I would like to share my time with Deputy Keaveney.
The last speaker, Deputy De Rossa, argued strongly against having two regions, but the one-region policy he favours has not worked. There are examples of this in the western region were spending on roads has fallen by 20 per cent compared with the eastern part of the country, and there is less spending on water and sewerage schemes, airports, railways and telecommunications development. Successive Governments have failed to address this issue, particularly in the western region.
The Minister for Finance made some very important points in his speech. He said a key principle of Agenda 2000 is to concentrate Structural Funds assistance, especially at Objective One level, on the poorest regions of the Community. He also said the criterion for Objective One eligibility is for a region to have a per capita income in GDP terms below 75 per cent of the Community average, that Ireland's GDP per capita now well exceeds this figure and, accordingly, Ireland as a whole no longer qualifies for Objective One status. Later in his speech the Minister stressed that if a part of the country were to qualify for Objective One status as a result of the proposed reclassification, this would not mean the rest of the country would be treated any less favourably than it would have been anyway under the transition regime currently proposed for Ireland as a single region.
We now have these messages in clear perspective. It has been stressed by the regional authorities for the west, the Border and the midlands that the retention of Objective One status for the three regional authorities will not adversely affect the moneys available to other regions. The regions in this group meet the EU criteria for Objective One status, and the regional democratic structure is in place in the form of regional authorities. The regions in this group are the poorest in Ireland and are losing ground to the other more prosperous regions. To provide this group with Objective One status is not "subsidy shopping". It is in keeping with the EU Commission guidelines and not randomly picking counties or townlands.
Whether we adopt a one-region or a two-region approach, there will have to be a regional dimension to the next national development plan, with a clear acknowledgement of the regions lagging behind economically. If the regions in the group get full Objective One status for the period 2000-06 then, for the following period, these regions may well qualify for further funding. At best the group will get Objective One status or, at worst, Objective One status in transition.
To increase the visibility and effectiveness of the Structural Funds there are three objectives. Two of the three objectives are regionally based, and the third deals with human resources across the board.
The first objective, known as Objective One, helps those regions whose level of development is less than 75 per cent of the European Community average to close their development gap. The calculation is based on the figures for the three most recent years available to the European Union's statistical office, Eurostat, and measured in terms of GDP per head in purchasing power parities. These regions will continue to have the same priority they currently enjoy because, according to the EU, "they are faced with the most serious problems; lack of economic potential, employment infrastructure and skills levels in the workforce".
In Ireland, some regions have already benefited from Objective One status, but five of the eight regional authority areas no longer qualify for this funding as a result. However, the European Union offers reduced funding during a series of transition years for areas such as these to help them move to self-reliance, and the five regional authority areas in Ireland are eligible to apply for Objective One transition funding.
What we are debating is whether the Government should make one application for the entire country for Objective One transition funding or make a separate application for maximum Objective One funding for the west, the midlands and the Border regional authority areas. As these three regional authorities meet the criteria, they are entitled to apply for Objective One funding which will provide Ireland with extra funds. It will also allow these regions to extend the funds available after 2006 as they will then be eligible for Objective One transition funding. These regions will also qualify for the retention of the high rates of State aid to industry. It does not mean the other regions will be denied funding allocated under a different heading. In fact, the whole country will benefit.
We have eight regional authorities, and they are recognised as democratic structures with democratically elected members working to ensure that the people have a say in the funding. The three regions will also qualify for the retention of the high rates of State aid to industry. It makes sense to maximise the claim by claiming Ireland's full entitlement for Structural Funds. It is also in the national interest. It makes sense to apply for Objective One funding for the west, midlands and Border regional authority areas.
I will refer briefly to a conference which was held in Galway on 30 October where a member of the EU Commission Mr. Esben Poulsen made it clear that the European Union would sooner rather than later phase out all funding to Ireland. He told delegates that Ireland would not qualify for Cohesion Funds after 2003, and advised bodies like the area aid partnerships, county enterprise boards and the Western Development Commission to come together and present a joint programme of development to the European Union to maximise the amount of funding. At that conference, the Galway Chamber of Commerce stated that the benefit to the region would be more than the £100 million mentioned because there was no examination of the benefits of Objective One status after 2006, and Objective One in transition status for the period 2007 to 2013 was not looked at.
It is important that we retain Objective One status for these three regions, particularly to allow the high rates of industrial grants to be paid by the State to that region. The rest of the country will go into transitional status with lower rates of allowable regional aid. However, the differential rates within a country could prove a powerful incentive to investors to consider the west. Traditional industries are in decline in the west and do not offer any opportunity for economic progress, so we certainly need the infrastructural development of road, rail, airports and telecommunications to support the location of industry in the region. At the conference MEP Mr. Mark Killilea said that regionalisation would allow Ireland to draw down grant aid at a continual rate of 75 per cent over a six-year period from 2000 to 2006, funding at the maximum amount for the first three years of the period. Only then would funding taper off over the following four years. We are talking here about half the country below the 75 per cent GDP figure, half the country with only one quarter of the population. I hope we will get support tonight for what we are seeking.
There are various schemes in the three regions, particularly in the Border region. These include the cross-Border funds and the Ireland funds. We need to have these funds in place so that we can direct funding to the less well off regions. We have Roinn na Gaeltachta and Údarás na Gaeltachta which benefit many parts of my county. Those schemes are important. Nobody would suggest that those very necessary schemes should be abolished. Incentives and assistance must be in place for the people who live in the western, midland and Border regions if GDP in those regions is under 75 per cent and they have not done as well out of the Structural Funds under different Governments in recent years. I would make the same point about urban renewal. Tuam is the only town in County Galway recommended by Galway County Council for urban renewal. It is most important that we get a decision from Europe to give the go-ahead to urban renewal. It should not be said that because we have Objective One status we do not need urban renewal. Urban renewal is most important as is rural renewal. Approval for these schemes, including the Dublin docklands development, must be secured in Europe. We must ensure that they benefit the people who live in the towns and rural areas involved.
Objective One status must be fought for and won for the people of the western, Border and midlands regions. There has always been agreement in the House to secure funding for regions. Developments in Dublin, such as the Irish Financial Services Centre and ring and toll roads, have been supported. It is only right now, given that there are three regions under the 75 per cent GDP figure, that the House should support what Deputies from those regions are seeking. I am glad the Minister spelled out how benefits can be given. I hope, as the Minister indicated, that a Government decision is taken soon to give Objective One status to the three regions in question.