We now come to deal with one minute statements on matters appropriate to the Minister for Finance and to the Minister for the Marine. I propose to call first, on Deputy Jimmy Deenihan to make a one minute statement appropriate to the Minister for Finance to be followed by statements appropriate to the Minister for the Marine by Deputy David Andrews in respect of two matters. The Deputies are entitled to one minute in respect of each matter raised and the two Ministers have five minutes between them to reply. I now call on Deputy Deenihan.
Adjournment Debate. - Finance and Marine Matters.
Where is the Minister for Finance?
This is not a matter of consideration for the Chair. The Deputy should proceed to avail of his one minute without delay.
The rising costs of keeping students at university and other colleges is now causing severe financial hardship to many parents. The burden on parents of middle income families in paricular in maintaining students away from home is now intolerable. A family with three dependent children which earns in exess of £15,400 will receive no help whatsoever. Parents who are not entitled to fees subvention or maintenance grants are under great financial pressure and in many cases have to forego their life savings or have to resort to second mortgages or loans. The financial burden is particularly difficult where students are required to live away from home to pursue their third level studies.
The higher education grant system clearly needs a radical overhaul otherwise the cost of university education will be beyond the reach of many middle income families. In the meantime I recommend that the following measures be implemented in the Finance Bill: allow parents to offset course fees against their tax liability at the standard rate and also revise the grants scheme immediately so that eligibility for fees and maintenance are assessed on residual income as is the case in Northern Ireland.
I now call on Deputy David Andrews in respect of two matters. The Deputy has two minutes.
I will deal with the development of Dún Laoghaire Harbour under two headings: the question of Sealink and its retention and upgrading and the matter of the marina. I am glad the Minister for the Marine is present as I know he is very supportive of matters in Dún Laoghaire and, more particularly, matters related to Dún Laoghaire Harbour. A campaign has been conducted by the Dublin Port and Docks Board to bring about a unified car ferry terminal. The logic of that argument is that there is a suggestion that the car ferry from Dún Laoghaire be relocated in Dublin Port. We find that utterly unacceptable. What we in Dún Laoghaire want, on behalf of the Fianna Fáil organisation, is a commitment and a statement from the Government that the car ferry terminal remain in Dún Laoghaire, that it be upgraded accordingly and that passenger facilities be properly geared to the modern day needs of people travelling overseas and more particularly between Dublin and Holyhead.
The second thrust of my urgings to a supportive Minister this evening is the question of a marina, or marinas, for the Dún Laoghaire Harbour complex. This argument has been going on for a number of years. I have raised it here from time to time as I have raised the Sealink problem over many years. I would appreciate if the Minister would indicate to the House that in the short term the interim harbour board will be reporting on this and other related matters, not only on the forthcoming hopeful installation of a marina or marinas in Dún Laoghaire Harbour but that they would also be making statements in relation to the future of Sealink specifically in Dún Laoghaire.
I would like to pay tribute to Sealink and their directors who employ in excess of 120 people in Dún Laoghaire. One can appreciate that if there was any suggestion that Sealink would be lost to Dún Laoghaire it would be a major economic blow to the area.
In response to Deputy Deenihan I will put the second part of the question raised in relation to the revision of grants, to my colleague, the Minister for Education.
In relation to the possibility of tax relief as raised by him, I am sure the Deputy will appreciate that providing this relief would involve a significant cost in terms of tax foregone to the Exchequer. In addition, introducing such a relief would be bound to generate claims from other taxpayers arising out of their varied personal and domestic circumstances. The resultant loss to the Exchequer would have to be made up by increased taxation elsewhere. In any event the Exchequer already spends heavily on third-level education both by way of direct allocation to the third-level institutions themselves, subsidies which are of benefit to all students, and by way of the higher education grants scheme. In total subsidies to third level education, including the European Social Fund receipts, will amount to nearly £300 million in 1991. In addition, many students benefit from covenants which are also an increasing cost to the Exchequer running to something of the order of £20 million.
Finally, I would point out that the taxpaying parents of third-level students will have benefited significantly from the income tax reductions of recent years which include the reduction in the top rate by 6 percentage points and the bottom rate by 6 percentage points bringing the top rate down to 52 per cent and the bottom rate to 29 per cent. During those same few years the standard rate band has also been increased by £4,000 for a married couple. They are the facts. Unfortunately we have to look at the situation: if I give more tax in one place I have to take it from another. I am sure we will come back to this matter again during the debate on the Finance Bill.
I am delighted to be able to reply to the two questions raised by Deputy Andrews. I feel I owe him a deep debt because at one stage he got around to his friends the fishermen at Dún Laoghaire, about 20 years ago, and got some very nice fresh fish for me. I still remember that with pleasure.
There are more fish in the sea.
It is a pleasure for me now to say that I am aware of the recent announcement of plans by Sealink to increase the number of sailings scheduled from Dún Laoghaire during 1991. In so far as these proposals provide for the accommodation of increased traffic through the harbour and into the country, thereby contributing to the target set for the expansion of the national tourist industry, I shall ensure that Sealink's operations at Dún Laoghaire will be supported in every way possible. The interim Dún Laoghaire harbour board have been working closely with Sealink in the course of the preparation of the board's outline development plan for the harbour and how it would impinge on the ferry terminal facilities. I have already indicated — and I can assure the Deputy because he has expressed his concern about it — my total support for the retention of the ferry service to Dún Laoghaire Harbour.
With regard to the development of the tourist and commercial amenity of Dún Laoghaire Harbour the Deputy is aware that I appointed an interim Dún Laoghaire Harbour board last year to advise on all aspects of the management and development of the harbour. The board are at present drafting an outline development plan for the harbour which will encompass commercial and recreational amenities alike. As soon as this plan is ready the board intend to mount a public display of their proposals and to afford all interested parties an opportunity to make an input into the nature of the developments recommended for the harbour. I have great hopes for Dún Laoghaire and its development.
The Dáil adjourned at 9.10 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 13 February 1991.