SELECT COMMITTEE ON TOURISM, SPORT and RECREATION debate -
Wednesday, 3 Mar 1999

Vol. 2 No. 1

Irish Sports Council Bill, 1998: Committee Stage.

Chairman

I welcome the Minister and his officials, Ms Julie O'Neill, Mr. Peter Smith and Ms Karen Mulcahy. The Select Committee will now consider the Irish Sports Council Bill, 1998, which was referred to it by the Dáil in accordance with Standing Orders and the committee's orders of reference. We must conclude the meeting by 1.45 p.m. because another committee is scheduled to meet in this room. If we have not concluded our deliberations by that time, we will have to schedule a further meeting. If we get down to business swiftly we can make a great deal of progress.

For the purposes of debate the following amendments will be grouped: amendments Nos. 1, 2 and 3; amendments Nos. 6, 10 and 11 and amendments Nos. 14 and 15. These amendments will be decided on separately but debated together. Other amendments will be discussed individually.

Section 1 agreed to.

SECTION 2.

Chairman

Amendments Nos. 2 and 3 are cognate on amendment No. 1 and they can be discussed together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Gilmore

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 3, subsection (1), line 16, after "physical" to insert "or mental".

This amendment arises from the case made by the Contract Bridge Association of Ireland for the recognition of bridge as a sport. I know the Minister and members have received many submissions from the association. I recall raising this matter some time ago with the Minister by way of parliamentary question. In his reply he indicated that the question of the recognition of bridge as a sport would fall to be considered by the Sports Council, when it was established on a statutory basis, and in the context of the Bill. The Minister reiterated that view on Second Stage when this issue was raised.

The concern which arises here is that, notwithstanding the Minister's indication that bridge would be recognised as a sport by the Sports Council under the terms of the Bill, it may not be possible to do so because of the definitions of the terms "competitive sport" and "recreational sport". The three amendments under discussion refer to the definition of sport and their purpose is to include the term "mental activity" in addition to that of "physical activity" in that definition.

As it stands, the Bill states that competitive sport "means all forms of physical activity which, through organised participation, aim at expressing or improving physical fitness and at obtaining improved results in competition at all levels". It states that " 'competitive sport' means all forms of physical activity which, through organised participation, aim at expressing or improving physical fitness and at obtaining improved results in competition at all levels." Similarly the definition states that " 'recreational sport' means all forms of physical activity which, through casual or regular participation, aim at expressing or improving physical fitness and mental well-being and at forming social relationships."

The key term here is that while both competitive sport and recreational sport, as defined, acknowledge the establishment of social relationships and the importance of mental well being as part of the activity, the definition hinges on the term "physical activity"; in order words, for a sport to be a sport, there has to be physical activity. That seems to be the bottom line. It is not stretching matters too much to anticipate that the Sports Council, when it comes to consider an application by the Contract Bridge Association of Ireland for the recognition of bridge as a sport, might decide that the activity involved in bridge did not constitute physical activity as understood under the Bill.

It is important that the Bill would include a provision in order that bridge would be recognised by the Sports Council and not be precluded from being recognised and it is to achieve that end that the amendment is tabled.

Mr. Allen

I was quite satisfied to leave the adjudication of the question of contract bridge and what I would terms as sports to the Sports Council at a later date. The amendment shows imagination and places us squarely in the terms of reference of the Bill, therefore we would support the amendments.

The case has been made for contract bridge. I have no doubt that contract bridge offers many people of all ages a form of recreation. The failure of successive Ministers, including myself, to recognise it as a sport has aggrieved enthusiasts because it denies them access to funding. At international level - and in the international Olympic movement there is move to recognise it as a sport. By accepting this amendment we will accommodate this very popular pastime.

As I said, I was content to leave the issue to the Sports Council. I mention this because we believe this should get recognition. I will not bore the Committee as to the reasons contract bridge should be recognised except to say it is a highly popular and undoubtedly a recreational pursuit for people of all ages.

Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation (Dr. McDaid)

Chairman, I recognise the Deputy's concerns regarding bridge. I have already been in contact with the Bridge Association of Ireland on a number of occasions and they are aware of my approach to recognising bridge whenever I have been able to do that. As regards the International Olympic Committee, it has also said it is considering adding bridge as a part of the Winter Olympics but it has not actually taken that on board yet. Let us not put the cart before they horse, it is still considering this matter. I have given my commitment to recognising bridge, albeit under the Sports Council. As I said to Members, as soon as the Sports Council is set up, bridge will receive a priority. My portfolio has been sport and recreation and we have to remember that we have various definitions for sport both from Europe and other countries. For instance, the New Zealand Hillary Commission for Sport and the United States took on different definitions of sport. The Hillary Commission for Sport, Fitness and Leisure ran into all sorts of difficulties because their definition of sport included a broad spectrum and eventually, they had to reverse to resolve their difficulties.

If we are to take on board the European definition of sport, I would not want the definition to be diluted in any way. That is why I am asking the Deputies to accept the situation as it stands. I fully intend to recognise bridge in due course and it will be a priority with the Sports Council but by actually diluting the definition of sport we will run into all sorts of problems. As with the European definition, we had the exact same type of amendment coming through in other countries particularly in the United and New Zealand. In both cases these countries had to revert back because they were diluting the actual physical aspect of sport.

As a medical doctor, I can measure physical activity but it is absolutely impossible to say if a person is mentally fit for anything. You could actually be mentally fit to take on this Committee this afternoon and go outside and collapse. I would ask the Members to be reassured that bridge will be considered a priority when the Sports Council is set up. I have already asked some of the officials to speed the drafting of the Bill but it has been impossible to do that because there is so much involved with each aspect. It is better to get the whole thing settled up in the Sports Council Bill and then I will propose to go ahead with it. I cannot accept the amendment for the simple reason that the definition would make it too broad and from the experience in other countries.

Mr. Gilmore

I do not propose to engage in professional debate with the Minister. There are many psychologists and psychiatrists who would dispute the Minister's point about whether it is possible to measure mental fitness. The Minister says he wishes to recognise bridge as a sport. Where will the decision on recognition of a sport rest following the enactment of this Bill? Will it be a matter for the Minister separately or will it be a matter for the Sports Council?

Dr. McDaid

It will be a matter for the Sports Council. We are in the European dimension now and this is the European definition of sport. We want to play our part so we have a broad European definition of sport and that definition will be accepted by the Sports Council.

