On behalf of the Select Committee, I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Finance, Mr. Cullen, and his officials. The purpose of today's meeting is to consider the Supplementary Estimate for Vote 10 - Office of Public Works - which comes under the remit of the Department of Finance. The proposed timetable for today's meeting has been circulated. This allows for opening statements by the Minister and opposition spokespersons, followed by a discussion on the Vote. Is that agreed? Agreed.
Estimates for Public Services, 1999.
Vote 10 - Office of Public Works (Supplementary).
I thank the Chairman and members of the committee for agreeing to meet this afternoon to consider the Supplementary Estimate for the Office of Public Works.
The additional funds being sought are very substantial in the context of the overall Vote. As was the case last year, the major increase is required for subhead D - purchase of sites and buildings. I am seeking an additional £103.369 million for this subhead. Some £23 million of the increase is required for the purchase of the Farmleigh Estate. Deputies will be aware that the estate was offered for sale by tender earlier this year and the Government decided to try to acquire it, in light of the high quality of the building, its unique setting and its historical importance. Negotiations for the purchase of the property prior to tender were successfully concluded by the Office of Public Works. The contract to purchase the property was signed on 22 June and the sale is due to close in mid-December. Farmleigh will be opened to the public as well as being available as a venue for some cultural events. Its primary uses will be as a venue for accommodation of visiting heads of state and other dignitaries, the venue for Government meetings requiring residential accommodation and any other State or cultural purposes for the benefit of the Irish people.
The Office of Public Works is currently planning a scheme of works to the building which will include upgrading it to comply with modern fire and safety regulations applicable to its proposed new uses. Members will also be aware that the Iveagh family has agreed to leave the unique Library and a significant amount of the furnishings in the main building on loan to the State. These will also be available for viewing by the public in accordance with the wishes of the family. Discussions on these arrangements are ongoing between the Office of Public Works and the Iveagh Trustees.
I indicated to the committee last year that it was the policy of the Office of Public Works to maintain a balance between owned and leased accommodation whereby a substantial portion, but not all, of its office accommodation would be owned. In pursuance of that policy, the Office of Public Works avails of opportunities that arise to acquire offices or sites for fair value, where these fit its long-term accommodation strategy. One such opportunity arose earlier this year when the Commissioners purchased Lansdowne House for £23.5 million. Seven of the eight floors are already occupied by the State and the ground floor is leased to AIB. The effect of this purchase is to turn an outflow of funds for rent of £762,000 per annum into an inflow of rent of £100,000 in respect of the lease on the property.
The Office of Public Works is currently in negotiation with the owners of two office buildings in Dublin with a view to purchasing the properties, which are fully occupied by the State. I consider it unlikely that we will be able to conclude agreements in both cases. Agreement may not be possible in either case. It is prudent, however, to make financial provision at this stage to enable negotiations to proceed. If those negotiations are not successful, the money will not be spent. The Office of Public Works is also in negotiations with the owners of some small but strategically located sites. As in the case of the offices, it is sensible to make provision for possible purchases at this stage, despite the fact that it is by no means certain that all the negotiations will result in agreement.
A major task undertaken by the Office of Public Works during 1999 was the provision of temporary accommodation for 1,000 Kosovar refugees. This involved the purchase, rental and renovation of several properties and mobile homes. These include Atlas House, Killarney; Drishane Castle, Millstreet; Kildare Barracks, Baltinglass; Presentation Convent, Dungarvan; Park Lodge, Killarney; Atlas House, Tralee; Airport Hotel, Cork; Presentation Convent, Waterford and the Presentation Convent, Crosshaven. The total cost to the office arising from the accommodation of Kosovar refugees is expected to be £11.3 million, of which £5.9 million is for purchases, £3.4 million for renovations and £2 million for rent. The provision of such a large number of fully serviced places in such a short time was quite a remarkable achievement, made possible only by an exceptional level of co-operation between the public and private sectors. I compliment the staff in all areas of the Office of Public Works - they have been highly complimented by many Departments and people involved in this whole exercise - administrative, architectural and engineering, and the many property owners and contractors and their staff, all of whom worked long hours in difficult conditions to provide good quality accommodation for the refugees.
