Estimates for Public Services 1990 and Public Capital Programme 1990: Motion (Resumed).

The following motion was moved by the Minister for Finance on Thursday, 30 November 1989:

"That Dáil Éireann takes note of the 1990 Estimates for the Public Services (Abridged Version) and of the 1990 Summary Public Capital Programme.

Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:

To add the following:

"That Dáil Éireann considers that the 1990 Estimates will do nothing to reverse the trend of inequality and disadvantage that has been the consequence of Government policy since 1987. Dáil Éireann considers that improved economic growth must be equitably distributed, must lead to the creation of jobs through the creation and retention of wealth in Ireland, and must be accompanied by social improvements in the areas of health, education, housing and social welfare here at home, and by an improved contribution to the alleviation of famine and poverty in the world around us. Against the background of an improved outlook for the economy, Dáil Éireann considers that the failure of the Government to make additional resources available in the following areas is particularly deplorable, and condemns the Government in respect of:

—Its failure to provide any specific programme to combat the continuing scandal of emigration;

—Its decision to reduce the Capital Allocation for the provision of health facilities by 8.5 per cent in real terms, notwithstanding the increasing and urgent demand for additional hospital wards and beds and notes that such a cut will inevitably delay, for instance, work on the Tallaght Regional Hospital;

—Its failure to provide sufficient current resources in the health allocation to allow for the reopening and adequate staffing of hospital beds and wards, notwithstanding the fact that the use of accident and emergency services as the only means of access to hospital beds for a great many people is leading to a resurgence of long waiting lists for elective treatment in public hospitals;

—Its failure to make any additional allocation available for the development of additional residential, training and employment opportunities for people with a mental handicap, even though it is now reliably estimated that in the Eastern Health Board area alone, for instance, a total of 328 residential places are needed immediately, with a further 567 places needed in the years after 1990;

—Its decision to maintain capital spending on the provision of educational facilities at the same deplorably low level as last year, which was the worst year for capital investment in education in the 1980s;

—Its decision to cut Exchequer current spending on First Level Education by 1 per cent in real terms, and to freeze expenditure on Second Level Education, having regard to the growing level of inequality within our education system, and its decision to use European funding to replace Exchequer expenditure at all levels of our education system;

—Its continuing covert approach to restricting access to Social Welfare programmes, and its lack of adequate funding for programmes whose main aim is to combat poverty;

—Its deplorable decision effectively to force local authorities to finance their housing programmes out of the sale of local authority houses, thereby ensuring that the housing crisis already evident will become worse this year;

—Its scandalous allocation to International Co-operation, which now represents the smallest proportion of GNP of any year since 1980."

—(Deputy Spring.)

Minister for Education (Mrs. O'Rourke)

In anticipation of inquiries about my script I should say copies will be available in a few moments.

I am very glad to have this opportunity to speak on the Estimates for 1990, in particular, those relating to my Department.

In recent years there has been general acceptance of the need to address social equity issues by having appropriate dynamic planning and development policies. I and my Department are fully committed to this approach and to the concept of providing quality services in an efficient and effective manner. This is best done by targeting resources and by having planning strategies which give special consideration to the disadvantaged and which are effective in promoting educational development.

The Clancy report Who Goes to College? referred to the rapid expansion in second and third level provision as “one of the most striking features of social change in Ireland over recent decades”. During the period 1981 to 1990 it is estimated that the number in full-time education in the 15 to 19 age group will have increased from 54.3 per cent to 70 per cent approximately while in the 20-24 age group the increase will be from 7.2 per cent to 13 per cent approximately. Currently some 80 per cent of students, corresponding to 58 per cent of the age cohort, who qualify for entry to third level education, proceed to further education or training programmes. It is expected that there will be continued growth in numbers in further and higher education during the years ahead.

The total gross provision for the four Votes in the Education group is £1,333.2 million which includes £154.6 million as Appropriations-in-Aid. The comparable gross figure in 1989 was £1,260.5 million. The amount being sought for 1990, therefore, represents an increase of £72.7 million or 6 per cent approximately over the 1989 provision. This amount of £1,333.2 million represents a very substantial outlay on education and represents over 6.1 per cent of GNP, one of the highest in EC member states. The provision will enable me to continue to promote the educational reform policies and strategies which will facilitate the process of change in education necessary to ensure that the programmes offered in our schools and colleges will be of relevance in the nineties and beyond.

The net Estimate for non-capital services in the 1990 Abridged Version of the Estimates Volume is £5,661 million approximately. Of this amount £1,128 million approximately is allocated to funding educational services. This means that almost 20 per cent of the Exchequer current expenditure is required to meet the day-to-day running costs of the Irish education system. Such a substantial level of expenditure on education is clear acknowledgment of the need to maintain and develop the quality of the Irish education system.

Since by its very nature the education process is labour-intensive 84.8 per cent of this amount— a total of £957 million — will be required to meet salaries and pensions.

An overall total of £210 million is being provided for non-pay non-capital expenditure. This corresponds to an increase of more than 13.4 per cent on the 1989 budget allocation. The provision for capital expenditure is £50.55 million corresponding to an increase of over 6.6 per cent on the 1989 allocation.

The significant increases in the allocation for education will enable me to continue to develop and reform the system and to ensure that, within it, conditions and opportunities are created to maximise the development of the abilities, talents and aptitudes of all our children.

All young people must be encouraged to develop their critical faculties, to analyse and evaluate information and to develop self-learning skills. It is necessary to reform our teaching and learning systems and, by means of observation, research, experimentation and review, develop teaching methodologies which will foster the development of the productive, creative, artistic and aesthetic potential of young people.

Priority will continue to be given to measures to promote equality of opportunity in education in all fields and at all levels of the education system.

The net allocation for the Office of the Minister for Education is £52.67 million which corresponds to an increase of 13 per cent over the 1989 provision. This increase will allow for a number of significant research and developmental-type activities to be planned and implemented.

The proposed allocation for the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment — NCCA — of £325,000 represents an increase of 12 per cent on the 1989 allocation. This will allow for increased activities relating to the review and reform of the primary and post-primary curricula.

The Primary Curriculum Review Body, under the aegis of the NCCA, are currently completing their comprehensive review of the primary curriculum. They have been asked to give particular attention to the last two years of the primary school and the alignment to the post-primary cycle. I have been assured that its final report will be forwarded to me within the next few months. I look forward to receiving it. The recommendations on curricular innovations and initiatives and on possible assessment evaluation procedures will be considered fully by me and measures will be taken to implement in a positive way appropriate reform strategies.

Two major initiatives were launched in post primary schools in 1989 and will be further developed in 1990. I refer to the promotion of the teaching of modern languages, in particular German, Spanish and Italian, and to the participation of some 60 post primary schools in a pilot scheme to develop a technology programme suitable for junior cycle pupils.

The work of the Primary Review Body, under Dr. Tom Murphy, is making much progress on the review of structures in primary education, school organisation, the quality of primary education etc. I expect their report early in 1990 and I am sure that the outcome will have a positive and fundamental effect on primary education which will extend well into the next century.

We satisfactorily began the first phase of the examinations' computerisation project. In 1990 it is planned to develop the system further by using the computer to process candidate entries and to produce candidate rolls for both the oral and written examinations. There has been widespread concern during the past year or two about the backlog in the issuing of formal certificates. All that will be cleared by my Department before Christmas.

The potential of information and communication technologies to achieve greater administrative efficiency and to provide quality services is very great. I am hoping to be able to avail in full of all these processes and of the subsequent data enabling us to plan further in policy.

The previous Government in the Programme for National Recovery gave a specific commitment to give special attention to disadvantaged groups. This Government are also committed to considering ways to recognise and assist the needs of pupils in disadvantaged areas. The 1990 Education Estimates will enable me to continue to fund programmes for the disadvantaged and to introduce some worthwhile developments. In 1990 £500,000 will again be provided to fund a programme of special educational measures for schools in disadvantaged areas. By means of this fund participating schools will be given special grants for the purchase of books and equipment, home/school/community liaison initiatives will be encouraged and strengthened and special in-service training for teachers in these schools will be provided.

In the school year 1988-89 there were 95 additional teaching posts authorised in certain national schools in disadvantaged areas. Provision is made in these Estimates for the allocation of another 95 teaching posts to other schools regarded as disadvantaged. There are currently 850 posts of remedial teachers in national schools and I have recently decided to create an additional 30. This measure, together with the reduction in the pupil-teacher ratio with effect from next September, will enable school managers and principals to improve the organisation of remedial measures. Guidelines have been issued and there have been in-service courses. Recently we launched a video on new and developing methods in remedial education.

Earlier this year I had indicated my plans to initiate a pilot school psychological service for primary schools in a disadvantaged area in Dublin and in a rural area. I have decided that these projects will be in the West Tallaght/ Clondalkin area and in South Tipperary. I am very glad that we have been able to get this project off the ground. It had been sought for a long time by agencies involved in education.

Recently I was glad to announce an additional £1.096 million which will allow for the replenishment of school library books. The necessary administrative arrangements are now being made and the local authorities will have the money in the next few weeks.

The scheme of aid towards the provision of books in post primary schools is intended for pupils coming from homes in which genuine hardship exists because of unemployment or various other social ills. There is flexibility in the operation of the scheme. In 1989 it was increased by 20 per cent and there will be a further increase of 24 per cent in 1990.

The Youthreach initiative is going from strength to strength. It was launched jointly by me and the Minister for Labour to cater for young people in the 15 to 18 year age group who left school without any formal qualification. This programme will be further advanced in 1990, at a cost to the Department of Education of £4.5 million.

Since becoming Minister I have been particularly interested in the need for schools to provide appropriate personal and social development programmes for young people. The Minister for Health and I have co-operated with the pilot schemes on AIDS education information in post primary schools. We have consulted all relevant groups, including the Catholic Church, the Church of Ireland and parents. It is planned that the analysis of the evaluative procedures will be completed by the end of 1989 and resource materials in their final form will be made available to all schools early in 1990.

The vocational training opportunities scheme under which unemployed adults can study for educational qualifications without losing social welfare benefits has been expanded. The scheme operated initially at three centres but ten further centres are to be established. A total of 260 places will be provided and we plan to increase this progressively before the end of 1990.

Next year is International Literacy Year and the Government have decided to establish a Cabinet sub-committee comprising the Minister for Labour, the Minister for Social Welfare and myself, as chairperson, to co-ordinate proposals in this area to ensure that the various resources available for adult literacy and community education and training schemes are used in the most effective and coherent way. Increased funding will be allocated to particular schemes. The Cabinet sub-committee will examine how resources can best be used.

Under the national school building programme 55 new schools and permanent extensions were completed in 1989 and there will be some 50 more projects on site in 1990. We will focus on essential classroom accommodation for schools which have acute problems.

The amount available for the second level school building programme is £18.625 million. Rationalisation and cost effectiveness are now key features of my policy on the provision of post primary schools.

I have spoken earlier about the growth in third level education. The current demand for higher education exceeds the availability of places. A working group consisting of representatives of my Department, the HEA and the universities is currently considering ways of maximising the use of existing facilities with a view to achieving an increase in student intake in the HEA for the start of the 1990-91 academic year. Student numbers are currently projected to increase by almost 10,000 over the next ten years.

The gross provision in 1990 for third level expenditure is £275,954 million, which corresponds to an increase of almost 13 per cent on 1989. As a result we are able to launch two important initiatives at third level. The first is the advanced technical skills programme in universities, providing one year vocationally oriented post-graduate courses in areas which contribute to the sectoral development objectives outlined in the National Development Plan, particularly in the fields of engineering, science, applied science, business studies, marketing, food science and technology. Up to 2,000 places are available on these courses and students who enrol will have their fees remitted. These initiatives are supported by ESF aid. It is estimated that overall some 60,000 trainees will benefit from ESF supported vocational training programmes at a cost of £160 million approximately.

In 1990 the allocation for third level capital projects is increased to £15.15 million, an increase of over 32 per cent. Over £9 million of this allocation will be provided to enhance the capability of the third level education sector to support industry in bridging the technological gap. My Department will be implementing a series of measures in areas where there are serious deficiencies in universities, regional technical colleges and colleges of technology.

Construction will begin on a new regional technical college in Tallaght which will assist in making third level education more accessible in an area noted for its low participation.

It is also planned that the 1990 capital allocation will make available funds for rationalisation, improvement and capacity enhancement programmes and for the provision of new facilities in certain third level institutions.

As a result of our clear national plans and the consensus reached in developing the Programme for National Recovery, reductions in Government expenditure and borrowing have been quickly achieved resulting in lower interest rates and inflation. Our interest rates and inflation are now much lower than in Britain, our largest trading partner. I need not remind Deputies that previously under various administrations the current budget deficit as a percentage of gross national product grew from 4.4 per cent to an all time high of 8.6 per cent. Since then by careful management and tight control of the public finances it has been possible to greatly improve our economic performance.

We have been able to increase our competitiveness in the UK market, in other EC markets and further afield. There have been significant performances by Irish firms in the exports area. Merchandise trade figures indicate that in 1989 our exports have been earning about £1,200 million per month resulting in a trade surplus of £1,700 million for the first nine months. Indeed, merchandise trade surplus in 1989 shows an increase of almost 9 per cent over the record figures achieved in 1988.

Government strategy is to plan for a further reduction in borrowing in 1990, to maintain low inflation and interest rates and to work towards eliminating the current budget deficit. By implementing sound budgetary policies and by maintaining budgetary discipline and strict control on public expenditure we have succeeded in arresting the economic decline and in achieving significant economic growth. We are well on the road to further economic success in that regard.

In the Estimates, as I have stated earlier, the Government have made a gross allocation in excess of £1,333 million to fund the education services in 1990. With this amount and with the co-operation of the many committed persons involved in the education sector it will, indeed, be possible to maintain and improve the quality of the services provided in our schools and colleges and to implement a number of important policy initiatives. I fully commend with confidence these Estimates to the House.

Mr. S. Barrett

In my opinion this could be one of the most important debates of the year if the Government were prepared to change the way we do our business. It should be an occasion for my party and others to say what level of public expenditure they want for the coming year, where it should be spent and if more or less is to be spent — if we were to spend more, to outline where the money was to come from and the areas in which this money was to be spent. We in this House better cop on to ourselves very quickly. We are here this morning debating Estimates for 1990 and the Ministers have very kindly come in and outlined the various programmes they will be engaged in over the next 12 months and where the money is going to be spent. My understanding was that previously this type of debate took place after the budget when we had a proper and full Estimates debate.

The original intention of this type of debate, the concept of which was first introduced during our period in Government by the then Minister, Deputy John Bruton, was that we could, as a Dáil, discuss proposed expenditure for the coming year. What we are doing here is falling back into the old trap of reading out scripts and telling us where the money is going to be spent. I could come in here and outline all that is wrong in the Estimate for the Department of Industry and Commerce. I could say more money needs to be spent in various areas. Other parties, like the Labour Party, The Workers' Party and Independents, could come in and say we are not spending enough money in this or that area, but the reality is that the country was on its knees for long enough as a result of that type of irresponsible approach to dealing with the job we were elected to do.

If we are not prepared to make the changes here, how can we say to the electorate that we must change many of the ways we do our business or that we must prepare ourselves properly for 1992? How can we put our hands on our hearts and say we are leading the way when every time there is a need for change here, it is delayed or postponed, we are told there is some difficulty with it or it is not in the interests of the Government of the day? It is time we led the way. I would prefer to come here and make suggestions to my opposite number as to where moneys should be spent. I would like to have the opportunity of listening to his views as to why the money is going into this or that area. I would like to have a general debate as to whether the level of expenditure proposed in the Book of Estimates is the right or the wrong figure rather than go through the nonsense of reading out a script, going away after 20 minutes and saying that is another job completed.

This procedure is getting us nowhere. I have gone through the Book of Estimates, the various press statements that were issued with it and the various announcements made by Ministers since its publication. On the face of it, the Book of Estimates shows that expenditure for next year will increase by approximately ½ per cent on last year. When you start digging deeper you find that is not the real figure. This is what is wrong with us. There is a sort of PR hype necessary to try to convince people that things are getting better. I am not a pessimist but we have to be realistic. Our job is to point out the dangers of falling back into the trap in which we found ourselves in the past. The inherent danger in the way this Book of Estimates is being presented is that it will open the doors again to an increase in public expenditure, something we just cannot afford at this time.

Last year the national debt was £24,000 million. At the end of this year it will be £25,000 million, an increase in the last 12 months of £1,000 million, the equivalent of £7,000 for every man, woman and child in this country. Anybody who has the notion that this problem has been resolved because of the sacrifices that were forced upon us over the past number of years, better start thinking again because an additional £1,000 million will be needed to service the debt next year, the following year after and the year after that, more of the revenue we are collecting going into foreign banks and out of this economy.

When you look at the Book of Estimates you find there is a difference of £140 million in social welfare, and you ask yourself how that came about. You then find that money has been transferred from two funds, the occupational injuries fund and the redundancy fund, into the figures for social welfare and you assume there will be fewer people drawing social welfare benefits. Unless these people emigrate, and I sincerely hope they do not because we have lost too many people already, the figures being assumed here are inaccurate and at the end of the year a supplementary estimate will have to be introduced for the Department of Social Welfare. When we look at the real figures and assume there is a once-off transfer of funds from two funds into the main social welfare fund we are talking about an increase of 3 per cent. When realistic figures are added to the various increases in the budget in relation to social welfare benefits and other benefits we find that current expenditure at the end of the year will be up about 5 per cent on last year. That will be the real figure.

How have we got down to this figure? The reality is that we have got down to this figure because there has been tax buoyancy. The reason I am pointing this out is that it is assumed we have cut public expenditure to such a level that we are now in a healthy position. However, when we look at the underlying factors we will find that we are not in a better position and that the improvements which, thankfully, have taken place, are the result of tax buoyancy. I am not being pessimistic but with rising interest rates and rising taxation there is always a danger that tax buoyancy will not continue. If by any chance there is a drop we will be back in the bad position we were in before and we will have to restart the whole process of trying to educate the public on the need for caution in regard to the amount of money we can afford to spend.

Those are the sort of problems we should be discussing in this House. It should not be left to the Government to have a produce a Book of Estimates and throw them out for discussion. It does not really matter what I say because at the end of the day they will be printed and will form part of the budget. Under the system we operate one side of this House is totally excluded from having any real input into the way our economy should develop. We are asking people to change the way in which they do their business so that we will be prepared for 1992. Once again I propose that we in this House lead the way and change the manner in which we do our business. We on this side of the House, I think the year before last, proposed a way of doing that but, unfortunately, our proposal was rejected. We suggested that the Book of Estimates be prepared and presented to us so that if we wanted to change the way in which the moneys were being spent we would have to outline in detail the areas in which we would save money, the areas in which we would reduce or increase spending and, if there was an overall increase, how we propose to fund it.

That would put an obligation on us, as an Opposition, to put our money where our mouth is. It would enable us to tell the Government and the public why we believed more money should be spent in education, health, etc., and that because of the increased expenditure in those areas we would have to reduce expenditure in other areas. It would also stop the nonsense I have heard from some of the parties on the Left who have been telling us we are Right wing politicians who do not care about people, that the vicious cuts which have taken place during the past few years are unnecessary and that more money should be spent in every area. It would also put an onus on those gentlemen to come in here and explain exactly how they propose to fund the various programmes they want. It would not be just to the benefit of this side of the House — when I say that I mean the main Opposition party — but it would put an onus on everybody else to say to the Government how business should be carried out for 1990.

It is frightening that with all the sacrifices we have made, in this year alone our debt has gone up by £1,000 million. What should our priorities be? I have no doubt that our priority should be the creation of employment and I do not think anybody would disagree with that objective. The Government have set a target for the creation of 20,000 manufacturing jobs between 1989 and 1993 but because of the numbers of young people coming on to the employment market even if that figure is attained, approximately 100,000 people will either have to emigrate or go on the unemployment register. This highlights the task which faces all of us in the creation of jobs for the future. We have to look at the ways and means by which we can achieve this target for job creation. I have maintained on numerous occasions that we can throw pound after pound into various grants and programmes, which we have done for the past ten or 15 years, but that it will not get us very far. There are certain underlying facts which have to be addressed. I should like to deal with these under the heading "creation of the right environment".

In the recent past there have been increases in interest rates and an upward trend in the rate of inflation. These are a great cause of concern and I suggest that every step be taken immediately to reduce to industry various transport, fuel and insurance costs. I would like to revert back to what I said earlier about the Estimates. When we look at the social welfare fund and the Book of Estimates we find that what has happened once again — I am not saying we were any better than the present Government in facing up to this problem — is that the ceiling for PRSI has gone up so that there will be more costs to industry, more demands on employees and less take home pay. That is not the proper environment for the creation of jobs. There is also the continuing saga of high rates of personal tax. This is a total disincentive to those who are working and who could perhaps produce more to create more wealth for those who are not working so that (a) there would be more money to pay the benefits we are paying at present and (b) we would have the production levels which would afford others the opportunity of getting work.

This is one of the most urgent tasks facing the Government in dealing with the overall tax problem. Recently we had an offer to participate in a committee for the reform of local government. I notice that one of the terms of reference of the committee is the review of the funding of local government. The Fine Gael Party have no intention of dealing with one aspect of taxation without being given the opportunity to participate in an overall reform of the tax system.

We have made numerous offers to participate in an all-party committee to review taxation and implement proper tax reforms. Now we have had the piecemeal approach and an offer to us to participate in local government reform. Why the hesitancy? Why not establish an all-party committee to consider tax reform and let us implement their recommendations in full? There is a danger that the Government will go off at a tangent and find a way of imposing more taxes on an already overtaxed population. They should look at the broader picture. I appeal to the Government to accept our offer and establish an all-party committee to deal with tax reform.

I hope that this time next year the Government will have realised the opportunity that exists in a debate like this to consider future spending and how we should tackle the country's problems. We should not have a continuation of this type of charade, of having two-day debates with Members arriving in the Chamber with prepared scripts and pouring out their hearts as to what they consider should be done to solve the country's problems. There is no doubt that when we leave the House after such debates the Book of Estimates will not be changed. One would not think we had contributed to this two day debate because our suggestions will not be taken on board. What is the purpose of this debate? Can we do something worth while in relation to the Book of Estimates? We can put forward many worthwhile suggestions but I do not think the Government will take them on board.

On the Estimate for the Department of Industry and Commerce I should like to make an appeal to the Minister — it is unfortunate that he is not present — to give assistance to the Consumer Association of Ireland, an organisation who are doing excellent work on behalf of consumers. They highlight many issues on behalf of consumers and suggest changes. Basically, they are a voluntary organisation struggling under difficult circumstances to highlight issues that need our attention. We have failed to provide them with adequate funding to enable them to do that work. Recently, with others, I highlighted the fact that reductions were not being passed on to the consumer arising out of the improvement in the value of the punt against sterling and the Minister responded by issuing a threat that if importers and retailers did not behave themselves he would have to see to it that they would.

