Vol. 441 No. 6
1 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach the areas of the local development programme, as provided for in the National Development Plan, 1994-1999, for which his Department has responsibility; the plans, if any, he has to coordinate the different elements of the programme; when the budget for the programme will be finalised; when it is expected that the programme will become operational; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
2 Proinsias De Rossa asked the Taoiseach the total financial allocation under the National Development Plan, 1994-1999, for areas for which his Department has responsibility; the allocation following the overall cut of 8.5 per cent announced by the Government on 3 March 1994; the way in which this will be applied to the projects for which he has responsibility; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to answer Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
My Department has the co-ordinating responsibility for the local development programme for which a provision of £1,263 million was included in the National Development Plan. My Department has direct responsibility for the disadvantaged areas element of the programme and for the Community Employment Programme, formerly CEDP-SES, in so far as it relates to the areas designated as disadvantaged under the local development programme.
Discussions are expected to be completed with the European Commission on the Community Support Framework by the end of this month. The framework will set out the broad national and sectoral strategies to be funded from the Structural Funds. The pro-rata adjustments proposed by the Government have been agreed by the Commission. It is clear that the Government and the Commission have agreed virtually all of the projects to be funded. The expected strong growth in the economy will enable virtually all of the projects to be completed within the period of the National Plan without imposing any additional burden on taxpayers. Discussions about the operational programmes, which set out the measures and objectives in more detail, are continuing in tandem and the intention is that they will be approved following the adoption of the Community Support Framework.
Pending the completion of these discussions, I am not in a position to give specific details of the final allocations of funds under the local development programme. For example, the discussions with the Commission Services suggest that the Community Employment Programme while very relevant to local development initiatives, may be more appropriately included with other education and training measures in the Operational Programme on Human Resources. Since the publication of the National Plan, the Government has decided to expand the numbers who may participate in the Community Employment Programme to almost double the number which were provided for in the National Development Plan. As a consequence the financial estimate for the programme will change significantly over the plan estimate. The programme will be co-financed by the Exchequer.
Detailed discussions will be undertaken with the Commission Services in regard to the specific measures which will be funded under the local development programme. Relevant to these discussions will be the Commission's proposals for Leader II and the measures which may be funded from this initiative.
State funding for the local development programme of £90.63 million will co-finance initiatives in designated areas and the Community Employment Programme in these areas.
My Department has the lead co-ordinating role in relation to the local development programme. Elements of the programme such as county enterprise boards and urban renewal will be directed operationally, respectively by the Departments of Enterprise and Employment and the Environment. The Community Employment Programme will be operated jointly by my Department and the Department of Enterprise and Employment through FAS. The programme will be supported and monitored from a policy perspective, by the Interdepartmental Policy Committee on Local Development which reports to me. All relevant Departments and agencies are represented on this committee. The policy committee's role also includes assessment and review of other policy issues in so far as they impact on local development. Financially, the programme will be monitored through the Community Support Framework monitoring system.
The local development programme is already operational. The objectives of the programme are to harness the potential which exists at local level to bring about social and economic development and to maximise this potential by putting in place a set of structures to facilitate this development. This process is already being implemented. A county enterprise board has been established for each county. The areas to be targeted under the disadvantaged areas sub-programme have been designated and the complementary measures — the urban renewal scheme and the Community Employment Programme — have been announced.
Would the Taoiseach agree that his reply highlights the incredibly complex process of local development and that there is need for some rationalisation of the way these programmes are agreed, put in place and run? The Department of Enterprise and Employment, the Department of the Taoiseach, the Department of the Environment, various monitoring committees as well as committees at local level, county enterprise boards and project committees must fill in a variety of forms and make cases to each other in order to make progress. Would the Taoiseach agree there is need for an urgent review of the way local development is put in place?
I do not agree and I do not accept that the process is particularly difficult. It is very clear when you understand the structures. The Central Review Committee which services the Programme for Competitiveness and Work has been in place for a long time and has worked very successfully. Directly under that committee are what were known as the 12 Programme for Economic and Social Progress companies, established a couple of years ago and targeted to areas of high long term unemployment, and these companies are operating very successfully. That concept has been expanded to other areas, bringing the number of companies to about 32. There is a very clear line as to how the Central Review Committee fits into this process — it reports on the Programme for Competitiveness and Work. The other areas are under the clear direction of the Minister for Enterprise and Employment, and FÁS is the operational agency dealing with these areas. There are very clear lines as to how the programmes work.
If the Taoiseach rereads the original reply he will clearly see the impossible complexity for any lay person outside this House and outside his Department of trying to understand precisely where responsibility lies for any given decision. Of the £1,263 million provided for in the National Development Plan, how much does the Taoiseach expect will be forthcoming?