Mr. Gilmore

Accepting what the Minister says following the enactment of this Bill, the recognition of a sport will be a matter for the Sports Council and not for the Minister. It seems that whether the Minister or his Department wishes to recognise bridge as a sport after the enactment of this Bill, it will be a matter for the Sports Council which will have to determine any application for recognition as a sport on the basis of what is in this Bill. How will the Sports Council be enabled to recognise bridge as sport when sport is defined exclusively as physical activity?

Dr. McDaid

From that point of view, the Deputy is taking it as being along the lines of sport. I remind the Deputy that the remit covers sport and recreation.

Mr. Gilmore

The Minister's departmental remit covers sport and recreation. When this Bill is passed and the Contract Bridge Association of Ireland writes to the Sports Council and makes the case for recognition, it will not matter what the parent Department is called or what the personal views of the Minister at the time are. The council will have to determine the application on the basis of what is in the Bill. I put it to the Minister that the definition of sport in the Bill will preclude the recognition of bridge by the Sports Council.

Mr. Allen

Without being confrontational with the Minister, his promise this morning that he will ensure bridge is recognised as a sport is valueless because the Sports Council, as proposed, will be an independent body and will make decisions independently of the Minister. The Minister's opinions, therefore, will not really matter. As Deputy Gilmore said, the only way we can ensure bridge will be recognised as a sport is to be very precise about the definition and his amendment meets that requirement. It will allow the Sports Council to recognise bridge, otherwise it will be out of the hands of the Minister.

Dr. McDaid

I disagree because, as the Deputy will know, certain sections of the Bill ensure it is not taken out of the hands of the Minister. This has been tried in other countries, including the US and New Zealand, and they found they had to go back over it because they had given it such a broad based definition that it was impossible for any council to work. The main reason the Deputies are arguing and, indeed, the Contract Bridge Association has been in touch with all of us is that it wants recognition for funding. As I said to the Deputy, my Department has responsibility for sport and recreation, and we will discuss under which element this comes. It is my intention that sport and recreation will under the remit of the Sports Council and, in so far as I can, I will recognise the bridge association under its auspices. That is how I intend to do it. The bottom line is that any recognised group is entitled to funding and that is what the Contract Bridge Association of Ireland wants. The remit of the Department covers sport and recreation and we can recognise the Contract Bridge Association in due course.

Mr. Gilmore

I am trying to follow the Minister's distinction. I understand his point that he does not want to open up the definition of sport to an extent that he will get applications for recognition which are not anticipated now. I know a case can be made in relation to whether sport should include physical and mental activity, but I do not want to get into that debate now. Is the Minister saying he intends to recognise the Contract Bridge Association for the purposes of funding? If that is what he is saying, it would be helpful. If a formal announcement was made to that effect prior to Report Stage, I would be happy to withdraw the amendment at this stage. However, I give notice of my intention to table an amendment on Report Stage if the appropriate announcement has not been made in the interim.

Dr. McDaid

I want to be as co-operative with this committee as possible. I said at the outset that I intend to recognise bridge under the auspices of my Department. I assure Deputies of my commitment to bridge. We all have difficulties with it because we do not want to dilute the definition of sport. The International Olympic Committee faces the same situation with bridge because the bridge association wants to be recognised as a physical activity and it is debating the question of whether bridge is a physical activity. It has that problem with it. I am not faced with the same issues as the International Olympic Committee because of the physical activities which it encompasses. I have broadened the definition of my Department's remit to sport and recreation and, in that respect, I agree to take the Deputy's point on board. I intend to do everything in my power to recognise bridge for the purpose of funding as soon as I can.

Mr. Gilmore

I will withdraw the amendment until Report Stage by which time I hope the Minister will have made a formal announcement. In any event, it will give us an opportunity to hear the view of the Contract Bridge Association on the statement the Minister made this morning.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment Nos. 2 and 3 not moved.

Mr. Gilmore

I move amendment No. 4:

In page 4, subsection (1), line 11, to delete "physical fitness and mental well-being" and substitute "physical or mental fitness and well-being".

This amendment relates to the earlier debate and I will withdraw it on the same basis.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Section 2 agreed to.

Sections 3 and 4 agreed to.

SECTION 5.

Mr. Timmins

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 4, subsection (1), line 35, to delete "Comhairle Spóirt na hÉireann" and substitute "Cospóir".

This is a simple amendment which substitutes "Cospóir" for "Comhairle Spóirt na hÉireann". This point was raised by my colleague Deputy Browne on Second Stage in order to ensure bilingualism. I cannot see how someone would use the term "Comhairle Spóirt na hÉireann". I appreciate the desire to use new names with a new body but to encourage bilingualism, Cospóir would be a more suitable name for the council.

Dr. McDaid

I accept what the Deputy seeks to do but Cospóir has been associated with sport for the past 20 years and my argument is, as the Deputy put it, that this is a new start and I want to continue from there. Cospóir is taken from the first two words of Comhairle Spóirt na hÉireann. I would prefer to leave the name as Comhairle Spóirt na hÉireann - CSE - rather than Cospóir. While many of us would understand what the word "Cospóir means, many people might not.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Section 5 agreed to.

SECTION 6.

Chairman

Amendments Nos. 10 and 11 are related to amendment No. 6 and all may be taken together. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Mr. Gilmore

I move amendment No. 6:

In page 5, subsection (1), between lines 5 and 6, to insert the following:

"(a) to exercise the functions of the Minister in relation to the disbursement of National Lottery funds.".

This amendment relates to an issue which has often been debated in the House and in public. In essence, it is about who should distribute national lottery funds. There is widespread dissatisfaction in the community and in sporting organisations in particular at the existing procedures and system for the disbursement of national lottery funds. I share the view that the decisions made on the distribution of those funds are political. They are often made for political reasons, and the way in which they are made and announced is often done in an overtly political way. In my ten years in the Dáil I have repeatedly experienced national lottery fund disbursement being circulated a day or two in advance to parliamentary colleagues on the Government side. This is presumably to give them the advantage of being first out with the news to the recipient organisation. Sporting organisations believe firmly that the disbursement of national lottery funds is done on a political basis, and no matter how it is dressed up or how sophisticated the application form, that point of view is strongly held.