Deputies will be aware that the Office of Public Works is now undertaking a flood relief programme in various parts of the country which are subject to periodic and temporary flooding. So far schemes at Lackan, Ardrahan, Sixmilebridge, Duleek and Gort have been completed. By the end of 2002, I expect that schemes at Carrick-on-Suir, Kilkenny, Mulkear River, Ballymackeogh, Mulkear River, Cappamore, Dunmanway, Carlow and Clonmel will also be completed.
Expenditure on major new building works is expected to reach £56.65 million this year. The biggest single project under way is the Leinster House Development. Ongoing programmes include the Garda programme at £3.6 million and the Social, Community and Family Affairs programme at £5.23 million. Other significant current projects include the centralisation of Dublin based Department of Education staff and the development of Turlough Park House for the National Museum. Plans have also been progressed for the provision of a new headquarters building for the Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands at Parkgate Street/Infirmary Road. An architectural design competition has been held and I expect that the winning design will be announced soon. Work on the new building should commence next year, with completion in 2002.
I commend the Supplementary Estimate to the Committee.
I have always accepted the principle that the State should purchase and construct buildings rather than rent them. I recall that the State sold off a large amount of property in the mid to late eighties when there were fiscal difficulties. The former leader of Fianna Fáil, Mr. Haughey, was the instigator of the sale of most of the property and there were questions about the people to whom he sold the property. That was a shortsighted policy which I referred to at the time. I recall that another Fianna Fáil leader, Deputy Reynolds, when Minister for Industry and Commerce, sold off IDA land throughout the country. At the time the Minister advised the IDA to sell off land in Castleisland, where land can no longer be purchased for industrial purposes. The people who purchased the land have made substantial profits, and rightly so. This was a very shortsighted policy of selling off the family silver. At the time the Minister also proposed to sell off the land bank in Ballylongford which was purchased for a considerable sum of money. The sale was resisted locally, including by local Fianna Fáil representatives and, thankfully, it was not sold off. That policy, despite the fiscal problems at the time, was flawed. One should look at the quality and historical significance of the Land Commission offices, for example. People like George Fitzmaurice and Sigerson Clifford from Kerry worked in that office for a period. These buildings have been sold off. Granted, it is a very fine hotel but it would be preferable if these buildings were still in State hands instead of constructing new buildings to which the Minister of State referred.
I am in favour of this policy. However, when the Minister of State presented a Supplementary Estimate indicating that he was selling off property, I asked for the names of the buildings and the owners' names. This was one year ago and I received the information last week. There may have been a mistake somewhere along the line; the information may have been supplied to the committee, but I certainly did not receive it at the time. I am not saying the Minister of State had another agenda, but this is something for which the Opposition has a responsibility. It may have gone to the committee but I certainly did not get it at the time. I do not think there was any agenda, but we as Members of the Opposition have a responsibility to ask these questions in case anybody might ask whether there was some kind of sweetheart deal between certain people and the Government. There should be openness attaching to the purchase of property by the State, thereby leaving no questions.
The Farmleigh estate will undoubtedly be a national asset. I would support the State purchase of other houses and estates. I remember a few years ago, for example, the sale of the noviciate in Tralee, a fine building which was occupied by the Department of Agriculture. While the people who bought it are doing a very good job, it would have been an ideal facility for the State to purchase at that time. This proves or supports the principle of the State buying estates and property.
Does the Minister think there might be duplication between Farmleigh and Dublin Castle in terms of State functions and other cultural activities? Was that ever considered before Farmleigh was purchased? Perhaps the Minister will say whether this was considered. There are other places also, such as Newman House in the city, which host these types of functions. How will the operation of Farmleigh conflict with this or will there be an overlap?
