Vol. 457 No. 3
1 Mr. McCreevy asked the Minister for Finance the cuts in expenditure he anticipates achieving in each Government Department by the end of 1995 in view of the ESRI call, which echoes Opposition calls, that very tight control be maintained on the level of day-to-day Government expenditure; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15246/95]
33 Mr. R. Burke asked the Minister for Finance if he intends to introduce Supplementary Estimates; and if so, in which Departments. [15241/95]
It is proposed to take Questions Nos. 1 and 33 together. As the Deputies will be aware, the end-September Exchequer returns showed that non-capital supply expenditure to end-September is running somewhat below the expected trend. This is due mainly to timing factors and it is anticipated that the outturn will be broadly in line with the Revised Estimates allocation. My Department is continuously monitoring the expenditure position in consultation with the various Government Departments.
I am satisfied that public spending in 1995 is on target. While some additional spending pressures have emerged, such as the additional costs associated with higher than anticipated average numbers on the live register, I anticipate that sufficient savings will be available elsewhere to offset these extra costs. I assure the House that very tight control is being maintained on the level of day-to-day Government expenditure. I am satisfied that gross current supply spending in 1995 will be kept within the 6.9 per cent nominal increase provided for in the Revised Estimates for Public Services. I do not intend, therefore, to take any specific corrective action to curtail expenditure in 1995.
I remind Deputies that the decisions which the Government took last July on public expenditure are aimed at containing the growth in gross current supply services expenditure in 1996 within the 2 per cent real increase figure to which we committed ourselves in our programme, A Government of Renewal. The decisions which the Government took on restricting the numbers employed in the public sector will achieve some savings in 1995 but the main impact of the decision will be felt on 1996 spending.
Decisions about Supplementary Estimates can only be taken when it is clear that additional expenditure is unavoidable and that no savings are available elsewhere in the Vote. In general, the position on most Votes in this regard is still unclear at this stage. However, I am aware of some instances where supplementaries will be required. I have approved to date Supplementary Estimates in respect of Vote 19 — Office of the Minister for Justice and Vote 13 — Office of the Attorney General.
The Minister said that he hoped to keep the gross current supply spending in 1995 within the 6.9 per cent provided for in the Revised Estimates but that there will be Supplementary Estimates. Given that he had such difficulty with his Cabinet colleagues during the early part of the summer when he asked them to trim £70 million from their budgets what are his chances of success when he asks his Cabinet colleagues to rein back their spending in 1996 by £600 million?
As a former Cabinet colleague, Deputy McCreevy will be well aware of the commitment to increased expenditure that every line Department and its Minister wishes to engage in. I am satisfied that individual members are committed to the Government programme. A Government of Renewal, and I am sure they will ensure that their Departments perform to the optimum level and adhere to its broad policy outline.
Will the Minister agree that at least a start should be made in 1996 in preparing the economy and the overall budgetary arithmetic to take account of the situation post 1999 when, whatever the outcome of EU negotiations, there will not be the same proportionate input of Structural Funds? In preparing his 1996 budget should the Minister not take cognisance of that stark reality facing whatever Government will be in office in 1999?
The Deputy will be aware that this administration is attempting, and so far has succeeded, to reduce the relative increase in public expenditure. The figure of 6.9 per cent this year is a reduction on the figure of last year's increase and I am confident that the increase in 1996 will be a further reduction. However, it is too early at this stage to give firmer figures.
The Minister will approve Supplementary Estimates in the Vote of the Department of Justice and the Office of the Attorney General. Why was there a need for Supplementary Estimates in the Department at this time? Was expenditure incurred that had not been envisaged at the time of the Revised Book of Estimates?
In Vote 13, the Office of the Attorney General, an extra £0.85 million was approved to meet additional demands for legal fees to counsel and this would bring the overall allocation in this subhead to £2.35 million from the initial allocation of £1.5 million. In Vote 19, Vote of the Minister for Justice, an extra £2.5 million was approved to meet additional demand for the criminal legal aid system. As the Deputy will be aware, legal fees are expensive.