I note that the Minister has said in the last few days that he is happy improvements have been made and that he does not intend to take direct action. I should like to know how the Minister proposes to monitor this and to ensure that the improvements will continue. We do not have price controls and I am not suggesting that we should have but we should have a monitoring system. We should seek the views of consumers and they are represented by the Consumer Association of Ireland. It is a scandal that we do not support such voluntary organisations who can do the work on behalf of the Minister if given the necessary resources.

I should like to appeal to the Minister to make funds available to that association. In fact, it is time the Minister allocated funds under a separate subhead to draw attention to the fact that we appreciate the work being done by that association.

Another point I should like to make relates to the Office of the Director of Consumer Affairs. That official, and his office, are being asked to investigate more and more complaints but we are not providing the necessary resources. We must do everything possible to enable that office to carry out investigations as soon as possible after complaints are made. It is time that we recognised the importance of making adequate resources available to that office. In the Estimate we should set priorities and make adequate funds available to such agencies.

I note that under subhead O.1 £2,274 million is provided in respect of export guarantee arrangements under the Insurance Act, 1953. In that regard I should like to refer to the action taken by the Minister in respect of export credit insurance. To date we have not been given a proper explanation why certain steps were taken in regard to that scheme. We are not satisfied that the appropriate steps were taken at the time. In the not too distant future I hope to have an opportunity to deal with that subhead in greater detail. I assume that after the budget is introduced we will have a full debate on the Estimates.

Minister for Health (Dr. O'Hanlon)

The economic and budgetary strategy for the past two and a half years has had, as all Deputies are aware, a dramatic effect on public finances and on economic indicators. The national debt-GNP ratio has been stabilised and we are very close to achieving our target reduction of the national debt to 120 per cent of GNP. Both of these targets will have been achieved ahead of schedule. The public expenditure constraints which have been a crucial element in this strategy have, of course, presented major challenges for the public services. As Minister for Health, I am acutely conscious of the difficulties in maintaining a high standard of service, let alone providing for any necessary development, under such circumstances. It cannot be denied, however, that the Government's strategy has been the correct one, so as to restore our economy and ensure a return to economic growth. Such growth is, after all, essential if we are to provide sustainable improvements in our social services such as health care, in response to increased needs and technological developments.

The 1990 Estimates reflect a continuation of the policy of the last two and a half years, with a further decrease in real terms in Exchequer spending. However, the Government have also responded to the needs of certain priority areas, including Health. The health services account for a substantial proportion of total public expenditure, and it was inevitable therefore, that the health sector would have to make a contribution to bringing the public finances under control and thus restoring confidence in the economy. The Government have recognised that this contribution was made, and are aware of the difficult choices which they imposed on the providers of services. It was inevitable, given the size of the reductions necessary over a short period of time, that some gaps in the services would arise.

The Government showed their commitment to the maintenance and improvement of the health services by providing an additional £15 million in the 1989 Supplementary Estimate to address specific problem areas in the acute hospital services. The 1990 Estimate for my Department provides for the continuation of these initiatives throughout 1990. In general, the Health provision for 1990 shows a substantial increase over 1989. The gross non-capital provision for 1990 is £1,371 million, which is £120 million, or 9.6 per cent, greater than the original 1989 provision and £71.5 million, or 5.5 per cent, higher when account is taken of the Supplementary Estimate approved for 1989.

These figures reflect a marked increase in the share of net day-to-day Government spending devoted to the health services. The net non-capital provision for Health represents 21.3 per cent of the total expenditure compared with 19.7 per cent at the same point last year. This improved provision should with proper management enable us to maintain service levels and provide some scope for enhancements.

The £15 million provided in this year's Supplementary Estimate was directed towards improving the capacity of the acute hospitals to deal with the existing demands upon their services. The measures introduced in recent months will continue, and will be seen to have a significant impact on removing bottlenecks and speeding up access to necessary treatment.

I now want to refer to the controversy which has developed in recent days regarding the availability of acute hospital services in Dublin and, in particular, on the north side of the city. I am deeply distrubed at the manner in which this subject has been treated by certain interests. All elective admissions have not been cancelled at the Mater Hospital. The statement issued by the Irish Hospital Consultants Association is incorrect on a number of counts and I have already said so publicly.

Wild statements about crises in hospital services show no regard for the facts. There was no crisis this week. However, what they do is cause unnecessary worries for patients and their families, as well as damaging the wellbeing of the service. I want to assure the House that patients who are in urgent need of admission will be treated and I reject allegations that patients may die as a result of the current situation. I would like to give the House an indication of the type of resource which is going into the three north Dublin acute hospitals in 1989. The figure for each of the three hospitals is: Mater Hospital, £27.5 million; Beaumont Hospital, £35 million and Blanchardstown, £11 million. There are 3,700 staff working in these hospitals and I can assure the House that each and every one of them is fully committed to the provision of an excellent hospital service for the area. One would think to hear the various allegations that I, as Minister, had hardly provided any resource at all for the provision of hospital services in north Dublin. These are major flagship hospitals which provide an excellent service and I am concerned because these wild allegations may damage the public's confidence in these institutions.

I question the motives behind the use of such terminology. It is totally untrue that the hospitals are in a shambles and that patients are dying because of the present situation. What we have here is opportunism. The secretary of the Irish Hospitals Consultants' Association seems to regard the knocking of the service as a legitimate and profitable exercise. I want to refute allegations made in the past few days by Mr. Fitzpatrick.

Let me again put the factual position on the record: the Mater Hospital is not cancelling all elective admissions; there will be no reduction in cardiac surgery in the Mater Hospital during the remainder of this year; urgent admissions will continue; consultants will continue to make decisions on admission of urgent cases; administrators do not make decisions about who is admitted, they convey the board's decisions on the overall amount of service that can be provided; and there will be some reduction in elective admissions during December. This is not unusual. It has been happening for years in every Dublin hospital.

Let me also put in context the reduction in activity which has been planned by the Mater Hospital for December. There has been an increase in the number of admissions at north Dublin hospitals as a result of the introduction of the 24 hour accident and emergency service. In fact there has been an increase at the six major Dublin hospitals. This increase shows that the Government answered a need in introducing the new arrangement and large numbers of people are getting a much better hospital service than heretofore.

A detailed survey of the usage of this new service is being carried out and decisions on any further improvements thought necessary will be made when the results of the survey are available. In the meantime, the operation of the service is being regularly reviewed by the standing committee on accident and emergency services under the chairmanship of the Eastern Health Board. This standing committee includes a consultant from each of the hospitals concerned. In that regard I am concerned that in some hospitals there has been a delay in supplying information on the level of private practice, requested on foot of a Government decision that this should be monitored.

I have not been taken unawares by the increase in attendances at accident and emergency units and my Department and the Eastern Health Board have had numerous consultations on the matter. In fact, my Department have been involved in the establishment of the survey. Full services will be restarted in the Mater from the beginning of January and I am confident that the institutions concerned will continue to provide an excellent hospital service during the coming year.

Quite apart from the special measures introduced in recent months, there are also a number of important developments in our major hospitals, particularly in relation to the technology available for diagnosis and treatment, which will enable patient throughput to be increased significantly. The funding being allocated to the health services in 1990 will provide for the first full year of service in the new facilities at the Mater and St. James's Hospitals in Dublin. It will also be possible to bring on-stream new facilities at Ardkeen Hospital in Waterford.

Indeed, progress can be seen throughout the country in the development of our general hospital services. Among the many examples I have already referred to are recent developments at the Mater and St. James's Hospitals. This month I opened a major extension at the Mater which cost £40 million and which provides some of the finest facilities available anywhere in the developed world. This week I opened a new major outpatient and accident and emergency facility at St. James's Hospital. Last week I opened a major new hospital in Cavan town. This afternoon I am going out to launch a new linear accelerator at St. Luke's Hospital, a major improvement in the facilities available to cancer patients.

There is also a new regional ophthalmic unit in Cork Regional Hospital with a more extensive outpatient department and improved treatment facilities; a new surgical ear, nose and throat services which are now available to patients from the Midland Health Board area at Tullamore; the provision of two new operating theatres at St. Mary's Orthopaedic Hospital, Cappagh and the construction of a new extension at Sligo General Hospital. In short, the Government's approach to our acute hospital services has two elements — we are remedying the difficulties and bottlenecks which are inevitable at any time but particularly when a period of tight budgetary constraints has been necessary; and we are ensuring that the services are developed and that they keep pace with the available technology.

These improvements in our hospital services do not imply any diminution in the priority being given to the development of primary care and community services. Indeed, with the provision of more and more high technology equipment to our hospitals, it becomes all the more important that patients should receive treatment in the appropriate setting. General practice has a vital role to play in this respect.

The new contract for doctors in the General Medical Service is now in place, and it represents the most radical change in the provision of primary care in almost 20 years. I am confident that the coming year will show that the new style of general practice upon which the contract is based will yield real benefits for patients, doctors and for the health services as a whole.

An obvious example of the growing pressure on health care resources is that of the financial costs of AIDS. The number of cases in Ireland is doubling roughly every nine months, and the likelihood is that this pattern of rapid escalation in the number of cases will continue for at least the next three to four years. Considerable progress has been made, and will continue to be made, both in controlling the disease and in assisting sufferers and their families.

I have also been reviewing the operation of the community drugs scheme. In particular, I am anxious to deal with the very real problems of those who need expensive medication on an on-going basis. Although the health boards refund all expenditure on prescribed drugs in excess of £28 a month, the need to pay for the medicines on purchase, and wait some time for a refund, can cause hardship to many.

A new community drugs scheme has been negotiated with the Irish Pharmaceutical Union and will be introduced as soon as possible. Patients with an ongoing need for expensive medication will receive a special authorisation from the local health board which will relieve them of the burden of any payments in excess of £28 per month. The balance will be recouped by the pharmacist from the GMS payments board.

Health promotion has been one of my major concerns since I became Minister for Health, and will remain so in 1990. There will be very considerable public support for the environmental controls over smoking in a variety of public places. These will not only provide a healthier and more pleasant environment for smokers and non-smokers alike, but will help to reduce the likelihood that young persons will acquire the habit. A special drink awareness programme for young people is also being developed by my Department's health promotion unit, in conjunction with the National Youth Council.

These measures may lack the dramatic impact of the provision of high-technology, life-saving equipment to our acute hospitals, but in the long-term, however, their impact may be no less significant.

The outlook for the health services in 1990 is one of service improvement and increased funding. It is therefore essential that I make it clear that this does not imply that the need for tight control of spending has passed, or that the pursuit of efficiency need no longer have the same priority as before. Over the past few years, those working in all areas of the health services have responded to the challenges presented to them by the financial restrictions. In spite of these restrictions, services have been maintained and the result is a leaner and more efficient service. It would be grossly irresponsible to throw away the hard-earned benefits of these years and allow efficiency to be eroded by unplanned and unco-ordinated spending. My Department will continue to work closely with health agencies in the pursuit of cost-containment and efficiency, to ensure that all of the increases in funding are translated into service improvements for the benefit of patients.

I am glad to inform the House that the recovery programme implemented by the VHI is continuing successfully and that the VHI is well on the way to recovery.

In conclusion, there have been many important new developments in the health services during 1989. These improvements will be maintained, and further enhanced, in 1990. These developments range from additional hospital facilities and increased patient throughput to radical changes in the general medical services.

This country has a very high quality health service. We devote a higher share of our national resources to health care than does any country at our level of relative affluence. Health services must undergo constant change, and there is always room for development and improvement. This Government have shown their commitment to the maintenance of high standards and the ongoing development of the services.

I look forward to the support of everyone involved in health care in ensuring that the extra resources, which are sizeable for 1990, now being made available are used to provide the greatest possible benefit in terms of patient care.

Mr. Connaughton

I would like to divide my time with Deputy Therese Ahearn. We will take ten minutes each, and this will be her maiden speech.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Connaughton

Today's discussion on the Estimates is the most important discussion we have had in this House, although one would not think that from looking around here today. The Estimates are important because they map out our future for the next five years. Before now mistakes could be corrected each year, but the proposals before us today are for the next five years. The Government, for better or worse have agreed on a plan of action. We have made our bed and we have to lie in it now.

It is important from an agricultural point of view to look at our present position. There are falling EC market supports for beef, strict quotas for milk, a very punitive levy regime for cereals and a sheep market sector which is becoming overcrowded by the day. The EC overall pricing policy is being geared towards the lower world market price and the outcome of the present Uruguay round of talks is vital to Ireland in more ways than one.

My job is to comment on the future of agriculture over the period in question. I do not like what I see because when all the bureaucratic garbage is stripped away there are huge gaps in the delivery of supports to Irish farming particularly to small farmers. We have between 30,000 to 40,000 who because of off-farm income for themselves or their spouses are likely to stay in rural Ireland and unfortunately we have another 40,000 to 50,000 small farmers whose future is in doubt, particularly small non-dairy farmers. The Government have negotiated a rotten deal for Ireland. It is well known that market forces alone will not solve the problems of many farmers at the bottom of the pile.

In relation to structures, despite my best efforts to elicit information on the headage schemes yesterday from the Minister at Question Time he used every device imaginable so as not to divulge the information sought. It was a disgraceful performance but I know exactly why he chose to do that. Having read the relevant section of the Community Support Framework, I am convinced of the report leaked from Limerick University a few weeks ago when Mr. Hubar of the EC structures division outlined Ireland's position on agriculture. This was reported exclusively in The Farmers Journal. Ireland sought £668 million but finished up being allocated £104 million less, at £564 million. The Minister's figure here yesterday was even worse — at £508 million.

Of most interest to farmers on low incomes is the headage payments for the severely disadvantaged areas. Mr. Hubar's figure of £216 million for headage payments over the next five years, where £266 million was sought by the Government is correct and, as the Minister informed the House, the amount for the other horizontal measures, as he called them, including headage, was pegged at £308 million for the period. This means that there is an EC ceiling of £54 million per year based on the four year plan or £43 million based on a five year plan now in place. Basically that is what we will get under the headage scheme. Ireland got £38 million from the EC this year in headage payments in the severely handicapped areas. The Government have committed themselves to increasing payment to the full rate in areas already in receipt of headage payments over the next four years as well as expanding the headage payment areas under the current review. A total of four million acres has been surveyed. How can this be achieved under the EC regime just negotiated?

The much commented on higher recoupment of 70 per cent from Brussels will not extend the benefit of the headage schemes because we are trapped with a ceiling on the EC contribution. For the first time I see a major shift of emphasis in the headage schemes to rural development programmes to help small farmers. The Community Support Framework indicates that the EC does not see headage payments as the important vehicle to deliver direct financial aid to small farmers. Why did the Minister accept this package? Rural development is a fine concept which can achieve a great deal. However, rural Ireland is suffering a major problem with low incomes on many farms. Many small dry stock farms are in dire financial circumstances as various farm management and recent Wexford and Laois surveys have shown. The problem is simple, shortage of money and low disposable income.

Rural development programmes, with their inbuilt self-help concept, are laudable and desirable but if the Government and the EC believe that small income farmers can wait for the benefit of rural development programmes to increase their incomes, there are frightful prospects ahead. I have never seen such unrelenting pressure on small farm families in certain categories over the last four or five years, and the position is certainly getting worse. Figures quoted for increases in incomes of 25 per cent over the past two years have no relevance whatever for those people. The die is cast. Do we want 30,000 to 40,000 farmers across the country or do we design programmes with meaningful EC aid which will help to keep people in rural Ireland?

I appreciate that no one measure can successfully achieve my target but, with headage payments which can be controlled both in regard to the number of livestock units and the amounts paid per livestock unit, a certain level of dignity is maintained and the direct income which headage is would provide the stimulus for further participation in the various rural development schemes. The Minister's efforts in Brussels to increase the level of livestock to qualify for the headage scheme from one livestock unit per hectare to 1.4 livestock units is most helpful, but will it be used in the present survey? My understanding is that it will not and I hope that we will have a reply from the Department on this later today.

The EC Commissioner also announced that the maximum number of livestock units eligible for payment of headage can be increased from 30 to 60 units. This is laudable as well. Last year we got £38 million from the EC to finance our headage. There is an increase of almost £10 million in the Estimates for headage payments for next year. This is to provide for farmers who will be admitted, for the first time, into the headage schemes. Their off-farm income will not be taken into account and it has nothing whatever to do with the extension of the disadvantaged areas. There is no provision in these Estimates for payment of headage to farmers who will be admitted into the scheme under the current review in 1990.

How can the Minister double headage payments for those already in the scheme, make provision for the new entrants on the current survey, particularly with the relaxed stocking rate provision, and allow payment on 60 units of livestock instead of the present 30 units? We are getting £38 million from the EC this year. The plan before us today suggests that we will get £43 million per year for the next five years. Will the Irish Exchequer cough up over £100 million per year up to 1993 for headage payments? There is no shadow of doubt but that the Exchequer will not do that. It is not in the plans. I can only assume that all the hype over the last six months will come down with a bang as far as those Estimates are concerned, and this is something the farm organisations and the media are now aware of. This is like the 11 million gallon quota that is due for distribution to small quota holders. Basically when it is broken down it means the production of half of one cow for every eligible farmer, and they will find that out to their cost in the next fortnight.

Because of the time factor I cannot go through the whole Estimate. We have lost an opportunity here to tackle many problems in rural Ireland. For example, there is a huge problem of low incomes for small farmers and we do not have the resources to solve this problem. I understood that a major attack was being made on this area and that it would unfold in the five year plan. That does not seem to be the case. I hope I am proved wrong, but I believe my costings and my facts are right.

The leading article in The Farmers Journal, the leaked document, was not commented on or denied by the Department or the Minister. From his performance here yesterday and that of his two junior Ministers who wanted to talk about everything under the sun except the structural side of agriculture, one would think we had no problems.

Next week when a supplementary Estimate is introduced for the Department of Agriculture and Food I will have much to say about the advisory service, Teagasc, who are in a disastrous position.

Finally, my grave reservations on this concept of direct income aid for low income farmers will not catch the television news tonight but it will be discussed in every parish across rural Ireland for the next couple of months. If the Government have no better answer to the problem of keeping people in rural Ireland than what is in the Community support framework document, I shudder to think of the numbers of what we would regard as farmers that will be around in ten years' time

It is my pleasure to hand over to Deputy Ahearn.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I hope the Chair will not be accused of being sexist if I say I am happy to call on Deputy Ahearn to brighten the morning for us.

Mrs. T. Ahearn

Thank you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, for that very kind introduction. First, I would like to thank Deputy Connaughton for sharing his time with me. Like him I wish to comment on the agricultural industry.

We all, and in particular the Minister for Agriculture and Food, pay lip service from time to time to the importance of the agricultural industry to the economy of this country. As we face the 1990s we have to look at the state of the industry and plan accordingly so as to ensure that we have an agricultural industry that will fully exploit our potential to produce quality produce and thereby provide employment, earnings and valuable export income to the agricultural community and to the nation as a whole.

A global view of agriculture at the moment shows that while the price of milk products has been satisfactory, the future does look bleak; that cattle and sheep prices are down substantially on last year; the farmers' potential to produce quality products and the processing industry's potential to process and market dairy and other agricultural products are both seriously hampered by quota restrictions on production on the farm.

I would like to ask the Minister whether the agricultural industry have been sold in the corridors of power in Brussels as Ireland's greatest natural resource. As we make full use of this natural resource, in an environmentally friendly manner, we must ensure that we have a highly skilled and well educated outward looking farming community, and that the processing industry is alive to the consumers' demands.

Marketing our farm produce is essential to the future of the industry. In this area I believe both the co-operatives and private firms have a major role to play. Rather than competing with each other in the home market, they should concentrate their efforts on developing a marketing strategy for their products in the EC and world markets. This market led approach should be based on the perceived needs of the consumers. It is my view that in future agricultural production must be consumer led, with emphasis on a continuous supply to the market of high quality products.

The Single European Act will ensure in the near future intense competition from industries in other EC member states. This will put renewed pressure on our agri foods sector to become even more efficient to ensure their survival and prosperity in the future. That is why I must emphasise again that both farmers and processors must co-operate in ensuring that only the highest quality product is produced for the market place. If we are to ensure that is to happen farmers must be supported by a wide range of short, medium and long-term policies at national and European level and they must be coupled with matching incentives and funding. The role of Teagasc is therefore of vital importance to ensure we have a farming community at least as modern in their outlook as their main European counterparts.

The Minister knows, and I cite my constituency of South Tipperary as an example, of the total destruction of the services which should be provided by Teagasc. It seems a complete contradiction to be on the one hand lauding the agricultural industry and on the other hand to be depriving it of its educational and advisory service. Whatever about the Supplementary Estimate, that will deal only with the crisis; it will not deal with the real problem in the Teagasc service.

We must remember that the two basic ingredients for a thriving agricultural industry are land and a forward looking, well advised farmer. We have always had the land but the advisory services are being dismantled day by day, and I regret very much to say it is a fellow Tipperary person who presides over this very sad scene. The Minister's colleague in Finance, Deputy A. Reynolds, has frequently, and correctly, stressed the importance of research and development. I ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food to view the role of Teagasc in the same light, but research and development at the agricultural processing level will never produce the potential that is there unless the quality product leaves the farm gate in the first place. Incentives, financial or otherwise to which I will refer later, are important but they can be used to their maximum only if the people for whom the incentives are intended are continually trained and updated to ensure they are in a position to maximise the potential benefits from these incentives. I ask the Minister, therefore, to reverse immediately his policy of dismantling the Teagasc service which is the cause of major concern not only to the agricultural community in Tipperary but in the whole country.

I come to a very important sector of the agricultural community, the young farmer. If agriculture is really to have a future we should lay particular emphasis on the young farmer, particularly the young farmer who has no hope of getting into the dairy industry. No young farmer should be totally excluded from getting into dairying because that section of agriculture is the one that is most potentially profitable and has any potential of providing a viable income. It is totally wrong to prevent young farmers who are starting out at farming not to have access to the dairying aspect of agriculture. Unfortunately, at present they are forced into an alternative enterprise which in many cases is their second choice and does not provide a viable income. Equally I think that as a Government it is very unwise that we should discard the tradition and expertise that exist in the dairying sector and have been built up for generations within the farming community.

Since my childhood on the land I have been hearing about the efforts to eradicate TB. It has cost the taxpayer millions of pounds. It has retarded the agricultural industry, yet today the incidence of TB is extremely high. Again referring to areas in my constituency such as Rossmore and Emly which are really only mirror images of many areas in the country, I see farmers who do not get adequate compensation when they have an exceptionally high level of disease in their herd. Furthermore, I believe the Minister does not really realise the traumatic experience it is for any farmer to have his herd totally locked up.

