Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 20 Oct 1999

Vol. 160 No. 10

National Development Plan: Motion.

Mr. Finneran

I move:

That Seanad Éireann notes with approval the extensive consultation process undertaken by the Government in the preparation of the National Development Plan and endorses the proposed broad priorities of the plan.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak to this motion. The opportunity to contribute to it at this appropriate time will also be welcome by other Senators, as we are in the lead up to what is generally accepted to be a final decision by Government on a national development plan, which I hope will be made soon. The next step is that the plan will be submitted to the European Commission.

We would all agree that in recent years the country has progressed at a rate that would not have been dreamt of back in the 1980s. We are proud of the record of successive Governments in recent years in progressing the economic stability and health of the nation. We are at a stage when we have to adopt a new national plan that will decide policies and programmes for the next seven years. This is the proper way to go about our business. It is important to plan properly for the future to ensure our plans are integrated, accepted at national level, following broad consultation and adopted and endorsed by the European Commission.

Our national plan will no longer be funded to a great extent by the European Union. The level of involvement from Europe over the next seven years may be in the region of less than £4 billion, while the national plan might have an expenditure of closer to £40 billion. We are very much on our own in this regard at this time and it is great we are in a position to move forward to that extent on our own. That is the result of sound economic policies in recent years. The level of support we will get in future from Europe will diminish at a fast rate because it is generally accepted we will be over the 100 per cent equalisation with Europe in terms of standard of living. That will exclude us from the major opportunities we had in the past under Structural and Cohesion Funds.

It is generally accepted in Europe that this country used the system of grant aids and supports extensively and reaped the results from it, but such results have not be achieved solely from such supports, they also derive from the implementation of sound economic policies. Decisions on our finances taken a long time ago, social partnership and major investment in our education system also contributed greatly to the us getting to where we are at today. In debating the new plan, we must also be aware of aspects and programmes that are necessary to carry it on for the next seven years and the following ten years after that. Whatever policies we put in place now will impact on our standard of living for a long number of years.

I am pleased the Minister of State at the Department of Finance is present. I should have welcomed him at the start of my contribution. Apart from his time as Minister of State, as a public representative, he has always had strong views on national policy and programmes. Having heard some of his speeches down the years, I know he would endorse the type of policy that has been put in place . I am glad he is in office now because his contribution at this time will be vital. I have no doubt his strong views on regional development and regional policies will be reflected in this plan.

We talk of regional policies and bottom up development and some people may argue that is window dressing and that such policies will not be implemented, but that argument was put to bed this year when the Government succeeded in dividing the country and holding on to 13 counties designated for Objective One status grant aid. That was a most important decision by the Government and it is one we must reflect in the national development plan. The lack of adequate infrastructure in the counties involved in the west, the Border and the midlands is evident. It is a glaring omission in terms of what is needed at this time. I hope the national plan will include a set programme for the development of the infrastructure in these areas.

One of our national newspapers today carried a headline "Many parts of State could not support hi-tech industries." That reflects what this debate is all about. That shows where the power lines and the broad bands for technology are and that the midlands and the west are excluded from development. If high-technology industries looked at possible locations, they would immediately see that those areas do not have the facilities. It is of vital importance that we distribute the power lines and broad bands for technology and telecommunications throughout the system. The broad bands could be placed along the railroad system, which has been done in other parts of the country.

The east coast is also being considered for the development of power plants. A briquette factory was to be built on a Bord na Móna site on the border of Galway and Roscommon many years ago. I do not see any reason that important industrial site cannot be used for a major power plant, particularly now that gas has been found off the west coast.

If an industrialist sees on a road map that the national primary route stops at Athlone, he will not look any further west. My county town is the only one in the country which is not served by a national primary route but by a national secondary route. IDA Ireland personnel have informed me that this is a negative factor when discussing the town of Roscommon or surrounding towns for industrial locations. We need to look at the development of our national roads. The N5 from Tarmonbarry through County Mayo and north Roscommon is inferior. The same can be said for roads in many other parts of the country. There must be a firm commitment in the plan to develop infrastructure in the west, the Border counties and the midlands.

I read the press release about the national development plan in which economic infrastructure is the first priority. Human resources, employment, the production sector and regional operational programmes are also included. The national development plan should also incorporate cross-Border initiatives. We must show we have an economic interest in supporting the Border regions and cross-Border activities.

I look forward to the publication of a balanced national development plan which includes infrastructure, health, employment opportunities, human resources and education. The debate over the past five years among the bishops, public representatives and the public focused on the regions and small towns. When the western development report was launched last week, small towns were not included as centres of activity. Only one town in my county and two in Galway were included. It fell into the trap of saying everything must be big. If the proper infrastructure, telecommunications network, power lines, roads and rail network are in place, we should be able to bring industry to any part of the country.

I welcome the opportunity to move this motion and I commend it to the House.

Mr. T. Fitzgerald

I second the motion.

Mr. J. Doyle

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on the proposed national development plan. The context in which the latest plan is being framed could scarcely be more different from the last plan which was prepared in 1993. At that time the sluggish state of economic growth and the relatively poor state of the public finances meant the focus was on maximising the amount of money we could obtain from Brussels. As Senator Finneran said, the situation has now radically changed. The Government is preparing a national development plan to spend £33 billion on economic and social development over the next seven years. Only £3.4 billion of that proposed spending will come from EU Structural and Cohesion Funding.