As regards the State buying offices which they previously rented from clients, is there an allowance in the guidelines for rent paid by the State over a long period? Is an allowance made by the lessor in such instances? Should such an allowance be made?
Regarding refugees from Kosovo, I compliment the Office of Public Works and the other State agencies on the efficiency with which they handled the issue.
The Deputy has one minute remaining.
The figure of £5.9 million for purchases seems very high. What was purchased? In terms of renovations, are those people who benefited from the rental getting renovations free of charge? The rent also seems to be high. I am sure we will have a chance later to ask the Minister questions, but in terms of the Leinster House development will the Minister confirm if a gymnasium is included? All we want is a very modest facility.
I have no difficulty with the principle of the State seeking to buy property in current circumstances where it is already spending a fair amount in terms of rent. However, I wish to ask some questions, particularly about the Lansdowne property. The Minister will be well aware that the property was purchased only a few years ago for a sum reported to be between £9 million and £10 million and was then purchased by the State for £23.5 million. By any standards this is an extraordinary increase in price over a relatively short period. It is no secret that the Telecom Éireann site, which is nearby, gave rise to a substantial public scandal - I will not go into detail on that as I think we know the facts, certainly in so far as they are available in the public arena. On what basis did the State value the property? The increase in price of £14.5 million seems quite extraordinary in a relatively short period of time. Did the Office of Public Works carry out its own valuation? Did it ask independent consultants to value it for them? On what basis did the Office of Public Works reach the view that that price was reasonable in the circumstances? Can the Minister reassure us that there was no sweetheart deal, to use Deputy Deenihan's phrase, and that it was entirely above board?
I have similar questions on Farmleigh. How was it valued? As I understand it, when it was originally discussed in the media some months before the Government took action we were talking about a possible valuation in the region of £10 million, while the Government ultimately paid well over twice that figure. Why did it not go to tender? Did the State in effect pay a premium so it could purchase it in advance of the tendering process? It seems the house will not be over-used in terms of the three purposes for which it is suitable and to which the Minister referred in his statement. Perhaps the Minister will indicate the usage made of it in the first few months.
I thank the Deputies for their questions and contributions. Deputy Deenihan referred to the sell off of much State property in the 1980s. That was the political mood of the time, but I agree with the Deputy's sentiments. We must not find ourselves in such a position again, no matter what happens or who is in Government. I think we have learned sad lessons. I look across the road from the Department of Finance at properties with hundreds of people and say, "That should still be in State hands". However, it is easy for us with hindsight to judge decisions people took for good reasons at the time. However, I think lessons will teach us that is not the way to proceed. The same may be said about the point raised by the Deputy concerning the IDA. I do not think people are aware that by law we must inform the Dáil of the property we have sold every six months. That information is deposited in the Library every six months. Therefore, there exists an ongoing system of placing information in the Library.
Deputies Deenihan and McDowell raised a number of questions concerning Lansdowne House and Farmleigh, and I am sure other Members also have questions.
On a point of order, why can we not pose all our questions together and then allow the Minister to answer?
We will take the statements by the two spokespersons initially and will then move on to further questions.
It is a funny way to do business.
I am happy to answer Deputy Belton if he has a question. However, the current format might be better so I can answer some of the questions which have been asked——
I have a question.
——and then return to the Deputy straight away.
I have a question like everybody else.
Regarding the valuation on Lansdowne House, we occupy eight of the floors and AIB occupies the ground floor. We operate according to market values - it is not very difficult to find out what is happening in the market. We carried out our own valuation and sought an independent valuation. Subsequent commentaries on the property market in newspapers said we did very well - we think we did exceptionally well. We could have resold the property for between £35 million and £40 million last week if we wanted, it is that simple. Unfortunately, that is indicative of what is happening in the property market.
It sounds like a fairy story.
No, as the Deputy knows I will not tell the committee something I do not believe to be true. One would be surprised by what is happening. The State is occupying the property and it is a very good buy for the State. We had an independent valuation in addition to our own and I am absolutely satisfied with the price we paid. People who purchased some years ago, both private homes and commercial operations, are very lucky.