This amendment gives the Sports Council the functions of the Minister in relation to the disbursement of national lottery funds. This would mean the council would receive the applications, decide on the individual applications and disburse the money. It does not, of course, preclude the right of the Minister to make regulations governing the policy under which funds should be allocated.

On that matter, there is also considerable dissatisfaction that the better off and better organised a sporting organisation, the more professional its staff and the better connected it is to the political and administrative apparatus of the State, the better its chances of getting national lottery funding. Small sports clubs, particularly in disadvantaged areas, often do not have the professional or material wherewithal to put together a national lottery funds application compared to the sophisticated submissions that are made. The smaller organisations' applications do not figure, even though their projects may be worthwhile. There is a need to depoliticise the manner in which national lottery allocations are made and this is an opportunity to do so. The Bill should reflect that.

Mr. Allen

As somebody who operated this scheme for a number of years when a Minister of State, it might be said that now I am in Opposition I am trying to change what I operated.

Ms Coughlan

We would not be like that.

Mr. Allen

I commissioned a national plan that was published in February 1997 which clearly indicated that there should be a review of the method of funding organisations at capital and administrative levels. I announced at the time that there would be a review of funding methods for these grants.

I agree with Deputy Gilmore that there is a perception that national lottery grants are allocated by political considerations rather than by need, and there is also a perception that better organised bodies are the more successful. However, if one looks at the record it is clear that there is a bias on the part of all Governments towards organisations that operate in disadvantaged areas. The previous Government, under the drugs task force set up by the then Taoiseach, committed itself to organisations in disadvantaged areas, and there was a bias towards organisations which were dealing with young people at risk. The principle was that sport was the greatest preventative element in the fight against drugs.

My proposal is in the context of what I announced before leaving office. There is an unfair perception that many grants are made on political grounds rather than on the basis of need. I am concerned that there is a drift towards a greater emphasis on competitive rather than recreational sport. I hope this is just a phase the Sports Council is going through, and I ask the Minister to assure me of that. I get worried when I see decisions made that favour competitive sport and I seek an assurance from the Minister that recreational sport and minority sports are considered as important as the high profile, commercialised sports. I hope the deliberations of the new Sports Council will use that principle.

The Minister had a review of the capital scheme some time ago and I tabled a parliamentary question on the matter asking him to publish the report of the review group. He sidestepped the issue and did not indicate if he would publish or not, answering that the new scheme when announced would reflect the views of the review group. I would like to see the group's report so that we can judge whether the new scheme applies the principles of that review group.

I am concerned by the conflict that seems to be developing in athletics over funding. The Minister is threatening to use the sanction of funding with the BLE, the NACA and other athletic groups that deal with schools and young people. I hope the Minister also uses the principle that sporting organisations should be left to themselves as much as possible, and politicians should not interfere in their operations. Sport is a recreation and pastime, and when the heavy hand of any Minister is imposed on an organisation, it causes resentment and tension. I am unhappy that the Minister is reported as saying that he may use the ultimate sanction of withdrawing funding from athletic organisations if they do not comply with what the Minister thinks is right for them. There is a complicated history between some of these bodies, and some of the organisations dealing with young people have their own constitution and rules. Those groups are fearful that they will be swallowed up by BLE, the big organisation in this area.

I sympathise with the Minister's problems in dealing with swimming; any Minister would be horrified by the problems he faced in this sport. However, some of the decisions made in this regard conflicted with the principles of sport. When the Minister withdrew money from the swimming organisations, he also withdrew funding from the athletes, who have been victims for a long time - we know that from various radio programmes and newspaper articles. The Minister should do something quickly for these swimmers; it could be done easily by the Irish Sports Council, which knows which swimmers should be supported. They are victims of a tragic situation.

I urge the Minister to reconsider the situation which pertains in regard to swimming organisations which deal with schools. I have spoken to him personally about the matter and do not intend to make an issue of it today. Suffice to say, an international gala involving the four home countries is due to take place in Galway at the end of the month but the organisers do not know where they stand in regard to funding. I do not understand the rationale behind bringing them under the new swimming body. This an independent organisation is which organises competitions between countries at school level. It should not be forced into an alliance with which it is unhappy. Funding for young athletes is being threatened and a question mark hangs over the event. I urge the Minister to deal with the situation sympathetically and sensibly to ensure funding will be made available to allow the gala to proceed.

I am tabling these amendments because I believe that if the independent and statutory Sports Council does not have the power to allocate funding, it will not be the kind of council envisaged by the national plan. It will be seen as lacking the ultimate power, namely, to allocate funds. The legislation is seriously flawed if it does not confer responsibility for funding on the Sports Council.

Chairman

On a technicality, I will be asking the Deputy to formally move or withdraw the amendments when we are dealing with the relevant sections.

Mr. Kelleher

As a public representative of a constituency from which a former Minister with responsibility for sport hails, we looked forward to money coming into the constituency every Friday. I am sure other constituencies got their fair share too.

I believe we are going down a very dangerous road. Every time an issue such as this arises, it is claimed that responsibility should be taken from the politicians. I respectfully suggest that the people sitting here know more about what is happening on the ground in their own constituencies than any sports council could ever know.

Our political system comprises multi-seat constituencies on whose behalf politicians from Government and Opposition parties make representations to the Minister. At the end of the day, the Minister is accountable to the House for any decisions taken. I am concerned about giving powers to quangos outside the House who are unaccountable to the Oireachtas, other than to lay reports before it.

We should not feel embarrassed about the fact that we make representations to the Minister of the day. When Deputy Allen had responsibility for sport I made representations on behalf of a number of sporting organisations and organisations dealing with disadvantage in my constituency. The Ridge project is an example of a very successful project which was in line with Government policy of the day. The Government deemed that sport and recreation was an essential part of the fight against crime and funding for the project was provided by the Departments of Justice, Education and Sport. The project might not have been set up at all had it been outside of the control of Government and Ministers to allocate funds.

A situation could arise where larger sporting organisations, by virtue of their strength, would have a greater say in securing funding whereas politicians on the ground would be aware of worthy causes in their constituencies. We must be aware of this issue, not just in the context of the Sports Council Bill but in other areas also in which we delegate decision making to external organisations.