Since the last national development plan was announced, we have enjoyed great prosperity. There has been substantial growth in the economy each year. According to the recent ESRI report, this growth will continue over the next ten years. Our economic growth has surpassed that of major countries in the EU. However, our infrastructure falls behind them. I am pleased to note that in the proposed national development plan the Government intends to address this important issue. The spending on infrastructure will include £4 billion on national roads, £3 billion on social housing, £1.4 billion on capital spending on health and £2 billion on public transport.

Traffic is one of the major problems facing the country, particularly the capital city, and it has been raised in this House on a number of occasions. Sometimes people do not realise that over the past three or four years more than 70,000 new vehicles were registered in Dublin. I understand that this year alone more than 70,000 vehicles have been registered and it is only October. This is a huge increase in motor traffic each year, yet there is no increase in road space. This is causing severe gridlock. Dublin Corporation is taking remedial measures to deal with this problem. Quality bus corridors have been a great success. The clamping of illegally parked cars has resulted in the fact that all motorists parking in the city centre are now complying with the parking regulations. However, these are only short-term measures. Long-term measures must be introduced to deal with the situation.

I am pleased to note the national development plan intends investing in public transport projects in Dublin, including integrating the existing suburban rail lines, the DART Connolly connection, the Arrow and DART services and the proposed Luas. The new rail link from Dublin city to Dublin Airport and a new link to Navan are also being evaluated as is a new rail line east of Loop Line in Dublin city. Some £500 million is proposed for spending on the development of mainline rail services and £130 million on other regional transport development.

I note from the Government's memorandum on the national development plan that the Government may yet reverse last year's decision to put Luas underground in the city centre. I regret that the plan proposes no money to build the underground section of Dublin light rail. The memorandum expressed the concern of the Government about the escalation in the cost of Luas. I am also concerned about the delay in the start of the Luas project, which is important for the city. Perhaps the Minister will indicate whether the Government still proposes to build an underground system in the city centre.

I welcome the new spending category of employment and human resources. This will help to consolidate spending on various education and training measures. Six billion pounds has been allocated to training and active labour market measures and £3 billion to education measures, including programmes for early school leavers.

As our economy grows, the majority of the population is enjoying prosperity. However, there are areas of social exclusion and deprivation, especially in Dublin. A Leas-Chathaoirleach, you will be familiar with many of these areas. The common factor associated with these areas is that young people leave school at 15 years of age. In one area of the city over 50 per cent of the school going population leave at 15 years of age. They receive no training to advance them in life and unfortunately fall into a life of drugs and crime. I salute the proposed spending on training and education, especially the measure for early school leavers. I congratulate the Government on addressing this important social issue.

As I said at the outset, this national development plan is being implemented in changed circumstances. Nevertheless, much of the debate has been focused on the eligibility of this region or that region to gain the maximum Structural Funds. There has been little political debate about planning investment priorities for the next six years and beyond. This can be seen as a reflection of the fact that there is agreement about key investment priorities between IBEC and the ICTU in their submissions to the Department of Finance. They share a broadly similar vision about the importance of the next phase of the national development plan which is the upgrading of our infrastructure and the improvement of our creaking transport system.

The National Development Plan 2000-2006 which will be published shortly will give a clear indication of how the Government intends to build on current progress. It will also reveal whether the Government intends to upgrade public transport services, its public services and physical and social infrastructure, all of which remain under-developed compared with other EU member states.

Mr. Bonner

I also welcome the Minister of State to the House. Three documents in the course of preparation which will have a powerful influence on the way we start the next century are the 2000 budget, the agreement on social partnership 2000-2003 and the subject of this debate, the national plan for 2000-2006. A focus on budget day discussions on tax and social welfare must not be allowed detract attention from the structural areas which must be tackled in the medium to long term. The national plan outlines our key economic and social investment priorities for the seven year period, 2000-6. The Minister for Finance has already stated that this national plan will be worth in excess of £40 billion, money additional to existing Government public spending programmes. The suggested allocation is £6.8 billion to the south and east regions and £13.6 billion to the Border, midlands and west region.

While the economy is performing well, our recent growth has not filtered through to all sections of society or all regions. I am confident this Government will ensure the national development plan will provide that regional inequalities and disparities are fully rectified in the next seven years. The Minister will forgive me for dwelling on this but, unfortunately, the spokespersons on this side of the House are all from the west so we have a full agenda to push.

The next national development plan must address the imbalance in economic growth between the west, north-west and midlands and other parts of the country. It must set out to achieve a balance of development between regions and within them. In order to do this, priority must be given in the allocation of EU and national funding to address the infrastructural deficit and expand the economic sector. If a balance within regions is to be achieved, the national development plan must take into consideration that over 80 per cent of the people live outside towns with a population of 5,000 or less. The development of smaller towns and villages in the rural hinterland is a necessity.

The National Development Plan 2000-2006 is the last real opportunity for the Government and the European Union to redress the infrastructural problems in the west and the Border county regions. We must face the reality that post-2006 and the accession of six new countries as full members of the European Union, there will be an even greater reduction in EU Structural Funds transfers to Ireland. Thirteen counties have been accorded Objective One status for this period because the standard of living there is well below 75 per cent of the EU average. To redress existing regional imbalances, it is important the Government takes advantage of the fact that Objective One regions can entice foreign companies to invest in their localities and receive a favourable level of State aid for establishment and operating costs.

