Vol. 495 No. 5
17 Mr. Sheehan asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if he will make a statement on the implementation of the URBAN initiative set up by the previous Government in 1996; if he will give details of the designated areas; and the progress made in each area to date. [20377/98]
28 Mr. L. Burke asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if he will make a statement on the implementation of the URBAN initiative set up by the previous Government in 1996; if he will give details of the designated areas; and the progress made in each area to date. [20375/98]
30 Mr. Creed asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if he will make a statement on the implementation of the URBAN initiative set up by the previous Government in 1996; if he will give details of the designated areas; and the progress made in each area to date. [20379/98]
47 Mr. Allen asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if he will make a statement on the implementation of the URBAN initiative set up by the previous Government in 1996; if he will give details of the designated areas; and the progress made in each area to date. [20376/98]
58 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if the mid-term review of the URBAN operational programme has been completed; if so, if the report will be published; the progress made regarding the drawdown of funds approved by the previous Government for areas under the programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20442/98]
65 Mr. Bradford asked the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Recreation if he will make a statement on the implementation of the URBAN initiative set up by the previous Government in 1996; if he will give details of the designated areas; and the progress made in each area to date. [20378/98]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 17, 28, 30, 47, 58 and 65 together.
Within the framework of the URBAN initiative, EU funding was made available for integrated development programmes for a limited number of geographically defined deprived urban areas throughout the European Union — three of them in Ireland. The three selected areas in Ireland negotiated between the Government and the European Commission in 1996 are Ballymun/Finglas/Darndale in north Dublin, west Tallaght/Clondalkin in southwest Dublin and the northside of Cork city.
The Operational Programme URBAN — Ireland 1996 to 1999 is designed to tackle urban issues in an integrated way by supporting business creation, improving infrastructure, social amenities and the physical environment and by providing customised training and actions for equality of opportunity in line with the strategic action plans drawn up and completed by locally established steering groups in each of the three areas. The steering group in each area implements its action plan.
The total funding of URBAN, including 25 per cent Exchequer co-financing, is approximately £21 million. The funding available to the North Dublin URBAN Steering Group is approximately £10 million and approximately £5 million is available to both the South Dublin and Cork groups. The balance is provided for the Technical Assistance Sub-Programme, which covers such aspects as monitoring, financial management and evaluation, information and publicity programmes and transnational links.
As the programme moved from the detailed planning stage to the implementation phase, the steering groups in each of the three areas had to consult widely with local communities to ensure that the end result of their plans would make a lasting improvement in the lives of the people living there. In addition, large-scale capital projects had to be fully costed and, in order for them to proceed, necessary planning permission and sufficient capital funding to complete the project had to be in place together with an appropriate and inclusive management structure to run them after 1999. As a result, expenditure to the end of 1997 was quite slow.
However, since then the rate of spend has increased considerably and to date funding of £8.3 million has been drawn down by the steering group as follows: £4 million by north Dublin, £1.4 million by south Dublin and £2.9 million by the northside of Cork. By the end of June 1998, the three steering groups had collectively committed a total of £13.8 million or 67 per cent of the URBAN budget as follows: £4.6 million or 45 per cent of the north Dublin budget; £4.7 million or 93 per cent of the south Dublin budget; and £4.5 million or 89 per cent of the Cork budget.
In the case of north Dublin a further £4.11 million has also been earmarked for a number of significant flagship projects which the steering group consider integral to the success of the URBAN plan. It is anticipated that legally binding commitments in relation to these projects can be entered into by early 1999 at the latest, when the National Monitoring Committee for URBAN will again review progress on all key projects.
The mid-term evaluation of the programme has been completed and was adopted by the monitoring committee at its meeting on 17 September 1998. I have arranged for a copy of the evaluation, together with copies of the 1997 annual report and the six month progress report to the end of June 1998, to be forwarded to Deputies Allen, Bradford, Burke, Creed, Rabbitte and Sheehan.
Is the Minister concerned that between consultation, planning and the setting up of structures there have been significant delays in introducing projects that have been fatal in some instances? Some delays have been unavoidable but there has also been a certain amount of footdragging. Some projects that I would consider flagship projects are now seriously underfunded because of cost escalation. Will the Minister deal sympathetically with areas where cost overruns have occurred because of delays? The expectations and aspirations of communities have been raised by the promise of these flagship projects, but they have now been told that specifications must be downgraded and the projects will have to be scaled back. Will the Minister look at this problem?
I will bring this to the attention of the Minister of State, Deputy Flood, who has a huge interest in this area. I am informed that this project is working very well. From the figures I have given Deputies can see that there has been a better drawdown of funding. Deputy Allen will understand that at the beginning of every initiative things move slowly. I found this out in relation to funding for Border projects when, while in Opposition, I asked about the drawdown of particular funding. The problem in that case probably related to inexperience in drawing down those funds, but I am informed that this project is a very good one, that it is gathering pace and that all of these projects should come to fruition. I will bring the matter of flagship projects mentioned by the Deputy to the attention of the Minister of State.