Quite recently we marked the 100th anniversary of the founding of the first co-operative creamery in the south. I am concerned and, indeed, saddened because it seems the wheel has gone full circle within the past century. We started off with the co-operatives taking over from private enterprise. Unfortunately, a lack of appreciation on the part of some of the farming community of the value of controlling their own processing industry now sees some of our co-operatives going back into private industry. The image of the co-operative movement as a type of community or parish service has long since gone and has been replaced with that of modern production and market-oriented enterprise. The co-operative movement needs to prepare itself further for the open competition with its Dutch and other European counterparts after 1992. Private enterprise in the processing industry is far more vulnerable to European takeovers than our more community-based co-operative movement. For this reason it is vitally important that the co-operative movement should continue to be producer-controlled.

Obviously we cannot review the state of agriculture in this country without reference to the European agricultural policy and its effect on our national industry. The role of Europe as I understand it is to provide supports and incentives to all sectors of our industry; yet looking at the industry at the moment we see the income of grain farmers continuing to be very low, milk prices about to fall, and beef and cattle prices falling below their 1988 levels. I wonder if the Minister or the Government have succeeded at all in getting Irish agriculture accepted in Europe as a vital national interest.

I regret to say the Minister seems to be failing to promote the image of Ireland as the garden of Europe. All too frequently statements about our native indigenous industries come not from the Department of Agriculture and Food but from the Departments of Finance and Industry and Commerce. The Minister and the Department of Agriculture and Food who have the responsibility for our largest indigenous industry seem to lack the necessary aggressiveness at home and by extension in Brussels to have due recognition given to this special position in

More funds should be paid directly to the farmer instead of the processor, so that farmers could derive direct benefit from EC funding. Furthermore, if payments were made in this fashion they could be scaled to protect the income of the small farmer. All one has to do is observe the alarming decline in the number of farm families during the eighties to see the importance of maintaining the maximum number of viable units. The Minister does not realise that incentives to the agricultural industry do not always have to be financial. Equally important are the leadership, the aggressiveness, the ideas, the formation of policies in a crystal clear, short, medium and long-term fashion. I regret that the Minister for Agriculture and Food and his Government are failing to convince not only me but an increasing number of farmers that they have the ability or certainly the sense of priority to deal with the task before them in the agricultural industry.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Déanaim comhghairdeas leis an Teachta. We thank the Minister for Justice for not indicating that perhaps his time had come.

Minister for Justice (Mr. Burke)

It would be totally improper to interrupt a maiden speech and I congratulate the Deputy on having delivered a maiden speech. I would not agree with a word she said but I congratulate her, especially on her comments on the Minister for Agriculture and Food who, on his record since he became Minister in March 1987, has proven himself to be one of the most enlightened Ministers for Agriculture this country has seen——

Mr. Connaughton

We would not agree with that.

Mr. Burke

——in what he has achieved. I suppose I could comment on the extra milk quota, the 11 million gallons he got, but I will not go into that.

A central part of the responsibility of any Minister for Justice is to ensure that the community is adequately protected from the small minority in society whose persistent refusal to respect the law is a source of continuing concern to law abiding citizens.

A Minister — and the Government to which he belongs — gives practical evidence of his commitment to the protection and safety of the community by providing the financial resources necessary to deal with the job on hands. The resources required are quite substantial and I am sure it would be accepted on all sides of this House that there would be no difficulty in finding worthwhile alternative uses for the £368 million being provided to run the Garda and prison services in 1990 if only the small minority to whom I have already referred would give us the choice of doing so.

But the harsh reality is that we do not have a choice and that law and order expenditure simply must be accorded priority in the Government's expenditure plans. Against the background of the understandable desire on the part of the average man and woman — often expressed to us by our own constituents — that they should feel safe in going about their lawful business and in their homes and places of work, the Government, if it is a caring Government, simply must find the resources.

This Government, I am glad to say, has seen fit to give due priority to the provision of the necessary resources as is clearly evidenced by the 9 per cent increase next year in the combined Garda and prison services Votes. I do not have to remind the House that this increase has been agreed at a time when the general thrust of Government financial strategy is toward the maintenance of tight budgetary control, the broad aim of which is to secure worthwhile economic benefits for our people.

Deputies will be aware that within the past few days I announced a major crime fighting package for 1990, based on the £30 million increase in the Votes mentioned. The central elements of that package were, very briefly, as follows: appointment of 250 civilian clerical staff to release gardaí from office work to perform outdoor crime prevention and detection duties; 200 promotions in the Garda Síochána — 114 sergeants, 60 inspectors, 22 superintendents and four chief superintendents; 250 gardaí in the ranks of garda, sergeant and inspector who would be due to retire on reaching age 57 before the end of 1991 will be allowed to serve until age 60; acceleration of the pace of recruitment of 1,000 trainee gardaí, with 348 being taken on during 1990 — 50 more than originally planned; and 260 young men and women will become fully attested members of the force next year: 86 of these are already on the streets of Dublin as part of their initial training and an additional 86 garda trainees will be doing on-the-job training in Dublin from 4 December.

On the prison side; the first half of Wheatfield — 160 places — will be brought into full operation before Christmas and the second half will be brought into use in 1990; a new, medically equipped, unit — 50 to 60 places will be built in the Mountjoy precincts to cater for the special needs of offenders known to be HIV positive; one of the cell blocks in Limerick will be replaced by a new block which will result in 30 extra prison places; with the transfer of young offenders from St. Patrick's Institution to Wheatfield, St. Patricks will be completely refurbished and used as an ordinary prison for about 200 offenders; and the combined effect is to bring about 300 extra prison spaces into use over the next 12 to 18 months, involving the recruitment of about 200 extra staff; these staff to be additional to the 131 already recruited for Wheatfield.

Deputies will, I am sure, agree that this is quite a comprehensive range of new measures. I am glad to inform the House that arrangements necessary for the implementation of the package are already well under way.

Justice — and the responsibility of the Minister for Justice — does not of course end when the wrongdoer has been apprehended, convicted and placed in custody. When that process has been completed, there then begins the all-important task of caring for the offender in a manner which is just, which fully recognises his dignity as a human being and leaves him with the hope of leading a useful life again as part of the community. The punishment applied to the man or woman placed in prison is loss of liberty — it cannot extend beyond that. It is vitally important that, as a caring and civilised society, we should always bear this in mind; punishments imposed on wrongdoers should be proportionate and must never be characterised by vindictiveness.

The task of striking the right balance between, on the one hand, society's understandable need to ensure the wrongdoers meet with an appropriate level of disapproval and punishment and, on the other, ensuring that the individual deprived of his liberty is dealt with in a just manner is a delicate one. Anybody who has served as Minister for Justice will know that there is a need, constantly, to face issues in which judgments must be made, in practical situations, as to how this balance can best be maintained.

One of the ways in which the issue presents itself daily is in relation to the temporary release of persons in custody — these releases are sometimes sought on compassionate grounds, sometimes as part of ordinary sentence administration.

I have received a substantial volume of representations since I became Minister for Justice concerning releases for one group of offenders in particular — those serving life sentences. In this instance, the problem of balancing rights becomes a very difficult one indeed; it is perfectly understandable that, side by side with the genuine concern expressed on behalf of these offenders, there should also be concern on the part of the community generally that the terms of imprisonment actually served by those concerned would reflect the fact that, here, we are dealing with offenders who have committed murder.

I have given some considerable thought to this matter and have been impressed by the sincerity with which public representatives, prominent churchmen and others have pressed the case for an examination of procedures applying to the review of life sentences. I now wish to announce, therefore, that I have — with Government approval — decided to introduce arrangements which I am sure will be welcome on all sides of this House and beyond.

Under the provisions of the Criminal Justice Act, 1960, it is open to the Minister for Justice to grant temporary release, subject to conditions, to offenders. For the purpose of assisting the Minister in the exercise of his powers, review meetings take place regularly in all our institutions, at which the cases of individual offenders are considered. Review meetings — which I refer to as "prison reviews"— are attended by those who have knowledge of the progress being made by individual offenders. These would include the governor, a departmental representative, prison staff, welfare officer, chaplain, teachers, and, if appropriate, a medical officer and perhaps a psychiatrist.

Various recommendations may be made following prison reviews including, for example, that the offender be transferred to an open centre or perhaps that he be granted temporary release either for a definite or indefinite period. The final decision in all cases, as well as the conditions to be attached — if there is to be a temporary release — rest with the Minister for Justice.

An offender who is in breach of temporary release conditions is, by virtue of such breach, deemed to be "unlawfully at large", liable to arrest without warrant and to be recommitted to custody; he is also liable to prosecution and to a maximum additional sentence of six months imprisonment.

What I have now decided to do — as I say with Government approval — is to set up immediately a special body on a non-statutory basis, to be called, "the sentence review group" which will have the task of advising the Minister for Justice, on an on-going basis, in relation to the administration of long-term prison sentences, including life sentences.

The group will consist of a chairman and four ordinary members. I am glad to be able to announce that Dr. Ken Whitaker, who is rightly held in the highest regard as one of the most outstanding public servants this country has ever produced, has agreed to act as chairman of the group. The four members, apart from the chairman, represent the following categories: a representative of the medical-psychiatric profession; a person with experience of supervision of aftercare of discharged persons; a senior officer of the Probation and Welfare Services; and a representative of the Department of Justice. Members of the group — other than the chairman — will, for the purpose of dealing with individual cases, be drawn from a panel of about ten or so suitably qualified persons.

All offenders who have served a term of seven years or more of a current sentence, including those serving life — but excluding capital murders — may, if they so wish, have their cases considered by the new group. The situation in regard to the nine offenders now serving 40 year prison sentences for capital murder will be considered by the Government in the context of their examination of proposals for the abolition of the death penalty.

Although the representations made to me were on behalf of offenders serving life sentences, I am not confining the new procedure to "lifers". Many offenders serving long determinate sentences, may, on the basis of experience over the years, expect their imprisonment to continue as long as some of those serving life sentences; it would, in my view, be anomalous, in the circumstances, if the new review procedures were confined to "lifers". Deputies will note that I am not confining the procedure either to any particular category of offender—though most of the representations related to one category. The only requirement is that, with the exception of capital murders, the offender has served seven years or more of a current sentence.

The primary function of the new group, as I have said, will be to advise me on the discharge of my existing statutory powers in relation to sentence administration, including the power to grant temporary release to offenders, subject to conditions, either for definite or indefinite periods. It will be open to the review group, where they decide in a particular case not to recommend temporary release, to set a date for a further review. The date set will be a matter for the group but I am imposing a condition that a period of not more than three years should elapse in any case between one review and the next.

Cases not coming within the new review group's remit will continue to be dealt with under existing procedures. Indeed it will be open to the Minister for Justice to apply existing review arrangements also to cases which are actually within the review group's remit, if he considers it appropriate to do so: it would not, be necessary, therefore, for example, for the Minister to await a recommendation by the review group where he considered it desirable to grant temporary release to a long term offender.

It is important that the existing review system remain in place for the vast bulk of offenders and it is certainly very important to stress that the establishment of the new procedure implies no criticism of the way in which the existing system operates. Reports prepared by existing prison review committees will in fact form a very important part of the material to be considered by the new group in relation to the individual cases coming before them.

My primary reason for introducing new arrangements for the review of long term and life sentences is that it seemed to me that, despite the fact that the existing system works quite well and that hundreds of cases are reviewed annually, it is still reasonable that a man or woman who has served seven years of imprisonment and who is faced with the prospect of a further long term in custody, should have the opportunity of having his case looked at by a separate body. This brings us into line with arrangements operating in most Western democracies, including our neighbouring jurisdictions.

Of course I have been guided also in this matter by the report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Penal System, — the Whitaker report — which recommended the establishment of a committee on the general lines now envisaged. In its composition the group will, however, depart in one important respect from the Whitaker recommendations and there may be an expectation that I should explain this point. The Whitaker committee recommended that the group be chaired by a High Court judge and I was prepared to give effect to this recommendation. However, when I discussed the matter with the Chief Justice — to advise him in advance, as a matter of courtesy, of what was contemplated — he expressed serious doubt about my intention to implement the Whitaker recommendation in relation to the chairmanship. The Chief Justice has since conveyed his reservations to me in writing and has indicated that I am at liberty to quote him. He has written to me as follows:—

Further to our discussion, I have carefully considered the proposals which you have in mind concerning the review of long-term sentences being served in our prisons.

I appreciate that these proposals are carefully constructed to maintain the constitutional separation of power between the Executive and the Judiciary in respect of sentences and that you as Minister for Justice are clearly retaining the ultimate power to remit sentences.

The separation of powers, whereby the courts have the full responsibility for the imposition of sentence subject to the provisions of the Oireachtas, and whereby the Executive has the full responsibility for the remission of sentences imposed and the conditions upon which such remission, if any, may take place, is of vital importance to the constitutional framework of our legal system and to its practical administration.

I would greatly fear that the appointment as Chairman of an advisory body to review long term sentences and to advise the Minister for Justice of a serving member of the Judiciary would to a significant extent blur this very clearcut separation of powers and would, for that reason, be undesirable.

I have come to this conclusion after careful consideration, including consideration of the proposals contained in the report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Penal System.

In the circumstances, having regard to this advice, it is not open to me to follow the recommendations made by Whitaker as regards chairmanship of the group.

Before I leave the Whitaker report, incidentally, it is worth quoting the following extract from it:

Our recommendation for formal and regular reviews of long sentences is not intended to replace, or in any way interfere with, the Government's prerogative exercised by the Minister for Justice, to remit sentences.

I am, as already explained, accepting this recommendation and the group now being set up will operate on this basis.

Finally, I wish to make it absolutely clear that the idea of maintaining the balance between the rights of offenders on the one hand and those of the general community on the other — a subject to which I have already referred — remains central to my thinking on this matter. There is no question of applying new criteria. The review group will consider individual cases by reference to the very reasonable and long-established criteria which apply to the existing review procedure. These criteria are worth mentioning. Very briefly, they are as follows: (1) Would a release constitute a threat to the community? (2) Is it reasonable to grant temporary release at this particular stage in view of the nature of the crime committed and the offender's previous criminal record? (3) Does the offender merit temporary release having regard to his behaviour while in prison? (4) Are there any compassionate grounds which warrant special consideration?

There is no question, either, of having decisions made by a separate body. The responsibility of this group will be to make a recommendation to the Minister. The final decision in all cases will continue to be made by the Minister for Justice and the Minister, in making his decision, will have regard not only to the recommendations made by the review group but also to the views of the trial judge.

In addition, it will be incumbent on the Minister, in each case, to obtain the views of the Garda Commissioner. Given the fact that the Garda Force are at the forefront of the battle against crime, it is obviously right that the Minister for Justice should have the benefit of the Commissioner's views and that he should have full regard to the views expressed by the Commissioner — certainly when he is examining a proposal that an offender who has been guilty of a serious crime or crimes be granted temporary release.

I am confident that Deputies will welcome the establishment of the sentence review group and that we will all wish them well in the responsible and challenging task they have agreed to undertake.

Mr. Rabbitte

The ad hoc nature of planning in the economy is underlined by the convention of the publication of the Estimates for the public service and the public capital programme as an annual event. What is required is a five year plan if any coherent thought is to be invested in tackling the structural weaknesses in our economy. Instead we lurch from year to year, paralysed by the dimensions of our economic failure; 300,000 people have been forced abroad since 1982, 250,000 people are unemployed and almost one million are living below the poverty line.

Imprisoned by conventions such as this ritual of annual Estimates and by conventional thinking in relation to getting the climate right it is considered that the private entrepreneurs will provide the jobs. Not even the Minister for Labour believes that any more. There is panic at the heart of the Government concerning the extent of the failure of job creation policies as the recent interviews given by the Minister for Labour to The Sunday Tribune and RTE demonstrated. In these interviews the Minister was, quite rightly, scathing about the appalling failure of private sector firms to deliver badly needed jobs despite the favourable conditions that have been created for them. Unfortunately, the Minister did not draw the logical conclusion from his own remarks and acknowledge the need for a fundamental change in Government policy. The Minister for Labour seems to be content to sit and curse the failure of the private sector rather than consider a change of direction on industrial strategy and give the unemployed some real hope of jobs.

Since Fianna Fáil were returned to power in 1987, they relied exclusively on the private sector for job creation and, at the same time, deliberately set about restricting the public sector. However, the Minister has at last acknowledged what most workers have realised for many years, that this policy is not working and is responsible for our appalling levels of unemployment and emigration. Indeed, it is significant that the Minister's remarks were made on the weekend of the publication of a survey by Mr. Damien Courtney of the Cork regional technical college which showed that gross emigration since 1982 now numbers almost 300,000 people. The reason for the recent small reduction in the numbers on the live register is clearly not due to the feeble efforts of the private sector, but to massive emigration. Unless there is a major change in job creation policies, massive unemployment and emigration will continue. The Minister for Labour's comments go as close to acknowledging this as any Government Minister has ever done. There is, of course, a role for the private sector in job creation, but we have to be far more selective in the way in which grants are doled out and tax breaks allowed, otherwise the Minister's plea will continue to fall on deaf ears. The policies of successive Governments have been all carrot and no stick.

There must be a far greater role given to the State sector, and especially to semi-State companies with a proven track record such as Aer Lingus and Telecom Éireann. It is imperative that we be more selective in the use of taxpayers' money and concentrate on building strong, indigenous export oriented companies, if we are to make any significant progress in reducing unemployment and emigration.

The public capital programme is the main potential source for job creation. Since 1985 it has been consistently reduced with serious economic repercussions. The Minister for Finance boasts of an 19 per cent increase in the provision of £1,657 million for 1990. This is seriously misleading. As long ago as 1982, the public capital programme budget was £1,858 million. If this figure were updated at the rate of inflation, it would require a provision of £2,861 million in 1990 — in other words, the 1990 provision of £1,657 million is 73 per cent below what it was in 1982 in real terms. This is a measure of the savage reductions and cutbacks that have taken place in the eighties.

Even more significant when looking at the public capital programme provision of £1,657 million is the amount expected to be spent by the much maligned semi-State companies, such as Aer Lingus and Telecom Éireann. I estimate between internal and external sources, almost one third of the entire public capital programme comes from these companies. Although much derided and decried, these companies are expected to make a major contribution. It will be very interesting later to examine individually what the heavy imposition of external financing requirement will do to further worsen the debt equity ratio of some of these companies.

Conservative politicians have always found it easier to cut the public capital programme rather than face the consequences of cutting current expenditure. The cumulative effect of continual capital cuts is evident in the run down state of the economy. I have accused the Minister for Finance of misleading the House and the general public in his "steady as she goes" bluster about having turned the corner and increased capital spending in this year's Book of Estimates. This is also apparent from a sectoral analysis of the published Estimates. The provision for industry in 1990 is £309 million and if we compare this with the provision for 1982 — the year emigration took off—in real terms the 1990 provision is almost exactly half the allocation for 1982.

I do not deny, in fact I positively welcome, the fact that less taxpayers' money is now being spent than in the early eighties to better effect. There are still glaring examples of waste, especially in the tax breaks and subsidies to the private sector where the taxpayer gets poor value for money. However, if we are much more efficient in spending public money then surely it follows logically that more investment finance should be available. It would require strategic vision to spend the additional investment wisely, and that strategic vision must encompass two things: attaching the highest priority to developing a food industry and, in adopting that priority, recognising the state of the industry today. That probably involves a few major joint ventures, notwithstanding the apparent collapse of the IDA-Goodman venture.

There will be no positive shift in industrial policy until a higher priority is accorded to human capital and especially investment in training. Therefore, it is ironic — I am glad the Minister for Labour is in the House — that the Estimates show a reduction of 21 per cent in the Department of Labour provision for training through FÁS. This is all the more ironic given the Government's own analysis in the national plan and what the CII have identified in their pre-budget submission. It is an indictment of the seriousness of the Government's approach that the reduction in training is because extra provision had to be made for make work schemes—in other words the cosmetic impact of taking some additional people off the live register. Even the CII, and surely the Government would not regard them as a left wing or radical body, recommend doubling the numbers in third level education by 1993. They also recommend that those who are denied access to third level education should be trained, qualified and certified similar to the German practice.

The 21 per cent reduction in the Department of Labour provision for training is especially ironic in the context of the Minister for Labour's forthright comments during interviews which he gave to The Sunday Tribune and RTE. I commend the Minister's frankness, but regret that he did not draw the conclusions he ought from his own remarks. I am especially puzzled that there should be such a drastic cut in the provision for training which is essential for economic investment and development, and the Government in the National Development Plan 1989-1993 have acknowledged the weaknesses in this area. Any paragraph on page 23 of the National Development Plan 1989-1993 sets out the Government's analysis of the weaknesses in the provisions we make for training as compared with any of our European competitors. It is acknowledged in paragraph 1.2.40 that “The Irish education system provides a high level of general education”. However, it continues:

On average, however, students leave secondary school at a relatively young age compared with other EC countries. Relatively few apprenticeships are available to school-leavers by comparision with some other Community countries. In addition, upper secondary education in Ireland is lacking the vocational emphasis evident in the more advanced member states.

Under the heading "Workforce" paragraph 1.2.41 reads:

Findings from recent labour-force surveys point to the serious lack of training and re-training of employed persons in Ireland. This is partly attributable to the small size of businesses. The Cecchini report indicated that most small companies lack the necessary resources to aquire the skills and qualifications that will be needed in the Single Market.

Paragraph 1.2.42 reads:

In addition to basic weaknesses, the Irish workforce has faced structural adjustment since entry to the EC due to a number of factors. These include increasing competition both from other Member States and from other countries, changing patterns in demand and changing methods of production. Ireland has also had to cater for the movement from a mainly agricultural structure to an industrial and service-based economy.

Paragraph 1.2.43 reads:

These developments can be expected to continue and accelerate in the future. The adjustment on the part of the workforce will therefore have to take place from a lower base than that of many of the EC countries and in a situation of continuing structural adjustments. Increasingly, the ability to compete will depend on the aptitudes, skills and efficiency of different categories of the workforce and their capacity to innovate and to exploit advances in technology. Ireland's workforce must achieve real growth in productivity levels to allow for equalisation of competition with other member states of the Community. This will require a concerted effort by private industry and by public training and educational authorities.

I agree substantially with that Government analysis — contained in their National Development Plan 1989-1993— of the inherent weaknesses in the provision we make for training and development of our human capital. Therefore, I find it puzzling in the extreme that the Minister for Labour should have allowed the Department of Finance impose reductions of the order of 21 per cent in the provision for training.

In that respect I might refer to a matter I raised in this House before, that is the challenge facing the Government because of the extent of repatriation of profits from this economy by foreign-based companies. For example, in the course of the debate on emigration, I suggested that the repatriation of profits would exceed £2 billion this year and contended that the Government are confused and bewildered as to what should be their response to this extraordinary outflow of capital.