The European Union is facilitating a level playing pitch in the area of State aid policies and common rules will govern Objective One regions, non-Objective One regions and those areas which are economically performing well above the national European Union yardstick for 2000 onwards. However, favourable State aid policies alone will not entice foreign and indigenous investment in Objective One areas, which includes my county of Donegal. The bottom line is that substantial money must be spent ensuring that road, water, sewerage, telecommunications and related transport networks in poorer areas are upgraded to a level which will guarantee that modern factory facilities can be constructed. This must also be put in place in a way which will ensure that products manufactured in these factories will reach their market destinations more quickly.

The national development plan must establish infrastructure networks in deprived areas. This is the case in the north-west which has suffered badly since 1969 as a result of the troubles. While much progress has been made in the past five years to redress many of the social and economic problems in County Donegal and the Border county region, substantial work remains to be done. The troubles caused untold damage to the Border county region in terms of developing its infrastructure, putting in place facilities to promote its tourism industry and helping ensure it was allocated its fair share of investment. INTERREG II, the International Fund for Ireland and the European Peace and Reconciliation Fund have helped establish job creation programmes in private, public and voluntary companies. This process must continue.

Since Deputy McDaid became Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation in July 1997, he has played an active role in promoting regional tourism programmes. He has funded extensive marketing campaigns in Europe and America to promote the different regions. This has helped to increase tourism numbers in the north-west. Between 1994 and 1999, 8 per cent of our national development plan was allocated to the promotion of the tourism industry. This has played a key role in attracting a large number of tourists to Ireland. However, we must ensure we consolidate these figures. The tourism industry is a growing sector which will guarantee long-term employment in small and medium sized companies in many rural and peripheral parts of Ireland. It has been reported that £150 million is being provided for tourism marketing in the development plan. Additional assistance is needed in counties Donegal, Mayo, Leitrim and Roscommon, either through direct grants or the extension of the renewal scheme implemented as a pilot scheme in the upper Shannon region.

Two national plans have been implemented since 1989. The first plan operated between 1989 and 1993 and the second plan between 1994 and 1999. We must learn from these programmes to ensure that we approach the next seven year plan in an innovative and forthright manner. Between 1994 and 1999, the European Social Fund helped to train over 255,000 people to give them the appropriate skills to take up active employment in the workplace. The last national development plan ensured that 40 per cent of all European Union Structural Fund moneys was spent in the areas of training and education. This too has played an important part in helping to reduce the unemployment figure, which now stands at only 6 per cent.

Since the 1960s, consecutive Governments have invested heavily in education programmes. This is an important factor in attracting many companies to locate here. We are becoming a more educated people as each year passes. National Exchequer moneys and the European Social Fund have both equally played a part in ensuring that we are becoming a more educated and better trained workforce at every turn. This is also important in the context of the information technology revolution which is taking place.

We must work to guarantee that Ireland becomes a key centre for future e-commerce programmes as well as a key outlet for telecommunication companies which are bringing new services into this field. Since the 1980s we have had a strong record of enticing many IT and computer software companies to locate in Ireland. We must ensure as the nature of information technology evolves that we win a substantial share of the new business in this area.

While the European Social Fund has played a key role in helping to educate and train our young people, it has also contributed to combating many social problems. The next national development plan must ensure that key problems such as tackling adult literacy, as well as combating poverty in many urban and rural black spots, is given special priority. We know that economic success has not filtered through to all sectors of our society. We do not want to build a two-tier society and special attention must be given to ensure that comprehensive training programmes are put in place for the less well off and deprived communities in rural and urban areas.

One other area I would like to touch on in the context of the national development plan is the need to promote strong rural development programmes within this overall framework. We have seen the success of the Leader I and Leader II programmes in recent years and the Government has also published a White Paper on the Future of Rural Development Policies in Ireland. I am sure if the Minister looks at the Western Development Commission's shopping list he will see most of the items I would refer to if I had more time.

I also wish to refer the Minister to the Donegal Task Force where £800 million is required—

Mr. T. Fitzgerald

That is in the national plan.

Mr. Bonner

—and that figure does not include social housing or education. The Government, the Taoiseach, Deputy Ahern, and the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, are adamant that they intend to redress regional disparities within the structure of the national development plan. This is an imperative if the Objective One areas are to be given an opportunity to become more competitive within the structures of an evolving internal market within the European Union. Regional disparities must be redressed if we are to tackle the ongoing problems of depopulation and the disadvantaged. The sum of £40 billion is a lot of money which, if wisely spent, will guarantee that Ireland becomes stronger economically within the EU and that all regions within Ireland become stronger as this process takes place.

Mrs. Jackman

I welcome this motion and accept that there has been widespread consultation. It is the implementation of the outcome of that consultation that we will be looking for in the future. As a member of the Mid-West Regional Authority I had the opportunity, during the term of the last local authority, to have an input. I am also a member of the Economic and Social Forum whose document on local development issues will be published tomorrow.

My first concern is with the decrease in funding. I was shocked to realise that out of the over all investment of £38 billion for the seven years duration of the plan the Structural Funds will contribute only £3 billion. Perhaps we are used to talking in millions and billions but the reduction in funding is dramatic. This allocation shows that moneys have dropped considerably. I hope the general public is aware of the decline in European funding.