Who carried out the independent valuation? How was it valued and what was the valuation?
I do not have the information in front of me, but I will get it for the Deputy. I am told it was the Phelan Partnership that did the independent evaluation.
What value did the partnership place on it?
The partnership also carried out the negotiations for us. We occupy almost the entire property and we were facing substantial increases - on our own market estimations I gave a figure of £762,000. We expected that to rise to £1.5 million over the next 18 months in terms of rental outgoings. That is a conservative estimate, it could have been higher than that. On a return basis, we think we did well. Market analysts have worked this out. I have no doubt that independent media commentators would have savaged us but property experts said we did exceptionally well.
That is the bottom line. We operate in the market. I do not want anyone to get the impression that the State is a soft touch. There is a difficulty for us that because we represent the State, we will pay whatever anyone asks, but that is not the case. We looked at other properties but viewed them as potentially bad buys for the State. The money asked for them was unreasonable and did not reflect the market, and we refused to buy. We will continue to do that. That is why in seeking the Estimate I have put in the rider that if we judge for ourselves or independent advice judges that the price asked is too high, we will not pay. If we feel we are getting good value, we will deal.
Farmleigh was a very good purchase. The figures which appeared in the newspapers were speculative. The State was asked if it had an interest in the property when it went on the market. The valuation ran from a conservative £14 million to £70 million, depending on what was being bought. The house on its own was £14 million. The estate consists of 70 acres and we bought it all. That put a completely different complexion on it. When people in the media talked about £14 million, that was absolutely incorrect. The house alone was worth that, not the entire property, which we bought for £23 million. We managed to have included a portion of the property - eight or nine acres - which was not part of the original deal and which had a high value on its own. The market had valued that at more than the price we paid for the entire property. It is a portion which could be cut off from the property without affecting its natural borders. The State will not go into the market to speculate with the property.
Did we pay more for it because we pre-empted the tendering process?
No, we bought it for less than the price we might have had to pay at tender. We were aware of other interested parties in the market. It could have cost substantially more. The trustees were worried about that.
The figures for rent and renovations for the Kosovo refugees are important.
I will come back to that. I have a breakdown of the figures.
I would like some more detail about the purchase of Lansdowne House. The State paid rent of £762,000 per annum, based on all the upper floors, while AIB had a lease on the ground floor. It was said that will turn into a net inflow of £100,000. That implies that AIB is paying £862,000. Is that correct?
No, we save £762,000 because we now own the building. Over and above that, AIB is paying £100,000 in rent.
For the ground floor alone?
Yes. The bank is paying us now.
When the savings are included, the State will benefit to the tune of £860,000 in terms of extra income and rent saved and will make a capital expenditure of £23,500,000. What is the pay back period? It appears to be about 40 years. What is the normal pay back period when buying a building as opposed to paying annual rent? It is quite high.
The only disappointment I have is that the entire Supplementary Estimate is for expenditure in the Dublin city area. In view of the congestion in the city, I hope that for future Estimates, much of this expenditure will be in provincial areas, particularly for new Government offices. We must focus on that in the future.
Rent reviews in the market show a 100 per cent increase on the basis of what people have been paying. That is the bottom line and we can do nothing about it. We have to make judgment calls. We looked at a pay back term on that building and it was well within the ability of the State. The money was available. We can save the money we are spending at present and create a small income.
I confirm to Deputy Noonan that we could get £35 million for the property tomorrow morning, that is an established fact. It is extraordinary what is happening in the property market in Dublin. The market was unaware of how well we were buying. We had a gut instinct on this property. It shows the expertise in the office that we were able to secure the property.
I put it to the Minister that the Office of Public Works sold some State property at a bad time in the market. That should remind the Minister of the need to be prudent when buying property because it is possible to buy at a bad point in the market. Clearly there are property owners who want to realise their capital gains since capital gains tax was reduced to 20 per cent. It is an attractive proposition. The fact there are so many willing vendors of accommodation occupied by the public service may be an indication that there is another side to the story. The Minister should be prudent.
