court proceedings but most of them traditionally have been of a quasi-judicial nature such as the Adoption Board or the Planning Appeals Board. It is a misconception of the role of High Court judges to get them involved in this activity. It is also a misconception of the role of the House because constitutionally the responsibility for the raising of revenue and the disbursement of funds lies in the first instance with the Minister for Finance. Secondly, through that power it transfers to the Government of which the Minister is a member and then it lies with this House to decide by vote on the Estimates what money is spent on what programme. It is a misconception to involve a High Court judge in that kind of activity. If we were to extend the concept of High Court judges being involved in the disbursement of funds from the millions of pounds in the national lottery to the area of public spending in general — after all the health budget is £1.3 billion and the education budget is approximately £1 billion——

East Limerick would not have got an industry in the past four years if there was a High Court judge in charge of the lottery.

(Limerick East): Is the Minister complimenting me on the level of manufacturing jobs in my constituency?

The Deputy looked after East Limerick during his four years in office.

(Limerick East): We did not get a load of gravel by Government decision since your crowd came in.

(Interruptions.)

(Limerick East): It was part of the punishment treatment for poor Deputy O'Malley.

Could we leave the gravel aside now and get a load of common sense into the debate?

(Limerick East): I am not offended by——

The Deputy has not yet substantiated the ridiculous allegation he made about me and I am waiting for him to do so.

(Limerick East):——the Minister of State's interruption.

I am offended by the Deputy's allegation.

(Limerick East): I know the Minister of State is upset about this issue and I know he is also upset about the revision of the constituencies because he does not know now whether he will run in East Galway or West Galway——

He would be welcome in East Galway.

I would get elected in either one of them.

(Limerick East):——thanks to the arrangements made by his colleague in Government, Deputy Flynn. I realise the Minister's sensitivity tonight. He should leave the House, have a cup of coffee and let the Minister for Education, who can put a far better face on these shameless activities, sit there and smile at the rest of us and pretend there is nothing going on when we all know it is an absolute scandal.

I was going to make the point that if we were to extend the principle we could have 15 High Court judges sitting around the Cabinet table, each responsible for spending allocations of money far greater than the amount of money in the lottery. We all have our roles and this Parliament has its constitutional role; the Cabinet have their constitutional role and the courts have their role, and we should, as far as possible, allow people to play on their own pitches and keep their roles separate. It leads to confusion when the constitutional boundaries are crossed.

The second reason I have strong objections to this Bill is that if the board are to be really independent they will have to be serviced by a staff. The decisions required to be made by this board will range from the health area to areas affecting arts, culture, education, and the environment and the provision of community halls and golf clubs, whichever vote they come under. There is a whole range of activities. If this proposed board are to be totally independent they will have to have an independent staff and they will have to be a huge staff if they are to have expertise to cross this wide area. If they do that we are duplicating many areas of the public service simply to have an independent oversight of disbursement of lottery funds. That is plainly ludicrous. I am against quangos. We have too many quasi-autonomous non-governmental agencies already and we should be reducing them rather than increasing them, and this will be the ultimate quango.

It is better than the quango sitting over there.

(Limerick East): I am sure if Deputy Harney got an opportunity to reply she would say that of course there is no intention of them having their own staff, but if they do not have their own staff they are going to be served by the civil servants of the Department of the Environment, the Department of Health, the Department of the Taoiseach and so on, and each of these is subject to the individual Minister who controls the Department. Therefore, you have two choices. Either you have the appearance of independence and all the decisions made on the basis of paper put in front of an independent board and civil servants subject to their own Minister, or you create a bureaucratic monster. Therefore, I do not think this works, but it incorporates a principle that we in Fine Gael agree with. We think — we know — there should be proper accountability for every round of public money whether collected by means of taxes, borrowed or selling lottery tickets, and there should be an independent input into the decisionmaking process.