I agree with Senator Doyle that economic infrastructure, human resources and employment in the productive sector will be the three operational programmes. In addition, the two controversial Irish NUTS II regions will have an operational programme for each region.

I was concerned about the regional assemblies when I read the documentation and found words such as "providing and promoting co-ordination and offering advice". These are soft words. I hope regional assemblies would offer more than advice and co-ordination. There is also a reference which says: "while there is legislation in relation to the regional assemblies the Government has made it clear, while it is not specifically stated in the legislation. . . ". I am always wary when I hear the words "not specifically stated". We are told that the Government has made it clear that the regional assemblies will be responsible for the management of the respective regional operational programmes. I hope this will be a new departure rather than the national plan remaining the preserve of central government. This is what everyone has been promised and let us hope it will happen.

I am concerned about regional imbalance. The Mid-West Regional Authority report, Priorities for Post-1999 Structural and Cohesion Fund Investment, states that a 30 per cent increase in employment in the east would surely stretch that region's infrastructural capacity to a considerable degree. We are aware of this problem. I do not oppose the eastern side of Ireland but we must put it in perspective for statistics. Senator Doyle referred to traffic problems and the east has severe traffic congestion. The report goes on to refer to pushing up supply prices with consequent effects on inflation. I could also refer to the housing shortage and the escalation of house prices. The report continues that market mechanisms alone are unlikely to be sufficient to deflect growth from the east to other regions, which would ease the infrastructural problems, labour market constraints and bottlenecks. There should be a rationale for policies to promote more balanced regional growth and divert economic activity to other less congested regions. That is why I am pushing for the mid-west region and outlining the key issues.

I accept that there is a lot of industrial development around the Limerick-Shannon-Ennis core and that it is a key strength of the region. I am sure Senator Margaret Cox will be pushing for her western corridor to counterbalance excessive concentration in the east.

The key weakness of the mid-west region is its peripheral location which is compounded by inadequacies in its roads network. When a survey was carried out on businesses in the region 65 per cent of them stated that the road network was inadequate. I know this problem is being addressed in the plan.

As we have agreed to have another debate on Shannon Airport I will only say that we know it is a key strength for the region, both in tourism terms and in attracting foreign direct investment. I am concerned about the current and future developments of the airport with regard to the open skies agreement. I am also concerned about the growing concentration of air services at Dublin Airport and the resultant implications for Shannon Airport.

My region is mainly rural and agriculture based. Therefore, Common Agricultural Policy and General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade reforms are important for us and this creates a need for further structural adjustment in agriculture. Even in the past few days Dell has tried to attract workers from other parts of the country to join its company. They have to do that in an effort to deal with exacerbated skill shortages, recruitment difficulties and long-term unemployment in my region.

With regard to the environment, it is important to balance the needs of industry and population growth while preserving the region's green image. That green image is a tourism asset.

I will refer quickly to infrastructural needs. I could spend much time speaking about roads but I will not. I will refer instead to the need to provide grants for water and sewerage services in small towns and villages. An investment of £15 million was made in a sewerage scheme in Castletroy, but the annual maintenance cost to the local authority is £500,000. It is one thing to install the infrastructure, but local authorities can be left to find money for servicing. We were quite shocked when we realised the annual cost involved. Water and sewerage charges have been abolished but that has a knock-on effect on local authorities facing bills for infrastructural input.

The Bacon report and the serviced land initiative have been mentioned in the debate. We can discuss having all the houses we like, but in my area the infrastructure does not exist for such development. Planning applications are made to build 300, 400 or 500 houses in areas that cannot be accessed because the N7 and N24 are already blocked. I hope we will emulate the United States where infrastructure is provided before the construction of major housing projects. In America, new houses are built after public lighting, roads and other facilities have been provided, but we seem to operate the other way around. Following the Bacon report, I hope that houses will be provided alongside community facilities, open spaces and playing pitches. One cannot take pride in one's area or have a good quality of life without such facilities, which local authorities are left to promote.

The debate on the housing crisis is centred on houses and prices, but not enough on the quality of life, pride in one's area and the support structures needed for a vibrant community. We can look back at housing provided in the late 1960s, which gave rise to social problems because of high density construction.

I cannot conclude without referring to the Paul partnership in Limerick, which has made an outstanding contribution to tackling the problems of high and long-term unemployment in five disadvantaged parishes in the city. A recent evaluation report on the partnership by Goodbody consultants was very positive. To give one example of the success of the Paul partnership, over the past two and a half years through the local employment service alone, over 1,500 long-term unemployed have been placed in jobs. A further 800 are currently undergoing education and training courses as a preparation for employment. Often these achievements do not hit the national headlines because they are success stories.

Over the past five years, Paul and the other 37 partnerships have assembled highly qualified and very committed staff members who have acquired unique experience in promoting the economic and social betterment of disadvantaged communities. Their contracts will expire on 31 December 1999 and it is imperative and urgent that the Government should provide the necessary funding to enable the partnerships to retain their staff after the end of this year. Financial provision should be made for this and the wide variety of ongoing programmes that must be provided for in the national development plan. The partnerships must be informed as soon as possible so that they can issue new contracts to the staff and continue with their economic and social programmes.

While the process has been slow and difficult, the partnerships are now, slowly but surely, becoming a success. I appeal to the Minister of State not to let the end of the year pass without renewing those staff contracts. In that way the success story can continue. I hope that all the good consultative work that has been done will be rewarded when the National Development Plan is launched and implemented. We look forward the plan's consequences for the future development of the country as a whole.