Ms Coughlan

Deputy Gilmore has ruined his argument by saying that the powers to dispense funding should be granted to the Sports Council. At the same time, he expressed the opinion that the national and professional organisations would stand to obtain a greater degree of funding. Deputy Kelleher stated that public representatives, regardless of their political persuasion, are more in tune with the needs of their communities. One of the greatest problems experienced in regard to the national lottery relates to the lack of funding which has been made available for sport and the fact that the manner in which the funding was dispersed was inadequate to meet the needs of particular organisations which were unable to complete their projects.

During my short tenure in the House, I have witnessed many functions being taken away from Government which politicians were elected to carry out. No matter what we do, we will be criticised so we may as well be involved in the blame rather than passing it on to independent groups and bodies. The National Roads Authority would be a case in point. The NRA was set up because of severe criticism of the perceived political antics of politicians. We now have very little influence on the manner in which funding is allocated, yet people persist in blaming their political representatives that a particular road was not built or improved. It is high time we stood up for ourselves and did what we were elected to do.

I imagine the Minister and his Department would love to do away with the national lottery which I am sure is only a headache for them as they receive far more applications than they have funding for. I believe the Minister should retain the function of allocating national lottery funding. If Deputy Allen were on the other side of the table, he would probably say the same. I do not agree with the amendment. Small local organisations need a great deal of support which they receive, in the main, from their public representatives who make representations to the Minister on their behalf.

Dr. McDaid

As Deputies Kelleher and Coughlan have pointed out, the major responsibility in regard to the allocation of national lottery funding rests with the Minister who will probably only manage to satisfy one out of ten organisations at any given time, in spite of the fact that many of the projects which require funding are worthy.

Over the years, politicians have handed far too much authority and power to independent bodies. It is very difficult to define the meaning of independence in this instance. This Bill is enabling legislation. I am waiting for the Sports Council to be set up before I decide on the manner in which funding will be allocated. If any future Minister wishes to transfer responsibility for funding allocation to the Sports Council, this legislation will enable that. I have not yet made up my mind on the matter. The Deputies and Senators in every constituency know the people on the ground who elected them. They are, in essence, a very broad committee of the entire country. I intend to leave it in that frame during my tenure in office. As Deputies Coughlan and Kelleher have pointed out, Deputies from every persuasion in a county are the best judges of what is needed in their areas. I would prefer to listen to them than to hand this area over at this time. However, it is still within my remit to do that any time and I reserve that right to so do.

In regard to Deputy Allen's point about the publication of the report, I do not see any reason I cannot have it made available. I will make it available to the Deputy. As I said, we were waiting for this Bill to be enacted. There is now a debate on the national lottery funds. I suggest to Deputy Allen that we publish the report and let the committee have a special debate on national lottery funding.

Deputy Allen also brought up the situation of the BLE. I do not want to get into an argument with BLE. I have not stopped any funding for BLE. Recent newspaper reports have been contradictory and the sources in BLE seem to have got it wrong.

The Deputy raised the issue of swimming in schools privately with me. The schools and the IASA were coming together before this incident happened and there is nothing stopping the schools from continuing in that regard. However, the Deputy should remember that the majority of the problems we had in swimming were in schools associated with the IASA. The swimming organisation is comprised of the individual members of that organisation, whether they are schools, adults or otherwise. Some 80 per cent of people participating in swimming are under 18 years of age.

I met the victims again last week and their AGM is in March. They had an EGM in January, which I facilitated. I have indicated to the swimming association my desire to see a full break with the past in swimming, if that is possible. However, I cannot tell individual members that they must contest particular positions. This is a democracy and it is up to them to do that themselves.

I would like to see a whole new beginning for Swim Ireland and for new members to be in charge of swimming, for the sake of swimming and the whole organisation. I told that to the victims when I met them. They raised some points with me. I asked them why they did not contest certain positions themselves at the last EGM and I was flabbergasted by some of the replies I received. It is up to the individual members of any organisation - GAA, hurling, swimming, basketball or whatever - to elect the committee. However, I hope they will contest those positions and that it will be a democratically elected committee. I hope there will be a totally new era for Swim Ireland.

It was said to me that there had been no change in Swim Ireland. However, six of the ten members elected at the EGM are new members or did not have any connection with the past. I hope that new beginning will continue for the sake of swimming.

I intend to oppose this amendment for the reasons I have outlined. Section 6 describes the broad enabling functions of the council to encourage the promotion, development and co-ordination of competitive sport and to develop strategies for increased participation in recreational sport and to co-ordinate their implementation.

Section 7 gives the council all the powers necessary to carry out these functions. Whatever Minister is in charge at the time can make that decision for themselves. It is in the Bill but it is up to the Minister to enact a policy. It includes the power to co-operate with and provide advice and assistance, including financial assistance, to any person or body. We are already giving the Sports Council funding disbursement because all the funding to the national governing bodies comes out of the national lottery. I have already determined that they are the best people to deal with that part of it.

Section 8 requires the council to establish the criteria, the terms and conditions for the provision of assistance and allows the council to refuse or withhold assistance in the event of the applicant failing to meet the applicable criteria.

In regard to the point raised by Deputy Allen, I am not trying to interfere with any national governing body nor am I telling them how to do their business. However, I will continue to use the funding issue, which is within my remit; if I am not satisfied that a national governing body is looking after the sport, particularly from a strategic point of view, I am prepared to withdraw funding from that organisation. This was done too much on an ad hoc basis in the past and many national governing bodies were too oriented towards the elite aspect of their sports and were not looking after the broad grass roots. If a national organisation does not produce a strategy I will use the funding criteria to ensure that organisation puts its house in order.

Mr. M. Brennan

I support the Minister in regard to the distribution of national lottery funding. National lottery funds have done excellent work for small sport complexes. Money has been distributed to GAA clubs during the terms of office of several Ministers, including Deputy Aylward and Deputy Allen, which has been very beneficial to those small clubs. As Deputy Kelleher said, the people on the ground know where the money is needed.

I have previously given the example of a small golf course. Golf courses always had difficulty getting money from the national lottery. However, there is a small golf course in my town of Tubbercurry, where a group of people got together and bought 60 or 70 acres of land. They had to fund raise to buy the land by selling £100 raffle tickets and so on. All the work on the golf course was done by a number of FÁS schemes. They received £20,000 from the national lottery, which was very beneficial. A large number of people in Tubbercurry, including schoolchildren, are now playing golf and that money, which I succeeded in getting from the national lottery, was of great benefit to the town. That is similar to what has been done for many other small community centres, GAA parks or soccer pitches. I am happy with the way the money is distributed and I support the Minister's view.