This morning's The Irish Times shows that I was wrong, that I had significantly underestimated the extent of the problem, as indeed had the Central Bank who, again according to this morning's The Irish Times, have been forced to revise downwards their growth forecast for our economy in 1989 because they expect profit repatriations by Irish subsidiaries of foreign-based multinationals to be higher than they had earlier anticipated.

Mr. Carey

A new black hole.

Mr. Rabbitte

A huge black hole indeed. The actual downward revision by the Central Bank amounts to a full 1 per cent which, it is said, is due to factor income outflows which, in layman's language, basically and substantially means the repatriation of enormous, unprecedented, unexpected, unanticipated profits made in this economy by Irish workers for foreign companies based here who are repatriating their profits to their countries of origin. The same article in The Irish Times contends that these factor income outflows are estimated at £3,115 million. It is contended that higher than expected profit outflows reflect the improved profitability of foreign owned companies in Ireland, according to the Central Bank. It is also contended that the effect will be to offset the improvement in the trade surplus and other elements in the current account.

It is time the Government addressed this matter. Nobody, not even the multinationals themselves — although I welcome the fact that they provide 80,000 jobs for our people — anticipated such profit levels to be repatriated. The Government do not appear to know what to do about them. We seem incapable of causing those companies to put down roots in this economy. It is now time for the Minister for Labour to espouse, at Cabinet level, the arguments being advanced by the Congress of Trade Unions to ensure that there is a review carried out of industrial policy in order to prevent this extent of outflow in the future and, amongst other things, to introduce a modest, progressive tax régime that would cause these companies to limit the extent of that outflow and invest it in jobs here where their profits have been generated.

Acting Chairman (Mr. M. Barrett)

The Deputy has two minutes remaining.

Mr. Rabbitte

This is a totally inadequate time to deal with the number of matters on which I wish to comment in regard to this Book of Estimates.

May I jump ahead to welcome something in the Book of Estimates, that is the provision for a surface transport system to Clondalkin, much overdue. Nonetheless, it is welcomed, but I deplore the cynical mentality which refuses to extend that desperately needed public transport system as far as Tallaght where almost 90,000 people are served disgracefully at present in terms of public transport. Why the provision of a surface transport system should stop at Clondalkin and not go to Tallaght is bewildering. Indeed, it is all the more reprehensible since the Government refused to avail of the opportunity to apply for EC Structural Funds for this purpose, designed precisely for this type of infrastructural development. It is regrettable that the Minister or none of his hand-picked consultants—including I suspect officials of the Department of Finance — has recognised this. Probably that is due partly to the fact that they have never even visited Tallaght never mind live there. I contend it is a tremendous opportunity lost to provide a public transport system to Tallaght.

The modest increase in the public capital programme is greatly assisted by EC structural money but, when viewed in context — having regard to the scale of our economic problems to which I have adverted, emigration and unemployment in particular — is completely inadequate. The Government seem so locked into dependence on the private sector they are incapable of taking other strategies on board. If the Government refuse to listen to this criticism then they should note a recent article on the performance of our economy by a famous conservative United States economist, Professor Dornbush, who concluded that all of our good work to control the national debt will be set at nought if we do not tackle unemployment.

Minister for Labour (Mr. B. Ahern)

The importance of the development of human resources is emphasised by the high priority given to it under the Community support framework of the European Communities. It is essential to the achievement of a strategy of development over the next four years. Indeed, it will enjoy the largest single allocation of aid under the framework. Total expenditure across all priorities on training and development will be £2.209 billion, of which £1.123 billion will be Community aid.

To achieve the best results from this massive injection of funds, we have to adopt clear priorities. The particular objectives of the human resource development measures are five fold. First, we want to ensure that we have enough of the right kind of skilled workers to meet our economic needs. Second, we want to encourage and assist the improvement of the skills of the existing labour force. Third, we want to make sure that enterprises have the necessary expertise to exploit new technologies. Fourth, we want to boost marketing and language skills for the needs of Irish industry in the single market and, finally, we want to encourage self-employment and co-operative and community enterprises.

The human resources measures will be integrated with operational programmes for industry and services, tourism and agriculture and rural development. Many of the key target groups have already been part of our strategy — for instance, help to the long-term unemployed and young people first entering working life. We will also be supporting improvement of existing training provision. We will give priority to apprenticeship training, the second level vocational preparation and training programme involving the education sector with FÁS and CERT, and to the social employment scheme run by FÁS. CERT will, of course, also benefit from development measures in line with the emphasis the Government have given to the potential of tourism.

We will also be paying particular attention to the retraining needs of people who have jobs. Many will need their skills updated to enable them to make their full potential contribution to economic development. Such training is the primary responsibility of the employer. However, both FÁS and CERT are available to assist in every way they can. Indeed, FÁS have got a special allocation of £4 million to run an industrial restructuring programme for people employed in industry. Recent changes in the FÁS levy/grant system will make the system more equitable and less bureaucratic. The industry contribution to CERT now in place also spreads the cost of CERT training more equitably.

The Social Fund, in particular, also gives major assistance to the education sector, including technological training provided by the regional technical colleges, certain other programmes in the education sectors, the training of handicapped persons for jobs on the open labour market, and job creation measures generated by the IDA, SFADCo and Údarás na Gaeltachta.

These measures are vital to help us overcome our particular problems in the single market. We are a peripheral nation with no overland access to the mainland of Europe. We have a relatively underdeveloped infrastructure and industrial base and we have a small, low density population, which is, uniquely in the EC, rapidly growing. We have very high levels of unemployment and emigration has grown significantly.

Our expenditure on human resource development, with the help of the Structural Funds, enables us to equip our workers with the skills and knowledge needed to complete. It also enables us to build up a well educated and skilled labour force which helps attract foreign investment. Indeed, investment in Ireland is increasing at a record level.

The increase in the level of assistance which has been guaranteed to us under the reformed Structural Funds will enable us to maintain and improve on our high standards. All in all, the programme will provide a comprehensive response to the human resource needs of the economy up to 1993.

We will also be ensuring that we get full value for money. Programmes must achieve their objective. Training which is not related to real or likely jobs is a waste of time and money. I am, therefore, pleased that comprehensive procedures for monitoring and evaluation are being established.

Both the Government and the European Commission are committed to ensuring that money is spent in worthwhile ways directly linked to real jobs. We will be emphasising not only the overall quality of training but also its standards and relevance. The training agencies are working to develop recognised standards. This, in particular, merits even greater attention and resources in the period immediately ahead. Under the public capital programme, increased Structural Fund assistance will also help us to improve our vocational training infrastructure. Major developments under this heading will include the regional technical college in Tallaght and the CERT headquarters and training centre in the north inner city of Dublin. At present CERT are operating from three locations in Dublin. Their new headquarters will enable them to achieve greater efficiencies. I am also glad that it will prove easier for trainees to reach, being near to the DART station, and that it will give an additional and much needed boost to the development of the north inner city. CERT are also looking at developing other training centres, including one in the Limerick/Shannon area, on the lines of the Cork inner city centre.

While the building projects grab the headlines, it is equally important to update training equipment to provide modern skill development. I was delighted that FÁS have been allocated £3.5 million from the Structural Funds to provide new equipment to meet the needs of training in new technologies and to replace worn out equipment. It will also enable FÁS to continue their programme of modernising their employment services offices to make them more efficient and attractive to their clients.

Human resource development policies have one central aim — to promote job creation by ensuring each individual can perform to his or her full potential and thus to maximise the productive capacity of the economy.

In 1990 FÁS will get an increase of 10 per cent in their total budget. This will allow them to train an average of 16,000 people at any one time and to provide opportunities on the various employment programmes for an average of 15,000 people. My priority targets for these programmes continue to be early school leavers and the long-term unemployed. I was particularly glad to be able to increase the attraction of training to the unemployed person with dependants, by paying them a £10 weekly bonus. This bonus will give a real incentive to the older long-term unemployed with family commitments to participate in training, increase their job prospects and hopefully leave the trap of long-term unemployment.

I am very much aware of the shortage of trainees in the hotel and tourism sector because of tourism growth. I was glad, therefore, to be able to increase CERT's overall budget by 21 per cent. This will enable it to expand training numbers to over 9,000 next year, including some 5,000 from within industry. Those who undertake CERT training are virtually guaranteed employment in the industry.

A number of changes have been made in training and employment programmes. Notable improvements have been targeted at urban disadvantaged areas. The social employment scheme aims to recruit an additional 1,000 people from these areas: indeed I am very pleased that 300 of them have already started since September. Special assistance is being provided to such areas under the community youth training programme and community enterprise scheme. I have also asked FÁS to adopt a more central role in developing community projects in such areas.

Because of its importance to job creation, I am glad that FÁS have now integrated their assistance to new enterprise development. I was also glad to be able to improve the usefulness of the enterprise allowance scheme; the payment of allowances is now concentrated at the initial stages when new businesses have greatest need of subsidy.

A special programme was needed for older long-term unemployed people with no school qualifications and I have asked FÁS to pilot this. Younger early school leavers are already catered for under the Youthreach programme, operated jointly by FÁS and the VECs. Up to the end of September, over 2,600 early school leavers had joined the programme, out of a target of 3,000.

I should add that the Government have decided to continue the Teamwork scheme for 1990 at its current level of 1,150 activity years, despite the loss of EC assistance. This is the only temporary employment programme for young people, and provides invaluable assistance to many worthwhile voluntary bodies.

For months now I have been exhorting employers to put the national need for employment creation at the top of their agendas. I must acknowledge that the private sector has created a substantial number of jobs.

I want to put some recent remarks into context. During the seven years before 1987 we lost 76,000 jobs, about 11,000 per year. Since 1987 there has been an increase. I am not looking to the small employers, new employers, the co-operatives or industries under stress from severe competition. They are trying to hold on to jobs and there has been a significant fall in the number of redundancies this year. There are, however, larger industries and these are the ones on whom I am calling. We must acknowledge that some sectors are creating jobs but there is a sector who are not creating jobs.

It is self-evident that the pace of job creation is too slow to allow us to reduce the level of unemployment and emigration as far as we all would wish, particularly in the light of the growing number of young people coming on the labour market. The pace is less than might have been expected from the very favourable levels of economic growth achieved.

The figures in the Programme for National Recovery will be achieved. When we were working on that programme in 1987 I do not think people believed we would achieve success under a number of headings. I acknowledge that the private sector have fulfilled the commitment in the programme, but——

Mr. Rabbitte

It is no longer enough.

In my own area I was delighted to see that redundancies are 40 per cent down this year compared with last year. That means that the jobs we are creating are net jobs rather than just targets of gross jobs. I expect that the redundancies for the year will be about 14,000, down from 30,000 three years ago. The Government are doing their best to promote the creation of viable self-sustaining jobs. A ministerial committee on employment was set up earlier this year to consider ways of boosting employment and helping the disadvantaged on the labour market. Last September, as chairman of that committee, I announced an initial package of measures to achieve these goals. The committee are now considering further initiatives.

Of the measures taken so far, the first is a new PRSI exemption scheme. I know my colleague, the Minister for Social Welfare, will give you the details of this, but I would just remind you that it could amount to an average saving of £1,500 next year for each additional employee.

I am also very concerned about the plight of the long term unemployed. Over 100,000 of them have been on the live register for at least a year and nearly half of them have spent more than three years continuously unemployed. I know that, without special help, many would never be able to get jobs again. I was glad to be able to target the FÁS employment incentive scheme on priority groups. The premium payable to employers taking on a long term unemployed person is now £60 per week for 39 weeks, a total of £2,340. For employers taking on early school leavers, the handicapped or exprisoners, the premium has been increased to £45 per week for 39 weeks, a total of £1,755. I hope that highlighting this improvement will encourage employers to recruit from those groups. It is targeted to those groups and there are substantial incentives in this regard.

I have also asked FÁS to arrange with companies for a scheme of training contracts, for up to two years, for young people in industry in consultation with the CII and ICTU. FÁS are also considering extending the work experience modules on relevant training programmes. These two initiatives should go a long way to overcome the problem of gaining the initial experience which would help get jobs.

In a further effort to promote recruitment, I have asked FÁS to give additional priority to their placement function. In particular, I asked them to launch a campaign to target 1,000 companies to persuade them to recruit more staff. FÁS are also developing a monitoring service in consultation with the CII, as there are signs that skill shortages are beginning to develop in key sectors, as the economy grows and the demand for skills increases. I am confident that these measures will work, that jobs will be boosted and skill shortages will be anticipated and avoided.

One of the factors leading to employment growth is stable industrial relations. This attracts investment both at home and abroad and facilitates long term planning and expansion. I am delighted to see that the number of strikes this year is likely to be the lowest in the history of the State, and the number of workdays lost has also declined from a level of 400,000 in the mid eighties to a likely 40,000 in 1989, again the best since the war. Much of this dramatic improvement is the direct result of the Programme for National Recovery and all those associated with it. Under this, moderate pay increases have combined with a £700 million tax reduction package to bring real improvements in take home pay to workers.

I want to do my best to ensure that these favourable trends continue. I hope, indeed, to bring my proposals for industrial relations reform before the House within the next two weeks so I will not go into further details on them today. But I would say that, after an even longer and more arduous process than I expected, I am confident that my proposals reflect the best balance between the interests of employers and employees and that they will create an even better framework for dispute settlement.

Over the next years I hope to bring a number of other proposals before the Oireachtas in the related areas of working conditions. I am giving priority to the development of amending legislation to give added protection to part-time workers. Preparation of amending legisaltion on unfair dismissals, payment of wages and employment equality is also well advanced. I am continuing to review the conditions of employment legislation, dating from the thirties and now out of date.

In the area of statutory protection for occupational safety and health, you will recall that the Safety, Health and Welfare Act become law in April 1989. On 1 November I brought the Act into operation and established under it the National Authority for Occupational Safety and Health. I am satisfied that the allocation to the Authority will enable them to make a real start on their new remit. I have asked the Authority for proposals as soon as possible as to how they plan to tackle this task, particularly for the many employment sectors coming within the scope of the statutory system for the first time.

The key elements of the new system are prevention and partnership. I would urge both sides of industry to take immediate steps to familiarise themselves with this new approach and to comply with the requirements of the new system. I look forward to this as bringing a progressive new era of risk management and safety in Ireland.

I would like again to thank both sides of industry, and indeed the members of the Commission of Inquiry on Safety, Health and Welfare at Work, under Justice Barrington, for their contribution to this new system. I look forward to a continuing high degree of commitment from both sides to the task ahead.

Finally, I would like to return for a few minutes to the international dimension. As you know, on 1 January Ireland takes over the Presidency of the EC for six months. As President of the Social Affairs Council, my over-riding priority will be the intensification of measures to promote job creation. Indeed, I will be pushing for a comprehensive strategy to boost employment across the whole range of Community policies, not just in the social affairs area.

In particular, I plan to bring long-term unemployment to the top of the agenda and to develop appropriate strategies to help reduce it. This a a major problem facing the whole Community. I also plan to pilot discussions on a number of measures, including an initiative on in-company continuing training, which I know is an area largely ignored by Irish employers. I will be active in the ongoing occupational safety and health programme.

The Presidency of the European Community is both an opportunity and a challenge. It is an opportunity to give prominence to issues we consider important and essential to consider at European level and it is a challenge to play a vital role in the steering of the EC towards the completion of the internal market in 1992. In this process I will be taking over responsibility for the Charter of Fundamental Social Rights. The charter is a political commitment to the development of a platform of basic social rights. I should stress that we have always strongly supported the charter. At no stage did we try to water down the text to suit any other country. Any amendments we sought were to ensure that the charter took account of our individual needs and circumstances. We recognised all along that social progress was a necessity, and that it needed the support of a strong political commitment.

I am confident that the charter will be adopted by the Heads of State at the European Council in Strasbourg on 8 and 9 December. Yesterday we discussed for the first time in the Social Affairs Council the action programme and I gave my strong support to it. The Ministers for Employment and Labour of the member states will consider their priorities. In early January I hope to start the process and through the troika to set an agenda, not just for the six months but for the next 18 months, to implement the 46 areas that are listed in the charter, all of them significant and important for workers. It is a considerable list that will improve the mainstay of the workforce right across the Community. I look forward to reporting to the House on these during the Irish Presidency.

Mr. Carey

With the permission of the House, I wish to share my time with Deputy Ted Nealon.

Acting Chairman (Mr. M. Barrett)

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Carey

I have listened to the debate on these Estimates and I want to join with the Deputies who say that this format is very unsatisfactory. I must compliment the Government on publishing these Estimates at this time but they do not serve any real purpose. It is somewhat similar to the system that operates in local authorities where Estimates are published by the bureaucrats and you either take it or leave it. There should be some opportunity in a democratic system to debate these Estimates and put forward suggestions on increasing or decreasing spending in particular areas. The significance of that is that we come in here and hear speeches on all sides about what should be done but nobody is put in the position where they have to take responsibility for what they do. I suppose that is an over-statement because the Government are responsible for what they do but all of the House should get involved in the preparation of the Estimates and a greater effort should be made to include them in this process.

I want to refer to the Estimates for Energy and Forestry, both of which have been cut. This shows the priority the Government are placing on the need to make our exports more competitive especially in the run up to the Single Market in 1992. Yesterday the Minister for Finance acknowledged the role of the domestic sector in energy but lectured them on their pricing policy. He ignored the part both he and the Minister for Energy must play if we want to heighten efficiency. He said that expansion, if not survival, depends on improving all elements of the product mix. Both he and the Minister for Energy have a role to play in this respect because without an energy policy our role in the Single Market will be diminished.

Our energy use is proportionately greater than that of our competitors. We must make serious efforts to improve the levels of consumption. The Government have concentrated on the industrial sector with some success but they still have a long way to go. Serious questions have to be asked following the performance of the previous Minister for Energy, Deputy Burke. Will the present Minister and there are no indications in the Estimates that he will do this, redefine the role of the INPC who must be in a difficult financial position following the ad hoc decisions taken by his predecessor? Will the Minister for Energy announce today a clean sheet for the INPC so that they can negotiate a beneficial joint venture for the Irish nation? The Minister must have observed the difficulties which arose following the controversial intervention by his predecessor, Deputy Burke. Will the Minister do the same? Is the Danish proposal another PR hype? The Minister should announce his intention to put the details of any new proposals in this area to Dáil Éireann. There are indications that he may do this because he has adopted a forthright attitude to Sellafield. There has been no huff, puff or bluff on the part of the Minister for Energy, Deputy Molloy, which is an contrast to the previous Minister for Energy, Deputy Burke, when he has responsibility for this area.

The Minister will be Chairman of the EC Council of Ministers for six months in 1990. This will be a very onerous task and he will have to deal with many different problems. I should like to ask the Minister how he will deal with the Commission's proposal for common carriers. When this scheme is put into operation it will put the ESB into competition with French and other EC energy suppliers.

The Minister has an obligation, both to the consumers of electricity and to the employees of the ESB to say exactly what his Department's position is in this area.

With the advent of the Green Party there has been a new awareness of the level of pollution and allied problems. Teachers and scientists speak daily of the greenhouse effect, the ozone layer and other problems. The Department of Energy do not seem to be dictating any line of policy in regard to these problems. Would the Minister consider publishing a White Paper on this area because the estimates do not indicate whether we have any policy in this regard? As the problem of pollution is very high on the agenda, especially with smog, I ask the Minister to consider concentrating on this area.

A rationalisation of the equipment used for bottled gas would bring about an improvement in every day life. Would the Minister for Energy be prepared to get in touch with his counterpart in the Department of Industry and Commerce and ask that regulations be published which would enable people to purchase gas from suppliers without the need for different types of bottles? In recent times there has been a huge increase in the use of this type of energy but the different types of bottles required cause a great deal of inconvenience and, I would say, distress, to many but to older people particularly.

In the past year the forestry area has been dominated by the establishment of Coillte Teoranta. I am glad that there have been new entrants into the planting area. In particular, the investment by Smurfits in my constituency is very welcome and desirable. However, claims have been made that Coillte Teoranta have serious cashflow difficulties. The Minister should impress on the board of Coillte Teoranta the need to promote a semi-mature market for timber. This would have the effect of improving the financial position of Coillte Teoranta and would also encourage a number of farmers to get involved in planting. One of the reasons they are reluctant to get involved in this area is that forestry is a long-term industry, the cycle can be up to 40 years. If they knew they could dispose of some of their products in the short-term the prospect of getting involved in forestry would be much more attractive. I should like the Minister to indicate whether he has any proposals from Coillte Teoranta about their current position. It is as well to point out to the House that they have serious problems. For example, Coillte Teoranta have a forest estate of approximately one million acres and 2,300 employees which Smurfits have a forest estate in the United States of approximately one million acres and 230 employees. I presume that both companies will be in competition with each other in the future. Coillte Teoranta seem to have serious difficulties and I hope the Minister will have a greater influence on departmental policy than has been the case to date.

Mr. Nealon

I should like to deal with the area of defence for which I have responsibility within the Fine Gael Party. There are certain positive elements in these Estimates in regard to defence which I wholeheartedly welcome. There is provision in the Estimates for the recruitment of 1,000 new members to the Permanent Defence Force in 1990. This has been projected as a major boost but I have great reservations as to what the actual position will be on the ground. Will it do anything other than maintain the existing strength of the force? Because of the conditions which prevail within the Army there has been massive wastage in recent times — in 1987 the number was 1,033 and in 1988, 1,029. If this happens in 1990, even with the recruitment of an extra 1,000 members, the numbers in the force will not be maintained. I hope we will not have the type of wastage we had in 1987 and 1988 but I fear we will because of the conditions and pay of members of our Permanent Defence Force. It is to that that I must object streniously.

The Minister, and the Government may point to the fact that the Gleeson Committee are dealing with pay and conditions. I accept that that is an excellent committee, but we have been informed that they will not report until June of July and they will not issue an interim report. Therefore, the Minister, and the Government, are saying to the members of the Defence Forces that all they will receive between now and the publication of that report will be the various public service pay awards they are entitled to and which they should have received a long time ago.

Everybody expects the Gleeson Committee to recommend a substantial rise in pay, it may be a massive increase. The Government should have agreed to make a payment on account to Army personnel because of the conditions under which many of them are living or, to be more accurate, existing. Such a payment should be made at Christmas time to help those people meet the extra expenses they will have to face. It is accepted by everybody, even at the highest level of the Army and in the Department, that many of our NCOs and privates are in desperate financial straits. Many of them cannot properly house, educate or feed their families. Some are living in atrocious housing conditions. Many of them have accumulated huge debts and are in the hands of money lenders. They can do little to get out of those difficulties because of the low pay and poor conditions under which they must work.

