asked the Minister for Finance if he will outline his proposals for the development of Phoenix Park for the good of the community.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Phoenix Park Development.
6.
The park already caters for a wide range of sporting and informal recreational activities which in my opinion provides a harmonious balance in the use of the park by the general public which balance I propose to maintain. A car park with a small information centre and toilets are under construction at present near the Knockmaroon Gate and some further developments in the nature of facilities for the general public are under consideration but I am not in a position at present to make any announcement in regard to them.
Does the Minister propose to meet the relevant local authorities involved in any development to provide further leisure activities which are long overdue?
This question refers to Phoenix Park.
I am asking if the Minister has any proposals to meet Dublin Corporation and Dublin County Council to provide additional amenities in Phoenix Park?
In the past many sporting and recreational facilities were provided, such as football, Gaelic and soccer, hurling, camogie, athletics, polo, hockey, cricket, motor and cycle racing, horseriding, walking, cycling, nature study and concerts.
I asked if the Minister had any proposals to meet the local authorities with a view to ensuring greater utilisation of Phoenix Park for recreational activities. I know there has been some co-ordination between the two local authorities and the Office of Public Works.
The Deputy is a member of the corporation.
Order.
The corporation want to do it.
We have no proposals at present to meet Dublin Corporation and Dublin County Council.
If a request is sent from the local authorities would it be received favourably, given the need for the development of the Phoenix Park for leisure activities? This park has been used for minority rather than majority activities.
If a request is submitted it will receive favourable consideration.
Would the Minister tell the House the resources of the Office of Public Works to plan the kind of recreational facilities required by the two local authorities? Why are the relevant details, which his office should have given him, not available in his brief?
We are getting away from the original question.
It is about the Phoenix Park.
(Interruptions.)
That is one Deputy who will be promoted in the next reshuffle. I pnt two questions to the Minister of State and if he is in a position to answer them I should like to hear the answer.
The question about resources is a separate question.
The Government are responsible for the park. They have not met the two local authorities who do have the resources. The Minister of State indicates that he has no proposals to meet the people who are paid out of tax-payer's money to design the kind of facilities required. I am asking the Minister of State to indicate what proposals are available and what details are available to him at present in relation to proposals for the Phoenix Park, as asked in the original question by Deputy O'Brien?
If the Chair heard the answer correctly it was that there were no proposals for any new facilities other than those already in existence. Therefore the supplementaries are out of order.
The Minister of State indicated that he is prepared to consider favourably meeting the two local authorities concerned.
That was correct.
One of the questions Deputy Quinn asked was had he any resources to meet any requests made with regard to developments. Surely that was a relevant question. What is the point of meeting them if he has no money to do anything he is asked to do?
I must get the request first. Over the years various interests have suggested the introduction of further specialised sporting facilities—for example, a golf course, tennis court, athletics track, swimming pool, bowling greens and fairground amusements. If those were acceded to the present character of the park would be greatly altered. Strong opposition was voiced to the proposed construction of the golf course and the proposals were not proceeded with.
Can the Minister indicate why he believes that the Office of Public Works are the relevant planning authority for this large open space? Does he not think that the kind of evaluation that has just been provided by him could be more directly and democratically provided by the likes of Deputy O'Brien in Dublin Corporation or indeed members of Fianna Fáil in Dublin County Council?
We are getting away from the basic question.
We are getting closer to the basic question. The Office of Public Works are planning for Dublin citizens without any mandate.
Management of the Phoenix Park has been entrusted to the Commissioners of Public Works under the Phoenix Park Act, 1925, which requires them to maintain the park as a public park for the general purpose of recreation and enjoyment by the public.
We cannot spend all day on the Phoenix Park.
It might be as beneficial.
Arising from the Minister's reply——
The Deputy does not have permission to ask another question.
If the Minister had a request to hand over the Phoenix Park to the authorities——
That is a different question.
Would the Minister consider such a request favourably? It may be a different question but it is relevant.