We have two Supplementary Estimates to consider and I propose to allocate an hour for each. Supplementary Estimates are purely for consideration and once we have completed our consideration, we will report to the Dáil accordingly. I welcome the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, Deputy Brennan, and his officials who are here to speak on the Supplementary Estimate in respect of Vote 35 — Arts, Sport and Tourism. Tá fáilte rompu.
Vote 35 — Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism (Supplementary).
I thank the Chairman and members of the committee. This is my first opportunity to meet the committee since it was formed and I wish everyone well. I look forward to working with the committee in a constructive fashion as it must cover a major segment of State and private activity where there is much to discuss. I look forward to an open and hard-working relationship between the Department and the committee. I am joined by the Secretary General of my Department, Mr. Con Haugh; the assistant secretary with responsibility for tourism, Mr. Paul Bates; the assistant secretary with responsibility for arts and culture, Mr. Niall Ó Donnchú; and the finance officer, Mr. Joe Timbs.
The Supplementary Estimate can be summarised as follows. An additional allocation of €1.15 million is provided for subhead B1 to finance the operations of Fáilte Ireland and an additional €550,000 for subhead D3 under which State support is provided for the Irish Museum of Modern Art, the Chester Beatty Library, the National Concert Hall and the Crawford Gallery. An additional €270,000 is provided for subhead D4 under which State support is provided for various cultural projects and an additional €3 million for subhead D7, through which funding for the Arts Council is provided. An additional €2.5 million is provided for subhead D10 under which funding is provided the Irish Film Board.
In one way the Supplementary Estimate is technical, to the extent that the additional funding is being provided from savings that will arise this year in my Department's Vote. Consequently, no additional Exchequer funding is being sought to give effect to the proposed additional allocations. Before explaining the additional allocations, I wish to refer briefly to where the savings have arisen, as I am required to do, under the procedures applying to Supplementary Estimates.
The relevant savings arise in a number of subheads in the Department's Vote for 2007, specifically subheads B5, D5, D6 and D9, and have been set out in the Supplementary Estimate. Subhead B5 channels funding for Fáilte Ireland's product development programme. Under subhead D5 funding is provided for cultural infrastructural projects through the Department's ACCESS programme. Payments under these programmes are demand driven, in that funds are only released on foot of claims based on matured liabilities incurred by project promoters, in these cases within tourism and arts infrastructural programmes. It is because the programmes are demand led that we often have variations in funding.
It is a fundamental requirement of Government accounting to ensure grant payments are made only where eligible grant expenditure is clearly demonstrated. At the end of each year an estimate is made of the likely draw-down demands by project promoters for the following year and this forms the basis of the Estimate subhead for that year. As committee members know, delays in the development of capital projects can occur for a variety of reasons. It is these delays that often give rise to savings. While substantial progress is being made in the delivery of capital facilities falling within the Department's Vote, the profile of the financial support may often vary. I think the committee will accept that when such delays are incurred at individual project level, the ability of the Department to make grant payments is often in the hands of project promoters. The Department is at the mercy of those who provide the relevant project documentation. In addition, the capital profile set out to the Department needs to be met.
Subhead D6 funds Culture Ireland which is charged with advancing Irish arts abroad and creating new opportunities for Irish cultural practitioners, both of which can lead to a deeper understanding of Irish culture among cultures and communities in other countries. The small savings which arise under the subhead can mainly be attributed to the claiming of lower grant rates by grantees and the postponement of a number of events.
Subhead D9 provides for the meeting of the general expenses of the National Library of Ireland. Savings arise in this instance as a result of unavoidable delays in progressing a number of acquisitions which were being pursued.
