Vol. 455 No. 1
7 Mr. Callely asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the new initiatives, if any, which have been put in place since the historic cessation of violence on 31 August 1994, for cross-Border economic co-operation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10705/95]
23 Mr. Callely asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the measures, if any, in place in each Government Department for North-South involvement and co-operation to assist in cross-Border links, in particular economic and business development links; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10704/95]
I intend to take Questions Nos. 7 and 23 together.
It is the Government's policy to promote cross-Border economic co-operation in all fields. The new context created by the ending of violence has transformed the potential for such co-operation. The Government wishes to see full advantage taken of the significant new opportunities which arise in this context for North-South trade and economic co-operation.
The evolving peace process will enable resources which were previously devoted to combating paramilitary violence to be transferred to productive economic purposes, North and South of the Border. The Government wishes to build on the positive developments of the past nine months and to explore how best to convert the "peace dividend" into real and lasting economic progress.
Within the Anglo-Irish Conference, we are considering with the British Government action which can be taken in a number of sectors to develop North-South co-operation. Over the past few years, we have taken initiatives in the conference to promote co-operation in fields such as tourism, transport, energy, environment, health, agriculture, education, North-South trade, forestry and fisheries. In the period since the cease-fires of last autumn, the conference has considered the scope for co-operation in the areas of animal health and rural development; cross-Border roads, urban renewal and environmental issues; and health issues.
At a meeting to be held later this week, the conference will discuss North-South co-operation in relation to heritage matters and broadcasting. Further possibilities for North-South co-operation will be examined by the conference over the coming months.
Apart from the regular meetings of the conference, Government Departments, North and South, are in regular contact with each other on a wide range of issues of mutual interest. The Government has also played a role in the elaboration of a number of other economic initiatives which are directly related to the peace process.
The White House Conference on Trade and Investment, which was hosted by President Clinton, was part of the American Government's support package for the peace process. It provided a unique opportunity for the private sector and the State agencies in Northern Ireland and the Southern Border counties to come together in a spirit of co-operation and to highlight the benefits of investing in these areas to several hundred leading American companies.
The European Union has also launched a support package to develop the peace process. The PEACE Initiative will help to develop cross-Border economic links and will devote a minimum of 15 per cent of its total funding to cross-Border development.
The Framework Document, which was launched on 22 February 1995 by the Irish and British Governments proposed the creation of new North-South institutions to "cater adequately for present and future political, social and economic inter-connections on the island of Ireland" and to enable representatives of the main traditions, North and South, to enter "agreed dynamic, new, co-operative and constructive relationships".
In addition to the foregoing initiatives, in which the Government has had direct or indirect involvement, a range of local government and private sector initiatives are under way to promote cross-Border economic and business co-operation in the context of peace.
I thank the Minister of State for her reply. Is she aware of the recent Newry-Dundalk conference which was held as a follow up to the Washington conference, and has her Department taken cognisance of the various speeches and statements made there by some very prominent people?
Will she accept that at the recent Washington Conference on the problems of economic development in the North and the six Border counties, there was too much emphasis on the six Northern counties and not enough on the six Southern Border counties, particularly as the Minister for Enterprise and Employment, Deputy Richard Bruton, only mentioned the Border areas once in his keynote speech?
Will she accept that the recently agreed division of international funds by a ratio of 20:80 between the six Southern Border counties and the six Northern counties is not sufficient, particularly in view of the fact that the Southern Border counties have suffered more than the Northern counties as they did not have the backing of a very large Exchequer and, up until recently, got no recognition for the difficulties they experienced over the years?
I have heard brief reports of the Newry-Dundalk conference which I welcome because there is enormous scope for work to be done in the Newry and Dundalk areas. I am aware that Dundalk has suffered over the years because of the Border and I welcome any initiatives to promote development in that area.
On funding, it has been agreed that Northern Ireland will get a maximum of 80 per cent of the total funding under the new package and the six Southern Border counties will get a minimum of 20 per cent. We consider this a reasonable distribution, bearing in mind that the Southern counties comprise a little more than 20 per cent of the total population covered by the initiative. For example, the international fund allocates 75 per cent to Northern Ireland and 25 per cent to the six Southern counties.
The Tánaiste has said here on a number of occasions, in answer to the Deputy, that he is most anxious that the Border counties benefit from the initiative. I am aware of a number of initiatives. From reports of the Washington Conference, my understanding is that the delegates from the Border counties were quite positive about the work done there in terms of the economic benefits which the conference might ultimately bring to the Border counties.
I share the Deputy's concern that the Border counties will benefit because many areas have suffered in terms of economic development and there are also questions of infrastructural development. I hope that a direction of a proportion of the funding to the Border counties will benefit the area.
One of the main issues at the Newry-Dundalk conference and which was adverted to by Dr. Tony O'Reilly related to the motorway between Newry and Dundalk, development of which is at a standstill, despite the flowery language which we get from the Departments on both sides of the Border. Will the Minister of State use her good offices to ensure that whatever bureaucratic blockage is responsible for the delay is dealt with? As Dr. Tony O'Reilly recalled, 40 years ago as a child he heard promises of the Dundalk-Newry road being improved but he is still waiting.
I am aware of the problems with the road because, as the Deputy probably knows, I visit Dundalk quite frequently. The road is a priority for the town and I will use whatever good offices I have with the Minister to make the case for that road and for Dundalk in general.
I welcome the comments of my colleague from County Louth and join him in supporting any move in the Border areas to achieve the maximum results. That is what we set out to do in Washington and I believe we were successful. In relation to the 80 per cent; 20 per cent allocation of the additional £240 million of cross-Border funding, I am the only Member of the House who is a member of the body dealing with that. We strongly opposed the division that was decided on but, as the Minister of State said, it was allocated on the basis of population. Is the Minister of State satisfied with the programme submitted under this heading to the European Union for sanction? It will be advertised nationally that moneys will be available for projects in the six Border counties. Will the Minister of State ensure that the programme is proceeded with on the basis that it is related to the peace initiative and that the moneys must be spent during the next three years?
Preparations for the programme are well advanced and we expect it to be finalised shortly. I am confident it will give rise to a number of applications which will reflect the level of interest in the Border counties. There is co-operation at local authority level, between business and community groups and organisations along the Border. I anticipate that much interest will be shown in the funding when it becomes available. I am confident that the projects which will qualify for funding under the various headings will be considerably enhanced.
Does the Minister of State accept that the reason the population level dropped in the six southern counties concerned was the lack of investment and that, therefore, it is wrong to use it as one of the criteria? Will she assure the House that any money provided by the International Fund for Ireland or under the INTERREG programme or the new Delors programme will be considered additional and not used to replace expenditure provided by the Department of Finance? Funding provided under the INTERREG programme has been used in this way. As there is a need to upgrade infrastructure in the area it is essential that the Department of Finance does not take the soft option.
I am confident that will not happen.
Will the Minister of State give the House an assurance?
The Commission has made it clear that any funding provided in the context of the peace initiative must be considered additional. It will be provided by way of the global grant mechanism. We have considerable experience of using this mechanism. In this way we can ensure that funding will be provided to those interests which will qualify for funding under the initiative.
The Minister of State should keep an eye on the Department of Finance.