Mr. Gilmore

In general, I agree with the point made by Deputy Coughlan and Deputy Kelleher about the tendency of legislators to off load on to so-called independent bodies and quangos matters which should properly remain in the political domain. However, it is important to distinguish what should remain in the political domain from what does not belong in the political domain.

The process of legislation is in the political domain. The issue we are debating, which is, the appropriate body to decide on who gets funds; whether it should be the Minister in the political system or whether it be the Sports Council, is an issue on which we, as legislators, must decide. It is not appropriate to leave it, as the Minister suggested, for the distant future when it may or may not be done by way of an enabling provision. We must decide whether it will remain with the Minister or go to the national sports council.

It is important to draw a distinction between the policy issues, which belong to the Minister and to legislators, and the issuing of the cheques or the decisions on who gets various sums. Section 9 gives requires the council to have regard to Government policy and to comply with any general policy directives which may from time to time be given to it by the Minister. That is correct. It is appropriate that, for example, a Minister might tell the Sports Council, if it had the responsibility to disburse national lottery funds, that the Government wanted the council to give additional funds to sports played by women as there has been a great deal of criticism of the lack of support for women's support, to prioritise disadvantaged areas or the development of new facilities in areas which do not have them. However, the decisions on who gets a cheque and the value of the cheque should not be a matter for the Minister; that should be a matter for the Sports Council. That is an issue on which we must decide.

I accept the point that we, as public representatives, have a fairly comprehensive knowledge of what goes on in our constituencies. Deputies would, through their collective knowledge, have a good feel for the projects which should be supported. The only point I would make in passing, which I hope the Minister will rectify in due course, is that my constituency did better when Deputy Allen and, indeed, Deputy Aylward, were in charge. My constituency colleagues on the Government side, none of whom are present, are doing their level best with the Minister, but I hope to see some improvement in the performance.

I would prefer if the decision on the allocations was made outside of the political domain. Everybody knows these are political decisions. When a sports club makes representations to me about a national lottery application, one of the first things I, as an Opposition Deputy, do is advise them to talk to the Government Deputies and Senators in the constituency because they and I know the score. It is not the way in which this should be done by any Government. We should let the Government make policy, allow the Minister set down the priorities to be applied and allow public representatives make their cases, but an independent body should decide who receives the cheques and the value of the cheques. It is an issue on which the committee must decide. Therefore, I intend to press the amendment.

Mr. Allen

There has been a suggestion here that some of us do one thing when in Government and something else when in Opposition. We clearly indicated before we left office in 1997 that we would change the system if we were re-elected because of public perceptions. That was set out in the national plan and in announcements about a major review of the method of funding.

The Sports Council is not a quango, as a Deputy described earlier. The setting up of a statutory Sports Council was one of the key proposals in the strategy set out in February 1997. It will be seriously flawed if it is not responsible, in its own right, for allocating both capital and other funding to organisations for their activities.

I welcome the Minister's concession that we will receive the report of the review group and that there may be a debate in the Dáil on it, but it is a little late in that, in response to a parliamentary question, he stated that he set up a new capital grants scheme based on that report.

Dr. McDaid

The Bill leaves it open.

Mr. Allen

The new scheme incorporates the proposals of the review group. It is a little late to debate that in the Dáil when the Minister has received 1,900 applications for the new scheme based on the recommendations of the review group. That said, I would welcome an opportunity to discuss and to highlight this important scheme.

I note also that there is an attempt to discredit the small grants, that is, the £3,000 and £4,000 grants which, it is said, are too fragmented and make no impact in communities. People who say that do not understand how the sports community works. A grant of £2,000 or £3,000 to a boxing club in a deprived area is a great encouragement to the group to be ambitious, raise funds and increase activities. The provision of such sums to a small group towards the cost of installing showers or equipment is more important than the £20 million provided to a major national organisation because the impact of 40, 50 or 60 such grants across the country has a major uplifting effect on the communities.

Sport in Ireland is about developing activities within communities. It is not about commercialism or grand national stadia. It is about promoting activity at grassroots level and working up from the community, parish and club to the national level. We have not had sight of the report of the review group, but the national plan stated there should be a grant scheme to reflect the need for facilities at local, regional and national levels. At present, the major investment is in grandiose schemes at national level and we have seen little evidence of investment at parish or club levels.

There is a concerted effort to discredit the small grants, which are the lifeblood of clubs throughout the country. I do not mind if it takes a club 12 or 18 months to draw down a grant. That is how clubs operate. They cannot react overnight because they are not run by full-time professionals but by ordinary people with full-time jobs who are trying to help the community and young people at the same time. When the club gets a grant, it must obtain planning permission and raise finance. That is the catalyst for further activity. If there is an 18 month delay, they should not be threatened with the withdrawal of the grant or told that it is useless because it has not been drawn down.

There is a contradiction in the Minister's reply regarding athletics and swimming organisations. Schools federations and athletics organisations lay greater emphasis on participation and involvement in sport than on achieving top class honours. If they are subsumed by bigger organisations, such as BLE and Swim Ireland, a disservice will be done to young people. I have attended presentations by BLOE in Kilkenny and elsewhere. It has an effective executive which runs activities in every parish around the country. It is independent and can decide how it will run various schemes and activities. If BLE becomes the conduit for funding, BLOE will lose a great deal of its independence and, inevitably, BLE will dictate what it does because he who holds the purse strings dictates, as was the case in the Irish Olympics movement. That is why its funding mechanisms were changed.

These organisations deserve to exist independently and to be funded directly. We should not kill the enthusiasm that exists for the sake of administrative neatness. Such neatness has replaced understanding how communities and small organisations operate. They are effective because the people involved are enthusiastic, independent and can make their own decisions. I am nervous about the interpretation of the plan published in 1997. The intention is to empower commercial sports rather than participant sports, which are the lifeblood of sport in Ireland.

Dr. McDaid

I will respond to Deputy Gilmore first. The Sports Council will be an independent body and under sections 25 and 26 it is accountable to the Houses of the Oireachtas and the Comptroller and Auditor General. The Bill is not prescriptive. If I were to accept his amendment, it would tie the hands of future Governments. It is a new body which will have teething problems. However, the hands of future Governments should not be tied on this issue, particularly given that I have offered to debate future national lottery funding in the House in order to reach a broad consensus. I am trying to co-operate with the Deputy and I agreed to circulate the review of that group and make it available to the Deputy. It is not too late because the debate will be based on this section. I am being as open and helpful as possible.