I will give the select committee details of the proposed reallocation of the savings mentioned. The additional allocation to Fáilte Ireland of €1.15 million is required to meet the cost of the selective voluntary early retirement scheme agreed by the Department of Finance earlier this year in the context of skill sets required by Fáilte Ireland when rolling out the tourism sector of the new national development plan. The early retirement scheme will be cost-neutral over time because a limited number of the staff who are leaving will be replaced. The initial cost of the scheme will be €1.15 million. When the scheme was negotiated, it was agreed that Fáilte Ireland would find savings in a number of areas this year to meet some of the extra cost and that the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism would meet the balance of the cost from savings elsewhere in the Vote. The balance of the cost of the scheme is €1.15 million. The approval of the committee is required to provide this additional funding within subhead B1, to cover the remaining cost of the scheme.
It is proposed to provide an additional €550,000 under subhead D3, which relates to State support for the Irish Museum of Modern Art, the Chester Beatty Library, the National Concert Hall and the Crawford Gallery. Some €450,000 is being provided for the Irish Museum of Modern Art to help it to meet the additional costs it incurred when providing banqueting facilities for charities at the Royal Hospital, Kilmainham and organising a limited number of official functions. The museum also needs additional moneys to cover the cost of exhibition insurance which fell to it when the ceiling on the State's indemnity was reached. It also requires funding to address the start-up costs associated with the Dublin exhibition project. In addition, further funds are required by the museum for the acquisition of artworks and the purchase of capital equipment for its storage facility. Some €100,000 is being given to the National Concert Hall to help it to meet the costs associated with marketing its summer programme and recording the summer proms. Moneys are also needed to fund the stakeholder consultation which is required under the public private partnership process on the redevelopment plan for the National Concert Hall.
Subhead D4 provides an additional €270,000 for a number of smaller cultural institutions, certain international commitments and miscellaneous projects of a cultural nature. It is proposed to provide €200,000 for the Foynes Flying Boat Museum in County Limerick to cover matured liabilities associated with phase 2 of the museum's development plan. Some €50,000 is to be made available to the Hunt Museum in Limerick to assist it with the costs associated with the restoration of the museum's premises. Some €20,000 is to be given to the James Joyce Centre in Dublin to cover capital works in the building which arise from a recent structural survey of the premises.
It is proposed to reallocate €3 million of savings to subhead D7 which funds the Arts Council. Some €2 million will be used by the council to fund its touring programme which brings productions to regional centres and audiences outside Dublin and its regularly funded organisations. The other €1 million will be spent on funding a pilot community music scheme and helping arts centres in the regions to upgrade their facilities in order that they can take part in the council's touring initiative.
It is proposed to allocate €2.5 million to the Irish Film Board under subhead D10. The board is charged with promoting the creative and commercial elements of Irish film-making and film culture to domestic and international audiences. It does so through the provision of development and production loans to the independent film and television production sector. The Irish Film Board proposes to utilise the additional €2.5 million to attract and support the production of new film and TV drama projects. The aim is to attract high quality international film projects and inward investment through the Irish Film Board.
Thank you, Chairman, for this opportunity to bring my Supplementary Estimate before you and your committee. I look forward to hearing questions and comments from you and your members.
I thank the Minister for his presentation. I reciprocate his wish that he and the committee will have a productive relationship. I compliment the departmental staff who prepared the Minister's presentation. It is clearer than many presentations of Estimates I have seen.
My first question refers to savings, which are often as instructive as spending. Savings are not always a good thing as often they mean an agency's programme is not being fulfilled in the way originally intended. The Fáilte Ireland saving is the most significant, amounting to almost half its budget for tourism product development. The Minister referred to this as being demand led and said he was in the hands of project promoters. Nevertheless, this budget is very much out of line. A programme was, presumably, prepared at the beginning of the year with clear proposals for which money was requested. What exactly is product development and what problem arose which caused this money not to be drawn down in the year in which it was provided? Does the problem lie with Fáilte Ireland or with the people with which Fáilte Ireland deals? Can anything be done to ensure that money voted by the Dáil for a particular area where a need has been identified is actually spent?
There are also savings in spending on cultural infrastructure. The amount is not very significant and I can understand that such projects tend to overrun. Nevertheless, it pains me to see capital allocation not spent.