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Mr. Cullen)

I thank Senators for their warm welcome to the House. I have enjoyed the incisive comments made about the national development plan. Notwithstanding a very obvious western bias, I will try to bring some balance to the debate, although the points that have been made are both valuable and correct. As I said at the outset, the national development plan will be of great significance in shaping Ireland, particularly in the early part of the next millennium. Therefore, it is important that we seize opportunities to have these important debates in the run up to the publication of the plan in the near future.

I support the motion before the House and I am happy to have this opportunity to speak about the National Development Plan, 2000-2006. I am also happy to hear the views of Senators as the process of developing the plan comes to a conclusion. The draft final plan will be submitted to Government in the next few weeks for approval of content, submission to the European Commission and publication. The plan will reflect the consensus view of what the country's economic and social priorities ought to be for the first seven years of the new millennium and the appropriate development policies and public investment proposals to address those development needs.

A comprehensive consultation process has been undertaken by the Government in drawing up the plan. In a process which began in February 1998, written submissions and views on the plan have been requested and received from regional interests, the social partners, sectoral interests, public bodies and Government Departments. Other valuable inputs include the Economic and Social Research Institute's report on the ex-ante evaluation of investment priorities for the period 2000-2006, commissioned by the Department of Finance and the two regional strategy reports for the two new regions – the Border, midland and western region and the southern and eastern region – which were commissioned by the existing regional authorities at the request of the Minister for Finance, in light of the Government's decision to regionalise the country. A submission on the plan was also received from the Western Development Commission.

Meetings to discuss the submissions received and the views of the various interests on the plan, have been held at official and ministerial level during the course of drafting the plan. A seminar on the plan to which all interested parties and bodies were invited was also held in May this year. At the beginning of this month, meetings chaired by the Taoiseach were held with the four social partner pillars to discuss the proposed draft content of the plan, reflecting the Government's determination that it should, as far as possible, take account of the key players in Ireland's social partnership process. The Government is especially anxious to ensure that the plan forms the emerging consensus on the way forward in relation to economic and social policy.

A meeting to discuss the draft content of the plan was also held with representatives of the Irish assembly of regional authorities and a meeting with the new regional assemblies is also planned for later this week. A separate but key further element of the consultation process has been the series of informal meetings held at official level involving all the Departments and the European Commission. In addition to the extensive consultation with regional and social partners, political debate on the plan at national level has also been facilitated. A valuable opportunity in this regard occurred when the Minister for Finance accepted an invitation to address the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Finance and the Public Service on the plan on 1 June last. The Minister noted in particular the views of Deputies and Senators on the committee concerning the priorities and scope of the plan, especially that the plan should be broad in scope, address the country's economic and social infrastructural needs, be a "people plan" and a plan for employment.

The background against which the plan is being prepared is one of remarkable economic success – a fact that has been widely noted in this debate. The economy has grown in real terms by an average of 8.5 per cent per annum between 1994 and 1998. This rate of economic growth has easily been the most dramatic in the EU as a whole. A very substantial increase in the numbers in employment has occurred. As a result, Ireland's unemployment rate has fallen dramatically from 15 per cent in 1993 to 5.8 per cent in early 1999, and is now significantly below the EU average. These unprecedented levels of economic and employment growth have been delivered in a stable non-inflationary environment. That stability is a crucial ingredient in our success. In tandem with this economic performance, the public finances have also been transformed. The budget has been in surplus for the last two years and that performance will be repeated again this year. In the last several years, the national debt has been nearly halved as a proportion of GDP.

One of the consequences of such economic success is that Ireland's case for substantial EU assistance is very much reduced compared to what it was in the past. For example, in terms of GDP per capita– the key indicator – it is estimated that by the end of 1999, Ireland will be over 105 per cent of the EU average, by comparison with the Objective One qualifying criteria of 75 per cent per capita. Nevertheless, the outcome of the Berlin summit, in terms of Ireland's share of Structural and Cohesion Funds in the next round, was more than satisfactory. Ireland's share, including headage payments to farmers, is £3.4 billion. More essentially, however, the Government obtained Objective One status for half the counties in the country and the best possible transition arrangements for the rest of the country. This commendable outcome also highlights the new reality where Ireland must increasingly look to its own resources for the extensive investment in infrastructure and human resources that the country still needs.

As EU assistance declines over the next seven years, the burden of funding the next plan will fall to a much greater extent on the Exchequer. Due to the prudent and sound economic management of recent years we are in a very good position to meet this challenge. We must continue with these sound policies. Therefore, the plan will be implemented in a manner consistent with the maintenance of long-term budgetary sustainability, including the achievement of budget surpluses while economic growth remains strong, and with the ongoing level of demand in the economy. The overall budgetary framework for the plan must also accommodate steps to address the major long-term costs associated with the progressive aging of the population.

The Government approved last July the policy priorities and general financial framework for the national development plan. In approving the policy priorities and general financial framework, the Government accepted the prevailing view that the national development plan would be based on the assessment of the development needs of the country and would put in place the investment programmes required to meet those needs. The plan will, therefore, tackle national and regional priorities through a major multi-annual investment programme. The following key objectives will underpin the strategy for the plan: achieving maximum sustainable national economic growth, balanced regional development and the promotion of social inclusion.