I have not abandoned the small grants scheme which uses national lottery funds. It has been cynical and unfair in the past to offer a small percentage of the grants that have been sought. For example, it is cynical and unfair to offer a club £2,000 when it requires £100,000. As a result of all the small grants which have been allocated, £16 million has been committed throughout the country. The grants received for some projects were too small but a legal commitment has been given to complete them. As has been seen in the past, the number of projects builds up. It is my intention to increase the amount of grant aid allocated to clubs so that they can finish their projects.

The world is full of good intentions and the Department has wonderful plans which have been formulated in conjunction with people who offer their services voluntarily. We are committed to 780 projects throughout the country but I do not know how many of them will reach fruition. Perhaps a decision should be made whereby clubs which already received partial grants could be facilitated to allow them conclude their projects. All of us would prefer to see bricks and mortars and not plans lying on a desk.

I am not taking from clubs which apply for small grants - and they are still available - but I want to increase the percentage of grant aid allocated for projects. If a project costs £100,000 it should be allowed to get off the ground by offering a sizeable amount in grant aid. I will take the political flak because in many instances there will be disappointments. However, I have received more funding from the Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance than any previous Tourism Minister. Their spiritual home is more in Croke Park and the Curragh than in Lough Derg and Croagh Patrick. They are very interested in sport and, consequently, funding has increased in recent years. I have been allocated £50 million to spend over the next three years.

Some clubs have not gone ahead with their plans even though they were allocated money. They sat on them and as a consequence the Department is not able to draw down all the funding it has committed from the Department of Finance. It is very easy for a Minister to commit funding but it is another matter to get clubs to put their plans in place. They have been prevented from so doing because the percentage of the grant which they required to start projects has not been adequate. It is my intention in consultation with Members, who know best what is happening in their constituencies, to commit to fewer projects but to provide more funding for the projects which have been approved. The intention is to get projects under way and not have plans lying on the table.

Deputy Allen is correct when he says that small grants have been a catalyst. However, £16 million worth of projects are on standby, which we cannot touch for legal reasons and I do not agree that all of them have been catalysts. The Government and all parties have a genuine interest in sport and I would like us to proceed along those lines, although there will be problems. I ask Deputy Gilmore to reconsider his amendment as it is already incorporated in this legislation. Any Government is allowed to do as it wishes. Until I set up the Sports Council, I will not make up my mind. I cannot accept the amendment.

Mr. Allen

The contribution from the national lottery towards capital grants was about 16 per cent some years ago. Will that be increased to 25 per cent? What progress is being made? That was also part of the recommendations of the Minister's strategy. Will the Minister explain his comment about how giving the Sports Council the power to allocate capital grants would tie his hands and those of the Department? Power was given to the Arts Council to allocate grants and art and its related areas have developed because the council was given power to make the hard decisions. The arts have prospered because of this. I cannot reconcile what the Minister said with the experience of the Arts Council. Finally, will the Minister name the Taoiseach or the Minister for Finance whose spiritual home is Croagh Patrick? We will also press our amendments.

Mr. Kelleher

In the event of a club approaching the Minister or a Deputy seeking funding of £5,000 to buy a new boxing ring and to hang some bags from a ceiling, is the Minister saying this grant is still available, but instead of getting £500, they may get £2,000? Is it a percentage of the entire sum?

Dr. McDaid

The percentage will increase.

Mr. Kelleher

Small grants are still available?

Dr. McDaid

Absolutely.

Mr. Allen

Is the Minister going from 70 per cent or higher?

Mr. Gilmore

The Minister made a good case for my amendment. If money is out there which was allocated to keep committees politically sweet, rather than to complete the project, it makes a strong case for what I want to do.

Amendment put.

The Select Committee divided: Tá, 7; Níl, 8.

Tá

• Allen, Bernard.
• Cosgrave, Michael Joe.
• Ferris, Michael.
• Gilmore, Eamon.
• McGrath, Paul.
• Naughten, Denis.
• Timmins, Billy.

Níl

• Aylward, Liam.
• Brennan, Matt.
• Coughlan, Mary.
• Hanafin, Mary.
• Kelleher, Billy.
• McDaid, Jim.
• Moloney, John.
• O’Kennedy, Michael.

Mr. Allen

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 5, subsection (1)(c), line 16, after "sport" to insert "recreational and children's sport".

Depending on the Minister's reply, I may resubmit this amendment on Report Stage.

Dr. McDaid

I have a problem with the definition of "children's sport". While I accept this amendment in principle, there is no definition of "children's sport". I will have to contact the Attorney General about a definition. I will come back to it on Report Stage.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Allen

I move amendment No. 8:

In page 5, subsection (1)(e), line 19, after "competitive" to insert "and recreational".

I will resubmit this amendment on Report Stage if necessary.

Dr. McDaid

I accept this amendment in principle but I do not see any difference between recreational and elitist sports. I will come back to it on Report Stage.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Allen

I move amendment No. 9:

In page 5, subsection (1), between lines 26 and 27, to insert the following:

"(h) to provide equality of sporting opportunity for everyone, regardless of gender, age or ability.".

I will resubmit this amendment on Report Stage if necessary.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Allen

I move amendment No. 10:

In page 5, subsection (1), between lines 26 and 27, to insert the following:

"(h) to examine applications from sporting, recreational and community groups for National Lottery funding towards capital projects and to allocate such funding to those applications as selected by the Irish Sports Council.".

Amendment put.

The Select Committee divided: Tá, 7; Níl, 8.

Tá

• Allen, Bernard.
• Cosgrave, Michael Joe.
• Ferris, Michael.
• Gilmore, Eamonn.
• McGrath, Paul.
• Naughten, Denis.
• Timmins, Billy.

Níl

• Aylward, Liam.
• Brennan, Matt.
• Coughlan, Mary.
• Hanafin, Mary.
• Kelleher, Billy.
• McDaid, Jim.
• Moloney, John.
• O’Kennedy, Michael.

Mr. Allen

I move amendment No. 11:

In page 5, subsection (1), between lines 26 and 27, to insert the following:

"(h) to examine applications from national governing bodies for annual funding and to allocate such funding as deemed appropriate by the Irish Sports Council.".