Subhead D6, which deals with Culture Ireland, shows a small saving of one third of a million euro. This work is important because it promotes Ireland abroad but also allows artists to gain exposure to new influences abroad. It is very unusual for money provided for such a scheme not to be drawn down. Is there a lack of information about the scheme or did applications not qualify for funding? What is the reason for the lack of demand? There must be thousands of artists who would be delighted to avail of this scheme if more information about it was available. Bigger organisations, such as theatre festivals, are aware of the scheme but individual musicians, for example, might not be.
Subhead D9, on the National Library, shows a saving of €500,000 for acquisitions. I presume the National Library will not lose this funding but that it will be carried forward.
I turn now to the beneficiaries of the saving and to where the money was reallocated. I am not clear whether the purpose of the reallocation of funds is to meet overspending by the various agencies and projects or to facilitate additional works. It is important to be able to identify this when we review the year's Estimate. It is clear from the Minister's presentation, for example, that the funding to Fáilte Ireland is for a voluntary retirement scheme which he has said will be self-financing. In referring to this, however, he implies that different skill sets are required as a result of the new national development plan. With a voluntary retirement scheme, staff will be let go, but will new staff be recruited with new skill sets? If new staff must be recruited, how will the scheme be self-financing?
One cannot quibble with the fact that the Irish Museum of Modern Art is being provided with extra moneys to meet unforeseen costs and acquisitions. With regard to the National Concert Hall, while €100,000 is not a major amount, there was a clear overspend on works, in advertising the summer programme for example. This happens every year and should be foreseen and budgeted for, but perhaps I am wrong in that perception.
Subhead D7 provides funding for the Arts Council. I welcome the additional €3 million, but again I am not sure whether there was an overspend by the council or whether it is additional funding. Perhaps the council was informed it would receive these moneys. I welcome their provision because they are going, almost exclusively, to the touring initiative. This is important to ensure value for money is received for the capital investment made under the ACCESS programme. If our capital investment is to repay us and achieve what it set out to do, namely, promote the arts in the regions, it is essential the touring initiative is mainstreamed and expanded. Will the Minister clarify this for me?
Subhead D10 concerns funding for the Irish Film Board, a matter we have discussed before. I do not begrudge the board the moneys provided for it because there have been good returns on moneys spent in the past. However, there are major problems in the industry. Marketing is all very well where there is a product to market, but there are structural problems with the product that marketing will not overcome. I think, for example, of the office set up in Los Angeles. I do not know how much it costs us. Perhaps the Minister can give us some indication of the cost. It has not yielded much so far, although I do not suggest that is the fault of those involved in it. The problems in the industry here which were discussed recently at Question Time in the Dáil must be tackled if the moneys we are putting into marketing are to yield anything. Otherwise, we will be throwing good money after bad. One of the problems concerns tax breaks, but there are others in the industry, on which the Department must show leadership if they are to be overcome. Perhaps the Minister will comment on this.
All the savings made have been redirected to the arts area, which is good for those involved in that sector. On Question Time last week the Minister revealed that there was a significant overdraft deficit at the National Aquatic Centre. I see no mention of the deficit in the Estimate and wonder how it will be tackled. Will it be met in the 2008 Estimate? What funding will be made available to meet this substantial deficit?
I would like to ask about the draw-down of funds in the sports sector. I understand the money provided for the redevelopment of Lansdowne Road is the largest single amount in the Department's budget. I think the sum in question is €56 million, which is a lot of money. Will all of it be drawn down this year? Has it been drawn down?
When I visited the Department's website today, I read that the Minister was pleased to present the output statement for his Department to the select committee. Was the statement sent to the members of the committee? Did this happen in another life? I do not know whether anybody else received it, but I certainly never got it. If we did, was it discussed by the committee earlier in the year?
Will we receive another such document in 2008?
When will it come before us?
It will be considered during the Estimates process.
I thank the Minister for that clarification. I was worried that I should have read the document in advance of this meeting.