While the final decision on the overall financial parameters for the plan will be a matter for Government in the next few weeks, the plan will involve substantial public investment over the period 2000-6 of an order in excess, on a comparable basis, of that proposed in the ESRI and two regional authority studies. Taking on board the concerns of the ESRI evaluation and the consensus on this issue, it is likely to be broader in scope than recent national development plans have been traditionally and to include investment in social infrastructure such as housing and health capital. The sectoral investments in the plan will be broken down by region in line with the designation of Ireland into two regions, the southern and eastern region and the Border, midlands and west region, for Structural Fund purposes.

The plan will be implemented through six operational programmes, three inter-regional and two regional programmes which will focus on the key policy priorities of the plan. The operational programmes are the three inter-regional programmes of economic and social infrastructure, employment and human resources development, the productive sector, a multi-sectoral operational programme for each of the regions, the Border, midlands and western region and the southern and eastern region and a separate operational programme for the PEACE programme which operates in the Border counties and Northern Ireland. This will include cross-Border economic and social co-operation measures. This deals with the point raised by Senator Finneran and others.

Much progress has been made in developing our physical infrastructure under the current plan. Nonetheless, it is clear that the recent rate of economic growth is placing enormous pressure on our infrastructure, particularly in Dublin and other urban centres. This can be seen most starkly in the areas of transport and environmental infrastructure, such as public water supply/treatment and waste management facilities, to support industry and services and in social infrastructure, such as affordable housing. As well as relieving congestion in Dublin and the larger urban centres, the provision of good quality infrastructure in the Border, midlands and western region will also have to be a priority for the plan. Targeted investment in energy and communications, particularly in less developed and more remote regions, will also be necessary to promote balanced regional development. Substantial investment in economic and social infrastructure will have to be a priority if the economy is to achieve its full potential over the medium term and if we are to secure development which is sustainable.

The investment in human resources in training and education in the current plan has paid major dividends in terms of the ability of the labour force to avail of the employment opportunities generated. Reductions in total unemployment and in long-term unemployment have been significant in recent years. Notwithstanding the advances made, the next plan must also have a strong focus on the continuing development of our human resources with a stronger focus on the long-term unemployed and the socially excluded. In the context of a tightening labour market, the plan will also address emerging skills shortages.

Key elements of the employment and human resources strategy will be lifelong learning measures in education and training and measures designed to facilitate access to the labour market for women, people with disabilities and disadvantaged groups. The plan will also include a number of measures to counter social exclusion at national and regional levels. Opening up education, training and employment opportunities to all sectors of society is the best way to counter poverty and social exclusion. It is recognised, however, that this is not sufficient to alleviate urban and rural poverty blackspots and the plan will, therefore, contain targeted interventions to deal with these specific problems.

In the context of the improved economic climate the private sector will be expected to contribute more to the productive sector's development needs. Public investment in the productive sector in the plan will, therefore, be more targeted with greater emphasis on assistance for foreign direct investment and indigenous industry on promoting balanced regional development and enhancing competitiveness. The single biggest investment in this area is likely to be in research and technological development and innovation. There will also be substantial investment targeted at SMES. There will continue to be investment within the sector on promoting agricultural development in areas such as the control of farm pollution, young entrants to farming, animal welfare and hygiene, etc., and in sectors which have the potential to make a significant contribution to balance regional development and rural development such as fisheries, forestry and tourism.

The private sector will have an important contribution to make, especially in the areas of the productive sector and infrastructural investment. Public private partnerships – PPPs – will be an especially important element in the next plan in addressing infrastructural investment needs generally. In looking at the scope for PPP projects, the key considerations will be value for money for the Exchequer over the lifetime of the projects and an assessment of how the PPP process can deliver infrastructure projects in a comparatively quick and cost effective way.

The commitment to more balanced regional development is a fundamental objective of the plan and I welcome Senators' comments in that regard. As a former Senator and as a Deputy, I fully agree with that approach. Regional concentration in the plan is of the utmost importance. The achievement of balanced regional development will be pursued in the plan through specific regional expenditure allocations in the inter-regional and regional operational programmes and the integrated and targeted application of sectoral policies, making use in particular of the discretion to vary State aid rates in favour of lagging behind regions under State aids which regionalisation permits. This approach must, however, also recognise that there will be high quality large employment enterprises which will always wish to locate in, or close to, the major urban centres. It will be vitally important that Ireland continues to attract such enterprises, not least for the spin-off opportunities that they present to home grown businesses. It is envisaged that the plan will also address the need for the development of a separate spatial development strategy to set a long-term national framework for greater co-ordination in relation to physical and economic planning.

The plan will contain for the first time two specific regional operational programmes which will be managed by the newly established regional assemblies. The assemblies will provide the secretariat and will chair the monitoring committees for these programmes and will carry out managing functions currently exercised exclusively by Departments. The regional OPs will in structure, content and the proportion of resources to be allocated reflect substantially the views put forward in the Fitzpatrick regional strategy reports. There will be measures under the sub-programmes of regional infrastructure, social inclusion and productive investment to complement the investment in the inter-regional programmes.

I believe the plan will play a vital role in the ongoing development and transformation of our society over the next seven years. I am glad to be present for the debate and I am pleased to endorse the motion before the House.

