Vol. 477 No. 4
1 Mr. Andrews asked the Minister for Tourism and Trade the latest communication his Department has had with the EU regarding the National Conference Centre; when a final decision will be reached; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9441/97]
The Operational Programme for Tourism 1994-99 makes provision for European Regional Development Fund support for a large dedicated conference centre capable of handling up to 2,000 delegates to be built in Dublin.
The tourism potential of a national conference centre here has long been recognised, and the first Operational Programme for Tourism, 1989-93, contained provision for such a development. No progress was made, however, at that stage.
In September-October 1995, Bord Fáilte organised an open tendering competition seeking interested parties to submit proposals for capital grant assistance of up to 50 per cent towards the development of such a centre and 13 consortia submitted full proposals. These were rigorously assessed by a Bord Fáilte-led assessment team and considered by the independent Product Development Management Board set up under the operational programme to consider such projects. None of the applicants met the criteria which had been set, and the open tendering competition accordingly terminated.
Following the failure of the competition to produce an acceptable private sector proposal to develop the centre, the independent management board, under whose aegis the competition was run, recommended that the strategy be reviewed.
They suggested, as an alternative, the possibility of developing the centre through a public sector option. As a result the Royal Dublin Society, as a voluntary body potentially eligible for consideration for the higher rate of European Regional Development Fund assistance normally reserved for public or similar bodies, was invited to submit a proposal on this basis. A similar invitation subsequently issued to a public-private joint venture who failed to submit an initial application within a twice extended deadline.
Upon completion of its examination of the RDS proposal, Bord Fáilte, on the recommendation of the management 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 who were selected by Bord Fáilte on the basis of a competitive tendering procedure. The results were favourable to the RDS proposal.
The Government, having taken into account a number of factors including the recommendations of the management board and Bord Fáilte and the results of the cost benefit analysis, agreed 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 a project in the current tourism operational programme. The proposal has been submitted to the European Commission for approval, as required under the operational programme for projects of this scale.
Since then the Commission officials of DG XVI and their consultants have been continuing their examination of the Government's submission, including the in-depth cost-benefit analysis. As part of this examination, they have sought clarification on a number of issues, and my Department is currently dealing with some final queries, recently received, on which the Commission requires a response before it is in a position to make its final decision. These queries are currently being dealt with as a matter of priority in my Department.
Deputies will recall references in the course of my reply to the House to questions on the same project on 5 March last, as reported in volumn 475, No. 8, columns 1594 to 1600 of the Official Report, to reports about a complaint lodged with the Commission. I indicated in a written reply to the House two days ago that the European Commission has now communicated formal notice of a complaint lodged with it on the subject of selection procedures. The clarifications sought in that communication are currently being prepared in my Department in consultation with Bord Fáilte who carried out the assessment of applications under both the tender competition and the alternative strategy.
A specific timetable for commencement or completion of the national conference centre project cannot be determined until the proposal has been formally approved by the European Commission and matters such as planning permission are in place. There is, however, no reason at this stage to believe that the project cannot be developed under the tourism operational programme in accordance with the permissible timeframe.
Just to place it in the public domain, we strongly support the principle of 75 per cent grant aid from the European Union. However, we are concerned about the so-called flagship project in the Minister's programme. It appears that it is gently sinking beneath the waves of incompetence. The Minister mentioned the original competition which was a shambles and indicative of what we could have expected.
When did the Minister submit the plans for the RDS? Has he been in contact with the European Union? What are the issues that concern it? To whom did he speak? What was the response? Can the Minister give some information on complaints and procedures?
I am glad to have in the public domain Deputy Andrews's support for this project.
No, for the 75 per cent grant aid.
Is the Deputy not supporting the project for the RDS?
When we get the 75 per cent grant aid.
I am glad to hear that the Deputy is at least supportive of the 75 per cent concept which is in the domain of Commissioner Wulf-Mathies. I do not agree that the original process was a shambles. It was properly and carefully conducted on the basis of a 50 per cent grant from within the private sector. Of the 13 consortia that submitted proposals none met the criteria, and the process self-terminated.
I have been in contact with Commissioner Wulf-Mathies and Commissioner Monti. On 5 November 1996 the Government gave formal agreement to making a submission to the European Commission recommending formal approval of a 75 per cent capital grant aid towards the proposed development by the Royal Dublin Society. As a former Minister for Foreign Affairs and potential President, Deputy Andrews understands the procedures of the European Commission and that there are rules and procedures to be gone through. Information requested by the Commission officials of DG XVI from Bord Fáilte and the Department was supplied. Further queries followed, and they were answered quite recently.
In respect of the lodging of a formal complaint, one has no control over what complaints are lodged with the European Commission. I have only just received a formal complaint which came through the Department of Foreign Affairs. This is now being replied to by Bord Fáilte in conjunction with the Department. I have not been informed of the name of the complainant, but I am aware that the complaint deals with technical and procedural issues. I hope the reply currently being prepared within the Department and by Bord Fáilte will answer all queries.
It is well known that the complainant has an address in the centre of Dublin. It appears there is a less than active effort being made to process this urgently before the operational programme runs out in 1999. I am concerned that there is a lack of will and urgency about the matter. Has the Minister adopted a hands-on approach to this? Has he sent an official or officials from his Department to literally sit outside the Commissioner's door until such time as the problem is resolved? This project is fundamental to tourism in this city because when the boom days are over it is the type of flagship project that will be necessary to maintain the input of people into the Dublin city and county. It is fundamentally important that this project be processed urgently without further fudging on the part of the Department or of the Minister and without it creating chaos.
I am adopting a hands-on approach to this matter. I spoke to Commission Wulf-Mathies — it is her responsibility — who said clearly she will deal with the issue of the level of grant assistance when that matter comes before her. I respect her decision in that regard. I had a special meeting with Commissioner Monti, who deals with the internal market, at a Trade Ministers' meeting in Brussels the week before St. Patrick's Day and asked him if he would formally send any complaint he had received. It was my understanding that this complaint had been lodged for some time within the legal section of the Commission. The Commissioner responded by saying he would do so and it is only in recent days that the complaint on technical and procedural matters was sent to the Department of Foreign Affairs.
I am as conscious and concerned as Deputy Andrews about the draw-down time, given that the operational programme will end in 1999. Article 5 of Commission decision C94/1972 of 29 July 1994, which deals with granting assistance from the European Regional Development Fund and the ESF funds under the Operational Programme for Tourism, provides that where money has been committed at national level before the end of the programme period it may still be spent after that period has expired up to 31 December 2000. The RDS was advised in discussions with DG XVI that if its project was to be given approval the deadline could be extended by a decision of the Commission to end December 2001.
In light of the chaos with this application, will the Minister put a time limit on when this project will be finished?
I would like to finish with it now and have it approved for the benefit of the tourism industry and the country. There are, however, procedures within the Commission over which I do not have direct influence and we are responding as quickly as possible in accordance with them. I have no control over the lodging of complaints or the consequences that might follow lodging a planning application. It is impossible for me to give an accurate time in terms of completion, but I would like to see the matter completed as quickly as possible. The developers indicated that it could take up to 43 months from the date of approval to completion as it is a major project, but until the first stone is formally laid it is not possible to put an accurate timescale on its completion.