There should not be a policy that everything used by the State should be owned by it. Often assets owned by the State are under-used or not used at all. The private sector gets a better economic return on assets. The health board in Cork, for example, was the biggest owner of neglected property in the city at one point. Property owned by An Post and the Department of Defence lies idle or is under-used. We need a State property company to take an inventory of everything in public ownership and to decide what to do with it. There may be a buzz in the market now, but five years ago it was possible to recognise publicly owned property by its neglected state.
Much public property has been under-used. I do not say it is all in Office of Public Works hands because there is a wider issue. It should not be a matter of principle for the State to own everything it uses and hold everything it owns. Decisions must be made on an ongoing basis and there may be times when the proper thing is to put property on the market and let it go. If a wrong decision is made, so be it. The example has been given of the houses in Merrion Street across from Government Buildings. Those buildings were under-used and in a derelict state when they were in public ownership and there did not seem to be an appropriate plan for them. The private sector seems to have done a good job with the new hotel which has opened there. A case can be made for the economic use of the asset. One could say that the present owners of the property have made far better economic use of the asset and have given a far bigger benefit to the locality than the State did in the years it held the property. The question of ownership of property should be a matter of principle.
Will the Minister take questions on matters such as the drainage of the Mulcaire river andthe refurbishment of Garda barracks, even though there is no provision here to deal with them?
I will.
A good job has been done by the Office of Public Works on the two phases of work on the Mulcaire river. The first phase around Newport was more satisfactory to the local people than the second phase, which was done by a private contractor. The objections were not to the design or management, work which was done by the Office of Public Works, but to the manner in which the private contractor seemed to ignore the wishes of neighbours when the work was in progress. There is now a danger that the public goodwill achieved by carrying out a successful scheme will be lost because of a couple of minor issues.
Will the Office of Public Works look generously at one matter? A new bridge has been built, at great cost, on the Doon road outside Cappamore. There are four houses above the bridge and the occupants would like a continuation of the footpath from the bridge up to the houses because of water settling in front of the houses. There have been meetings with the Office of Public Works engineering staff and Limerick County Council but the matter remains unresolved. This is a case of spoiling the ship for a ha'p'orth of tar. In the middle reaches of the Mulcaire, at Killuragh-Pallasgreen, there are two old people living on the bend of the river just where the Office of Public Works has stopped work. They are just at the point where there will be quite a rush of water, right on the bank of the river and below the level of the road. They fear that the water will come in on top of them in the first flood. A small piece of impactive work is all that is required. I can give the Minister of State the name of the family concerned. These small matters which people are unsuccessful in dealing with at local level could easily be resolved.
What is the policy on the refurbishment of Garda barracks? In some small stations which have residential accommodation gardaí and especially sergeants commute 25 or 30 miles to work. There are vast stretches of County Limerick where there is no Garda sergeant in residence. Gardaí drive to work in the morning and home again in the evening and there is no Garda presence when the gardaí are off duty. Some stations have accommodation which could be used if money were spent on basic refurbishment. It would add to village life if Garda families settled there and the gardaí's children went to school there. The turnover rate is very high and some places have a new garda sergeant every 18 months. Cappamore is an example of a place where there is appropriate accommodation which would be very attractive if new windows were installed in the station and slates replaced on the roof. Village renewal is a wide issue, but garda presence is part of the essential community mix. When teachers and gardaí do not live in the communities where they work, when there are no nuns in the convent and the bank is open only twice a week, communities die.
I hope I have not misled people by my enthusiasm for the Lansdowne House purchase. It is important to state that there are not many willing vendors. The opposite is the case, and that is our problem. We will get in where we can but we can do this only very rarely. We buy property only when we know the State will be involved with it in the long-term. We are not interested in dealing in property in the short-term. This may deal with some of the points made by Deputy Noonan with regard to the current state of the property market. We are satisfied with our present position, considering the long-term view of the market. We have weighed up the points made by the Deputy and it is prudent to do that.