I welcome the Minister and hope we will all make fruitful contributions to the debate. A feature of the most productive committees is the willingness of their members to support each other. I thank the Minister for his presentation. I join Deputy Mitchell in noting the total absence from these revised Estimates of anything to do with sport. Perhaps the sports authorities are highly efficient at managing their moneys. Is there some other reason for the Minister's failure to refer to the sports area?
I would like to ask a few specific questions about the expenditure of the moneys available. I welcome the allocation of additional funds to the Irish Museum of Modern Art, which is in my constituency. I cannot quibble with the rather nice decision to give the museum more money. The Minister has mentioned that the Royal Hospital is being used to host charity banquets and official functions, which are presumably State-sponsored or State-related in some way. What are the criteria for the holding of charity events at the venue? Which charities can apply to host their functions there? On what basis are the charities which may avail of this fabulous facility chosen?
One of the documents submitted to the committee by the Minister stated additional artwork had been purchased by the Irish Museum of Modern Art. While I welcome such purchases, I ask the Minister to give the committee more details. I do not expect him to be able to tell the committee what the artwork is. Are most of the artists in question Irish, or are they from other countries? What is the thrust of it? I will understand if he does not have the information to hand. I wonder what investment is being made by the Irish Museum of Modern Art.
I would like to speak about the provision of additional funds for the National Concert Hall. I agree with Deputy Mitchell that the Department should be able to anticipate the need to fund summer projects. The Minister said extra moneys had to be provided to pay for consultation with stakeholders. What is that about? What are the implications of that consultation? How much money is needed to drive that process?
As someone with remote connections with County Limerick, I am pleased that it will benefit from the allocation of money to the Foynes Flying Boat Museum and the Hunt Museum. I hope the James Joyce Centre does not have much work to do because the €20,000 being given to it will not go far. Perhaps it needs a new kitchen. It does not sound like a lot of money.
On a more serious note, I would like to comment on the recurring difficulties faced by the Arts Council. The council which is responsible for many cultural bodies receives a huge number of grant applications each year. It is obvious that it is unable to meet the financial demands of many of the smaller organisations which seek assistance. The case for giving the council substantially greater funding has to be made again. I have raised with the Minister on many occasions the need for a three-year Arts Council plan. I appreciate his comments about budgetary requirements, etc., in that regard. It is worth reiterating that the current arrangements make it difficult for the council.
The issue of the payment of VAT by foreign artists is probably raised with the Minister every year. This anomaly creates great difficulties for those affected. It can be a huge drag on the resources and finances of foreign artists. The Minister addressed this issue last year, but it has not yet been resolved. Perhaps someone would look at that again and see if it could be reconsidered.
Money has been provided for the new community music scheme. To whom is this funding available and how can it be accessed? Anything we can do to promote music as a community project is to be welcomed.
My thoughts on the Irish Film Board have been expressed in parliamentary questions. Many other countries are now considering measures equivalent to our section 481. The film industry has the potential to be very important to the economy and tourism. A good film is a showcase for Ireland and provides a mechanism for advertising the country. It is important that we continue to fund film promotion adequately. We have not been doing particularly well. We have been, perhaps, lucky. We need to consider further investment and improving the facilities of the studios, such as Ardmore, which are currently available.
I welcome the Minister and his officials and thank them for this report. Deputies Mitchell and Upton have asked many of the questions on my list.
I welcome the fact that the money allocated has been spent. Too often we hear of funding falling by the wayside because projects which have been approved do not proceed within the given year. I congratulate the Minister and his officials on the fact that they have found homes for this money. Arts and culture play an increasingly important role in Irish society. I welcome the role played by the Arts Council. It is marvellous to have projects which can take up available funding, sometimes at very short notice.
Can the Minister give an overview of the projects which have not got off the ground or are delayed? Will money be provided in the 2008 budget to allow those projects to proceed as originally planned? The fact that no money is available for sport indicates that all projects have proceeded. I welcome this. Hundreds of sporting organisations throughout the country have wonderful projects and I welcome the fact that they have exhausted the funding. Funding for sports is an important issue. Not only does it allow clubs to develop properly it also improves the health of the young people involved. This is important in tackling health problems such as obesity.