We have our proposals and it is worth while outlining them briefly. The lottery has been such a success and the amount of money so far ahead of what we had originally estimated that there is scope now for extending the areas in which the money should be used. For example, as well as for youth and sport, arts, culture, the Irish language, health and special projects which we brought in by legislation when we set up the national lottery, we would like the money to be used also in assistance to organisations catering for the physically and mentally handicapped, a task force for the elderly and provision of educational equipment for primary and second level schools to cater particularly for teaching of language skills. We would like it to be used for grants for the provision of amenities to promote tourism in the private and public sectors. As the money gets bigger and the amounts reach the proportions I have described and as we extend the areas of activity, the case for accountability and an independent process in arriving at the decision becomes unanswerable, and the Government should move to do that. When it comes to the distribution of the lottery funds, Fine Gael believe the Government should regularly review the proportions of available funds to be allocated to each of the areas specified in the original Bill. In addition they should allocate a proportion of the available funds to a reserve to finance special projects and needs such as contributions to disaster relief.

How would you work it? Funds for the arts and culture area should be allocated by the Arts Council who are there, independent. You do not need a High Court judge and another board of trustees. Let the Arts Council do it, but do not override the decision of the Arts Council as was done recently by the Taoiseach. If you set up an independent body, as long as they are acting properly let them make the decisions. Of course the responsible Minister would have to authorise it, but he would authorise it like we all authorise things decided by independent groups, by rubber stamping decisions and not altering them. Funds intended for the Irish language should be allocated by Bord na Gaeilge, again subject to the approval of the Minister for the Gaeltacht but subject to his approval only in accountancy fashion. He should not be making the decisions. The board should examine the projects, make the decisions, put them to the Minister; then we would have the strong independent element I am talking about. Funds for the promotion of amenities in tourism should be allocated by Bord Fáilte. Funds in the youth and sport area should be allocated by an independent board also. We do not think COSPÓIR are properly structured to fulfil this role. We would abolish COSPÓIR and set up a new sports and recreation council, but we would not duplicate the quangos. We would replace one with the other.

We have independent bodies already and if we had proper accountability to this House and the input by the independent bodies which we already have then we would not have the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, being so upset by allegations made in this House about the disbursement of funds in his constituency because the decisions in effect would have been made by independent groups and the Minister would not be personally involved in choosing one project over another in a way which leaves him open to these kinds of charges.

On a point of order, when the Deputy opened he made a serious allegation that I acted improperly——

(Limerick East): No.

——in the way I had dealt with the job I had been given. He has not yet substantiated that claim.

Who paid for the advertisement in RTE?

He has not yet substantiated that claim and until he does so——

Minister of State, the point you raise is not a point of order, while it is an understandable point of personal dissatisfaction. Presumably you will have an opportunity to contribute to the debate later at which time, if Deputy Noonan has not given the evidence you think he should, you will be able to put the record straight. That is the extent of the advice I can give the Minister of State.

I am merely asking him to substantiate it with the facts if he wants to make such an allegation.

Deputy Noonan has heard what you said. I remind Deputy Noonan there is remaining to him another 11 minutes total.

(Limerick East): I am sharing my time with Deputy Deenihan and I propose to allow him in very shortly. That is why we are not supporting the chapter and verse of the Progressive Democrats Bill. That is why we would much prefer if the Progressive Democrats had allowed us all to keep our independent policy positions and united on a motion which deplored the activity of the Government which is turning the disbursement of the lottery funds into the national scandal it is now. In the absence of that agreement we are quite prepared, for the sake of registering the protest and ensuring that our views on accountability and independence as regards lottery funds are on the record of the House, by word and by vote to vote for the Second Stage of this Bill.

The last point I would like to make is on a different issue. It seems now that there is such a concentration on the manner in which the funds are being disbursed that the quality of decisions made, whether they are accountable or not, are not being brought under the spotlight at all. A national lottery should result in projects around the country in which people would have a national pride. No matter how meritorious local groups are, how good the local GAA club are or how necessary it is to put an extension on a community hall, there is not the feeling of national pride one gets by having the big project. We need a Madison Square Garden in this city of which all the people of the country could be proud. We need it bigger——

We are going to have one.

(Limerick East): How can we have it when you have all the money spent on footling things down in your own constituency?