Some time ago the Government made pro rata adjustments to all areas, including this area. That has been accepted by Brussels despite the fact that there were many non-believers in various parties over there. It was their view that this plan should be scrapped and that the pro rata adjustments would not be accepted. There will be many red faces over there at the end of this operation.
Here is one pale face.
There are plenty of reasons for it.
I hope the Taoiseach will be blushing to the roots of his well manicured hair when I am finished with him.
There is no one on the Front Bench with the Deputy. He needs help.
I certainly do not need the Taoiseach's scriptwriter.
The Ministers for rates are over there.
The Minister for rates and the Minister against rates.
Let us get down to questions, please.
I listened closely to the Taoiseach's reply on the pro rata cut of £800 million. He said that a cut of £800 million was being made but that all the projects would be completed within the time available. From where will this £800 million come? Did I hear the Taoiseach suggest that it would come from tax buoyancy, that invention of his predecessor, the former Deputy Charles J. Haughey? In other words, PAYE taxpayers will be denied cuts in taxation that they would otherwise have enjoyed in order to make up the difference between what the Government promised they would get from Europe and the £800 million less they will receive. The price of the Government's pride is £800 million more in taxation than would have otherwise been the case.
As usual, Deputy Bruton is losing the run of himself trying to analyse simple matters that he likes to complicate in the hope that the general public will follow his line of thinking. Of course, they will not, have not done so for a long time and are unlikely to do so in our time here either.
The Taoiseach did not do too well in the last general election.
Can I explain simply——
The Taoiseach had to be sprung out of prison.
The Tánaiste is enjoying that one.
Those are accidents that beset Fine Gael, not me.
Let us have an orderly Question Time.
We are still on this side of the House.
That is all that matters as far as Deputy Dempsey is concerned.
That is the attitude that has the Opposition over there and will keep them there.
Deputy Bruton is doing his best to get over here.
Deputy Bruton will get his answer from the Irish people if he wants to denigrate £7.2 billion coming into this country.
The Taoiseach can say the figure at last.
I will leave it to the public to deal with that when the time comes.
That is the first time the Taoiseach has put the figure on the record.
The pro-rata adjustments made by the Government were accepted by the Commission. Consequently, there is no change in the figure agreed by the Commission last October for the Irish national plan, approximately £7.2 billion. The adjustment from £8 billion — the figure on which the plan was based — to £7.2 billion is being made on a pro-rata basis over the period of the plan which will bring us up to 1999. It is not an adjustment that some people on the opposite side of the House would like the public to believe has to be made this year or next year. Virtually all the projects will be completed on time, including the flagship projects that many in the Opposition tried to convince people would not be proceeded with, whether we are talking about Tallaght Hospital, a light rail system for Dublin, a peat fired station or whatever.
We are all well aware of what is needed to produce, for example, £50 million per year. If we take 15,000 people off the live register——
Send them to London.
——through some of the local development projects to which I referred, that immediately reimburses the Exchequer to the tune of——
Were they not built into the Programme for Government?
——£50 million. If the Deputy does not want me to give examples, he can work it out himself.
Let us hear the Taoiseach without interruption.
So far as we are concerned strong growth is projected for this economy for the remainder of this decade and there will not be an additional taxation burden on the taxpayers although opposition Deputies are trying to convince the public otherwise.
I am delighted that the Taoiseach said that the Community Support Framework will be published at the end of April, which is only three weeks late, and that the Government spokesperson that briefed The Irish Times yesterday was wrong when he said it would be published after the election. Why was the support framework not published on 8 April in accordance with the regulations? Will the Taoiseach agree that Deputy De Rossa's question refers to the National Development Plan 1994-99 and the figure we are talking about for those years is £5.9 billion and not £7.2 billion?
I do not know what point Deputy Harney is trying to make about these regulations and 8 April. We have been involved in negotiations with the Commission for quite some time and it is quite likely that ours will be the second national plan on which agreement will be reached. We are not lagging behind, as people would suggest, and we have agreement on all the major issues.
On the period of the national plan, it has been clear from the beginning that the last budget prospective ended on 31 December 1992. The money about which we have been talking since applies from 1 January 1993 and that is the figure on which the original allocations were based. The period in question has not changed and neither has the money agreed on last October, so I do not understand what further information Deputy Harney is requesting. I will try to facilitate her if I can determine what information she wants.
Is it not the case that the former Taoiseach negotiated the 1993 figures?
No, that is not the case.
Give him credit for something.
I will give credit where credit is due. I was the Minister for Finance during that period so I know what I am talking about.
So the Taoiseach is to blame as well?
The budget prospective for the EC ended on 31 December 1992. Any funding allocated to this country or any other country from 1 January 1993 had to be negotiated at Edinburgh.