Tourism needs as much funding as possible. It is a major revenue earner for the country and an important employer. This committee should do everything it can to promote tourism within the country and overseas.
Deputy Mitchell raised the question of product development. The initial funding provided to Fáilte Ireland in 2007 targeted infrastructure provision such as walking and cycling routes, beach management works and access to angling waters. Funding of €11 million for expenditure on 127 projects has been announced to date. It is estimated that funding required in 2007 in respect of grants approved to date will be of the order of €8 million. The grant-in-aid for tourism product development goes to develop a whole range of projects under Fáilte Ireland to improve the tourism infrastructure of the country. This Supplementary Estimate comes to approximately €7 million, which was identified in savings. We have appeared before the committee to reallocate those savings. One always has the option of returning such savings to the Department of Finance, but nobody has yet been photographed doing that. With regard to the reallocation of the €7 million, we considered where we needed to offer assistance, for example, to the early retirement scheme and some of our cultural institutions. I have gone through the choices we made, which we think are sensible.
Deputy Olivia Mitchell raised the fact that sometimes one gets a lower figure or a saving. This has two causes. Some of our schemes are demand led and if people do not apply for the funding we return a smaller figure than intended. If, for example, we provide for X applications and fewer than X applications are made, demand is down. Perhaps we should call it effective demand. There is very significant demand, but effective demand is demand that meets the criteria.
The second reason concerns capital expenditure generally. Anybody involved in capital expenditure will know that one starts with a particular profile of capital expenditure, but a host of issues can then emerge which will return the capital expenditure in a different profile. Therefore, it does not fit as neatly as one expects. These are really fluctuations in our spending rather than particular savings, because we are able to reallocate them to other areas.
A question was asked about Culture Ireland. Subhead D6 provides for the programme budget and expenses of Culture Ireland, which is a fairly new national agency for the promotion of Irish arts worldwide. We are considering establishing Culture Ireland on a statutory basis, but it is too early to decide the level of demand. The CEO was appointed in May 2007 and he is aware of the significant duties of the organisation. Over 700 institutions received grants in 2007. We increased the Culture Ireland budget by 50% in 2007 over 2006 in order to help it get up and running and I expect that it will be an important institution in the future.
On the general expenses of the National Library, capital savings of €500,000 arose in 2007. These were as a result of unavoidable delays in progressing a number of acquisitions, which is a feature of our cultural institutions. While the library intends to make acquisitions of artistic works, quite often these acquisitions do not proceed or the library makes other purchases. I am keen that the library maintains this freedom so we can get the best possible value for the moneys available.
Deputy Mitchell asked about the Irish Film Board. We have one person based in Los Angeles, which was an initiative taken by my predecessor to see if we could drum up interest. It is still early days in that regard. This person has made good contacts and hopefully we will be able to turn leads from his network of contacts into real business. It is an initiative on which I would like to build, because Los Angeles is where the action is. The more presence we have in places like Hollywood, the more likely we are to attract major films.
I was asked about the Irish Museum of Modern Art and Deputy Upton asked about the criteria for charities. The Minister has to be sure that the organisation hosting the function in question is a charity before he can sign off on the Department's picking up of the tab, in effect, for the use of the Royal Hospital.
Deputy Upton asked about the purchases made by the Irish Museum of Modern Art. I understand the museum has purchased works by artists like James Coleman, Barry Flanagan, Patrick Scott, Louis le Brocquy, Anne Madden and Hughie O'Donoghue, most of whom are Irish. I can give the Deputy a more comprehensive list if she wishes. It is important to ensure that the museum has the artistic freedom to build up its collections.
Deputy Mitchell asked about Fáilte Ireland. It is intended that 25 staff will leave Fáilte Ireland, to be replaced by eight new staff who will have product development, project assessment and financial skills. The new staff will deal with the roll-out of the new product development programme, which is to be established under the national development plan, as I mentioned earlier. New skills are required as a result of the reorganisation of the tourism agencies which has taken place over recent years. A great deal of marketing activity is now being undertaken by Tourism Ireland. Savings will arise in future years as a result of what is, in effect, a reduction of staff on that front. There will be no reduction of service, however. I am confident that the reorganisation will prove to be effective.