The Minister is responsible for local development and thus has specific responsibility for ensuring that this programme works effectively and is continued. In that regard is he concerned by the Government's proposals to create two regions in this country which will have the effect of ensuring that URBAN will never be applied to Ballymun, Darndale, Finglas, Tallaght and the northside of Cork? The loss of such significant funding to these areas will be a catastrophe and, rather than taking the road it appears to favour, the Government should look for an extension of time for the URBAN programme.
The Deputy is trying to bring forward misinformation.
I am not.
He is, and of all Deputies, he is aware that this is a Community initiative and has nothing to do with the debate on regionalisation. Whether regionalisation goes ahead or not, the URBAN initiative is totally separate from it. Deputy De Rossa knows that URBAN is a special Community initiative for these specific areas.
The Taoiseach has also stated in the House on several occasions that he is fully aware — as are other Deputies on all sides, not just Deputy De Rossa — of large urban areas of disadvantage. The Government has no intention of depriving those areas of funding. The Exchequer provides 98 per cent of all the social funding that comes to deprived areas, as the Taoiseach has also said, and only 2 per cent is EU co-funding.
I assure the Deputy that the Government is fully aware of the deprived areas; Government Deputies raise the issue with the Taoiseach on different occasions. However, this matter has nothing to do with the regionalisation debate. The Government is fully aware of and committed to looking after these deprived areas as it has done in the past.
On a point of order, it is the Minister who has blatantly misled the House.
That is not a point of order
The fact is that URBAN is only applied to Objective One areas. If the Dublin and Cork areas lose Objective One status, they will not benefit from the URBAN initiative.
It is a separate initiative.
The Minister has deliberately set about trying to create confusion. The Dublin and Cork areas will not have the URBAN initiative if they lose Objective One status. That is the reality. The Minister can shout all he likes about regionalisation or otherwise, but that is the reality. As the Minister responsible for local development, with specific responsibility for the areas benefiting from URBAN, what steps is he taking to persuade the Government to drop this nonsensical plan?
As I already stated, the URBAN initiative is totally separate from this area. In any new round of Structural Funds, the URBAN areas will have to be negotiated separately. As a former Minister for Social Welfare, the Deputy should find out that information himself. I do not want to mislead the House——
The Minister has misled the House and continues to do so.
but the information is that this is a separate Community initiative that has nothing to do with the regionalisation plan.
Based on Objective One status.
I call Deputy Perry.
URBAN is based on Objective One status.
The Deputy is not in order.
The Minister is not in order.
I have called Deputy Perry.
On the question of Community initiatives, does the Minister see problems arising in the future with regard to EU approval for the designation of areas that would entail private enterprise and Community initiatives working together? According to today's Irish Independent, the EU appears to be blocking all initiatives for the development of tourism.
That is a separate question, but it would have to be included in any future plans brought forward by the Department of Finance.
Regardless of whether the Minister deliberately or unintentionally misled the House, will he agree that all partnership programmes and URBAN initiatives will be put at risk if Objective One status is lost to Dublin, Cork and the other areas? It is logical that if these areas do not receive Objective One status, they will not be classified as deprived areas.
The Deputy must ask a specific question.
Will the Minister ensure that in any policy the Government produces, the URBAN initiatives, which have the potential to do much good in many areas, are protected as well as the partnership programmes? I do not want to be specific about a particular case, but there are major problems in relation to cost overruns due to delays. For example——
The Deputy cannot give examples during Question Time. He must ask a question.
Will the Minister examine the case of the Glen project in Cork, the costs of which have escalated from £1.3 million to £1.6 million because of the type of delays I outlined earlier.
The Government does not care.
I will repeat what I said earlier. The URBAN programme is a Community initiative which is separate from the normal Structural Funds allocation and will be dealt with separately.
But it does not apply to areas that do not have Objective One status.
The Taoiseach clarified the position on a number of occasions in regard to the areas to which Deputy De Rossa referred. Deputy De Rossa does not have a hold on these particular issues.
He is right on this occasion.
The Government is fully aware of the position in regard to these areas. The Taoiseach's constituency is in one of these areas.
Question No. 18.
A Cheann Comhairle——
The Deputy should resume his seat. I have called Question No. 18.
Some 20 minutes were spent on the last question.
It is the prerogative of the Ceann Comhairle, not the Deputy, to decide on the number of supplementary questions. We are now proceeding to Question No. 18.
May I raise a point of order?
No, the Chair is on his feet.
I want to raise a point of order.
What is the point of order?
It is about the Minister misleading the House.
The Deputy is out of order in charging that the Minister has misled the House. The Deputy should withdraw the remark that the Minister misled the House.
He has repeatedly stated that the regionalisation question has nothing to do with this matter.
If the Deputy does not withdraw the remark he will have to leave the House.
I will not withdraw it.
The Deputy must resume his seat. He is out of order. I ask the Deputy to withdraw the remark.
The Minister has stated that URBAN has nothing to do with regionalisation. At the rate the Government is going, Dublin and Cork will lose Objective One status.
If the Deputy does not leave the House I will have no option but to name him.
I will leave the House.