Amendment put.

The Select Committee divided: Tá, 7; Níl, 8.

Tá

• Allen, Bernard.
• Cosgrave, Michael.
• Ferris, Michael.
• Gilmore, Éamonn.
• Naughten, Denis.
• McGrath, Paul.
• Timmins, Billy.

Níl

• Aylward, Liam.
• Brennan, Matt.
• Coughlan, Mary.
• Hanafin, Mary.
• Kelleher, Billy.
• McDaid, James.
• Moloney, John.
• O’Kennedy, Michael.

Question proposed: "That section 6 stand part of Bill."

Mr. Naughten

I raised an issue on Second Stage regarding proper planning by county councils and the provision of recreational facilities by developers of land. I mentioned that the Minister should consider including in the Bill an onus on the Sports Council to investigate the issue.

The reason I raised the matter was because of a specific area in my constituency where 1,000 people live without even a basketball court or soccer pitch. There are no recreational facilities and this was a development planned and built by the local county council. This has happened throughout the country, especially in Tallaght and other major areas of development. Housing has been built quickly by developers but they have not provided any recreational facilities.

There is no onus on the Sports Council to implement the recommendations of Ministers or the Government to provide these facilities. The council should play a role in ensuring these facilities are provided, that proper planning is carried out and that a balanced development is achieved, rather than houses being built quickly with no facilities provided and people left suffering the consequences. There are many examples of where resources have not been made available for facilities and this has resulted in social problems. This places further demands on the State for resources which it must provide, either through the Departments of Health and Children or Justice, Equality and Law Reform, to reform people through education or other means. Perhaps the Minister will ensure it is one of the functions of the council to examine the matter. I may table an amendment on Report Stage to this effect, so I ask the Minister to examine the valid points I raised on Second Stage.

Dr. McDaid

I agree with the sentiments expressed by Deputy Naughten. It has happened in the past that developments have proceeded without facilities being made available. We know of many large estates which have suffered as a result of not having such facilities. The Deputy is trying to achieve more balanced development. However, this is perhaps more the responsibility of the Department of the Environment and Local Government. The requirement that planners consult with the Sports Council is something local authorities could examine. It is not necessarily the remit of the Sports Council to seek that these facilities be included. It should be up to the local authority to consult the Sports Council in any future planning.

Mr. Allen

I also raised this matter on Second Stage. There has been a poor level of co-ordination between different Departments and the Sports Council should be the body which communicates with Departments regarding the optimum use of open space. Too often we see a token piece of open ground in housing estates which is useless. There should be purpose-built open space provided when areas are being developed.

The Government yesterday raised the issue of increased density of housing. I am not sure if that will reduce the price of houses, but it will put pressure on developers and local authorities to eliminate open recreational space. We must be careful in our attempts to control and, if possible, reduce house prices that we do not abandon the good planning practice of creating purpose-built open space.

Mr. Naughten

Will the Minister's Department contact the Department of the Environment and Local Government on this matter and inform committee members of correspondence and ongoing discussions? It is an important issue and, with the point made by Deputy Allen about housing density, it will become even more important in years to come. We cannot neglect the social aspects of housing development, especially since housing densities are being increased.

Dr. McDaid

I will do that. If the Deputy is planning to table an amendment on Report Stage, he should refer to section 6(1)(b) which perhaps addresses his concerns.

Question put and agreed to.

NEW SECTION.

Mr. Gilmore

I move amendment No. 12:

In page 5, before section 7, to insert the following new section:

"7.-The Ombudsman Act, 1980 and the Freedom of Information Act, 1997 shall apply to the Council and any reference in any enactment to the non-statutory Council which existed immediately prior to this Act shall be construed as a reference to the Council.".

It is accepted now throughout the public service that people have a right to information from public bodies. Therefore, the Freedom of Information Act should apply to the Sports Council.

It is also accepted that people have a right to make complaints. While I do not anticipate that the volume of complaints against the Sports Council would be on a par with those made against Departments or local authorities, the right should be established in the legislation. It should be stated that the terms of the Ombudsman's Act apply, that the public has the right to seek information from the Sports Council and to make complaints if they feel their dealings with the body are not satisfactory.

Dr. McDaid

I agree with the Deputy. As he is aware, the non-statutory Sports Council is already covered by the Freedom of Information Act. I have no problem with the Sports Council coming under the terms of the Act. However, it is not necessary to deal with it in an amendment to the Bill. It is already scheduled that the Sports Council will come under the Act.

Mr. Gilmore

What is the position regarding the Ombudsman?

Dr. McDaid

I will come back to that matter on Report Stage.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Section 7 agreed to.

Sections 8 and 9 agreed to.

SECTION 10.

Question proposed: "That section 10 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Naughten

The section deals with requests from the Minister to the council for advice or further information. Many members are finding increasingly that the response to parliamentary questions is that the relevant Minister has no official responsibility to the House for the matters raised. It is becoming more difficult to extract information in relation to various bodies and organisations. In the future, if a Member of Dáil Éireann tables a parliamentary question about an element of the Sports Council, will he or she receive a similar reply? Will the Minister of the day state that there is an annual report and accounts and Deputies may raise issues once every 12 months if they are lucky? Will this arise with regard to the Sports Council?

Section 26 deals with the annual report and accounts, but section 10 deals with advice and information. Will the Minister assure the committee that if parliamentary questions on this area are tabled, Members will not receive such responses from the Ceann Comhairle's Office? If I do not receive a satisfactory response to this issue, I intend to table an amendment on Report Stage.

Dr. McDaid

I note the Deputy's views and I assure members, as I assured Deputy Naughten last night, that I intend to furnish them with as much information as possible. As I stated with regard to the previous amendment, the Sports Council will come under the auspices of the Freedom of Information Act. Information will be available through parliamentary questions and that Act.

Mr. Naughten

I am sure information can be secured under the Act. However, politicians are elected to represent various constituencies and we should have access to information through parliamentary questions. This is not the case in relation to many Departments at present. I thank the Minister for his statement last night and for accepting our Private Members' Bill. I am sure this problem will not arise under the present Minister, but it may arise in the future if there is a difficult Minister. I fear Members will not receive information. Will the Minister assure me that Members will receive replies to parliamentary questions about decisions made by the Sports Council or other issues in relation to it?

