Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 10 Oct 1996

Vol. 469 No. 7

Adjournment Debates. - Peace and Reconciliation Fund.

This matter relates to proposals to slash moneys from the peace and reconciliation fund. It emanates from the European Parliament Budgetary Committee and is sponsored by the Socialist Group of which the Labour Party is a member. We abhor what happened. Many people, including Ms Bernie Malone, are saying this is a housekeeping exercise because the uptake on the money is slow and, ultimately, we will not lose the overall figure.

Why has the uptake of this money been slow? It is because of the system that has been set up by this Government in respect of the disbursement of that money in the Border areas. The Government involved ADM, which was quite right, but the Combat Poverty Agency was brought in by somebody for a reason. All sides of the House have been vociferous in their attitude as to how best this money could be spent; 20 per cent of the money was to be spent in Border areas. We have had all party meetings to try to insist that a portion of this money be diverted into the Borer areas to provide a proper industrial infrastructure. These areas have suffered as much, and in some cases even more, than the North, but there is huge Exchequer backing in the North which is not found in the southern Border counties. This is required in these areas to assist peace and reconciliation. This issue is relevant to my constituency, but there are areas along the Border outside my constituency which are in even more need of a proper industrial infrastructure to entice business.

On the question of the task force on funding arrangements in the Border region, the Minister of State, Deputy Carey, was given responsibility for the Border areas and I often wonder if he knows what his job is in that regard. This report is a farce and was expensive. It tells us about the funds that are available. We already know about them. The only recommendation is that these funds should have a distinct identity, there should be a better application form and perhaps more leaflets to inform people about them. Unfortunately, the existence of these funds builds up a huge expectation in the people along the Border. When people come to apply for these funds, they find that they are designed for some airy-fairy schemes and not something that is really needed in the Border areas.

This, as my colleague said, is an appalling decision. The fact that it was defended by an Irish member of the Parliament is also appalling. I am not surprised that a Labour member would defend it because the Labour Party has nothing to offer in rural Ireland, especially in the Border area. This matter had been raised time and again in this House by myself and others. We expressed concern at the involvement of ADM and the Combat Poverty Agency and at the delay in setting up the necessary facilities to ensure the money would be distributed as there is substantial funding available. We have to move from our current position. The most serious aspect of this is that we have the Presidency of the EU at the moment.

The Taoiseach washed his hands of this particular issue on two different occasions here yesterday. He stated "If the Deputy has any problems he wishes to pursue with the Members of that Committee, he should pursue it with them". On another occasion he said "I am not answerable for the actions of members of the European Parliament. If the Deputy wants to say something to them he should do so". That worries me. The Taoiseach does not care about us losing £78 million. I ask him to interest himself in this issue and pressurise the Tánaiste to influence his colleague in the European Parliament to vote on it in a fortnight's time.

I also ask him, even at this late stage, to reshuffle his Cabinet and appoint a Minister to the Border region because that is the fundamental problem. No one in Government cares about it. The Taoiseach should use his influence with the Fine Gael MEP in his area and also at European level. We are concerned that he walked away from the conference in Pittsburg last week, which he was supposed to attend on behalf of the Border region. I ask the Minister for Finance to use his influence in Europe to ensure that the decision on the diminution of funding for the Border region is repealed when it comes before the Parliament in two weeks' time. I compliment the MEP for Connacht-Ulster, Deputy Pat the Cope Gallagher, who has been very active in highlighting this issue.

The Essen European Council of December 1994 agreed on the principle of a multi-annual programme and on the allocation of additional funding of ECU 300 million which would provide support for urban and rural regeneration, employment, cross-Border development, social inclusion and investment promotion for Northern Ireland and the Border counties.

Funding for this initiative has been provided through the annual EU budget. The first ECU 200 million was funded from within the Structural Funds resources, while the additional ECU 100 million was drawn from the reserve for Community Initiatives. In the draft 1997 budget sent to Parliament by Council, provision was made for commitment appropriations of ECU 159.9 million for the special programme for regions in both parts of Ireland. The draft budget for 1997 is now being considered by the European Parliament as part of the ongoing budgetary procedure.

The European Parliament's Committee on Budget has reduced the commitment appropriation by ECU 100 million. Their justification for doing so is that the resources provided were not fully utilised in 1995 and that expenditure in 1996 is likely to be significantly below the amounts provided. The committee envisage that the unused appropriations from previous years be carried forward to supplement the amounts available in 1997. The Parliament has taken the view that the savings which would thus accrue in 1997 should be used to provide additional funds for other Structural Funds programmes. Ireland totally rejects the position of the budget committee and calls on the European Parliament at its plenary session on 24 October to restore the amounts proposed by Council. I am confident that the Budget Council at its second reading of the budget in November, which will be presided over by the Minister of State, Deputy Coveney, will reject any amendment which would put at risk the funding of the programme in 1997. I hope that Parliament will take account of the Council's strong view on this matter. The European Parliament justified the proposed reduction on the basis that the Council has not acceded to its request to provide additional cover of ECU 100 million to replace the resources taken from the reserve. It is regrettable that the funding of the peace programme should be called into question because of this technical development.

The Commissioner for Regional Policy, Ms Monika Wulf-Mathies, has issued a statement strongly criticising the action by the Parliament's budget committee. The Commissioner reconfirms the Commission's commitment to the peace programme, which is carrying out valuable work in difficult circumstances. The Commissioner points out that although total expenditure on the programme in 1995 was slower than expected due to the new administrative arrangements — which the Commission insisted on implementing, not the Government——

Not the Combat Poverty Agency.

The Commission insisted that certain structures be put in place and we had to nominate local groups.

Nobody listened to us or asked our opinion.

The Commissioner points out that although total expenditure on the programme in 1995 was slower than expected due to the new administrative arrangements, it is now accelerating. The present forecast is to spend ECU 70 million of aid in Northern Ireland. A further ECU 28 million will be spent in the Border counties. In total, it is expected that in 1996 some ECU 100 million will be spent. The Commissioner has insisted there is no doubt that there are enough projects to absorb the amounts in 1997 for which the Commission asked and which the Council confirmed. Ireland fully supports the Commission's position. Ireland will be pressing for continuing adequate funding for 1998 and 1999.

An unusual feature of the programme and a major contributing factor to the perception regarding slowness of expenditure is the extent to which implementation of the various measures has been devolved, at the insistence of the Commission, to intermediary funding bodies and the emphasis on actions to combat social exclusion which permeates much of the programme. The intermediary bodies are funded by way of global grants on foot of legal agreements signed between them and the EU Commission.

Why did the Minister not suggest local authorities?

This departure from the norm was strongly recommended in the course of widespread consultation in the eligible areas carried out by the EU Commission task force and the two administrations. The setting up of the intermediary bodies took time, but they have been in place for much of this year and the pace of commitments under the programme is very satisfactory.

The consultation process carried out by the Commission and the two administrations found a widespread emphasis on the need to combat social exclusion in order to achieve the objectives of peace and reconciliation. All sectors, including the business sector, urged that the theme of social inclusion, as well as forming an important sub-programme in its own right, should also inform all the other measures and sub-programmes of the programme. In the difficult circumstances pertaining in Northern Ireland at present the thrust of the programme is particularly relevant and I would ask the House for its support in Ireland's efforts to ensure that adequate funding is secured.

Barr
Roinn