Deputy Noonan was fair in saying that many of the matters he referred to do not come under the Office of Public Works and I agree with him in some of the instances he mentioned. All Office of Public Works property has 100 per cent occupancy so we have very little flexibility. It is not my intention and it would be very bad policy to try to own 100 per cent of all property occupied by the State. That would be a very bad property mix. Because of the need for flexibility, we will maintain a mix of approximately 75 per cent owned and 25 per cent rented accommodation.
Bad decisions were taken in the past. Very good, substantial plans were drawn up for the Merrion Street buildings but there was a lack of political willingness or resources to put them into effect. It would be unfair of us to look back and criticise what was done in the 1980s. No one could have predicted the present economic climate, but there is a strong lesson to be learned. I do not think the approach taken in the 1980s, even by the IDA, would be countenanced again by any politician on any side of the House. We have learned a lesson from that. There may be exceptions but as a general rule I do not think that would ever occur again.
With regard to the Mulcaire river, if Deputy Noonan will give me details of the family I will follow up the matter. We are on site and nothing annoys me more than simple problems being left unresolved. We do an enormous amount to meet people's needs and we try to solve problems on the ground wherever possible.
The question of Garda accommodation is a policy matter for the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I do not disagree with Deputy Noonan because I see similar developments in rural areas in my own part of the country. The gardaí have resources to do their own minor repairs and decorating, but the use of these resources is a matter for their own priorities. The Office of Public Works has no difficulty in doing necessary refurbishments of Garda barracks, but it is for the Garda Síochána, through the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, to decide on priorities. The Garda programme is substantial compared with that of some years ago, but the Deputy's point regarding gardaí living in the communities where they work is one to which I and most people in political life subscribe. There may be operational problems preventing this from happening, but this is a matter for the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Minister.
Deputy Deenihan has a selective and slightly unbalanced view of the historical facts. In 1985 and 1986 this country was going down the tubes. If it was a company it would have been declared bankrupt under legislation now in place. Interest rates were as high as 23.5 per cent. It is even said that some of the derelict and semi-derelict sites should not have been sold because of the high prices now being paid for land, but that would have meant that the public would have been left without health care and education services. While some did not pay their income tax, it would have made a small dent in the problem. We still owed £29.75 billion.
I was taken much more by the approach adopted by Deputy Noonan which was in direct contrast to that adopted by Deputy Deenihan. I am involved with the Southern Health Board and other bodies. As a member of the Committee of Public Accounts, I have regularly questioned why derelict and semi-derelict sites encompassing thousands of acres of land adjacent to railway sidings or in the ownership of health boards, such as former mental hospital farms, are not being utilised. I would not mind if they were transferred to another State agency, but making a black and white decision that nothing will be sold, that regardless of circumstances they will be retained in State ownership, is the last thing that should be done. That would be ludicrous.
The Committee of Public Accounts was given a list of properties rented by State agencies throughout the country. It is unreal. I never realised that some of those included in the list owned property in Cork. It is a handy number. I am aware of a few cosy relationships or deals and for obvious reasons I will not name people, but they are not colleagues of mine. I was amazed at the number of individuals who had property let.
Deputy Noonan is correct that there are old hospitals and other properties which are either not being used or are underutilised. Departments seem to have a difficulty in communicating with each other. The Office of Public Works has its own regime, but somebody has to get to grips with this problem. Adopting a policy that there will be no move in either direction is the most stupid thing that could be done.
I will not criticise those who were in office in 1985 to 1988, inclusive. I was first elected to the House in 1987. The health board of which I am a member closed two wards in Cork University Hospital in 1985 and may have closed another in 1987. I ran from Barry Desmond to the current Leas-Cheann Comhairle, Deputy Rory O'Hanlon, and others. The last thing I would have expected anyone to say was that the 1,000 acres of land in State ownership would be retained as prices might rise in the following 20 years. One must adopt a pragmatic approach. Circumstances could change. The bottom could quickly drop out of the market and the bubble may burst in four or five years, or in five or six months. Interest rates are starting to rise again.