All Members will accept that Army personnel are a most loyal and disciplined body, but I do not think we should take that for granted and ask them to endure this intolerable situation any longer. In considering the Estimates we have an opportunity to do something about the pay and conditions of Army personnel. What is more, the Government, the Minister and the Department, have a moral obligation to do something to alleviate the hardships being endured by Army personnel and their families.

As far as I can see the Government have not made any provision in the Estimates for any special payment for soldiers. They have an opportunity to show their appreciation of what the members of the Defence Forces have done and are doing for the country. They should recognise the hardships they are enduring and, most important of all, they should fulfil an obligation which may not exist in black and white in the pay regulations but which must clearly exist morally. The Government could make a special payment to members of the Defence Forces before Christmas at very little cost to the Exchequer.

As the Government have not made any provision in the Estimates for an interim award to Army personnel I will be recommending to my party that they vote against the Estimates. There are other reasons we should vote against them and one of them concerns housing. Since Fianna Fáil took office in 1987 their local authority housing policy has proved disastrous.

The Minister for the Environment, Deputy Flynn, has done for local authority housing what no cement strike ever did, he has brought it to a complete standstill. County Sligo is a good example of what has happened to the building industry. Since Fianna Fáil took office they have built in the local authority area of Sligo County Council five or six rural cottages. We have virtually conquered the problem of housing in that county but it appears that within a few years we will face major difficulties. The Government have failed to keep up the momentum or even make a gesture as far as housing is concerned. There has been no effort made in the Sligo County Council area to build local authority houses. Sligo Corporation are in a worse position in that since 1987 they have only built four houses. A scheme in Magheraboy of 101 houses which was sanctioned and documented before the previous Coalition left office has not commenced. Not one sod has been turned and money has not been advanced. I should like to call on the Minister for the Environment to fund that scheme immediately. He should not divide it up. There is also a need to carry out major improvements to the road network in that county.

I should like to make a special appeal on behalf of those who suffer in any way from a mental handicap. We have had difficulties in my area with the threatened closure of Cloonamahon Centre and the curtailment of services at Cregg House. They have arisen because of the inadequacy of the funds given to the NorthWestern Health Board by the Department of Health. The Government, who are in a good position as far as finance is concerned, do not appear to be anxious to do anything to tackle the massive problem of emigration which has ruined many areas in my constituency and totally upset the social fabric. I am afraid that we will have great problems in the future because of emigration.

Minister for Energy (Mr. Molloy)

As Deputies are aware by now, the 1990 Estimates for the Public Service continue the effort of recent years to control public expenditure, alleviate borrowing and consequential long-term effects on taxation. The two Votes for which I have responsibility, Energy and Forestry, have continued the process of achieving significant expenditure reductions of recent years and in 1990 these two Votes combined show the largest reduction of any ministerial group of Votes. This is not to say that the level of activity is shrinking in these areas — far from it, as I will explain later. It represents a sustained effort to achieve economies and efficiency together with exploiting all opportunities to generate income and receipts from non-Exchequer sources.

Although the required disciplinary process to reduce public expenditure has been effective, there is, in my view, scope left for continuing to improve efficiency, particularly in administration and redeployment of resources to better effect. With this in mind my Department are one of three selected Departments who are co-operating with the Department of Finance with a view to participation in a new arrangement leading to an agreed programme of administrative efficiency. In return my Department would have more flexibility and responsibility for administering their resources and developing initiative in their staff. I am confident that this will lead to a continued effective performance in future years.

Although the total public service Votes for Forestry and Energy are reduced by 27 per cent there is a significant increase of 12 per cent in public capital programme provisions. This is consistent with virtually the same percentage increase as the Government's overall capital programme. It is laying the foundations for the future in terms of an economic and secure energy supply system and an expanded forestry resource for long term development and wealth creation. Increasing emphasis on capital expenditure is desirable provided a few important criteria are complied with. It is essential in the case of our commercial State bodies that there is a market demand for their output, that the investment projects are properly evaluated and show a satisfactory economic and financial rate of return and that the project is efficiently carried out. Prime responsibility for compliance rests with each of the boards concerned but in the overall supervision and guidance exercised by me and my Department we satisfy ourselves that these criteria are observed. I am also concerned with the financial stength and viability of our State companies. I am glad to note that in 1990 increased expenditure is being financed largely from internal resources and when account is taken of the availability of increased EC Structural Funds there is no net increase in the draw on Exchequer funding or external borrowing.

I now propose to speak about the principal activities in which my Department are engaged covering energy supply, minerals, oil and gas exploration, and forestry.

Natural gas continues to play an important role in national development. An increasing number of our urban householders now have the choice of a clean, reliable and efficient fuel which is competitively priced. The ESB will source about one third of their fuel requirements this year and next from natural gas and there are now 200 industrial consumers taking gas in varying quantities for a wide range of applications.

Natural gas has served this country's economy very well in many ways, especially in terms of import substitution. About £2 billion will have been saved up to the end of 1989. The benefits, however, do not stop there. Increasingly, the environmental aspects of the gas industry are beginning to assert themselves, and in a very timely and most welcome manner. Dramatic reductions in sulphur dioxide, for example, have been achieved by gas use, and we now look to natural gas to contribute to the solution of the urban smoke pollution problem. In this respect, my Department will be working very closely with the Minister of State responsible for environmental matters and the House can be assured that the contribution of natural gas will be maximised.

Bord Gáis Éireann have returned very creditable performances in recent years with expanded sales in the domestic markets. This is where natural gas can do most good — both in economic and environmental terms. Since the takeover of the Dublin Gas business, and the other gas utility companies, natural gas has rightly come to be regarded as a modern, safe and efficient source of energy for the rest of this century and beyond. In 1990, Bord Gáis Éireann will invest nearly £40 million in expanding their customer base, renewing and developing their mains network and ensuring the future security of gas supplies. The 1987 Gas (Amendment) Act and subsequent orders confer extensive safety obligations and powers on Bord Gáis Éireann for the distribution of gas in Dublin and the other gas utility companies now under its control. A Bill to consolidate and update the old gas distribution legislation is currently in preparation.

The price of energy is a key input for virtually all economic activity and it is an absolutely vital weapon in the battle to maintain and improve the competitiveness of Irish industry. In this respect, the progress made on electricity prices in the last few years has been impressive by any standards. Irish industrial electricity prices have dropped by almost 19 per cent since 1985 and they are now on a par with the European average. Domestic consumers are now enjoying electricity prices lower than the EC average. However, I do not intend to leave it at that. The ESB have told me that they will maintain those levels at least until 1992. In the meantime, I will seek out every opportunity to reduce electricity prices to industry further. The drive towards greater competitiveness in industry must be pursued by whatever means so as to maintain and increase employment.

The ESB's capital spending provision for 1990 is estimated at £86.1 million. While this is substantially down from the levels of recent years because no need currently exists to invest in further generating capacity, it still represents a determined and committed approach on the part of the ESB to the upkeep and modernisation of their transmission and distribution systems and to meet changes in demand due, for example, to industrial development. Quite often it is routine ongoing investment of this nature that is so crucial to keeping electricity prices at the lowest possible level in the years ahead.

Whitegate will continue to play a key role in the Government's strategy of preserving our security of oil supply. The commitment to make substantial capital investment resources available to INPC is firm evidence of the Government's resolve in this area. A special task force has been established to identify all realistic investment options available for Whitegate Refinery and Whiddy Oil Terminal.

Domestic developments in the oil market have focused on the Government's search for investment opportunities in the oil facilities at Whitegate and Whiddy. By means of select and targeted contacts the Government have elicited a series of expressions of interest from domestic and international parties. At present discussions are under way with a number of interested parties concerning oil supply and investment issues and I am confident that these contacts will proceed very satisfactorily.

Bord na Móna have contributed to the economic fabric of the country since the mid-forties. Recent years have, however, proved difficult for the board and the company are now engaged in the major task of reorganisation and revitalisation. In order to meet the challenges facing them, the board have recognised that they must restructure their operations so as to improve their competitiveness in the market place and to exploit worthwhile development opportunities.

The Turf Development Bill, 1988, which is currently before this House, will further allow Bord na Móna to expand their present core business and enable them to engage in other activities in which they have acquired a particular expertise. The Bill's main purpose is to provide greater flexibility in the way the board may adopt to re-organise the company, thus enabling them to preserve jobs and continue to contribute to regional and national prosperity.

Deputies will recall that earlier this year my Department concluded negotiations with Outokumpu of Finland for the sale of the State's 25 per cent share-holding in Tara Mines Limited and its past and future royalty entitlements from the company. The total consideration received was US $50 million and I am confident that the working partnership between my Department and Outokumpu will continue to ensure that the full potential of Tara Mines, which is a major employer and contributor to both the local and national economy, will be realised.

Since coming into office I have given a good deal of attention to the question of the impact of mining on the environment. I have decided that in future no mining leases will be granted by me unless a full and detailed environmental impact assessment has been carried out by an independent expert acceptable to my Department. The procedures for the implmentation of this policy are being clarified with the Department of the Environment. I expect that the new Environmental Protection Agency will play an important role in relation to the question of assessing the impact of mining operations on the environment. I have also noted that concern has been expressed in a number of areas about minerals exploration activity. I am satisfied that minerals prospecting has little or no impact on the environment, but I have stressed the need for prospecting companies to proceed with great care in their operations.

In order to provide a stimulus to exploration and thereby enhance the prospects of discovery, new offshore licensing terms were announced by the Government in 1987 meeting many of the concerns previously voiced by the industry. This was followed by an agreement with Marathon signed in November 1988 as part of which the company are committed to a three year programme of drilling up to ten exploration wells. In April 1989 after completing a well drilled as a direct result of that agreement, Marathon located a gas deposit in Block 48/20, about 20 miles offshore and nine miles north-west of the existing Kinsale Field. The company have since carried out considerable work to further evaluate the deposit. Marathon have also been in discussion with my Department in relation to developing this deposit and I expect in due course the formal submission to me of a development plan for what has come to be known as the Ballycotton Field. If all goes well, I hope to see natural gas from Ballycotton contributing to our energy needs in the near future. In 1990, I expect a further five wells to be drilled in our offshore and let us all hope that more discoveries and more development plans will result from that activity.

In relation to energy conservation, a subject which must be central to any coherent and effective energy policy, I am pleased to report that progress on the implementation of the revised energy conservation programme is proceeding satisfactorily. I have also been very encouraged by the success of Irish applications for assistance from the EC energy demonstration project scheme which I recently announced. The nine successful Irish projects will receive grant assistance of £2.3 million.

Increased funding has been provided for the Nuclear Energy Board for 1990 to enable them carry out new work which relfects the changing emphasis in the direction of radiological protection. A Bill to reflect this change of emphasis and set up the National Radiological Protection Institute has recently been approved by the Government.

Ireland continues to maintain a firm anti-nuclear stance and we make our strongly held views known at every available opportunity, particularly in international fora. We are striving to ensure the continuing ban on dumping of high level radioactive waste at sea and the continuing moratorium on dumping of low level waste. It was agreed at this year's meeting of the London Dumping Convention, where Ireland play an active role, that dumping of decommissioned nuclear powered vessels of any kind is covered by the convention and, therefore, subject to the moratorium. Following strong intervention by our delegation, on my instructions, both that body and the Paris Commission, which deal with land based pollution, have agreed to examine what international convention would be the most appropriate to cover the case of sub-sea repositories for radioactice waste accessed from land.

The net Vote for Forestry shows a reduction of 32 per cent from £14 million to £9.6 million. This reduction, however, conceals a number of significant changes in planned activity in relation to Forestry. Nineteen eighty-nine was a year of considerable change. First, Coillte Teoranta was established. The financial consequences of this affected the Vote and the public capital programme in different ways in both 1989 and 1990. Thus, a straightforward comparison of overall expenditure in these years can be misleading. However, the net effect is that Coillte Teoranta's dependence on Exchequer funding is being reduced.

Secondly, the European Community adopted a number of measures which greatly extended and improved the Community funding of forestry operations. Private forestry in all parts of the country will in future be aided and public forestry is also eligible for aid for the first time.

Thirdly, my Department have drawn up an ambitious five year forestry action programme as part of the national plan which broadly aims at doubling our annual planting level from 15,000 to 30,000 hectares per annum over the plan period and increasing by one third the output of wood and timber from our existing forests. This programme is now in the final stages of negotiation with the EC Commission to secure eligibility for EC Structural Fund assistance. I would expect to have Commission approval shortly and I will then be in a position to announce the detailed measures aimed at forest development.

Fourth, there has been a welcome and significant growth in private planting of new forests in recent years. The 1990 Estimates provide for a very significant expansion of private planting and I am providing for extra expenditure of £3 million for this purpose. The contribution of EC Structural Funds is also provided for in increased appropriations-in-aid.

The changes which have occurred and the plans for the future are outlined in the Programme for Government, 1989-1993 and the National Development Plan and detailed in a firm action programme to develop forestry. This action programme will set out to exploit and utilise in a commercial manner the extensive areas of land suitable for afforestation; increase timber output from existing forest resources and increase added value in processing; create more jobs particularly in rural areas where alternative employment opportunities are scarce; attract suitable capital seeking long term profitable investment, and maximise Ireland's comparative cost and yield advantage for afforestation to supply an increasing share of the Community's markets for wood and wood products on an economic and competitive basis. An active forestry programme being widely dispersed in rural areas will also support and underpin rural development generally in particular agricultural structural reform, tourist development and recreation, and preservation and improvement of wildlife and the environment.

To achieve the specific objectives set for forestry over the period of the Programme for Government, it is proposed to double planting levels from their record 15,000 hectares in 1988 to 30,000 hectares in 1993. This will be achieved through a combination of public and private planting, both essential elements in Ireland's forestry development, increase harvesting and marketing programmes from 1.5 million cubic metres in 1988 to 2 million by 1993 and increase the level of self-sufficiency in sawn softwood from 60 per cent at present to at least 80 per cent by 1993.

Over the past few months, it has become increasingly obvious that the development of Irish forestry is progressing at a rapid, in fact a record breaking pace. It has now become clear that private afforestation this year will reach a record 8,000 hectares, the highest level of private planting ever achieved by the private sector in the history of the State. The Government's efforts to get farmers involved in forestry are also showing positive results. Farmers are likely to account for about half of the record planting to be completed by the end of this year.

The current figure for those employed in the forestry and timber products sector is approximately 13,000. Of these 2,500 are employed directly by Coillte Teoranta. The increasing levels of afforestation and forest activity generally, which has already seen the establishment of several private forestry management and investment companies, will result in the creation of about 2,000 jobs in forestry between 1989 and 1993.

Eight new regulations, comprising the Community Forestry Action Programme, came into effect on 18 June 1989 following their adoption by the EC Council of Ministers. These regulations represent, for the first time, a real EC forestry policy with significant funding. Over the past few months, my Department have been pressing ahead with the adaptation of Ireland's forestry policies in the light of these new regulations. An operational programme proposing to implement many of the new measures has been submitted to Brussels and is currently being negotiated with the European Commission. Significant Structural Fund aid is being sought under the operational programme and this aid will change the whole basis of Irish forestry.

The operational programme sets out the new schemes which the Department propose to introduce to promote afforestation and to achieve the Government's aim of doubling planting by 1993. Broadly, the proposals include the following: improve the existing western package planting grant scheme; introduce similar planting grants in all areas of the Community; place increased emphasis on species diversification and the promotion of broadleaves; introduce an improved forestry annual income premium for farmers who plant their own land; introduce more generous grants for the improvement of existing woodland and for the reconstitution of woodland damaged by natural cause or fire; and provide grants for the construction of forest roads throughout the country. The premium and planting grant schemes will be geared to maximising farmers participation and will thus support the structure of rural society. My Department are pressing ahead as a matter of urgency to have the new forestry schemes in place early in the new year.

The operational programme for forestry places particular emphasis on protecting the environment and the measures proposed are geared towards ensuring that forestry development generally will improve rather than detract from the environment. Particular care will be taken in regard to planting in or adjacent to areas of outstanding national or scientific interest. Special measures are being taken to encourage the planting of broadleaved trees wherever possible.

The establishment of Coillte Teoranta, the State forestry company, was a significant element of Government forestry policy in 1989, and Coillte Teoranta's operations will continue to be of major importance in 1990. Production from public forests has increased steadily as a greater percentage of the estate reaches an exploitable age, and it already supports indigenous wood industries with potential and capacity for growth in jobs, import substitution and exports. I expect the highest ever volume of timber, at 1.55 million cubic metres to be sold this year, to be improved on again in 1990 and to rise steadily to 3 million cubic metres by the turn of the century. Coillte Teoranta will also continue to expand their afforestation programme from the 10,000 hectares achieved in 1989, in line with their contribution to the national plan target of a total national annual planting rate of 30,000 by 1993.

The provision in the 1990 Estimates of £2.5 million relates to a contribution to Coillte Teoranta's current expenditure through a grant-in-aid. This grant is being gradually reduced as the company are able to increase their revenue from sales of timber and secure economies in their operating costs. The company's capital expenditure on their land acquisition and planting programme will be financed through non-voted Exchequer funding in the form of £15 million equity, EC receipts and borrowings. The Exchequer funding reflects the long-term nature of forestry investment and the age profile of the estate transferred to the company on their establishment, and represents a reasonable compromise between continued Exchequer support for public forestry and the commercial mandate which has been given to Coillte Teoranta.

In my address this morning I hope I succeeded in giving the House a good flavour of the varied activities for which I exercise responsibility. My address indicates that there is a lot going on in the Department of Energy at the moment but that there is a lot more work to be done and the House can be assured that I will be pressing ahead urgently with it.

Mr. Hogan

I reiterate what a number of speakers have already said during this debate in that its format has little to commend it. In spite of the fact that it is important to have Estimates published as early as possible so that we can discuss them adequately, on this occasion there is little scope for making changes.

The Minister for Energy referred to a number of matters in his address, particularly Coillte Teoranta. I am sorry he did not refer to the fact that for the first time VAT is being imposed on the sale of Christmas trees from Coillte Teoranta. This runs counter to the Programme for Government. Christmas trees are now being taxed for the first time by this State organisation. It would appear that there may be a tax on Santa Claus himself.

The yardstick of the Government is the Programme for National Recovery which was published in October 1987. In that programme it was stated that lower interest and mortgage rates, a stable exchange rate, low inflation, the stabilisation of the national debt/GNP ratio and its subsequent reduction to a sustainable level, halting and reversing the flow of capital out of the economy and lower and more equitable personal taxation constitute the fiscal and monetary policy of the Government.

With the exception of the stabilisation of the national/GNP ratio the Government have failed on all of those counts. In the last 18 months we have seen a five per cent increase in mortgage and interest rates, tremendous instability in the exchange rate, increasing inflation which will result in wage demands and increase economic costs in the course of the coming year; and the flow of capital out of the economy, far from abating, has increased alarmingly.

The Government's approach to personal taxation has been to reduce it rather than radically reforming it in order to create the environment for employers to employ and give greater incentive to the employee in the workplace. The Minister for Finance said yesterday that the fundamental objective of our approach was straightforward in so far as it is to achieve strong but sustainable economic advantage through increased employment and higher real incomes.

Despite the statistics the Minister trotted out, the reality of the world outside this House is a stark one for the many people who are unemployed and the many thousands of young people who have emigrated. Contrary to what the Minister said, the strategy being adopted is not working. It is laudable that the financial independence of this country be made good. Since 1981 Fine Gael have played a responsible and constructive role in conditioning the general public to accept the reality of monetary policies to reduce Exchequer borrowing and reduce our national debt. The conversion of the Taoiseach and his Government to this policy has probably been one of the landmarks of the last decade. My party look forward to a time when we will have got back to the stage of budget surplus.

In August of 1989 the Central Statistics Office published their annual estimates of migration figures for the year ending April 5, 1989. These figures show that 46,000 people emigrated in the preceding year; these are the worst figures since 1958. In spite of the glowing statistics, registered unemployment went up during the summer period this year. This is in direct contradiction to the normal seasonal trend. In the UK, our nearest neighbour, unemployment has fallen for 38 consecutive months including this month, in spite of the recessionary indications that are evident there. Emigration from Ireland is now featuring regularly even in the international media. All communities have been decimated and the Government do not appear to be able to tackle this very major problem with radical and imaginative measures. We seem content to leave things as they are, saying that the rising tide will lift all boats.

Unemployment and emigration are symptoms of the same problem. The principal causes are high income tax, PRSI and other overheads which make it too costly to put a pound in a worker's pocket. The overlay of social legislation makes the employment of labour unattractive. The high cost of transporting raw material to the market and a multitude of poverty traps arise out of official policy. These are just some of the problems in creating employment.

There is no coherent and co-ordinated Government policy to tackle unemployment. There is a widespread sense of hopelessness in political circles and among the people at large that anything significant will be done about unemployment. The scale of the problem can be demonstrated by the fact that net emigration in the preceding five years to August 1984 was 30,000 and the corresponding figure for the preceding five years to August 1989 was 156,000. This is alarming. During the same period the register of unemployment in the UK fell by 44 per cent. In fact if there had been a similar trend here as occurred in the UK during the period 1984 to 1989 the total of unemployed and those who have emigrated would be 107,000 fewer than the numbers registered as unemployed in 1984 and 251,000 fewer than the numbers who emigrated in 1989.

Why should there be such a dramatic difference in trends between us and our nearest neighbour, the UK? What are the basic solutions being offered by the Government in the UK that could readily be adopted here to improve our unemployment situation? Undoubtedly our tax and social welfare systems contribute to the enormous poverty traps and the disincentive to work here. The UK have fewer poverty traps so that a person going off social welfare and taking up employment is always better off there. Means testing in the UK is simpler and always based on net pay and not gross pay as it is here. Income tax rates are lower and allowances higher so that it is far cheaper to put one pound in a worker's pocket. Industrial relations reform has reduced disincentives to employ and absenteeism in the UK is just over half the Irish rate. The UK statutory sick pay is part of taxable income while our disability benefit is not. There is an urgent need for radical reform of our tax and social welfare systems in order to meet the objectives I have set out.

In recent times the Government have been content to allow the Minister for Labour to make accusations against employers. He has carried out a witch hunt against them for not creating sustainable employment. This is not a constructive approach. Although it is part of the lead up to the review of the Programme for National Recovery it is certainly not in keeping with the practice on the ground whereby the Minister for Labour has failed to acknowledge the enormous contribution that the private sector has made towards creating employment. During the course of his address he came some way towards acknowledging that contribution. In recent statements to cover up his own inadequacies and the inadequacies of the Government he has carried out a witch hunt against the private sector.