Mr. Costello

I am pleased the Minster of State has outlined to the House the up-to-date position on the national development plan. There appears to be a substantial departure from the draft document presented to the Cabinet last July where approximately £33.5 billion was allocated for spending. The Minister of State now appears to concur with the spending projections of the ESRI and the two regional authority studies on investment when he says that the final decision on the overall parameters of the plan will be a matter for the Government in the next few weeks but that it will involve substantial public investment over the period 2000-6, in excess, on a comparable basis, of that proposed by the ESRI. All three studies proposed spending of £50 billion. On what basis is the gap between this and the original draft submitted to the Cabinet to be bridged?

I was interested to note the Minister of State's indication that the newly established regional assemblies will have some responsibility for specific regional operational programmes. This appears to be a new departure in terms of how the plan will be managed. How will the overall plan be managed in a five year context? What Department will be involved or will a separate structure be established? I am pleased to note there will be some regional input in the operation of the programme.

To date a very inadequate vision of the possible parameters of the plan has been presented to the media. A breakdown of what was originally presented to the Cabinet a couple of months ago reveals that not much additional spending has been proposed to the current annual capital programme, to which approximately £4 billion has been allocated. The sum of £33.5 billion only represents £4.8 billion on an annual basis. If the funding from the EU, amounting to £3.4 billion, and the public-private element, which amounts to £1.65 billion, is subtracted, £28 billion remains, which is what is being spent this year on the capital programme if the annualised figure of £4 billion is multiplied by the seven years of the plan. This means that no increase in spending has been envisaged and it does not take account of this year's anticipated budget surplus of £2 billion.

The country has been growing at an annual rate of 8.5 per cent for the five years from 1994-99. If growth were to continue at this level the economy would expand by 60 per cent in terms of GDP over the next seven years. In view of this we need to consider doubling spending on the capital programme in the latter years. It makes no sense to allocate £4 billion on an annual basis to a national plan which must get the country into a sufficient state of readiness for the expansion that will take place in the economy if anything like the levels of growth of the previous seven years are maintained. Furthermore, it must be borne in mind that the £4 billion being spent this year represents a 25 per cent increase on last year, which in turn was a 25 per cent increase on what was spent in the previous year. It is clear, therefore, in which the direction the State is going. If we maintain these parameters in the national plan they will be exceeded by the ongoing expansion of the economy without allocating extra funding to the plan.

The plan represents a very limited vision of how the Government sees the country developing in the coming years. In this respect, Senators have already referred to infrastructural problems. There is no primary road in County Roscommon and no primary road containing unbroken dual carriageway links any city in the country with Dublin, whether it be Cork, Limerick, Waterford, Sligo, Galway or Belfast. Indeed, there is no decent road in the country. There are by-passes here and there, wide stretches and the occasional dual carriageway which is followed by single lane traffic. In travelling on the road from Dublin to Kinnegad one takes the Chaplelizod by-pass to beyond Maynooth at which point there is a five kilometre stretch of road where overtaking is prohibited. One then continues along a narrow road until Kinnegad where the roads divide between Athlone and Galway on the one hand, and Sligo and County Mayo on the other. Surely, at the very least, a dual carriageway as far as Kinnegad is needed.

There are no spending estimates on the mainline railways referred to in the Minister of State's speech. The original projection anticipated expenditure of £500 million, which is not good enough given the condition of the Sligo railway line or the line to Limerick, Tralee or County Mayo. If this figure is maintained it will not be developed to a decent standard.

Dublin faces traffic gridlock, yet there are no proposals on the Luas light rail project. There is a need to address our infrastructural needs in a much more radical fashion. While I do not begrudge Objective One status to the west, we must address the blackspots in our urban communities at the same time. They require Exchequer funding to match the extra money from the EU to help the west. A huge integrated development programme is required to eliminate them.

I would like to see much more detail on the plan. What amount of money does the Government propose to spend? What structures will be in place for the overall development and the regional assemblies? I understood the programme had to be submitted to Brussels by the middle of this month. What is the present position? Will it be submitted before Christmas or the New Year? When the plan is ready I am sure the Minister of State will return to the House and provide us with a full breakdown.

Ms Cox

Listening to what Senator Costello said, this is one of the reasons we should not pay attention to leaked documents as happened during the summer because it could lead one to believing that things are different from reality. The Minister of State said that the final decision will be a matter for Government within the next few weeks and it will be published thereafter. This will involve substantial public investment during the period 2000-6 in excess of that proposed in the ESRI and the two regional authority studies. This is a firm indication that we are talking about a substantial increase in spending, not just an equivalent the amount spent at present. To describe the national plan as being of limited vision is an insult to all who participated in the consultation process. The fact that Senators could stand up here and put their views, regardless of what part of the country they come from, is indicative of the enormous amount of work done by organisations throughout the country in ensuring their particular objectives were taken on board. I have no doubt the national plan will achieve these objectives.

On the issue of dual carriageways and improved roads – Senator Costello knows this – I can measure the improvement in the Galway to Dublin road, and I am not old. It is important to have continued improvement but dual carriageways are not needed everywhere; they can often be a waste of money. What we need are improved roads with proper hard shoulders and proper surfaces. Proper investment in the roads structure to ensure safe roads is what is needed.

The national plan is the blueprint for the way forward; it is our mission statement on where we want to go from now until 2006. I intend to make my contribution, with no apology, based on geographical bias. I intend dropping a few hints to the Minister of State which he might take on board in the lead up to this year's budget. The budget is one of the important implementation processes of the overall national plan. If we do not take measures in the budget to fulfil the recommendations in the national plan, we are not going any further.