Dr. McDaid

In so far as it is appropriate for the Department or the Sports Council to answer questions, I will ensure that Deputies receive information. I understand the issue raised by the Deputy is a matter for the Ceann Comhairle but, in so far as it is appropriate, I will ensure that information is available. It is the Deputy's prerogative to return to this matter on Report Stage if he wishes.

Question put and agreed to.

Section 11 agreed to.

SECTION 12.

Chairman

As I informed Deputy Allen, amendment No. 13 is out of order because it involves a potential charge on the Revenue.

Amendment No. 13 not moved.

Question proposed: "That section 12 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Allen

I do not understand why the amendment was ruled out of order. I presumed that in addressing the establishment of the Sports Council, one of the fundamental issues would be to decide the number of personnel on the council. While I accept the ruling, when we are discussing the establishment of a council we should be at liberty to debate and vote on the number of members.

The previous Sports Council comprised 23 people and a decision was made to reduce the membership to 13 people. However, the problem was the difficulty in getting balanced representation of sporting organisations, the media and expert groups and incorporating all the various interests on the council. Reducing the membership to eight people will make the council unrepresentative of the various interests in competitive and recreational sport. It will not represent the media and other groups, local authorities and the vocational education committees, which have a vital role in the development of participative sport. I am concerned that the number is too restrictive. However, I cannot move my amendment because of the decision to rule it out of order.

Chairman

It was ruled out of order because, according to advice, it seeks to increase the number of people on the Sports Council who are paid from moneys at the council's disposal. Such remuneration and allowances incurred by them would be a charge on the Exchequer. As a result, it would create a potential increased charge on the Revenue.

Dr. McDaid

I am open to suggestions on the number of members. I will consider the Deputy's comments and I may introduce an amendment on Report Stage. However, smaller committees with fewer members get more work done than larger bodies which involve too many people.

While the council will cover all the various national organisations, it would be impossible to facilitate everybody. The members should be people who have a broad interest in sport. They do not necessarily need to be from certain organisations. Given the direction of sport and the funding available, I intend to focus on professional people to run the area. While there may be eight or ten members of the council, there will be sub-committees on which the representatives of different sports may be facilitated. There is also the executive. We want to broaden the area and I take on board the Deputy's comments. We may return to this matter on Report Stage.

Question put and agreed to.

Sections 13 to 16, inclusive, agreed to.

SECTION 17.

Question proposed: "That section 17 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Allen

What is the status of the present chief executive of the Sports Council? I must add that no one has approached me to question anyone's status. Will the chief executive of the present council continue in office when the statutory council is appointed, for the duration of his contract?

Dr. McDaid

The chief executive is under contract.

Question put and agreed to.

Sections 18 to 21, inclusive, agreed to.

SECTION 22.

Chairman

Amendment No. 15 is cognate on amendment No. 14 and they may be discussed together, by agreement.

Mr. Allen

I move amendment No. 14:

In page 13, subsection (5), line 2, after "conditions of service" to insert "(including conditions in relation to tenure of office)".

I tabled these amendments because of a letter I received from the Public Service Executive Union regarding this Bill. The letter reads:

The Union is concerned to ensure that the provisions of this Bill, in so far as they relate to the transfer of civil servants to the new body, are on a par with similar legislative provisions which applied in the case of staff transferred from the civil service to other bodies such as Telecom Éireann, An Post, FÁS, the Health and Safety Authority and the Irish Aviation Authority.

As the Bill stands, we are concerned that the legislative protection proposed for the transfer of staff is not on a par with the provisions enacted in the examples cited above. We therefore proposed an amendment to the Bill to the Minister for his consideration but the Minister has indicated that he is not willing to introduce such an amendment.

The text of the proposed amendment is enclosed and the union would be appreciative if you would consider same, with a view to having the matter raised when the Bill next comes up for debate. The effect of the amendment is to make it clear that the provisions relating to no " less than official terms and conditions of service" include conditions in relation to tenure of office. The formulation we have proposed in the attached amendment to deal with this point is precisely the same as that enacted by the Oireachtas in section 40(2) of the Irish Aviation Authority Act, 1993.

The union understands that there is a view that the Bill, as it stands, covers the issue of tenure but we are not satisfied that this is the case. In our view, the provisions of the Irish Aviation Authority Act point to the necessity for a specific mention of tenure and it is unreasonable of the Minister not to apply similar provisions in this instance.

The amendment suggested would have had the effect of deleting section 22(5) and replacing it with the following:

Except in accordance with a collective agreement negotiated with any recognised trade union or staff association concerned, a person who is transferred in accordance with subsection (4) to the Council's staff shall not, while in the Council's service, receive a lesser scale of pay or be made subject to less beneficial terms and conditions of service (including conditions relating to tenure of office) than the scale of pay to which he or she was entitled and the terms and conditions of service (including conditions in relation to tenure of office) to which he or she was subject immediately before his or her transfer.

I submitted that amendment and, on the suggestion and with the co-operation of the Bills office, it was redrafted in two forms as contained in amendments Nos. 14 and 15. I put them to the Committee for the reasons I have set out.

Dr. McDaid

Tenure of office is defined by section 5 of the Civil Service Regulations Act, 1956, which states that "every established civil servant shall hold office at the will and pleasure of the Government". The view of the Department of Finance - and one shared by my Department - is that tenure of office is one of the conditions applying to the employment of established civil servants and therefore implicitly included in the current wording. An amendment is, therefore, unnecessary.

Tenure of office is implicit in the conditions of service. Therefore, there is no need to specify it in the Bill. However, I will consult the Attorney General's office to ensure it is covered. We both have the same objective in this case. We can return to this matter on Report Stage if necessary.

Mr. Allen

On a point of information, will it be necessary for me to move this amendment again on Report Stage or will the Minister return to it.

Dr. McDaid

No. I will come back to it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment No. 15 not moved.

Section 22 agreed to.

Sections 23 to 25, inclusive, agreed to.

SECTION 26.

Question proposed: "That section 26 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Allen

Although we all support the concept of a statutory Sports Council, because of its independence and its very nature, there will, as Deputy Naughten said, be more distance between its activities and the Government in the future. Can the Minister assure the committee that the annual report of the council will be discussed, at least by this committee?

Dr. McDaid

I have no problem in giving that assurance.

Question put and agreed to.

Sections 27 and 28 agreed to.

Title agreed to.