The Minister and the Government seem to fail to realise that for every pound put in a worker's pocket by an employer the employer must contribute £2.60. That is an enormous contribution and an enormous burden on each employer to come up with the necessary finance in order to create employment. How could employers under those conditions readily create the thousands of jobs the Minister wishes them to create? If the conditions, incentives and environment are correct I have no doubt the contribution can be even greater than it has been by the private sector and employers in general.

In relation to food policy and the food industry generally it is fair to say the strategy adopted by the Government for the period 1989-93 now does not exist. The only major policy initiative that has taken place since 1987 has been the large scale publicity surrounding the multimillion pound investment by one individual private company in this country. I can never understand how the Government or the IDA would put together a package of creating greater capacity in the meat industry at a time when there was no adequate raw material to meet the type of meat processing employment that was envisaged at that time. That was acknowledged by the Government in the Programme for National Recovery in 1987 when they suggested a grant loan scheme to individuals in order to maintain the beef cow herd and even increase it. They realised that this is essential to the further development of the meat industry. Of course, nothing has happened in relation to that scheme since. In spite of the fact there has been some increase in the beef cow herd since 1987 there has been nowhere near sufficient increase in the livestock numbers to meet the type of meat processing capacity we have readily available. It is time for the Minister for Agriculture and Food to review the incentives being given to the food industry generally, particularly in the meat sector, to have a reappraisal of the necessity to create a market-led approach to the food industry rather than a haphazard approach involving a very small number of players in the entire industry.

Enormous abuse is taking place in the social welfare system in relation to the agricultural industry generally and the agri-business sector has been involved enormously in the payments of the State to this area. How many meat processing activities, how many agri-business activities are operating on a three-day week outside intervention periods or outside times when there is support from the EC? This should be examined and measures taken to bring agri-business into line to prevent them from abusing that situation.

The Agricultural Estimate certainly is disturbing in so far as a ceiling has been placed on expenditure over the next five years from the Structural Funds allocation. During Dáil replies it has been estimated that £308 million will be devoted towards headage, the farm improvement programme and various marketing programmes to be operated by the Department of Agriculture and Food in the next five years. This ceiling is too low indeed to satisfy the various demands that will be placed on the Agriculture Vote over the next few years. The Minister will be more than aware of the enormous interest in extensions to the less favoured areas and that demands from various parts of the country on his Department will be enormous in the next six months in the application this country will be making to Europe for extensions under the less favoured areas directive. I would like him to explain how he will be in a position, under the Estimates proposed for 1990 and, indeed, under the estimated income from the Structural Fund during the course of the next five years, to satisfy the many demands that will be placed on him over the next few years from the many people who will meet the criteria and will, unfortunately, because of lack of finance once again, be unable to benefit from this less favoured areas directive.

It is disappointing that there has been a reduction in the reactor grants paid to farmers under the TB eradication scheme. This, of course, is done with the intent of funding the new round of brucellosis which the Minister denied recently but which in reality is true. I am critical also of the fact that young farmers taking over farms under the installation aid scheme are not getting payment under that scheme as quickly as they should. It would be a considerable help if that process was speeded up.

There are difficulties on the horizon for the agricultural industry, particularly in the beef area and also the dairy area which has enjoyed one of its best years in 1989, but I can never understand that when the new Commissioner for Agriculture, Mr. MacSharry, met our Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy O'Kennedy, earlier this year one of the first things they did was to abolish the seasonality of intervention we had built up over the years and concentrated the support for the beef industry in just one part of the year. I have no doubt that has contributed significantly to the problems in the beef area at the moment. It is a startling statistic that 7,000 steers were slaughtered in our meat factories at the end of September while 50,000 steers were killed at the end of October. That clearly will indicate to the Minister that the beef industry has taken a direction for the worst in the last while.

Under the Education Estimate I welcome the fact that the Minister has committed certain funds towards alleviating distress and creating additional posts in the disadvantaged areas. I trust that St. John's Infants School in Kilkenny will not be forgotten on this occasion. Representations and a clear case have been put forward in relation to that school on many occasions by myself. The post-primary construction programme which has been proposed is welcome and I hope the various schools the Minister for Education will be aware of will include Mooncoin, Ballyhale and Johnstown in County Kilkenny and that they will be subject to getting a fair share of the expenditure in 1990. I hope the rationalisation she speaks about will not fail and she will not fear to take the necessary steps rather than the loading off this problem to the VECs as she is inclined to do at present.

In relation to the environment I wish to join other speakers in outlining the enormous housing crisis we have at the moment. There are 400 on the waiting list for local authority housing in County Kilkenny alone as the result of a shortsighted approach by the Minister for the Environment using the sledgehammer tactic of abolishing all home improvement grants and all capital expenditure in relation to building local authority housing. That is now beginning to have a devastating effect on many families. Roads in many aspects are like dirt tracks through ports like Waterford and New Ross, ports which will become increasingly important in regard to our being competitive in the marketplace in 1992. Here again the Minister has failed to come up with any proposals of his own to bring about financial reform in local government.

Generally, even though we are presented with a fait accompli on the question of the Estimates, there are many areas where there will be difficulties over the next year. I trust that during the year the various Departments will introduce amendments and Supplementary Estimates to deal with the problems I have outlined.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food (Mr. Walsh)

The increase in the net Estimate for the Agriculture and Food Vote for 1990 of £4.1 million, from £154.3 million to £158.4 million, represents an increase of 3 per cent on the original Estimate for 1989.

I propose to make some comments on the agricultural situation generally and to limit my remarks on the Estimates 1990 to the main changes in the subhead groups under which the Vote for Agriculture and Food will be accounted for. It is expected that a Supplementary Estimate for 1989 will be introduced next Tuesday. A number of the subheads which will be dealt with in that Supplementary are also relevant to the 1990 Estimates.

1989 has been another good year for Irish farming. I expect total farm incomes to increase by 4-5 per cent in 1989 over its 1988 level. By comparison with the spectacular increase of 45 per cent over the previous two years, this may seem modest but it must be remembered that the income increase in 1988 is set against a much higher base.

Prices have continued strong for the main farm products throughout the year. This is due in part to the improved market balance at Community and world level for our major products. The Council of Ministers and the Commission must take some credit for this better market balance. Decisions, some of which were unpopular at the time, have been taken to restrain production but the pay-off, in terms of better prices, has been coming through to farmers over the past two years. At Government level the response to this welcome development must be to maintain our tight economic and financial management to ensure that inflation is kept as low as possible to preserve the hard earned income gains which have been achieved.

Because of these improved incomes, farmers are now investing heavily in their industry, as is evidenced by the dramatic increases in livestock numbers which have taken place over the past two years. Between June 1987 and June 1989, for example, sheep numbers increased by over two million animals, a growth rate of 17 per cent, per annum which by any standards is quite dramatic. In the same period, the number of beef cows rose by over 100,000 or by 23 per cent, again a dramatic increase which shows the confidence there is in the industry. In 1989, largely due to these improvements in prices, there are clear signs of a recovery in the pig sector.

The improved income situation on farms has also led to substantial investment in relation to pollution control measures. This investment has been stimulated by the attractive grant levels now payable in the whole country for pollution control measures, in the wake of the extension of the grants scheme. The importance of an optimum use of the major investment now being made can hardly be over-emphasised. We are aware that some of the investments during the seventies on Irish farms and farmyards have not stood the test of time. There must be no recurrence of this with the present investment.

Increased provision in 1990 of £4.9 million is made under the heading of general administrative expenses and arises from computerisation, relocation, decentralisation and the additional burdens which will arise during the Irish Presidency of the European Community.

Now I turn to Teagasc. The Government's main objective in setting up Teagasc was to ensure better co-ordination and cost-effectiveness in the operation of the agricultural advisory, training and research services. The legislation places a special emphasis on the training of young farmers. As far as I am concerned I am very pleased that there is special emphasis on food research and development; a matter to which this Government attach special importance.

On the one hand, our young farmers need to be at least as well trained as their international competitors and on the other, the raw materials they produce should be processed to the maximum extent possible to provide maximum returns.

In combining the considerable resources of the former An Foras Talúntais and ACOT under a high calibre authority and a strong unified management, the Government's objective was to deliver the agricultural research, training and advisory services in the most efficient and cost-effective way possible. I am heartened by the manner in which Teagasc has set about reorganising and restructuring the services and much has been achieved in their first year of operation. It is now well on the way to becoming a streamlined organisation with greater commercial orientation, capable of meeting the current and future needs of the agriculture and food sectors. In this way, Teagasc can greatly assist our major industry in responding to the challenges of the nineties.

As the Minister indicated recently, it is proposed to introduce a Supplementary Estimate of £8 million for Teagasc shortly to clear the deficit which has accumulated over the past year or so. Accordingly I consider that the £27 million Exchequer provision for Teagasc will be adequate for the agricultural advisory, training and research services for 1990.

There is an additional amount in Subhead C.2 of £4 million to cover increased expenditure by ERAD. This represents the increase over the annual amount originally guaranteed for the four years of the ERAD programme and will be funded jointly by the Exchequer and by the increased bovine disease levies which will take effect from today.

In formulating a strategy for the eradication of bovine TB the board of ERAD are taking cognisance of a number of factors which they feel may be impeding the progress of the eradication of bovine TB in Ireland. These include: the existing disease testing structure; the exceptionally high level of cattle movement; the high level of non-specific infection; the established role of wildlife in TB spread and that eradication was not achieved prior to farm modernisation and intensification.

To halve the existing TB levels over four years ERAD instigated a comprehensive strategically focused programme in 1989. The three phases of this progressively evolving programme are: phase one, launched in February 1989, was designed primarily to achieve the maximum extraction of TB infected cattle and, thereby, reduce cattle to cattle infection, which probably accounts for the majority of infected cattle in the country in any one year. Phase two of the programme proposed for 1990 must further reduce infection levels of bovine TB by adding a second major thrust to the programme, namely the reduction of sources of residual infection. Phase three, to consolidate and better the reduced infection levels achieved in the previous two years, a further thrust must be added to the ERAD programme, namely, control of the geographical spread of bovine TB. This can only be fully achieved by having a computerised movement permit system. I am satisfied that the programme that has been devised by ERAD is the correct one and will, in time, result in a greatly reduced level of these diseases in the national herd.

In so far as Bord Glas is concerned, as Deputies are aware, it is Government policy that the development of the country's horticultural industry should be placed in the hands of a body with specific overall authority to ensure that this task is carried out in a co-ordinated way. I want to pay tribute to my colleague, the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food, Deputy Kirk, who has had a very good performance in the past two years, first in introducing the interim Bord Glas and recently in introducing legislation to have it set up in a permanent capacity. He has also published a five year programme for the development of the horticultural industry.

This programme aims at import substitution and export expansion of £58 million and the creation of 1,750 full-time and 1,500 part-time jobs over five years. Three hundred and fifty new jobs were created last year and the indications are that the 400 extra jobs target for this year will be exceeded.

The provision in Subhead H.1 of £500,000 maintains the level of Exchequer support granted to CBF for 1989 and demonstrates the Government's continued confidence in the work done by CBF on market research and promotion in the meat sector. I am aware that some sectors of the industry hoped for a higher level of support. However, Deputies will appreciate that the Government's difficult decisions on expenditure in recent years have contributed to the real recovery we are now seeing in the national economy. To sustain that recovery, public expenditure — even on worthwhile measures — has to be kept on a very even keel. That is general Government policy.

Marketing is crucial to the growth of meat exports. I am satisfied that CBF have been instrumental in identifying opportunities on export markets and have assisted the industry to develop products with greater added value. The meat sector, which benefits from these developments, contributes in an important way to CBF funding and this displays in a very concrete and tangible way their appreciation of CBF's role. I wish to reiterate my publicly stated view that CBF are an exemplary State organisation.

As regards structural measures, in particular the farm improvement programme, the farm modernisation scheme and western measures, Integrated Rural Development Programme and, Set Aside of Land, the Government's policy in relation to agriculture and the environment is set out clearly in the National Development Plan 1989-1993. That policy fully recognises that, apart from the protection which it deserves in its own right, a clean and unspoilt environment is an important factor in enhancing this country's attractiveness for tourists and in promoting the marketing of our food products. I want to say how important our excellent image is environmentally in the marketing of our food products. In that regard it is crucially important to maintain our green image.

The elimination of farmyard pollution is the first step in implementing this policy. It was with that in mind in the middle of 1988, as part of the new western package, my colleague, the Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy O'Kennedy, negotiated with the Commission a new scheme whereby farmers in the less-favoured areas — and that means some 62 per cent of the country — could avail of grants of up to 55 per cent for the provision of storage for animal waste and silage effluent.

The response to that scheme was so encouraging that in July last — in advance, I may say, of the Community Support Framework for our plan as a whole — the Minister succeeded in getting the Commission to agree to extend the pollution control measure to the entire country. The result is that farmers in all areas can now avail of attractive grants for this purpose — up to 55 per cent in the less-favoured areas and 45 per cent elsewhere. Over the five years for which the programme is to run, some £140 million will be paid in grants, of which the Community will contribute around £100 million.

The House will be interested to know that since July 1988, when the original scheme was launched in the less-favoured areas, 8,470 farmers have received approval for pollution control work entailing payment of some £37 million in grants.

Deputies will be aware that since October 1988 the Department of Agriculture and Food have been implementing a pilot scheme aimed at testing out a particular approach to rural development. That experiment will continue for another year or so, at the end of which time, and in the light of the experience gained, we will make a decision as to the approach to be adopted in implementing rural development policy in the future. Meantime, as envisaged in the National Plan and as agreed under the Community Support Framework, an operational programme for rural development is being finalised in the Department with a view to having it approved by the Commission and ready for implementation early next year.

It is mandatory on member states to implement the Community's set aside scheme and also the scheme for the extensification of production. The former is already in operation — indeed, has been in operation for almost a year now — and some 72 farmers are participating, leading to the setting aside of 1,239 hectares. These figures do not, of course, include those farmers who are now entering the scheme for the first time.

A pilot scheme to introduce extensification in the beef and veal sector has been drawn up and is being discussed with the Commission. Extensification will have to be introduced for other sectors next year.

Progress under the scheme of installation aid for young farmers and under the farm improvement programme during 1989 has significantly exceeded our expectations. The high level of applications under these schemes is encouraging. It shows that farm management is passing into younger and more enlightened hands. It also shows that farmers have the confidence to invest in agriculture. All this augurs well for the future of the industry.

In relation to the disadvantaged areas schemes covered under Subhead L.3 it will be seen that £67 million has been allocated to this subhead for 1990 as compared to £57.2 million for 1989. This is a clear representation of the Government's commitment in this area.

Looking to the future, the survey of disadvantaged areas which was completed this year will form the basis for a reclassification and an expansion of those areas in Ireland. The survey results are being computer-processed at present. When this processing is completed, the survey results will be presented to Government and the list of areas for designation and reclassification will be forwarded to the EC as soon as possible. It is difficult to estimate how long it will take to obtain EC approval of these newly designated and reclassified areas or when payments can be made in these areas — but I shall make every effort possible to expedite EC approval and to see that the necessary funding to make payments will be provided in due course. I might add that the survey was the most detailed and comprehensive of the four reviews of the disadvantaged areas carried out since 1975 and covered an area of 4.4 million acres in 22 countries and 90,000 farms in 20,000 townlands.

The estimated decrease in the financing of the common agricultural policy (Subhead L.4) from £67.5 million to £40 million indicates the extent to which intervention activity has declined in volume arising from changes in EC policies in various sectors. There is also a similar decrease in the corresponding Appropriations-in-Aid subhead — as indicated at note (b) at the bottom of page 41 of the Estimates for Public Services.

The decrease in the special premium on exports of beef to the United Kingdom (Subhead L.7) arises from the termination of this premium earlier this year. There is a corresponding shortfall in the Appropriations-in-Aid subhead.

The Taoiseach last week in Dáil Éireann offered every co-operation and support to our fellow Irishmen in the North of Ireland particularly in the context of our Presidency of the European Community. Nowhere is this more relevant than in the agriculture sector. We have already this year made a significant breakthrough in the common interest of sheep producers, North and South, by achieving a single region for sheepmeat for Ireland for the first time. This will guarantee premium payments, North and South, at a level which will not be reduced by market trends elsewhere in Europe. The extension to the North of many special concessions for the Republic has always been supported by us, a fact which has been readily, if not always publicly, acknowledged by Northern farmers. The increase in farm incomes in the Republic has been well ahead of Northern Ireland in recent years. The common characteristics of our farming methods, climate and environment offer a great opportunity for a co-ordinated marketing drive to the benefit of all.

The revolutionary pace of change in agricultural marketing and technology, the forthcoming GATT negotiations during our Presidency, the change in direction of European agricultural policy all call for an agressive and confident response from us at home and abroad. The Minister, Deputy Michael O'Kennedy, as incoming President of the Council of Agriculture Ministers, will willingly make himself available for consultations towards common action for the long-term benefit and prosperity of all farmers, North and South.

Mr. Ryan

The Labour Party consider that this Estimate will do nothing to reverse the trend of inequality and disadvantage which has been the consequence of Government policy since 1987. The Book of Estimates must be considered in the general context of the current economic indicators. I am very pleased with the way the economy is developing. Economists and the Central Bank have said that we have a surplus balance of payments, that our GNP — depending on who you listen to — is 3.5 per cent or 4.5 per cent and that inflation is, relatively speaking, low.

We must also look at the steps the Government are taking in the context of the Estimates and the budget in relation to people in need. I refer to those living in poverty, people trying to get into hospital or to receive health care, the ever-growing number on the housing list and the unemployed. We must ensure that we do not continue the two-tier system which, unfortunately, was established in recent years. We must try to eliminate poverty in all forms. However, having gone through the Estimate and listened to Ministers up to now, I do not detect a trend in this regard.

I compliment the Government for their decision to take new recruits into the Defence Forces. I welcome the fact that the figures in respect of pay for the Permanent Defence Force acknowledge the recruitment. However, the extra numbers envisaged will hardly offset the reduction in the numbers within the forces in recent years due to natural wastage. It means that many members of the forces have to work eight or twelve hour shifts because they are understaffed.

On behalf of the Labour Party, I will be seeking the full implementation of the recommendations of the commission which was set up in July. We will be seeking retrospective payment to that date. It is regrettable that many families of members of the Defence Forces would be better off if they were in receipt of social welfare. I hope this will be rectified when the commission reports its findings. Although, there is not provision in the Estimates, I hope the necessary money will be provided for retrospective payments, which is nothing less than they deserve. I hope the Minister will recognise the representative association of the Defence Forces.

I will now deal with the Estimates for the Department of the Environment. Prior to the local elections, Fianna Fáil made a commitment that water charges would be abolished and that central Government would fund local government adequately by means of the rate support grant. Under pressure from the Labour Party and The Workers' Party water charges were not introduced by Dublin County Council or Dublin Corporation. However they have been increased substantially throughout the rest of the country. Local authority finances are in a shambles. Since 1987 there has been a reduction of 30 per cent in real terms in funds from the Exchequer.

It is scandalous that there are no local authority houses available. All public representatives, be they county councillors or TDs know that the lists are getting longer and longer. In County Dublin there are over 900 applicants on the waiting list. There are over 2,000 people on Dublin Corporation's waiting list looking for a home for their family. Fianna Fáil have always led people to believe that they support the building industry. It is ironic that under their stewardship since 1987 we have seen the rundown of the local authority housing stock. It is all very fine for economists, Government, and big business to say that people will have to wait until the economic climate improves. However, I contend that people caught in the poverty trap have waited far too long. People must be given some hope in the current economic climate. It is up to us, the public representatives to show that we are prepared to do something about their problems. If we are to retain credibility we must be seen to do something positive.

How have the Government responded to the housing crisis? New housing starts are almost negligible. In my own area, County Dublin which is the fastest growing area in the EC, there were seven new starts the year before last, and 17 new starts last year. That is an indication of the Government's commitment to date. The Government have reduced their direct allocation for new house construction by a massive £33 million in the Estimates. However we have been told by the Minister that 1,000 new starts will be made in 1990 which will be funded from the proceeds of the sale of local authority houses. Are we now saying that no new houses will be constructed in those areas where local authority tenants were able to take up the purchase option? We had been told last year that the proceeds from the purchase scheme would go towards the maintenance of existing local authority dwellings which had been allowed deteriorate by virtue of the reduced allocations to local authorities.

I will comment on the allocation for sanitary services. There has been a proposal from Dublin County Council for a modern sewage treatment plant for Balbriggan, County Dublin. But I understand that in the future, whenever that will be, only an outfall and extension of the existing scheme will be provided. Raw sewage will be going into the Irish Sea. I wish to put on record that that is totally unacceptable to me and to the people in the area.

There is an allocation of £8,000 for commissions, committees and special inquiries in the Estimate for the Department of Industry and Commerce. There has been no increase on last year's allocation. I do not think £8,000 is sufficient. In today's Irish Independent they had a very good article on buying toys. I have been meeting with my constituents in recent weeks and they have been complaining day-in-day-out about the cost of toys. I would love if we could go out and buy Irish toys. However, the children dictate what Santa will bring. The article sets out the differences in price between Belfast and Dublin of the most popular toys for children. For example, the price of Ghostbusters in Dublin is 72 per cent dearer than in Belfast, with an increase of 65.5 per cent on the price of dolls in Dublin, again compared with Belfast. One could go down the whole range of such toys.

I call on the Minister to use even some of the £8,000 to have that rip-off investigated particularly when one remembers that the same articles on sale in those shops after Christmas will cost at least 25 per cent less. It is time to call a halt when one sees this type of rip-off. I call on the Minister for Industry and Commerce to do something to rectify that matter on behalf of parents generally. It is also totally unacceptable that such toys are displayed at checkouts in major stores in the lead up to Christmas. While one can appreciate that such toys have to be displayed, that should be done away from checkout points.

I might refer also to education, at primary level in particular. The failure of the Government to increase school capitation grants in line with spiralling costs has forced most schools to rely on additional non-State funds, a feature becoming more and more prevalent in this sector and causing much resentment among parents, teachers and boards of management. Needless to say, schools located in poorer areas are affected most. However, funding or resource problems obtain at all levels and I predict that such problems will worsen in the future, just to take the one example of the reduction in the capitation grants allocation for the current year.

There are deplorable circumstances obtaining in St. Columcille's boys national school in north county Dublin which warrants two additional teachers this year, notwithstanding that fact that school and its pupils will have to wait until September 1990 to have their case reviewed. There are something of the order of 38 or 39 pupils in each classroom which, when teachers' absenteeism through sickness is taken into account, leads to classes of between 44 and 46 pupils. Such class size is totally unacceptable. Similar circumstances obtain in St. Helen's senior school in Portmarnock where there is no remedial teacher. I should like to refer also to the need for a school building for Fingal community school in Swords.