That shows the Deputy's ignorance. We will have a £35 million national centre within two years. That shows his ignorance about what is going on.

(Interruptions.)

(Limerick East): Is that not the problem? Is the money not gone? I note the Minister was walking around the dock site. The nearest thing to a national stadium we have in the country now is the Point Depot, where we were at the weekend, and that was due to Harry Crosbie who got no lottery money either. We need a project like that.

That is a shameful effort at misrepresentation, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

(Limerick East): As Minister with responsibility for sport, Deputy Fahey must have been ashamed to see that our excellent Olympic swimming team did not have the facility of an Olympic size pool here, yet despite the lack of infrastructure in this country they still performed excellently. The same Minister of State, if I heard him correctly, cast a slur on the performance of our athletes in the Olympics when they came back and perhaps he should clarify the record on that, too.

That is not true. I just cannot sit here and listen to that kind of total misrepresentation and I ask the Deputy to withdraw it.

(Limerick East): The Minister had better explain what he said about the lack of performance because if they had not got a proper pool——

I said nothing whatsoever about the lack of performance. In fact, I praised the Olympic athletes for the way they performed.

(Limerick East): If they had not got a proper pool to train in and they have to fly out to Florida to get a proper length of pool, how can they be expected to perform? These are the kinds of projects we should look at so that everybody in the country who buys a lottery ticket can say that they helped to build it and are proud of it. The youth of Ireland would be motivated by that.

Such a project is now in the course of being built, and if the Deputy does not know about that he does not know the major facts.

(Limerick East): How could the Minister build it? The sales of lottery tickets are going down already because of what is going on.

I would remind the Deputy that he is eating into his generosity towards Deputy Deenihan who now has four minutes.

(Limerick East): That is tonight. Do we not have time again?

(Limerick East): I had better allow Deputy Deenihan in at this stage. The allocation in this year's Estimates is £93 million, £60 million on the current side and £33 million on the capital side. In the Estimates for 1989 that is dramatically reduced, with £40 million on th current side and £15 million on the capital side. What was £93 million last year is £55 million in 1989. The Minister can check the figures. I am sure he is familiar with his own Book of Estimates. There seems to be confusion over on the other side. The explanation is that there were two years rolled into one last year, but it is a major reduction. I know the other lottery is increasing its market share. What the Minister is doing is leading to a process which is disabling the national lottery. Eventually he will not have the funds for the major projects he is longfingering because he is nursing constituency interests. I thank you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

The Deputy has four and a half minutes.

As a former PE teacher and a sportsman and as somebody who promoted the idea of a national lottery since I came into politics I must say I am rather disappointed at the manner in which the proceeds were generally distributed. I admit that much good has resulted from the lottery already, but some practices will have to be eliminated to bring back confidence in the whole thrust of the National Lottery Bill which was originally introduced by Deputy Donal Creed. But for his foresight we would not be here tonight speaking about a national lottery. He must find it galling to see what is happening at the moment when he had the true interests of sport at heart, when he sees how politicised the whole thing has become. I am disgusted with what has been done.

I do not want to appear to be a begrudger, but as somebody with a love for sport and a general interest in it, I am not happy with what is happening. As party spokesman on youth and sport I will be doing my best to bring forward a five-year policy on sport. I mentioned in the Seanad four or five years ago some of the things mentioned by the Minister tonight, and I congratulate him on bringing forward those proposals. They are going in the right direction, but we need a five-year sports policy here so that we can say we expect to have spent so much on, say, a national stadium, be it indoors or out.

In the short time I have I want to point out that unless we have people who know how to use the facilities we are going no where. The emphasis is on the building of plant. There is not enough emphasis on the provision of proper administrative staff or on training people to coach people in the use and running of these facilities.

The level of physical education has been run down in our schools. At the Millennium conference the Government spokesman on sport accused the Department of Education of running down physical education here. This was quoted in an article in the Irish Independent.

Would the Deputy now bring his remarks to a close?