The National Concert Hall was mentioned by members. It is worth noting that the hall has held more than 500 concerts to date in 2007. The staff of the hall should be congratulated on that fantastic achievement. The National Concert Hall's stakeholders are consulted on a regular basis. The provision of some of the hall's marketing funds has been brought forward to 2007, as members are aware.
There is nothing sinister about the omission of sports from this Revised Estimate, which was mentioned on two occasions. It is rather strange that we are considering the Revised Estimate today, given that all of these figures will be changed by tomorrow's budget. I am sure members will express their thoughts on the various figures in the budget. Virtually all of these figures will change tomorrow. It will be clear tomorrow that sport is included in the Department's Estimate.
It is worth pointing out that we have an overhang of well over €150 million in the sports capital programme. I will come back to this subject on another occasion. Members will recall that we distributed sports capital grants worth €85 million last year. We estimate that we have built up an overhang of over €150 million — we will have to get an exact figure. I refer to sports projects which were approved over a number of allocations, but not drawn down. I assure members that when we consider this programme again, we will focus closely on the ability of applications to go ahead. We cannot allow that figure to continue to pile up — we will have to release some of that money back into the system at some stage.
Deputy Kennedy spoke about employment in the tourism industry. This is one of the most important committees in the House, given that over 250,000 people are employed in the tourism industry. That figure is based on the broader definition of tourism, which includes sectors like catering and the cultural institutions. It is fair to include such sectors under the broad heading of tourism. Similarly, I was astonished to learn that approximately 30,000 people are working full time in the arts. That is a sizeable number of people. There has been a fall-off in construction employment in recent months and a rise in employment in the tourism industry. For many years the construction industry was the largest employer in the State but the tourism industry, in its broadest definition, is now the largest single employer. It behoves us to take care of it and develop it as best we can. That is why this committee, my officials and I have a particular responsibility.
Deputy Mitchell mentioned the National Aquatic Centre. This was discussed during Question Time in the Dáil some days ago. It is not referred to here because it is dealt with in the main Estimate. The Deputy was anxious about the subsidy of €1.8 million. This comes through the main Estimate, not the Supplementary Estimate. It will be dealt with in the main Estimate tomorrow, in effect. Anything not dealt with here is dealt with in the main Estimate.
It will be budgeted for tomorrow.
I must provide for the subsidy of €1.8 million, which I mentioned to the Deputy yesterday.
Is it normal to provide in a particular year for a subsidy in the previous year? Is that how it works in the normal course of events?
It is provided for in the first available annual Estimate.
Nevertheless, there are overspends in other Departments which have been catered for here in the Supplementary Estimate. Why is this different?
Is the Deputy asking if we had the option to allocate some of this money to--
We probably had that as a choice but--
These were worthier.
We probably had not finished our work on it and taken it to a point where we were ready to do it. A more holistic approach to the aquatic centre could be adopted. It can be dealt with in the main Estimate rather than in a Supplementary Estimate like this.
A number of Deputies mentioned the Arts Council. The council does a top class job on behalf of all of us and on which I compliment it. Since 2002 its funding has increased by 67%, which is more than that of most other organisations in the State. In 2005 the figure was €66 million and in 2006 it increased to €82 million. Today, I announced funding of €83 million. Between 2005 and 2007 its funding increased substantially more, in percentage terms, than that of most organisations in the State. In 2002, only five years ago, its funding was €42 million; it is now €83 million. The taxpayer has been very supportive of the work of the Arts Council. Its has substantial funds.
Will this €3 million fund work that has not already been done? There is, obviously, an overspend.
It will fund the touring programme. The Arts Council wants to invest in touring.
I know what it wants to do in 2008. This is a Supplementary Estimate for 2007. Does this mean it has spent the money and needs extra funds?