I ask the Minister of State to keep an open mind on the issue. There is a need to establish a co-ordinating group, perhaps under the auspices of the Office of Public Works, with responsibility for State owned lands. CIE will indicate that as the population of a town or village may treble, it wishes to retain land for an extra station. In cases where lands should have been kept, in Carrigtwohill and Youghal for example, they were sold. I would not like us to decide on a policy of never again on the basis that somebody has criticised decisions made 12 to 14 years ago. I am familiar with the houses on Merrion Square which have been mentioned. While my first reaction was that they should have been used for office accommodation, I had an open mind. I am pleasantly surprised at how well the hotel in question is doing. I have been in it only twice but a great job has been done.
In the context of the figure mentioned by my colleague, Deputy Fleming, for property in Dublin - £75 million - each time the matter of office accommodation is raised the first thought of the Minister of State should be decentralisation. As his officials are aware, I am concerned about this matter which has been examined by the Committee of Public Accounts. While there is need for a co-ordinating group, we should not adopt a rigid approach of never again.
I compliment Deputy Dennehy on his fine speech. On refugees, where have properties been purchased and rented? Are they long-term rental arrangements and how many refugees are involved? Does the flood relief programme make provision for tidal flooding? On Deputy Belton's behalf, what is the position regarding the old Garda station, Dublin Street, Longford? Is the Garda station in Cobh also being provided for? Will the Minister of State provide a breakdown of the properties occupied by the Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs?
As someone who supports the concept of decentralisation, I am amazed that the Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands is based in Dublin and not in the west where much of its work is done. Deputy Deenihan would probably recommend that it should be based in County Kerry.
In Listowel.
Deputy Deenihan sought information on the position in regard to the Kosovar refugees. Responsibility for the maintenance of the properties rented rests with the owner of the property concerned. The total fee payable is approximately £2 million. Properties are being rented in Baltinglass, Millstreet, Dungarvan, Waterford, Crosshaven and Killarney. Properties have been purchased in Killarney and Tralee while the property in Kildare is State owned and accounts for almost all the sum of £3.4 million included for renovation works. This money has not been spent on private sector properties, on which we have spent a fortune and which will be handed back.
How many of the refugees are still here?
There are more than 1,000 still here. It was one hell of a logistical problem.
The Minister of State mentioned that property to the value of £23.5 million has been purchased. How many square feet are involved? The State could provide office accommodation at a much lower cost in business parks and industrial estates on the outskirts of the city. This would be a form of decentralisation within the Dublin area. While the State is now receiving rent of £100,000 from the AIB on an office block in Ballsbridge, the trend in the property development market is to turn industrial estates into office parks which offer better parking facilities in a less congested environment adjacent to motorways. This should be looked at as a less costly option in deciding on the location of Government offices. The State, in co-operation with the local authorities, should be able to secure approval to minimise the exorbitant prices. We have a refugee problem. If space becomes available when those people return to their homeland, will it be utilised to solve some of the current problems in co-operation with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform?
The Deputy is correct in regard to his first point. We are sourcing property in Tallaght, Blanchardstown, Swords and other areas. I agree with the Deputy it is cheaper and he identified the reason. We were in Lansdowne House but we are now looking beyond Dublin 4. It is unacceptable that every agency that is established wants to build and occupy an office in Dawson Street or Kildare Street, and politicians must say so. Many of these agencies should be located around the country. We have instigated our own policy. When we get a request for a location for a new agency the last option to be considered is Dublin unless somebody puts forward a very strong argument that it simply has to be in Dublin. A much deeper policy is needed. We have come almost to the end of the decentralisation policy of the past two decades and we need a strong new policy. Decentralisation might be too narrow a word to use in the context of where we can go in the future, but it would help strengthen the regions. It is in Dublin's interest to arrest this growth. There are many positive and proactive moves the State can take in the marketplace and the Minister for Finance is looking at this policy area. We can advise the Government without question on value for money. We can do far better the further we move from the centre of Dublin and the further we move away from Dublin and around the country.