It worries me when I read the kind of flowery language which I accept must be used in the plan at this stage. However, we must set real targets. This was the recommendation of a number of reports considered by the Government. If we do not have targets that are measurable, realistic and achievable, we are wasting our time. If a target cannot be measured, then it is not a target. It is vitally important to set out the number of roads to be upgraded, when the work will be carried out, the amount of money and the areas in which it will be spent and to identify the infrastructure that will be put in place. This will be an important part of the blueprint for the future.

The Minister of State said that he sees tonight's discussion as constructive dialogue and I hope that is the message he will take away from it. I welcome the continued commitment to achieving balance throughout the country and the Minister's recognition that balance is vitally important. There has been an imbalance, particularly between the west and the rest of the country, and this includes the area from Donegal to Kerry. It is important to redress this imbalance. One of the recommendations of the Western Development Commission report is that positive incentives should be set for development outside the major cities. There are problems of congestion, the deterioration in the quality of life and people not being able to afford houses in their home towns or cities, such as Galway. People living outside our major cities must have a certain quality of life and to achieve this there must be development throughout the country. I say this because I do not wish to see a slowing down of development in Galway city, which I regard as the capital of the west, and it is important that this is maintained at all times.

The quality of the roads network has already been mentioned. I do not wish to go into detail on this issue, except to remind Members that this is vitally important. While I do not agree that we need dual carriageways everywhere, we do need safe roads, particularly the Headford to Galway, Spiddal to Galway, Galway to Ballaghaderreen, Roscommon to Ballaghaderreen, etc., secondary roads. This should not just apply to the Dublin-Galway and Dublin-Limerick routes, but to the roads in between because many people travel on these roads daily going to and from work. There should be prioritised measurable targets, targets that can be achieved and that are realistic.

I want to refer to air services. Many people who live on this side of the country believe that only one, two or three airports are needed in the city. I disagree with this view because regional air services are vitally important to the continued development and quality of life of the people throughout the regions. I make no apology for saying this. I look forward to investment in Galway regional airport. I hope this will be a new airport based at a different location and that it will be up and running within the next five years.

A lot of emphasis has been placed on the quality of life. We have passed the stage of worrying about bread and butter. This can be seen from the attention being paid to environmental issues. People are now more focused on the quality of life, the quality of the environment and what they are passing on to their children. It is important that this is recognised and that proper infrastructure in terms of waste management and water treatment is put in place. Adequate funding should be made available for the continued development of these services.

I am disappointed that child care has not been mentioned. Anyone who ignores the fact that the lack of child care facilities is one of the impediments to people coming back into the labour market would be foolish. Perhaps this document was written by a man whose wife looks after the children. This is a horribly sexist remark and I apologise for it, but I think that sometimes there is a bias there and people do not realise that it is difficult to find proper child care facilities outside the cities. I would like to see this as a target in any national plan as a way forward in terms of looking at human resource problems. If we do not follow through on the Taoiseach's statement during the summer that the Government intends making a substantial move in that direction, we might as well go home.

In relation to Galway, a new report has been published on land use and the transportation study which needs an investment of £170 million over the next five years for the development of infrastructure in Galway city. I would like the Minister to take that matter on board. In relation to macro implementation at budget level, I ask that we be visionary in our approach to this year's and next year's budget. We should focus on enterprises such as computerisation, telecommunications and ISDN lines. In five years' time why not have ISDN lines available at an affordable price to every house in the country? Why not remove VAT on personal computers for home use? Why not give women additional PAYE incentives to return to work?

Mr. Finneran

I am very impressed by the contributions of Members and particularly by the contribution of the Minister of State. It was a very broad outline and there was no aspect of national concern which was not addressed here tonight. I hope that the document agreed by Cabinet and eventually agreed by Europe will take a broad approach and that operational programmes will be broad in their base and in their opportunity. This is the kernel of the matter. Other than deciding on infrastructure, nothing is written in stone as far as I am concerned when we talk about a national development plan. We must always adapt to circumstances and that has been the hallmark of successive Governments in recent times. While problems were developing in other EU member states, successive Governments adapted rapidly. We are the envy of other nations. As a member of the Joint Committee on Finance and the Public Service I have been in Brussels and have spoken to members of similar committees in other states and they are extremely impressed by the development of our country over the past number of years. They point to Ireland as having an approach which should be adopted by other nations.

Investment in education has been the cornerstone of our progression. Our economic policies are one thing, but our investment in education has played a major part in our development and we must not rest on our laurels in this regard. Information technology changes by the day. A son of mine is in that business and tells me that the changes that take place over periods of months are phenomenal and at all times those involved have to be geared to new situations and to moving forward. Therefore, there must be investment in education for young people, retraining and in research and development, which is of major importance.

I am very pleased by the level of debate and that we had the opportunity to have this debate prior to the publication of the national development plan. The House should consider a further debate on the plan, perhaps lasting a full day, when it is available as it is important that everybody has an input. When the final document is available people may hone in on matters and provide help and advice for the Government.

I thank those involved in the debate and commend the motion to the House. I thank the Minister of State for attending and for giving a broad based and comprehensive speech in advance of the Government decision.

Question put and agreed to.

Sitting suspended at 7.25 p.m. and resumed at 8 p.m.