Physical education in our national schools is almost non-existent at the moment. Most teachers go through their training with just 20 hours of training in physical education. In our secondary schools 60 per cent of students at senior level are not now doing physical education. That is a national scandal. Here we are providing facilities and looking for results in the Olympics, yet we are not providing the basic training and education for these people. Instead of running around the country and trying to be popular and providing facilities everywhere, why do we not start at the kernel of our problem, why do we not start in the schools and ensure that there is a proper physical education curriculum implemented? If we are serious about putting sport on the agenda we should start there.

I am delighted to have an opportunity to contribute to this debate. It is a pity the Leas-Cheann Comhairle has left because we must put it on the record of the House that the person who initiated the national lottery idea, the man who had the meetings, created the concept and the structures and left the file ready was the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, Deputy Tunney. It was easy to carry on the file and to bring it into legislation when this had all been done.

(Interruptions.)

Deputies will be aware from this year's Book of Revised Estimates that the national lottery is assisting five capital projects being undertaken by the Office of Public Works. The lottery assistance amounts to £1.8 million and the largest single element is the allocation of £1 million to the stonework restoration project currently in progress at the Custom House.

The Custom House is considered by many to be the most important building erected in Dublin in the 18th century. The masterpiece of James Gandon, it was built between 1781 and 1791 at a cost of £250,000. The location of the Customs House exposes it to both urban and marine pollution and, in its history, it has survived two major fires. The first fire which occurred in 1789 delayed completion of the building and the second fire in 1921 burned for days and devastated the building. Temperatures were such as to melt bronze and powder limestone and the cracking of stonework, following cooling, continued for months. The complex nature and extent of damage caused is only fully understood now — almost 70 years later. If Deputy Noonan wanted some place in which we could have national pride all he has to do is go down and examine the Custom House and the work that was done.

The philosophy of the work now being aided by the national lottery has been established as one of the conservation and repair, rather than restoration and replacement. Establishing both the location and extent of ferrous metal in the structure was of prime importance and non-destructive techniques, including ultrasonics and radiography, were employed. The contractors on this project have on site a team of highly skilled masons and stone carvers and cleaning processes have been developed to achieve the gentlest possible cleaning. The work is due to be completed in 1991.

The restoration work at Kilmainham Jail is receiving lottery assistance of £0.2 million this year. Part of this money is being spent restoring the infirmary to provide a proper administrative centre for the jail, repointing of the facade, paving with granite sets and slabs, repair of metal balconies, ceilings and window bars and general improvements to the main entrance area. The lottery money has also assisted with the cost of adapting the chapel for use as an audio visual theatre.

The national lottery is also providing £0.2 million this year for landscaping and other site works at the magnificently restored Casino at Marino. The area inside the compound has been cleared of rubble, rotovated and grassed, while an area of eight metres around the building has been prepared for paving. In the general park area mounds have been moved to new positions and planting of shrubs on them will commence shortly. Following planting, topsoil will be laid before grassing commences. Railings will be erected on the north side of the area.

The fourth project being assisted this year by the lottery is the Holy Trinity Church in Dublin Castle. This building, in the Gothic style, was designed by Francis Johnson and was first used on Christmas Day, 1814. Among its most notable features are the 100 stone heads carved by Irish craftsmen.

When is the Minister going to deal with the Bill?

The Deputy does not like the facts. She never did like facts and ran away when the pressure came on.

(Interruptions.)

Order, please.

The lottery funds of £0.1 million have allowed the Office of Public Works to commence the stone cleaning of the church and to place a structural restoration contract. The contract should be completed well in time for Ireland's Presidency of the European Community in 1990.

Perhaps the Minister would now move the Adjournment of the debate.

A lottery allocation of £0.3 million has been made this year for the works to No. 5 Kildare Street, which is a four storey over basement town house originally constructed in the middle of the 18th century.

Is that the building that cost £2 million?

Deputies Harney and O'Malley do not like facts. When the pressure was on they ran. This is a sham.

We are now intruding on the time set aside for the Adjournment debate.

This shows their jealous attitude to the allocation of funds to needy projects.

Debate adjourned.
Top
Share