Bertie Ahern
Question:4 Mr. B. Ahern asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the first meeting of the monitoring committee for URBAN held on Friday, 25 October 1996. [19862/96]
Céisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - URBAN Monitoring Committee.
Chapter 10 of the Operational Programme for the implementation of the URBAN initiative in Ireland outlines the role of the monitoring committee.
At its first meeting on Friday, 25 October 1996, the members discussed the objectives of URBAN, agreed on rules of procedure and considered the report on the appraisal of the action plans for the three areas where the operational programme will be applied. These plans had been circulated prior to the meeting to the committee, who must approve the strategies, targets and performance indicators envisaged in them.
The committee noted the progress to date in preparing the plans, asked for supplementary information and approved the allocation of initial sums of up to £500,000 to enable work to begin on the more detailed planning and development of priority projects.
Could the Minister of State explain URBAN to us? What are the schemes which were in existence before that first meeting on 25 October?
URBAN has many similarities to the local development programme but it is an EU initiative applicable in all the 15 member states. We had a local development programme here which was far more advanced than in any other European Union state, but as every other Union state was able to benefit from URBAN we also benefited.
The Commission's objective was to spend this money in one area but because we had local development projects up and running it was agreed that three areas could be involved. The three areas chosen were two in Dublin, one on the north side of the city, in Ballymun-Darndale-Finglas, and one on the west side of the city, Tallaght-Clondalkin, with one in north Cork. The local communities, in consultation with the partnerships, the local authorities and local communities, have submitted plans which are being assessed for the expenditure of the money. In some cases the information was not sufficient. The fact that we are taking some time over allocating the funds indicates that we are determined the funds will be spent in a cost effective manner.
The Comptroller and Auditor General in his report on this and the local development scheme made suggestions and highlighted some discrepancies on how the scheme was monitored and the lack of advertising for it. He said there was not any documentary evidence or any critical analysis of the projects for which grant aid was sought, nor was there evidence that all the specified criteria had been adhered to. He also said tax clearance procedures were not adhered to, no tax details were obtained in any case prior to payments being made in March 1996 and that only 12 of the 37 projects had provided the relevant tax clearance certificates. I do not wish to make any allegation against the Minister of State.
The Deputy should wait untill we reach Question No. 4. and then make the allegation.
We will not reach Question No. 4 and that is the problem.
The Deputy has been misdirected. The comments do not refer to the urban initiative. It is a totally different matter. The Deputy is wrong. The reference the Deputy used does not refer to the urban initiative programme. It is not related to the question put or to the projects about which he asked questions.
All of these programmes are linked. If I can read page 13——
The Deputy is asking the Chair to create a deliberate precedent. I cannot and will not do that.
It has taken five weeks to get any information on local development on the Order Paper.
The Deputy could raise this matter on Question No. 6 and I will take that before Question No. 5 to enable the Deputy to raise it. He will hear some interesting replies.
We have been waiting five weeks for an answer.
I have been waiting five weeks to reply. I have come home from European Union meetings——
The Taoiseach changes the orders every week.
They are the Standing Orders of the House and have nothing to do with the Taoiseach. Why can we not take Question No. 6?
There is no Standing Order involved. The Taoiseach's office changes the questions.
This question has nothing to do with the urban initiative but if the Deputy wants to get a reply to that under Question No. 6 I would be happy to answer Question No. 6 now.
I will have to wait another four weeks.
We will deal with questions seriatim in the ordinary way. I am not prepared to deviate in such a matter. We will proceed with relevant questions on Question No. 4.
We will run out of time. This happened five weeks ago. All the money for these schemes will be spent for 1996 and there will not be any accountability. I cannot find out what is happening. I asked the Minister of State which schemes were approved, which were on the agenda and who has received money under this scheme?
Time is moving on.
Page 13 of the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General refers to this.
We will move to Priority Questions shortly.
That is a shameful performance by the Leader of the main Opposition party. Before asking questions in the House, he should know about what he is concerned about. The Urban Initiative applies to three areas, one in north Cork, one in north Dublin and one in west Dublin. A sum of £500.000 has initially been applied. Why does the Deputy not ask a question that can be answered instead of making false allegations, as usual?
The Minister of State should answer the question.
I will answer it when we reach Question No. 6. Then we will see the reality. The Deputy is ill prepared and performing like a three ring circus.
Answer the question.
Let us avoid a shouting match.
On a point of order, I have asked the Minister of State several questions. He has stalled again and has done so for five weeks. He has refused to be accountable to the House. The Minister of State could have answered my questions about the Comptroller and Auditor General's report because it affects this. He has refused to do so and has hidden for weeks from answering questions on local development.
That is unworthy of the Deputy.
It is not only unworthy but untrue.
Give us the details.
Gaffes in the House today will give Deputy Ahern the title of "The Gaffer", following titles such as "The Chief" and "The Boss". That is the biggest gaffe in this House for a very long time. It in no way refers to——
(Interruptions.)
The Chair is on his feet. This is the end of questions to An Taoiseach for today. I will now proceed to deal with questions nominated for priority to the Minister for Health.