I propose to take Questions Nos. 153 and 155 together. Details of receipts from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) for the years 1986, 1987 and 1988 are as follows: 1986, £77.1 million; 1987, £87.4 million; 1988, £129.9 million.
Records are not maintained in a format which would allow the ERDF receipts to be broken down by county council and borough corporation for (i) the number of projects which received ERDF assistance; (ii) the location and nature of these projects; and (iii) the amount of money received from the ERDF in respect of these projects.
However, the following table shows (i) the value of ERDF commitments to Ireland and (ii) the number of projects on a county by county basis for the period 1986 to 1988 inclusive. In this regard it should be noted that ERDF aid is granted in the form of a commitment which is translated into a cash receipt according as the project progresses. The table does not take account of non-quota measures such as the Special Border Areas' Programme (Phases I and II). The National Programme of Community Interest — Roads Development in Ireland 1986-1990, The STAR and VALOREN Programmes and certain Telecommunication projects are also not included as they are Multi-Regional and cannot be broken down on a county by county basis.
|
County
|
ERDF Commitments(1986-88)
|
|
Value(£m)
|
No. of Projects
|
|
Carlow
|
7.56
|
8
|
|
Cavan
|
0.97
|
8
|
|
Clare
|
5.05
|
9
|
|
Cork
|
33.62
|
54
|
|
Donegal
|
11.68
|
18
|
|
Dublin
|
49.19
|
56
|
|
Galway
|
8.04
|
20
|
|
Kerry
|
11.13
|
24
|
|
Kildare
|
3.52
|
9
|
|
Kilkenny
|
1.94
|
7
|
|
Laois
|
0.95
|
6
|
|
Leitrim
|
1.29
|
5
|
|
Limerick
|
17.28
|
26
|
|
Longford
|
0.36
|
2
|
|
Louth
|
6.06
|
13
|
|
Mayo
|
7.15
|
12
|
|
Meath
|
1.26
|
8
|
|
Monaghan
|
0.90
|
6
|
|
Offaly
|
2.51
|
10
|
|
Roscommon
|
1.69
|
4
|
|
Sligo
|
2.53
|
9
|
|
Tipperary
|
4.60
|
16
|
|
Waterford
|
6.65
|
11
|
|
Westmeath
|
4.28
|
9
|
|
Wexford
|
3.74
|
8
|
|
Wicklow
|
16.18
|
16
|
The provision of information concerning the names and locations of projects, the amount of money received from the fund and the percentage which that money represented in the overall cost of projects would involve an inordinate amount of staff time in research and could not be justified. However, the following table represents a sectoral analysis of ERDF commitments for 1986, 1987 and 1988:
ERDF Commitments (1986-88) by Sector
|
1986
|
1987
|
1988
|
|
£m
|
£m
|
£m
|
|
Industry
|
18.2
|
20.8
|
20.3
|
|
Telecommunications
|
—
|
33.2
|
12.9
|
|
Roads
|
47.8
|
50.0
|
45.6
|
|
Sanitary Services
|
22.6
|
13.2
|
13.3
|
|
Education/Training Centres
|
5.7
|
1.1
|
—
|
|
Tourism Infrastructure
|
0.7
|
—
|
5.8
|
|
Airports Development
|
—
|
1.3
|
1.3
|
|
Harbours
|
0.6
|
2.4
|
3.5
|
|
Energy
|
—
|
3.8
|
11.9
|
|
Total
|
95.6
|
125.8
|
114.6
|
For the years in question the normal rate of ERDF assistance, which applied to developments being implemented, was 50 per cent of the eligible cost, although in the case of developments of particular importance to the area in which they were located a 55 per cent rate of ERDF assistance applied.