Any examination of these Estimates must highlight the failure of the Government to provide sufficient current resources, particularly for health to allow for the reopening and adequate staffing of hospital beds and wards. Despite the fact that the accident and emergency departments of hospitals now constitute the only means of access to hospital beds for many people, there is a resurgence of long waiting lists for elective treatment in public hospitals. The Estimates before the House for consideration will not tackle the inequalities obtaining in the areas of social welfare, education, health and local government. Indeed, I would predict they will even worsen the overall position and, in the health area, lead to a two-tiered system.

Minister for the Marine (Mr. Wilson)

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on the Estimates in general and, specifically, in respect of my Department, I am also pleased that I am speaking at a time when, as the Minister for Finance said yesterday, a 3.5 per cent growth is forecast for our economy in 1990. The ESRI put it a little higher at 4.75 per cent real growth, provided there is no recession in Britain. That is good news also for employment which is forecast to increase by some 20,000. The consumer price index, by the end of 1990, is forecast at 3.5 per cent, which is even more important as far as arrangements with the social partners are concerned. The Government's national plan for the period 1989-93 has identified the marine sector as one of those with particular potential to provide sustainable employment in areas where there are few alternative industrial sources.

Restoration of confidence in the economy requires a disciplined approach to the management of the public finances. This continued attention to the strict control and management of public expenditure, however, will be accompanied hand in hand by a concentrated emphasis on sectors with developmental potential. The 1990 Exchequer allocation of £35,042,000 for the Marine Vote reflects this philosophy. I welcome this overall increase of £5.5 million on the underlying 1989 allocation. In summary, the main areas benefiting from increased funding are: inland fisheries development, a funding allocation of £6.3 million in 1990; harbour development, a funding allocation of £5.4 million; An Bord Iascaigh Mhara, a funding allocation of £7.9 million; marine research, a funding allocation of £1.01 million; and shipping investment grants, a funding allocation of £1.34 million.

I will now elaborate on these areas in some detail.

An Bord Iascaigh Mhara, together with other State agencies, are pursuing a vigorous market-led approach to the development of our fishing and fish farming industry which is highlighted in the National Development Plan and underpins support being sought at EC level for a whole range of programmes including fleet development and modernisation, aquaculture development, fishery harbours, with support from the European Regional Development Fund, fish processing, supported under FEOGA grants, exploratory fishing, port facilities — including ice plants — as well as manpower training.

The main areas targeted by BIM for funding are as follows: grants for vessels and equipment £1,158,000; exploratory and experimental fishing £300,000; aquaculture £1,780,000; exploratory fishing gear £669,000; and marketing £740,000.

The fishing industry play a key role in sustaining the economies of coastal regions. This industry is thus of major regional significance not only in this country but in the Community as a whole. Promoting sustainable growth in the fishing industry and achieving smooth structural change is thus a major objective of the Community and of member states.

The optimum growth of the fishing industry in both a domestic and a European context depends on tackling all the links in the chain from the catching sector to the final marketing of products.

We need an efficient catching sector. To this end, our fleet must be adapted to go after new species or under-exploited species — argentine, blue whiting and horse mackerel being the three targeted so far. We need efficient conservation and management regimes. We also need to promote and develop high-quality handling and processing standards. Furthermore we need to address marketing constraints and, in particular, to shift the focus away from bulk commodity sales to the development of specific products.

We have in place in the BIM development strategy, a wide range of programmes designed to address all of these issues and resources have been carefully targeted to the priorities of quality upgrading and marketing.

In the area of marketing the activities are being increasingly re-orientated towards the emerging sectors of aquaculture — salmon, shell fish — and added-value — herring roe, and shellfish. The State's market development role has a critical part to play at this stage in its efforts to find markets for new species and to shift the industry from a commodity basis to value-added products. The reason for this shift is to capitalise on the potential for sea-food products and, in particular, to support the rapidly emerging aquaculture sector where Ireland suffers from the marketing disadvantage of being a late entrant. BIM marketing expenditure increased by 24 per cent to £740,000 in 1989 and this level will be maintained for 1990.

As regards exports, a separate fish quality programme has been introduced by An Bord Iascaigh Mhara, the aim of which is to ensure, as far as possible, that Irish fish products adhere to the emerging European standards for the production and processing of such products. Cargoes of fish and fish products intended for export are inspected to ensure that the highest possible standards are maintained right from the point of production to the point of consumption. BIM have also inaugurated a co-operation and advice service for fish factories and processors. BIM's development strategy also provides for increased training for fishermen and for all who are involved in the handling, processing, and marketing of fish for sale.

I would like to take this opportunity to inform the House of the outcome of the Council of Fisheries Ministers in Brussels last Monday, which both I and Deputy Michael Noonan, Minister of State at the Department of the Marine, attended. While agreement on a range of guide prices will have real effect on fishermen's income in 1990, the undoubted highlight of the Council was the adoption of a new fisheries surveillance package. This measure, which sets aside approximately £80 million over the period 1991-95 and which has an intervention rate in the range 35 per cent to 50 per cent, will be an immense benefit to Ireland in order to ensure that our surveillance capacity is kept up to date and fully equipped. While I am unable to state, at this juncture, how much of the moneys will be allocated to Ireland, I would expect that in view of our disproportionate burden we will qualify for a significant proportion of the total funding available.

The aquaculture sector remains on a strong growth path and my Department's efforts will be directed at supporting environmentally sound development which will bring the rewards of jobs, exports and growth. I would like to take this opportunity to focus for a moment on the environmental aspects of the fin-fish sector of the aquaculture industry, that is the sector which produces salmon and trout. The environmental impact of this sector has been the subject of much comment of late. While I regret to say that the sector has been the subject of some wildly ill-informed comment and criticism, I acknowledge that the siting, the numbers and the impact of salmon farms has to be carefully researched and monitored in the interest of the environment and, not least, of the salmon farmers themselves. To achieve this, fin-fish farmers are now required to commission thorough environmental impact assessments in advance of licence approvals by my Department. In addition, the results of these assessments are made public by my Department in order to allay fears which people may have about impact of farms in their areas. Together with An Bord Iascaigh Mhara, my Department are now compiling thorough scientific data which will underpin the future designation of areas as suitable for aquaculture development. In relation to the operation of established salmon farms, I am glad to advise the House that I recently announced the establishment of a special technical group to investigate and advise on the introduction of mandatory codes of practice for fin-fish aquaculture, taking particular account of those aspects of fish husbandry which have a direct bearing on the environment. The group are representative of the Fisheries Research Centre and aquaculture division of my Department, the Central Fisheries Board and the Irish Salmon Growers Association. I expect the group to report to me by mid-December 1989.

In addition, I have directed my Department to draw up a systematic inspection programme for aquaculture, using all available resources, to ensure that existiong standards and any new codes of practice are adopted and fully observed. Furthermore, agreement has been reached to make good certain deficiencies in the staffing levels at the Fisheries Research Centre, thereby strengthening their supervisory capacity particularly in the aquaculture area.

These initiatives, taken together with the substantial research work undertaken in advance of licensing aquaculture projects, will greatly facilitate the objective of an aquaculture industry operating in harmony with other water users. Whilst the fin-fish sector accounts for the bulk of the outout by value of Irish aquaculture — over £40 million in 1989 — the shellfish sector is also growing in importance and will be providing a livelihood for many more small and part-time operators in the future. My Department will be supporting growth in that sector in conjunction with the relevant State agencies — An Bord Iascaigh Mhara and Údarás na Gaeltachta — and will be seeking also to maximise the contribution from the European Community to this area. In the context of European funding, I see aquaculture as providing an ideal conduit for development funds for the less developed regions. The sum of £1.8 million is being provided for grants/loans for aquaculture development in the 1990 allocation in line with BIM's plan for this sector.

I am pleased to say that a very ambitious programme is planned for 1990 in fisheries research and related areas, with an overall allocation of £1.01 million — this shows an increase of 15 per cent on the 1989 level. In particular, moneys have been set aside to carry out new surveys of the herring in the Celtic Sea, off our south coast, using special scientific echo sounders to obtain a direct count of the numbers of herring in the sea during the spawning season. This information is required by my fishery scientists in order to improve the planning and management of fisheries, and thus assist the European Community in its deliberations on TACs and quotas.

The herring fishery in the Celtic Sea has always been an important one for our industry, and particularly for the fishermen on the south coast. In recent years our catch has been running at about 16,000 tonnes, generating a financial yield of almost £7 million. It is a valuable export fishery, the roes being extracted and flown to Japan for human consumption, where they are a high priced delicacy. After the roes have been extracted, the herring fillets are sold on the Irish or European market. These surveys are intended to protect those sectors of the industry which utilise the Celtic Sea herring, and ensure the best possible management of the resource.

Work on formally establishing the marine institute is at an advanced stage. The institute is designed to bring together under one authority all the resources of the State involved in marine research activities and to undertake marine research in areas which are unfortunately neglected at present. I shall introduce a Bill in the Seanad next week.

Provisions have been made to enhance my Department's existing programme of monitoring and control of marine pollution. In particular moneys are being allocated to the investigation of the levels and distribution of nutrients in seawater — nitrates and phosphates, for example. Combined with other data on the environment, such information can be a valuable indicator of some types of marine pollution. It is also important for optimising the development of our national aquaculture industry by identifying the most appropriate sites for setting up fish or shellfish farming installations.

I am glad of this opportunity to talk about the further development of our inland fisheries resource. Inland fisheries has a tremendous potential for development. There is a need, however, to put this sector on a firm financial footing. Representing as I do a region which depends to a considerable extent on tourist angling for income and employment, I am acutely aware of this need and of the difficulties which have arisen in recent years in tackling the problem.

The Agreed Programme for Government acknowledges that the difficulties which have arisen in relation to angling licences were part of a wider issue relating to the funding of inland fisheries and pledged that discussion would take place at the highest level with interested parties with a view to resolving the problem.

I initiated the process of consultation soon after coming to office. As Deputies are no doubt aware, officials and I have met several groups; those totally opposed to the licensing arrangements, those who support the arrangements, members of the Central Fisheries Board and tourist interests.

I would like, for the record, to outline the key elements of the most recent settlement package which I presented to the anglers: the establishment for each regional fisheries board area of a trout and coarse fish development co-operative to identify and prioritise local fishery development opportunities; membership of the co-operative to be open to everyone including trout and coarse anglers — funding will also be sought from hotels, guesthouses, tackle dealers, etc; membership to comprise of annual "share certificates"; as a major start-up incentive for the co-operatives, the State will match share certificate receipts on a £1 for £1 basis for the initial period and within agreed parameters; special annual block share certificate arrangements for angling clubs with credits for valuable work undertaken by clubs; holding of a current annual share certificate will enable the holder to fish — implementation will be a matter for the co-operatives availing of support from regional fisheries boards, if sought and with appropriate penalties for non-compliance; and generous exemption provisions for young anglers, senior citizens, the unemployed and disabled persons.

I would like to stress that the lines of communication to all sides are still open. I am determined that the difficulties should be overcome and that the support will be forthcoming from anglers to enable the continuation of the task of preserving, improving and developing the resources for the benefit of all our people.

The Estimates for 1990 provide for an allocation of £6,272 million for inland fisheries — I think the increase is 31 per cent, I do not have the figure here. This underlines a continuation of our commitment to the development and improvement of this natural resource and the provision of a satisfactory fisheries protection service in 1990. The continued development and conservation of inland fisheries, however, can only be achieved through co-operation between the interested parties and through support for fisheries boards staff in their task. I appeal to all concerned to co-operate in this regard.

I want to refer to the Structural Funds. They are small when compared with the total Community budget, the total GDP of the Community. There are inequalities, noticeably in Ireland and other countries, and structural problems. NESC, in their recent report, indicated that the Structural Funds were not sufficient to create convergence in the Community. There is grave need for serious attention to be paid to regional development. The NESC report indicated that the budget is the only usable facility or weapon to produce the kind of convergence that we want. We are inaccessible here, we are peripheral.

In the 1973 campaign to join the EC, Europe insisted with all the fiscal and financial measures they could, that development would not take place in the central parallelogram at the expense of the outer regions. In fact, the study by NESC showed that there was continuing increased economic activity not at the periphery but in the centre. It is important for us to keep hammering that point so that we will get the obvious budgetary facilities in the future.

The plans for the development of the commercial harbours are an integral part of the Government's broad development strategy to overcome the structural weaknesses in the Irish economy and to offset the effects of peripherality that I have just mentioned. In determining the investment programme for sea ports, the Government have decided that the major priority must be to ensure that there is appropriate port capacity and quality port infrastructure strategically located in relation to the main internal transport arteries. More specifically the investment programme for ports has been determined on the basis of two overriding considerations as follows: first, investment in those ports which are essential for the efficient and economic movement of export goods and the import of raw material for manufacturing, and second, essential preservation and development work at certain ports so that they can retain their existing capacity and employment and satisfy regional needs.

Provision has been made in the National Development Plan recently submitted to the EC for substantial expenditure between now and 1993 on developments at Irish commercial harbours. Expenditure will be concentrated particularly on Dublin, Rosslare, Waterford and Cork ports and will involve the following elements: provision of appropriate berthing facilities and investment in improved facilities, including bulk cranes and lift-on/life-off equipment. The objective is to make our port cost efficient and to introduce the type of equipment which will facilitate the quick and economical loading and unloading of ships. These measures should of themselves make our ports more attractive to shipping lines and hopefully increase the tonnage of ships prepared to use our ports.

Subject to approval of the peripherality programme by the EC a total investment of approximately £60 million in commercial ports is proposed during the period of the plan. Capital expenditure by harbour authorities under the aegis of my Department will be in excess of £12 million in 1990 with a direct Exchequer contribution of £0.05 million.

The Government, with the assistance of the EC Structural Funds, are continuing with their policy of developing fishery harbour facilities to cater for the specific needs of the Irish fishing fleet. The programme for development of fishery harbour concentrate on: the fishery harbour centres, namely Killybegs, Rossaveal, Castletownbere, Dunmore East and Howth; a number of strategically placed secondary harbours such as Greencastle, County Donegal and Dingle, County Kerry and small harbours and piers which cater for needs which cannot be satisfied elsewhere and which require improvement works. Of the allocation of £4.5 million for fishery harbour development in 1990 over £2.5 million will be used to continue major development projects at Rossaveal and Greencastle. Provision is also made for the funding of surveys and investigations at a number of locations to enable detailed engineering assessments to be prepared.

Maintenance of Dún Laoghaire Harbour, together with a number of small piers, navigational lights and beacons around our coasts, will require a sum estimated at £1.555 million. Since my Department took over control of Dún Laoghaire Harbour on 1 January 1989, the thrust of our activity has been towards a greater use of Dún Laoghaire Harbour for recreational purposes. The opening of a marine activity centre and the reorganisation of the boatyard are examples of our positive commitment to the harbour. In addition, my Department organised an open week last September which proved a great success and attracted many people to the harbour.

Although some necessary improvements to the passenger terminal building at the Mailboat Pier in Dún Laoghaire were carried out in 1989 and further improvements are provided for in 1990, I am conscious that the existing passenger facilities need to be reviewed. The harbour board will assist me with all aspects of harbour management and development at Dún Laoghaire. I am certain that the terminal will figure highly in their considerations. In addition the board will assist me in bringing forward plans for the establishment of marina facilities in the harbour.

Despite continuing budgetary constraints, I am glad to say that funding of £1.34 million has been provided for in the 1990 Estimates for shipping investment grants. This compares with £0.515 million last year and together with the 10 per cent tax rate and continuing access to business expansion scheme for companies engaged in shipping operations, serves to under score this Government's ongoing commitment to the Irish shipping industry.

The importance which the Government attach to shipping is evident from the National Development Plan. Most of our total trade and our exports are seaborne and fast, efficient and inexpensive shipping is a prerequisite to our success as a trading nation. The whole area of access transport is to be the subject of a feasibility study to be undertaken shortly and substantially funded by the European Community.

In February 1989 the Government established the review group on air-sea rescue services. Their task is to examine the structure and the operation of air-sea rescue services and to make recommendations to ensure a cost effective and efficient service to meet national and international requirements. As a result of the interim report, an Air Corps Dauphin helicopter has been located at Shannon Airport, available 24 hours a day. Throughout the year we added six coastal radio stations at Donegal, Mayo, Cork, Waterford, Wexford and Dublin and now we have one of the most modern coast radio systems in Europe, also available on a 24 hour a day basis the whole year round. The allocation for this service for 1990 is £440,000.

In conclusion, I would like to state that the 1990 Estimates allocation for the vote for the Office of the Minister for the Marine reinforces the Government's resolve to develop the marine and marine related sectors and to optimise their potential contribution to national economic recovery. The finances allocated are fully consistent with the objectives for the industry and the economy as a whole as articulated in the National Development Plan and the agreed programme for Government.

Mr. Garland

I would like first to deal with the statement by the Minister for Finance yesterday. On superficial consideration it is commendable that the Minister has held the Estimates at the same level as last year. The Green Party, Comhaontas Glas, do not support the concept of high Government expenditure. In the long run we want to get the State off people's backs. It should be stressed that everyone pays tax, not just the rich. The average worker pays an immense amount of tax not only through PAYE and PRSI but through VAT on a wide range of goods and excise duty on drinks, cigarettes and petrol. We would like to see a huge reduction in centralised spending and devolution to local authorities with corresponding rights to collect local taxation. This system would be much more efficient and effective. However, until such time comes — and it will come when we have a Green Government — we must continue to provide for those people in society who need help, in particular the poor, the ill and the handicapped.

What do we find in the Estimates? There is an increase of 8 per cent in the Vote for the Garda Síochána, and an increase of no less than 14 per cent for Prisons. No doubt this expenditure is necessary in the context of the social problems facing our society but it reflects the failure of successive Governments to tackle unemployment. The correlation between unemployment and crime is accepted by everyone. There was nothing in the Minister's speech about his plans to reduce unemployment from its totally unacceptable level of 230,000 people. Many jobs could be created in the areas of recycling and energy conservation and by redirecting expenditure by the IDA into more labour intensive industry. Reduced working hours and job sharing would make a considerable impact also. The fact that we cannot create sufficient jobs on the basis of the present 40 hour week must be apparent to all. I ask the Minister for Labour to give serious consideration to setting up a meeting with representatives of both sides in industry in an effort to work out a five year plan to reduce working hours to at the very most 32 a week. I am sure this could be done in a way which would not increase industrial costs and would result in major reductions in PAYE and PRSI contributions for employees. Employment creation would also be enhanced by the introduction of a basic income for all to replace the present complex system of social welfare which is bureaucratic and is not conducive to encouraging people to seek employment, particularly part-time temporary employment.

The Minister for the Environment's speech ran to 13 pages and of this only three were devoted to the environment as such. As I have already stated in this House, the title of this Department is totally misleading and represents a fraud on the public. Let us call a spade a spade: this Department is the Department of Local Government whose name was changed a decade ago as a cynical cosmetic exercise. In the small section of his speech dealing with the environment the Minister's comments were full of the usual waffle such as "we cannot sit back and do nothing" and "we must intensify our efforts to tackle them", that is, the problems. The Minister went on to say "I do not have time today to develop fully the action being taken by my Department". I want to ask the Minister what better time could there have been than today. When will the Minister deal with these problems which are extremely urgent?

The continuing delay in the setting up of the environmental protection agency is totally reprehensible. It is obvious from the paltry amount of £500,000 proposed in the Estimates that this agency will not be up and running until 1991. Would the Minister not accept that the Bill proposed by Deputy Shatter is, in the main, satisfactory and could be passed with whatever amendments are deemed appropriate early in the New Year?

I notice there is an increase of £1 million for grants in smoke control areas. This is a totally inadequate response to the serious problems created by smog in Dublin. The Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Deputy Harney, has indicated that she intends to amend the Air Pollution Act. This needs to be done immediately. The Green Party have always said that this legislation is inadequate and we have been proved correct. It must now be obvious that vested interests such as CDL will object to every single smoke control area. They have already stated that they will object to the Crumlin zone A despite the fact that all independent tests have shown that their appliance, the full burning fire, is to all intents and purposes useless.

The right to automatic objection needs to be withdrawn and the incidence and cause clause of section 39 of the Air Pollution Act must be repealed. This clause was inserted at the behest of Coal Information Services and puts the onus on local authorities to prove the source of smoke emission but we already know that 70 per cent of smog in this city is due directly to the burning of bituminous coal. This is an unnecessary and time consuming exercise and one which stalls the introduction of smoke control areas. It has led to the farcical situation at oral hearings where for instance at the Bally-fermot zone A hearing, the lawyers for coal distributors claimed that the reasons for high smoke emissions in the Bally-fermot area were due to dust from skips, the burning of abandoned cars and the rerouting of the 79 bus. How much longer must we tolerate this sort of nonsense when people are dying in our city? How long will the Minister and Minister of State pander to these vested interests? Why did no one in this House object to the original Air Pollution Act with the exception of Deputy Gerard Brady who eventually went along with his party? The bandwagon joiners in Fine Gael, the Labour Party and The Workers' Party sat idly by and watched this Bill go through. Our party want to know if any of the established parties receive money from CDL. Until such time as they open their books to public scrutiny there will be a very real suspicion that certain parties in this House can be bought. If we want to effectively tackle Dublin's smog problem it must be done as part of an overall energy conservation policy. This will deal not only with the localised problems of smog but will also combat the global problems of the greenhouse effect.

This brings me to energy. I am most disappointed that only £290,000 has been provided in the Estimates for energy conservation. It is essential that we make a considerable breakthrough in this area in order to reduce our energy needs. I think everyone in this House realises the effect on the world's ecology of the ever increasing production of energy from fossil fuels. Apart from the pollution caused by this, most of it in the form of acid rain, the emissions from power stations contribute to the global warming, the so-called greenhouse effect.

There is tremendous scope for energy saving at household level by way of insulation, draught excluders and double glazing. The inertia of successive Governments in this area is incomprehensible especially as generous grants of up to 50 per cent are available from the EC.

There appears to be no provision in the Estimates for research into wind energy which is undoubtedly the most promising source of future energy for this country. The ESB's neglect in this area is scandalous. As we know Ireland is one of the windiest countries in the world. Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Holland are generating increased amounts of energy from this source and the State of California is a pioneer in this area. The reason for the ESB's lack of interest in this area was the disastrous decision to proceed with the Moneypoint project some years ago. The ESB's absurdly optimistic projections of power consumption have been proved totally wrong and ridiculous. If this country had a proper energy policy we would be targeting a reduction in our present needs over a 15 year period to perhaps half our present energy requirements. This has been achieved in Davis City in California and has not resulted in any reduction in living standards.

