Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 26 Feb 1991

Vol. 405 No. 6

Adjournment Debate. - Border Regions Development Funding.

Mr. Leonard

This is a very important issue. There is at present substantial EC funding available for Border regions development, more than was anticipated in the early or mid-eighties. There are a number of programmes: the rural development programme, the LEADER programme, INTERREG and the International Fund for Ireland. It is important to gain the maximum benefit from those funds. There is adequate funding and if properly utilised it could improve the economy out of all recognition and create many jobs. I am not satisfied that up to now we have secured the maximum benefit from many of those programmes. I will deal with the two which are related mostly to the Border regions, INTERREG and the International Fund for Ireland.

The reason I raise this matter is that I understand the terms of the INTERREG initiative are being drawn up. I quote from the Explanatory Memorandum from the EC introducing INTERREG which stated:

The creation can be envisaged of some form of shared institutional and administrative structures to reinforce and develop cross-Border co-operation on a long term self sustaining basis. This may also involve the setting up of management structures for certain specific functions with appropriate technical support and financial resources.

In support of that Mr. Poulson, the director general for regional policies, stated at a conference in Enniskillen on 9 November that there is a requirement for a suitable administrative structure which will strengthen existing cross-Border links and be suitable for cross-Border co-operation. Through inquiries which I have made it appears that the Department of Finance may not avail of this suggested administrative system but will continue as heretofore with funds disbursed through Government Departments and various development agencies.

Anyone involved in cross-Border economic development, as I have been for a long number of years, welcomes this proposal because very few were satisfied with the administration of the previous funds. The funding to date has not been evenly distributed. No consideration was given to the most disadvantaged areas; the more populous regions, which were better off and which had the ability to secure matching funding, benefited. They should avail of this opportunity to set up an administrative structure instead of piecemeal application of funding for a very narrow scale of projects. An umbrella body should be set up to co-ordinate the various funds.

There should be three considerations in selecting projects for funding by either the IFA or INTERREG: (1) the projects should be those promoted locally; (2) the projects should be, as far as possible, through cross-Border projects; (3) the projects should have the prime aim of job creation. When the International Fund for Ireland was being approved in this House — I spoke on it and welcomed it — we were told that its terms were to support the private sector and job creation projects. I am sorry that that has not been the case, because projects put forward by many individuals and groups have been turned down. In the 1990 report of the IFI a wide range of activities in the Six Counties is listed which received 75 per cent funding. In the South the money has been on a very narrow scale and given to hotels and urban councils. There was also a fairly substantial funding of £2 million for the six southern counties adjoining the Border for urban development programmes and public space improvements. Most urban councils are very short of funding and are unable to secure matching funding.

Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Mr. V. Brady)

A substantial proportion of developmental funding in the Border areas, as elsewhere in the country, is being co-financed by the European Community through the Structural Funds. This is being done under the various operational programmes under the Community Support Framework for Ireland. The activities under these programmes are given effect by the relevant Government Departments, State agencies and other public bodies, such as the local authorities, the IDA, Bord Fáilte, FÁS, Teagasc, etc. Each programme is monitored and co-ordinated by a monitoring committee made up of representatives of the responsible Departments and other implementing agencies, the EC Commission and the social partners. The monitoring committee for the Community Support Framework oversee the work of the programme committees. Furthermore, there is ongoing consultation and co-ordination, as necessary, at local and subregional level between the implementing bodies.

The county development teams also play a valuable role in promoting economic development by ensuring maximum use of existing public services and by fostering worthwhile new ideas for development. The teams are comprised of local elected representatives and representatives of State agencies.

The arrangements put in place for the Structural Funds also provide for a large element of local consultation. Seven subregional review committees have been established throughout the country to monitor the implementation of the operational programmes in their sub-regions. The committees review periodic reports on the implementation for each programme.

The North-West Review Committee — extended to include Louth — has also been consulted at a series of meetings about the preparation of the joint Ireland and Northern Ireland programme under the Structural Funds Community initiative INTERREG for Border regions.

The Government are satisfied that the arrangements in place are those best suited to co-ordinate and deliver the whole range of development activities in the most effective and efficient way.