It would help the traffic problems.
It is a win, win, win and I think we would all subscribe to that. The use of refugee space for asylum seekers is a matter for the Departments of Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Foreign Affairs. The matter is being considered and ethnic and other issues arise in that context. I think it was stated in the Dáil during the week that the Minister is looking at this whole issue. The office has been contacted in terms of accommodation because it was seen that we were able to deal with the Kosovars.
Deputy Stanton asked for information regarding social welfare. I will give the Deputy the precise programme. It is a matter of record but I do not have it in front of me.
The Minister has to tell Deputy Belton or he will be in serious trouble.
As regards the Leinster House development, is it on schedule, behind schedule or ahead of schedule?
This project started extremely well. We were all satisfied and had arrangements made with the Seanad regarding the work that was to take place during the summer. To accommodate Members it was arranged to get much of the heavy work out of the way when the Dáil and Seanad were not sitting. Unfortunately, an unofficial picket was placed on that project at the beginning of August, which lasted for nine or ten weeks. It does not involve the Office of Public Works and did not involve anybody working on the site. It came from elsewhere, but a high profile site was chosen to provoke another situation. We worked very hard in the background to try to resolve the dispute but substantial time was lost. If the work can get back to full speed immediately, we still hope to meet the deadline. The loss of ten weeks, in addition to climate change as we head into the winter, is regrettable. Up to that point we were happy with progress and were three weeks ahead. It was intended that the project would be finished in June and fitted out over the summer. If the work resumes immediately, we still hope to meet that deadline.
It is ironic that I agreed with the Minister of State on the sale of State property and also that Deputy Dennehy agreed with Deputy Noonan. We are breaking down in different directions.
The Deputy is part of the establishment.
At least I have been consistent. I am on record in the late 1980s voicing my reservations about the sale of State property, but one has to take it case by case and that is the bottom line. In regard to the gymnasium, for those of us who are still interested in keeping fit, I hope it will be in that building, not outside. Deputy Stanton made an excellent point that the new office for the Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands should be located in Listowel, the literary capital of Ireland. A former President, Mrs. Robinson, once described it as the Athens of Ireland. I will be following that up shortly and I am sure my colleagues will support me.
No one from The Kerryman is present.
I am loath to use the word "gymnasium" as used by the Deputy. I have described it from the beginning as a fitness room. Primarily as a result of pressure from the Deputy's party, it will not be located in the new building. The Fine Gael spokesperson on the Committee on Procedure and Privileges ensured it would not get into that building but I do not know the reason.
Will it be there at all?
I am in the hands of members as regards what will be provided. It will be located in Kildare House and it will neither be as small as some people thought nor as elaborate as Madison Square Garden, as others want.
It is unfortunate that those who are involved in sport will not be consulted.
I spoke to the Deputy about this and I asked to speak to his colleagues. I have so many different groups to deal with from steering committees to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges in the Seanad and the Committee on Procedure and Privileges in the Dáil that it is difficult.
Is it too late?
Given our sports background and that we have played rugby for Ireland on the playing fields of the world, we have a similar mind on what is achievable. What I intend to——
The Minister sounds as if he was as successful.
We were much more successful and were unbeaten until Springboks came over to take us on. I am aware of the Deputy's interest and his background and when we come to a point where we have a reasonable proposal, I would like people to see it before we finalise it.
It is not finalised.
No. We are still in the throes of it, but it will be located in this building.
It will not be in the new building.
It will not be in the new building. This was the overriding view of members. My own view was——
I switched the Minister off by mistake. Does the Minister wish to make a closing statement?
I do not think so, except to thank you and the committee for meeting us and thank my officials for accompanying me.
On behalf of the Select Committee I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Cullen, and his officials for attending today's meeting.