Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 28 Jan 1998

Vol. 486 No. 1

Written Answers. - EU-Funded Projects.

Ruairí Quinn

Ceist:

92 Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Finance the requests, if any, to the Departments of the Environment and Local Government and of Public Enterprise to prepare and have ready for tender alternative infrastructural projects in the event of the Commission's mid term review declining to support the Luas, the peat fired power station and other projects with EU funds; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22050/97]

Minister for Finance (Mr. McCreevy):

The mid-term review provided that progress on the National Conference Centre, the peat power station, the Biomass Blanchardstown, the National Gallery and Luas will be considered in the spring of 1998 by the CSF Monitoring Committee with a view to decommitting Structural Funds in whole or in part if it cannot be shown that sufficient progress has been achieved to secure their likely completion within the existing agreed time scale for the projects under the current round. Similar provision was made for reviewing progress on training under the Local Urban and Rural Development OP. In addition, the review provided for progress reports being prepared for the CSF and Operational Programme Monitoring Committees on measures in respect of which expenditure is expected to be more than 20 per cent below the year's provision in the latest approved financial plan.

My Department has issued instructions to all the Lead Departments for the operational programmes, not just those mentioned by the Deputy, which lay down considerations which must be taken into account in implementing the provisions arising from the mid-term review. The paramount concerns stressed are the need to avoid the possibility of any Structural Funds being lost to Ireland; ensure the earliest possible decommitment of any funds which will become available as a result of the failure of projects or measures to be progressed and finalised within the deadlines for committing and incurring expenditure; enable any funds released to be decommitted in sufficient time to be spent efficiently and effectively on alternative uses within the time scale of the current round which will maximise their contribution to the achievement of the CSF objectives as refined in the mid-term review; and ensure that reprogramming arising from the decommitments is Exchequer neutral.

In relation to reporting progress on the specified major projects and measure underspends where lack of progress on projects is a factor, Departments were asked to state clearly the stage at which projects are: e.g. design and planning, public consultation, planning approval, environmental impact assessment, contract or construction etc. and to indicate both the minimum time and the estimated likely time to complete each of the outstanding stages of developing the projects. They were also asked to give a frank and realistic assessment of the likelihood of the projects being completed within the prescribed deadlines for the Operational Programmes.

In putting forward projects or measures for the possible use of any funds which may be released Departments were asked to indicate the actual level of spending, the amount of any funding uncommitted and the anticipated level of demand in respect of the relevant measure at that point in time; indicate non-cofinanced eligible expenditure which has taken place during the programme period or is planned for the remainder of the period which could absorb any decommitted funds; give details of the proposed expenditure and the expected outcome; specify the time scale for completing the activity. In the case of projects, the minimum time and the estimated likely time required to complete each stage of developing the project as outlined above for major projects; and show how the proposed expenditure will contribute to the achievement of the objectives of promoting growth and sustainable employment, the priorities outlined in the mid-term review or to bridging Ireland's development gap.