I am advised that the capital schemes are up and running. This money has not been spent yet. This is new money.
Is it new money for the few days left in 2007?
It has entered into commitments.
Therefore, it got a nod from the Department.
It is not a neat answer. It has entered into commitments for some of the €3 million. We are now compiling a Supplementary Estimate to cover that spending. Some spending has not yet taken place but will between now and the end of the year. It is money to be spent in 2007, not 2008. The Estimate tomorrow will include the 2008 figure, if that is what the Minister for Finance finally decides. In five years, spending has increased from €42 million to €83 million. No other organisation in the State has had such a high percentage increase. The taxpayer has been generous in this regard. I thank the Arts Council for the good job it does. There is much spending in the world of arts, outside the council. The total budget for the arts is €220 million, of which the Arts Council receives €83 million. The major portion of funds spend on the arts does not come through the council. It is important to see the broader picture.
There was a question on Lansdowne Road.
The State has committed to a figure of €191 million for Lansdowne Road. The IRFU and the FAI will pay the rest, which comes to approximately €365 million. I have been informed the plans have been changed and extra catering and car parking facilities are being included, but I am determined that the cost of any changes to the plans will not be picked up by the taxpayer. We have a contract with a fixed figure of €191 million. Therefore, any additional costs must be met by the IRFU or the FAI. The State will not advance any more than €191 million.
Has the budget for this year been drawn down?
The site has been cleared, but I do not have the figure for what has been drawn down. I am informed that whatever has not been drawn down will be carried forward.
I understand, but it is unsatisfactory because it seems like the same amount is being spent every year.
The moneys will be drawn down next year. The figure I do not have is what has been drawn down already, namely, what has been drawn down to meet the cost of clearing the site, signing the contract and professional fees paid to date. The Deputy wants to know how much has been paid and drawn down to date.
It is unsatisfactory that the same figure appears every year. It is not a cumulative sum. It seems like we are spending a significant amount, but in fact the moneys were not spent. This seems to happen in many of the capital programmes.
I will get the figure for the Deputy as soon as I can. If she drives past the site, she will see it is a building site.
I know that.
It is not hard to find out how much has been drawn down so far because we would have had to pay fees and meet the cost of the demolition. Some millions must have been spent. A maximum of €191 million will come from the taxpayer and I am determined that this will not be increased. A further €365 million will come from the IRFU and the FAI. There are signs that this element is increasing, some millions more than originally intended. It is their prerogative to make new plans, but I am indicating that the State will not go beyond its commitment. Therefore, taxpayers can be assured that if the project costs more than intended--
That is their problem.
It will be because the promoters made changes. I am informed they drew down €35.5 millionup to the end of November.
I seek clarification on the €150 million not drawn down under sports capital programmes.
That is only an estimate. The figure could be higher.
Does it include the Lansdowne Road moneys that have not been drawn down or are there other notable projects? It was suggested all the extra funding was going to the arts and that sports projects were well managed and had spent all the money allocated. According to the Minister's comments, that is not the case. Is there any other--
I referred earlier to a figure of at least €150 million. That is just an estimate — I believe the true figure is much higher. That is just a rough estimate of the overhang in the sports capital programme. It does not include the Lansdowne Road project, which is totally separate. Everyone in the House is familiar with the sports capital programme, under which grants are paid in respect of projects throughout the country. Over 7,000 projects have received funding under the programme over the last ten years. We have an overhang from projects to which money was awarded but not drawn down. I am advised that the €62 million provided under the sports capital programme in 2007 will be fully drawn down. The overhang I mentioned has built up as a result of moneys not being drawn down. Those responsible for sports projects need to get on with such developments in so far as they can do so. If they cannot do so, they risk the eventual loss of the allocated moneys.
I had intended to ask the same question as Deputy O'Mahony about the overhang of €150 million. It seems to me that we need to encourage the people in question to draw down the moneys which have been allocated to them. I know of many people involved with projects throughout the country who would give their eye teeth to get their hands on a fraction of the €150 million under discussion.