Would the Taoiseach agree that anybody who knows anything about arithmetic will find it hard to believe what he has just said? If there is an £800 million shortfall, at least, the same plan cannot be implemented without some other adjustments. In view of the Taoiseach's suggestion that there will not be an increase in central taxation, will he give a like guarantee that a local contribution will not be expected and there will not be an increase in local charges as a result of this shortfall?
The last part of Deputy Mitchell's question is not even relevant. It has nothing to do with the national plan. On the adjustment of £800 million over a period of six years, I have already made clear the position of the Exchequer and, of course, there will be private sector funding——
Will the Taoiseach rule out requiring local contributions?
I would appreciate if the Deputy would not interrupt me; I did not interrupt him. There will be private sector funding also. I have made very clear in my original reply and in my replies to supplementary questions the position on funding. If the Deputy wants me to repeat it again I will but there are none so deaf as those who do not want to hear.
Will local contributions be required?
Will the Exchequer contribution be increased from £8.5 billion for 1993-1999, which is provided for in the plan, to make up the shortfall for the loss of £800 million in EU funding?
I have already stated there will be additional Exchequer funding over the period. We do not know the exact figure but I have already said where it will come from; it will not come from taxation.
We have already spent nearly 20 minutes on these questions. I want brevity from now on, please.
If the additional £800 million in Exchequer funding is not coming from taxation, will it be borrowed?
Deputy Bruton is again trying to play the innocent here. The money will not come from additional taxation. I have heard the case being made by the Opposition that this will necessitate additional taxation; I say it will not.
The Taoiseach is preempting the buoyancy of revenue.
Does the Taoiseach think there is a spare £800 million hanging around?
I am bringing these questions to finality quite soon. We have already incurred some 20 minutes on them. A brief question from Deputy Rabbitte.
It took the Taoiseach five months to admit that the figure was £7.2 billion, if indeed it is, rather than £8 billion. Will he now tell us, if additional money must be made up by the Exchequer, where it will come from and how does he reconcile that with what he told us three times on the Order of Business today and the same number of times yesterday, that the bottom line is that people will pay less tax? Is it his intention to publish a revised plan and allow the House to debate it?
We provided an additional contribution of £40 million for the plan and we reduced taxation in the budget.
The Government sold the shares in Greencore.
The Government abolished last year's levy.
We reduced taxation and contributed £40 million towards the continuation of the plan.
The Government sold the family silver.
Is the Taoiseach saying he expects the economy to perform so well it will generate sufficient funds to the Exchequer without the need for additional taxation and that instead of using the money to reduce taxation it will be used for flagship projects such as the peat powered fire station?
That is not what I am saying and I wish Deputies would listen and try to understand what I am saying. It is very simple.
The Taoiseach had a bad week. His voice is going.
He should go back to Killarney.
The Deputy need not worry about Killarney. All she does is jibe at the Government. If I had a little cúnais I would give the information to the Opposition.
The Taoiseach is rattled.
I know Deputy McDowell understands the position but if he wants to understand——
I was trying to be fair to the Taoiseach.
I thank the Deputy. We have already decided what the pro rata cutbacks will be and how they will be accommodated. This is the first year we provided an additional £40 million of Exchequer funding towards the plan.
That is a cutback.
We did not increase taxation but reduced it in the budget. We made up the pro rata cutback and will do so every year.
Income tax is going up this year.
The Minister for the Environment, Deputy Smith, is like Horatio on the bridge.
The Deputy should have been at the convention.
How does the Taoiseach reconcile his statement that taxation is reduced with the fact that revenue is rising and the tax take this year from unemployment benefit will be £30 million? Does the Taoiseach regard that as a reduction in taxation? When does he expect the revised plan to be agreed with Brussels and when will it be available for debate here?
We expect the issues that make up the Community Support Framework to be agreed before the end of the month. After that, it is a matter for Brussels to publish it. In tandem we will continue to present and, hopefully, have agreement on the various operational programmes. Everything else will flow from the Community Support Framework when it is published. In the meantime we will continue to do our job. The reason we have more revenue is that a greater number of people are working, businesses are buoyant and there is growth in the economy.
The Government is getting £30 million from unemployment benefit and £20 million from health——
Better relative improvements in the economy than improvements for relatives.
I am at a loss to understand the Taoiseach. Is this the same as the character one used to see on fair days doing the three card trick?
Now you have him.
That does not deserve any comment except to say that if the Deputy does not understand, he should come to my office for 15 minutes and I will write it out for him in very simple language.
As someone who has been there I know he will go away more confused than when he arrived.
That is the intention.
He is a master of confusion.
Deputy Reynolds is not the first Fianna Fáil Taoiseach to invite me to his office.
Deputy Bruton would like the road ahead to be paved with good intentions. His good intentions for that office will be the occasional visit such as, I hope, will take place tomorrow morning.