Finally, I would like to deal with the Overseas Development Aid allocation Estimates. The Estimate for Overseas Development Aid has been described as the meanest cut. Our contribution has now fallen to 0.16 per cent of GNP which makes a mockery of the Government's claim that they plan to achieve the UN target of 0.7 per cent. Last year we were the meanest of the OECD countries in this regard. It seems that the Government are not happy with this achievement and they mean to cut more. It is the cruellest area in which to wield the knife. A small cut in expenditure here leads to greater misery than an equivalent cut in any other area but since the beneficiaries of this aid cannot vote in our elections they are well down the Government's list of priorities. We are used to seeing Government Ministers flying off to Brussels armed with the infamous begging bowl pleading to the good nature of our European friends trying to make them see the justice of narrowing the gap between the richest and the poorest countries, and the Government regularly boast about the billions of pounds in aid they have secured for this country but this concern for narrowing the gap between rich and poor countries seems to stop at the Mediterranean. In making these cuts the Government are clearly out of step with public opinion here. Despite the fact that we are not the most wealthy country in the world our people have consistently given more than any other to Third World development. Instead of responding to the clear desire of Irish people to do what we can to help, the Government have clawed back this money by cutting back on the ODA allocation.

We have a lot in common with countries in need of development aid. We should have more sympathy with their plight than most western countries but, instead of working with them to achieve a common goal, we have definitely sided with the rich for what we can get out of it and ignored their pleas for help. Not only do we accept the unjust economic system which has led to poverty in the Third World, but we actively encourage the intensification of these policies and we are in there fighting for everything we can get. Not satisfied with this we now deny the developing countries even the crumbs from our table.

This is, of course, a very shortsighted attitude. It will all come back on us in the end. Our continued exploitation of the Third World has forced those countries to engage in all sorts of environmentally catastrophic projects. It is just as much our problem and if nothing else seems to convince the Government we can at least appeal to their sense of self-interest and urge that Ireland move to the forefront in development aid for all our sakes.

Mr. Flood

The early publication of the 1990 Abridged Estimates and Summary Public Capital Programme continues the excellent practice commenced in autumn 1988 by the Fianna Fáil Government. Their publication at this time gives Members, and the community at large, an opportunity to review progress made over the last two years in the management of our economy and the country's finances. Previously, it was the practice to publish the Estimates one week before the budget and I do not think that was the most efficient and appropriate way to introduce the year's Estimates. I might add also that the good practice has been extended to local authorities and estimates for the following year are usually dealt with in the months of November and December of the preceding year.

In my opinion that allows for good local financial management and ensures that the estimates are in place prior to the year they apply to commence. Local authorities are also given a better opportunity to plan the management of their finances particularly in regard to the generation of finance in their administrative areas. They can ensure that any changes or new introductions are in place on the first day of the new financial year.

Economic growth over the past three years has been very encouraging. A growth of 11 per cent over that period has been hailed by most independent commentators as being extremely helpful and healthy and an indication of the correct management of our economy. That growth was achieved by the Government's approach to the economy as a whole, to the management of Government expenditure and, in many cases, the curtailment of projects which were giving rise to over-expenditure leading to an increase in our national debt.

The economic growth has, of course, reflected itself in the volume growth in exports of 34 per cent over the three years. That was an excellent achievement and it reflects very well on industry, workers and management alike. The trade surplus of £2 billion in 1988 will, it is confidently expected, be also repeated in 1989. It is vital that everything possible is done to improve our export performance so as to ensure that the benefits which arise from increased employment will continue to accrue.

We are aware that at last it appears that there will be a net increase in the number of people at work on a year by year basis. We all agree that unemployment is one of the greatest scourges of our time. I passionately believe that all our efforts must be directed towards creating job opportunities and that the net increase on a year by year basis must be sustained. It will not be easy to achieve that target but we must set a target and endeavour to stick to it.

To assist in economic growth which will produce the extra jobs, the Government must continue to manage very carefully the economy and, at all costs, endeavour to hold down costs to industry. We must remain competitive particularly in the export field. Costs can be held down in several ways. That can be achieved by holding down energy costs, postal and telecommunications charges, bank rates and by keeping inflation down. For too long our economy was bedevilled by high inflation. In the last three or four years we have had great success in holding down inflation. We managed to reduce it to 3 per cent, through Government efforts and the co-operation of the social partners. I hope we will be able to keep interest rates at their present level which is well below continental rates and in particular, a good deal below the UK rate. According to commentators our interest rates have stabilised and are expected to gradually, though very gradually, decrease in the next 12 to 18 months.

We can support the economic development of our country by keeping control on all costs. We must remain competitive so that our export trade can continue to grow. The output of our industries must continue to expand so that more jobs are created. It is because of the tremendous success in exports that we must approach the question of export generation in a more professional manner. I am thinking in particular of the area of international marketing.

Most Members are familiar with the big trade fairs that take place in London, on the Continent, in New York and in other countries. They are the glamour events at which countries such as Ireland must exhibit. We need marketing expertise to fight for a place for Irish exports on foreign markets. We must endeavour to produce goods that will be on a par with those from other countries. In the area of international marketing we can make improvements. That will require investment by the State and by the companies be they large or small. The State, working in tandem with the private sector, could achieve significant progress in this regard. We must adopt a professional approach to exporting and give the best of training to our marketing people.

I accept that we must reward our workers in industry. We are all aware of the complaints in recent years about the high rates of personal taxation. We must try to ensure that we have a system in operation that will allow for a reduction in personal taxation and will, at the same time, meet our responsibilities to the less fortunate in our society who may be disadvantaged or unemployed. There has been a continuous debate on this issue and it is recognised by all concerned that there is a definite need to reduce personal taxation. I do not believe there should only be reductions in personal taxation. It is also necessary to reduce indirect taxation rates which are abnormally high in comparison with the rates operated by some of our partners in the EC. A reduction in indirect taxation will lead to additional commercial activity and a reduction in costs. This should not be forgotten when we come to discuss the issue of taxation which has been debated at length.

In the time available to me I would like to refer briefly to the effects of some decisions made in previous budgets, with particular reference to my own constituency. In 1988 a sum of £3 million was provided in the budget for the development of a major industrial estate in Tallaght. I am very pleased to be able to report to the House that the construction of this industrial estate is well under way, that the business park comprising 22 units will shortly be opened and that the major industrial unit will be completed by the spring of next year.

I am also pleased to be able to report that, following a decision taken by a Fianna Fáil administration to designate Tallaght, the development of Tallaght town centre is now under way at a cost of £70 million, with hundreds of Irish workers in gainful employment. The centre which is due to open in the autumn of next year will provide 2,000 permanent jobs.

I am also particularly pleased to note from this year's Estimates that the Minister for Education has found it possible to honour her promise by providing for finance for a new regional technical college in Tallaght. We certainly have the required number of young people in that once most disadvantaged of areas. I am also pleased to be able to tell the House that Tallaght will have a new town centre and that there is a new spirit abroad in the area which obviously will soon be an attractive location for both industry and families who may wish to move there.

I also note that the Minister for Education has made provision to enable the second level school building programme to proceed. I am anxious that the proposed Jobstown second level school will become a reality. I understand construction will commence in the spring of next year and part of the school will be ready for occupation by September 1990.

I am also delighted that the Minister for Education has been able to respond to the demands to her Department from the teaching profession in the west Tallaght and Clondalkin area and has agreed to establish a psychological service on a pilot basis in the area. This is to be welcomed. I believe this will lead people to the realisation that this area has much to recommend it.

Mr. McGrath

That was known years ago.

Mr. Flood

Now at least there is some action. I am happy that it is the Minister for Education, who was much maligned in the past for making cuts, who has taken it and that she has now found it possible to invest considerable additional resources in second and third level education, and make provision for additional teaching and remedial staff. This is to be welcomed.

Mr. McGrath

We still have not got it back to the 1986 level.

Mr. Flood

This is an indication of the positive approach adopted by the Minister for Education and long may this continue.

Mrs. Taylor-Quinn

We will deal with that matter in a few moments.

Mr. McGrath

Old people.

Mrs. Barnes

The Taoiseach will give in and allow that legislation to be rescinded. This is despicable behaviour. The Minister for Energy is acting irresponsibly and we all know the efforts that that Minister made last July to become a member of the Cabinet. The Minister should seriously consider his position in relation to collective Cabinet responsibility. The Minister is defying his Taoiseach and is being totally disloyal to his colleague, the Minister for Energy.

Minister for Finance (Mr. A. Reynolds)

You would not expect me to believe that, would you?

Mrs. Taylor-Quinn

Mr. A. Reynolds

That is what she is trying to do. Although she does not mean it, that would be the effect of what the Deputy is asking.

Mrs. Taylor Quinn

I am afraid the Minister is convoluted in his thinking. I do not know how the Minister could think that, as I am talking specifically about shipping. Yachting and shipping are two very different things. One is for pleasure and the other is for business.

Mr. A. Reynolds

The definition is not very different. I am sorry that the Deputy does not understand that.

Mrs. Taylor Quinn

I hope the Minister for Finance will convey to Cabinet on Tuesday what I have put on the record of this House.

An Leas Cheann Comhairle

There are seven minutes remaining to be divided by two.

Mr. McGrath

I congratulate the Minister, Deputy O'Rourke, on her presentation of the Estimate for the Department of Education. I applaud her delivery. I suppose it is what we have come to expect from the Minister for Education — a magnificant performance.

I would like to devote my few minutes to talking about primary education. As a member of the Opposition I feel it is my duty to point out to this House the lack of progress in education over the years. In particular I will be pointing to the lack of credibility of this Minister. In 1986 the Minister said in this House that it was her job to show how money was not being spent, where progress had not been made and where she hoped it would be made in the next few years. That will be my job this afternoon.

Primary education is the one sector that all our children attend. It is a section of education that prepares a child for life. In those formative years when they learn the very basics it is important that we provide a service that is adequate, meaningful and imaginative. At four years of age a child leaves home and goes off to a new experience of attending school. Unfortunately many of our schools are in a very dilapidated condition. Indeed the Minister in the years before she became a Minister, was very loud in her condemnation of the quality of many of the schools around the country. Some magic wand must have been waved in the meantime because she now seems to be totally unaware of the dire need to improve the condition of our schools. Children go to draughty cold, dilapidated schools and class sizes are very large. This may well influence not just the children's attitude to school but their attitude to society in general as they grow up.

As the Minister pointed out, again unfortunately before she had the responsibility of being Minister, it is the lack of equipment, facilities and attention in schools that propels many children into the ranks of the drop-out and the disadvantaged in our society. That is what our Minister was saying before she became a Minister.

Let us take a closer look at the capital expenditure for 1990. In the Estimates the Minister has set out £15.6 million capital expenditure for primary schools. She feels this will be adequate to deal with the problem. Let me remind her that in 1986 when the then Minister for Education produced his Estimate of £28.2 million the Minister said that this was not enough in the areas of building, equipment and furnishing of national schools. What has happened in the meantime? Why has she changed her mind? How come £15.6 million now is adequate and £28 million in 1986 was not adequate?

Let us have a quick look at the capitation grants payable in primary schools. The capitation grant is now £26.50 per pupil; in 1986 it was £24 per pupil. It has risen over the years from 1982 by 60 per cent. Our Minister has increased it in three years by £2.50, a very poor increase indeed, especially when one considers the rate at which inflation is running now. This has a tremendous effect on our schools. That money is meant to cover the heating and cleaning costs of the schools. Indeed, we have a major problem brewing in some of the schools because they have run into debt. One of the regulations of the Department is that they must not go into debt; yet the Minister is not doing anything to alleviate the problem. The non-increase in this fund has left a lot to be desired and it is very shortsighted. The non-maintenance of these schools will cause major problems down the road.

Let us have a very quick look at the free school books system. In our primary schools necessitous pupils are allocated £7 per pupil for free school books. At the moment to equip a child in first class with books for the year it is costing approximately £16; to equip a pupil in sixth class it costs approximately £30. How does the Minister expect the school to manage with just £7? Perhaps she should investigate the possibility of school books being rented to pupils. The Minister has also paid lip service to the Irish language in primary schools. There is one statistic I would like to point out. In her allocation she allows 5p per primary school pupil to buy supplementary Irish readers and library books. If one takes the average school with 80 children, it gets £4 per year to buy library books. I suppose by the time the Minister is old enough to retire they might have a book per child in that school.

The Minister mentioned the thorny subject of the pupil/teacher ratio in primary schools. In 1985 the Minister said that many pupils were leaving school because they did not think they could cope, that they were drop-outs because of the system and that the problem could be related to the pupil/teacher ratio and that Fianna Fáil, in Government, would work towards a reversal of the pupil/teacher ratio. Sure enough, when they came into Government they did work on changing the pupil/teacher ratio — to disimprove it.

In 1984 the Minister said nobody begrudges money for education and if she asks where she is to get the money, I would say it is the job of the Minister to see that there is an adequate provision for education. I ask Minister O'Rourke if she really is the mistress of her own Department, or if she is a puppet on a string unable to secure adequate financing for the education system.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

In the circumstances, I wonder if I could suggest to you, Minister, that you might be magnanimous enough to allow the Chair to call Deputy Barnes for three minutes, and we will extend the time?

Mr. A. Reynolds

Yes.

Mrs. Barnes

I thank the Chair and the Minister and promise to keep within the three minutes.

The Minister for Health said today that considerable progress had been made and will continue to be made both in controlling the disease of AIDS and assisting sufferers and their families. As this is World AIDS Day I want to place on the record of the House the findings of a seminar a couple of days ago that showed that the brunt of the HIV positive virus was being carried by women. There was a tendency to accept that women would be the carers of their male partners and children — sons, brothers, sisters and daughters — with the HIV positive infection.

It was also accepted that women were the invisible group being assessed or treated. They did not perceive themselves as being at risk. They are being completely ignored in literature about AIDS and about the danger to themselves and the treatment they deserve. It was also stated at the seminar that women need to be helped to be more assertive about practising safe sex and using condoms. As it is World AIDS Day I want to put it on record that this is an area that has been highlighted and it is terrifying in its implications with regard to both the burden on women and the danger to them. I would ask the Minister to back up what he says. He said considerable progress had been made assisting sufferers and their families. This may be so in other areas but this seminar showed that it is not so in the case of women. This problem needs to be tackled urgently, not alone morally but from a health point of view.

The Minister for Labour said that total expenditure for all priorities on training and development will be £2.209 billion, of which £1.123 billion will be Community aid. I want to lay it before the House and continue to emphasise that if we are talking about closing gaps, inequality, bringing part time, low paid and low skilled workers into equality with Europe there will have to be a total affirmative investment of a large amount of that money diverted and directed towards the training of women. What the Minister says does not accord well with the fact that certainly in some areas of FÁS — I am glad Deputy Flood is here — nobody over 25 is being accepted for training programmes. The implications of that for his constituency and for women in particular are horrendous.

I thank the Minister for giving me this few minutes. I would like action taken on those two priorities immediately and I look forward to future debate in the House.

Minister for Finance (Mr. A. Reynolds)

It will not be possible to reply to all the points but first I want to express my thanks to all the Deputies who have contributed in the past few days to what has been an interesting and constructive discussion on the Government's spending plans for next year. I will begin on the general thrust of the two amendments tabled to the Government motion. Do the proposers really believe there can be genuine social advance without economic progress? When I talk about genuine advance I mean advance of a kind which can be sustained, which does not have to be rolled back again later because we do not have the resource to sustain it. Social advance cannot be divorced from economic progress.

Deputy De Rossa said yesterday that the success or failure of the Government's policy cannot be measured by a fiscal audit alone, that there had also to be a human and social audit. I congratulate him on his belated recognition, and one could say on his conversion on the road to Damascus, that this is a strategy which has been pursued for the past two and a half years; getting the country's finances in order was essential to the future of all in our society and the less well off in particular. People matter, not statistics. The less well off would have suffered most if the drift into chaos which had characterised our situation prior to 1987 had not been arrested and ultimately reversed.

It is clear to me that the proposers of the motion do not understand the interdependence of sound financial management, economic growth and social advance. If our experience of the last decade has any lessons for us it is that more public spending does not mean greater equity and social progress. While expenditure soared with the inevitable consequences of rising taxes and mounting debt, the economy and with it employment moved backwards. We have since turned the corner and secured a renewal of economic and employment growth essentially by acting responsibly in expenditure, which means bringing it more into line with what we can afford. The philosophy of these amendments is quite clear. They seek a reversal of engines. They want to rebuild the "Berlin Wall" of borrowing and taxation that stood between Ireland and progress in the early eighties. I will not do this. That would be a dereliction of duty to the very people whom the proposers pretend their approach might help. They and indeed all in Ireland deserve better.

An extraordinary implication of the proposed amendments is that this Government are for some reason holding back on job creation and that we could if we wished vastly accelerate the pace of sustainable employment growth. Could the Deputies who proposed these amendments think of any rational reason why we might be holding down the rate of job creation? I certainly cannot. Our commitment is to create the maximum possible number of sustainable jobs, and this commitment is clearly set out in our Programme for Government 1989-1993 where it says that job creation is the major priority of this Government. In concrete terms we have an objective of accelerating gross job creation to at least 35,000 jobs per annum by 1993. We are going about this actively through our macro-economic strategy and a comprehensive set of sectoral strategies and through the Structural Fund programmes which underpin these.

Three hundred thousand have emigrated.

Mr. A. Reynolds

We will continue. Deputy O'Keeffe suggested a different way in which public expenditure allocations were settled, resulting in a loss of perspective and overall strategies and policies. I do not know where he pulled that fancy idea from. He suggests we should have an expenditure review committee chaired by the Secretary of the Department of Finance whose other members are senior officials of the Department of Finance. Does he know what we are doing? Did he read my speech to tell him how we approach the Estimates every year with a committee first and then the Government go through every item of expenditure? There is nothing in his idea but if anybody has better ideas I will be glad to take them on board.

Deputies O'Keeffe and Barrett were critical of Dáil procedures for dealing with the Estimates. What better can we do than bring them forward at this time of the year, only a bit later than last year because of the Structural Funds? We are giving Deputies the full advantage of open debate long before the budget. They are only half the budget and it gives them that opportunity in advance. We will listen to any good ideas put around in relation to tackling job creation, but do not tell me to spend more money for the sake of creating jobs. That would put up taxation and borrowing. I am not buying that philosophy. The very fact that we are debating these here today shows clearly that we are doing and will continue to do all we can to let this House have ample opportunity for debate in advance of the budget every year.

In relation to tax reforms I have to reject totally the criticism of Deputy De Rossa that only minor changes have been made in the taxation system. Is this man spending so much time in Brussels that he cannot even see what is going on over here, or is his sincerity about job creation real at all? When the man is a glorious example of double jobbing? Does he know what is taking place in this House at all?

Mr. Quinn

He knows exactly.

Mr. A. Reynolds

In the past two budgets the income tax reliefs were introduced including the reduction in the rates of tax that I brought in this year. They will have accumulative cost over the period of the Programme for National Recovery of over £700 million, three times what the programme's commitment was from the Government's point of view. The PAYE sector significantly benefits from those generous reliefs and, of course, that sector has also benefited from the increase in PAYE allowance. Last year's budget provided for an increase in general taxation limits and I attacked for the first time low pay to give exemption limits and bring in a child allowance to get to the people on the margins.

Mr. Rabbitte

They are still paying tax.

Mr. A. Reynolds

I never believed Rome could be built in a day and I do not belive the taxation system can be solved in a day. In terms of reliefs if you want to look at what we have done and are interested you will see we are going in the right direction.

As regards future progress I want to point out that the programme includes a commitment to reduce the standard rate of income tax to 25 per cent by 1993 and to move towards a single rate of tax and to make further improvements in the taxation limits——

Mrs. Taylor-Quinn

The deep end.

Mr. A. Reynolds

I want to put it on the record of this House that the first steps towards achievement of the 25 per cent rate of tax were taken in the 1989 budget, the first steps in 20 years in fact——

(Interruptions.)

Mr. A. Reynolds

——to reduce the standard rate of tax from 35 to 32. The first step towards the achievement of a 25 per cent rate, let me say for the benefit of the House, was taken in the 1989 budget. I said then, and I repeat now, that was the road I was going to travel if circumstances permit and I will continue to travel that road as long as circumstances permit——

(Interruptions.)

Mr. A. Reynolds

——taking into consideration that I will continue to reduce the EBR.

In relation to medium and long-term budget strategy and framework I want to look to 1989 and beyond. Notwithstanding the excellent progress made this year, and despite the fact that there will be a hefty reduction somewhere in the region of £400 million to £500 million, we will still be borrowing in the area of £500 million to £600 million this year. Let nobody run away with the idea that all the problems have been solved. For every £400 million or £500 million we put on borrowing it is going to take 8 per cent to 10 per cent to service that figure, and that will increase tax again. Let us keep our feet on the ground and look at reality, and not think that all our problems are behind us. They are not. A number of problems are still to be solved.

Mrs. Taylor-Quinn

Charlie said we were over the financial crisis.

Mr. V. Brady

It was under control. The Deputy is not listening.

Mr. A. Reynolds

You know what the EBR was for 1990. We not alone achieved it this year but we did slightly better. As I said, I am carrying out a medium-term economic outlook so we can set ourselves new targets.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Rabbitte, this is not a cross-table confrontation. You must obey——

Mr. Rabbitte

The Minister is misleading the House.

Mr. V. Brady

The Deputy does not want to hear him.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Whether in your opinion he is doing that or not, it does not entitle you to interrupt. If you interrupt again I will ask you to leave.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

If Deputy Rabbitte interrupts again I will ask him to leave.

A Deputy

Forgive him, he has just arrived.

Mr. A. Reynolds

"Forgive them for they know not what they say" might be appropriate. In relation to reform in the approach to public expenditure, I am sure some Deputies are aware — and I hope all will be aware after this — that we are constantly looking at ways and means of evaluating all sorts of expenditure, and will continue to do that. I announced in my budget of January last that this year I intended to delegate responsibility and authority to various Government Departments on a three-year rolling budget basis to give more efficiency, authority and delegation——

Mr. Quinn

I will believe it when I see it.

Mr. A. Reynolds

Deputy Quinn will see it. I can now confirm to the House that three Departments have already taken up my offer, the Department of Social Welfare, the Department of Energy and the Revenue Commissioners. I hope that as 1990 progresses there will be more, but that is only part of it. In relation to Health and other areas the commission have only reported. That issue will be taken on board. We will continue to improve efficiency and effectiveness and get better value for money in the Public Capital Programme. We are not just spending money for the sake of spending. A proper evaluation is appropriate to each Government Department to ensure that when they are spending they get the best value for money. If they do not, they might not get as much from me the following year.

Question put: "That amendment No. 1 be made."

Deputies

Vótáil.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

In accordance with an earlier order of the House the division will take place next Tuesday, 5 December 1989, at 6.45 p.m.

The Dáil adjourned at 4.05 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 5 December 1989.

Dáil Éireann debate - Friday, 1 Dec 1989