The Minister said earlier that many applications for arts grants — we were not dealing with sport at the time — do not meet the criteria set out by the Department. Those involved with such projects would like to get their hands on some of that money.
I wonder about the difficulty associated with meeting the criteria which have been set out. Is there any way of reducing the levels of bureaucracy associated with some of the criteria? It is clear that this point does not relate only to the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism. We have issues with bureaucracy and excessive form-filling in many other areas. Many smaller organisations need more help in dealing with these processes. They would like to get some of that money to organise little projects. If they cannot meet the criteria, for whatever reason, perhaps we should help them to fit in a little better.
The Supplementary Estimate of just over €7 million which is before the committee represents approximately 1% of the original Vote. Therefore, the officials in the Department should be complimented on their tight management of a wide range of projects within the budgeted figures, involving 99% of the expenditure that was allocated and committed 12 months ago. The €7 million being considered today represents small change.
The Minister mentioned that the draw-down on the Lansdowne Road project, to the end of last month, was €35.5 million. What proportion, if any, of the total expenditure on the project is being met by the FAI and the IRFU? Are those partners in the project providing matching funding? What proportion of the total money being spent does the figure of €35 million represent?
I assure Deputy Upton that the Department is in regular contact with organisations which have not drawn down any of the funds due to them. We keep gentle pressure on those involved in such bodies to get on with the various procedures associated with their projects. They know that departmental officials are available to provide assistance if it is required.
I am reluctant to be too draconian in the early stages of this process, as we are talking in many cases about voluntary organisations led by people who are giving their time and energy to projects for no financial reward. We appreciate that such people cannot give the full-time commitment to these projects that we might like. I will send the message out, starting from today, that we cannot let the overhang build up any further. If people are given approval for good projects, and many good projects have been approved, they should get on with bringing the projects to fruition. I share Deputy Upton's wish that bureaucracy will be kept to a minimum. I will review our procedures in that regard.
In regard to Lansdowne Road, the State's contribution is €191 million. The Department's grant is to be paid up front. Therefore, taxpayers have shown good faith in putting their money up front to get the project going. All of the grants will be paid by the end of 2008, except for the retention figure. The overall figure is €191 million, plus €265 million. It was originally under €500 million, or €161 million, plus €265 million. There is €191 million from the State plus €265 million between the IRFU and the FAI, which brings the total to €456 million. The figure of €265 million has grown but I do not yet know by how much. I stress that it is the figure of €265 million that has grown, not the figure of €191 million.
The National Development Finance Agency is involved in assessing the financial capacity of the FAI and the IRFU to meet the balance of the project costs and has confirmed that it is satisfied they have the required capacity to do so. It is important to indicate that the agency has reassured me that the FAI and the IRFU have the financial capacity to meet their end of the bargain. It is a wonderful project, of which the nation will be proud when it opens in 2010.
I thank the Minister and his officials for attending. In regard to an issue raised by Deputy Kennedy, will the money not drawn down through the ACCESS programme for cultural and infrastructural projects be included in the budget for 2008?
It will. I hope, some time in the first half of 2008, to announce a new ACCESS programme. We will see what funds are available at that time.
Deputy Curran is wrong in saying it was only €7 million and that the Department's budget was not spent as allocated. That is what is being reallocated. We are talking about millions that were not spent. However, that is not down to the Department but to the agencies.
Deputy Michael Kennedy took the Chair.
To clarify, the Department's total budget is of the order of €650 million. As Deputy Curran said, the Supplementary Estimate amounts to approximately 1% of that figure.
Absolutely, but he is also making the point that money that was allocated was spent as intended and that is not the case. I am being picky, to be honest.
Deputy Upton mentioned the community music scheme. Is that scheme administered through schools? Who can apply to participate in it?
The scheme is administered by the Arts Council. I can get a report on it for the Deputy, if he wishes.
I thank the Minister and his officials for attending and wish everybody a happy Christmas, a prosperous new year and a prosperous Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism budget.