Vol. 414 No. 6
2 Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Finance if a separate subhead has been included in the draft Estimates for 1992 to provide an annual subvention towards the running costs of Carysfort; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
It is not proposed to include, in the 1992 Estimates for Third Level and Further Education, a separate subhead for any expenditure on the running costs of Carysfort College. Any such expenditure will be a charge against subhead B.2 of that Estimate, which is for the grant-in-aid to the Higher Education Authority for Non-Capital Grants to Universities and Colleges and designated institutions of higher education.
I thank the Minister for his reply. Does the Department of Finance's file on Carysfort refer specifically to the fact that no commitment was given to include a subhead in 1992 for this matter?
It does. I can explain that in some detail if the Deputy so wishes.
Can the Minister confirm that the Department of Finance are still in possession of the file?
What happened is that——
The second question is perhaps more relevant. Will the Minister for Finance confirm that the Department of Finance are still in possession of the relevant file?
Yes. There were two stages to this. The first stage was the Supplementary Estimate for £9.7 million and at that stage there was no Exchequer subvention to the annual running costs of Carysfort. At a later date a request was made for subvention which was subsequently agreed to by my predecessor at the end of January.
Is the Minister referring to an annual subvention that would be provided but not under a separate subhead?
If the UCD authorities wish to draw down money for Carysfort Graduate Management School, they will have to do it from the HEA subhead that covers all these areas. However, they have not done that for 1991. If they wish to draw down money, it will be from the general subhead.
I would like to give Deputy Quinn more latitude but there are three remaining questions.
A Cheann Comhairle, may I respectfully draw your attention to the fact that I have had less than three minutes on this question, whereas we spent seven minutes on the previous question.
It is very difficult for the Chair to apportion an equivalent amount of time to the Deputies.
I appreciate that.
I can only appeal for brevity, otherwise I may not be able to complete the five questions.
I will be brief. May I ask the Minister if a formal written assurance was given by his predecessor, under the direction of the Taoiseach, to the effect that there would be an additional annual subvention to UCD on top of their normal entitlement?
The Minister for Finance agreed that Exchequer assistance could be provided for purposes other than what was in the original Supplementary Estimate on condition that it would not give rise to increased demand in the overall HEA grant. Let me state for the record because I know it is important, that subhead B.2 of the Vote for Third Level and Further Education provides a block grant to the Higher Education Authority to cover the non-capital requirement of all the relevant institutions. This grant has not been increased. Any additional annual subvention to UCD must come within the grant under subhead B.2.
