Vol. 472 No. 1
38 Mr. S. Brennan asked the Minister for Tourism and Trade the legal actions, if any, pending against the State following its decision to abandon the competition for a National Conference Centre; if he has satisfied himself that the deadline for the completion of the conference centre will now be met; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22033/96]
80 Mr. Andrews asked the Minister for Tourism and Trade the current position regarding the Government's application to the EU for 75 per cent funding for the proposed location of the National Conference Centre at the RDS; whether another location will be considered if the EU Commission provides only 50 per cent funding for the RDS; if not, the way in which the funding shortfall will be made up; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22035/96]
93 Mr. M. McDowell asked the Minister for Tourism and Trade whether the separate independent cost-benefit analysis of the RDS National Conference Centre proposal has been made available to him; if so, the action, if any, he proposes to take in the matter; whether the findings of this analysis will be made public; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22045/96]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 38, 80 and 93 together.
As the Deputies are aware the Operational Programme for Tourism 1994-99, makes provision for European Regional Development Fund support for a large dedicated conference centre to be built in Dublin and capable of handling up to 2,000 delegates.
Following the failure of the open tendering competition to produce an acceptable private sector proposal, an alternative strategy was pursued whereby Bord Fáilte under the aegis of the independent management board for product development, examined an outline proposal from the Royal Dublin Society which, as a voluntary body, is potentially eligible for consideration for a higher rate of capital assistance normally reserved under the tourism operational programme for public and similar bodies.
Upon completion of their examination of the RDS proposal Bord Fáilte, on the recommendation of the product board, commissioned an independent cost-benefit analysis which is required under the tourism operational programme in the case of all large projects. This was undertaken by an experienced UK consultancy firm, ECOTEC, which was selected by Bord Fáilte on the basis of a competitive tendering procedure. Reports of this nature would not normally be made public as they contain information of a commercially sensitive nature.
The Government, having taken into account a number of factors including the recommendations of the Product Board and Bord Fáilte and the results of the cost-benefit analysis, agreed on 5 November 1996 to make a submission to the European Commission recommending formal approval of the proposed development by the RDS. The Government is recommending approval of 75 per cent capital grant aid subject to the existing financial provision for such project in the current tourism operational programme. I understand this provision is already adequate to fully meet the total cost of grant recommended in the Government's submission and will not necessitate any change in priorities or budgets in the current operational programme.
The proposal has now been submitted to the European Commission for its formal agreement which is required under the operational programme for projects of this scale. We await a formal response from the Commission and in the interim, I do not propose to anticipate or speculate on the substance of that response. A specific timeframe for commencement or completion of the national conference centre project cannot be determined until a proposal has been formally approved by the European Commission and matters such as planning permission are in place. There is, however, no reason to believe the project cannot be completed and supported within the timeframe permissible under the operational programme.
I am not aware of any formal legal actions pending against the State following the decision to terminate the open tendering competition for the national conference centre.
It is not clear from the Minister of State's reply whether the RDS has already been found to be eligible for the higher rate of European funding. I expect it has not yet been found eligible. Does the Minister agree it is a great pity that contracts for consultancy reports such as the cost-benefit analysis have to be placed outside the country? We have had many examples of it in several Departments in recent times. It is a pity that we are not able to do this work ourselves and keep within the country the very substantial amounts of finance involved.
Does the Minister agree the Government ought to have a fall back position in mind in the event that any of the myriad difficulties which might beset the RDS proposal come into play? I understand there may well be difficulties in relation to the local community. There may be planning difficulties and perhaps even a failure to get the level of European funding which is expected. As I understand it from the Minister, if that happened, the conference centre proposal would effectively collapse. Am I correct in understanding that?
In answer to the Deputy's first question, we no longer have any choice in these matters. We are now part of the European Union and it is necessary to advertise internationally when we advertise these contracts. Does the Deputy agree that if the Government had decided on a fall back position, we would have to go to Europe and say that although we are making a submission on behalf of the RDS, in case it is not successful we have another proposal? Does he agree that it would undermine our position and send out the wrong signals? I think it would.
The Minister is confident.
We are very confident.
