Perhaps it was the Department, if the Deputy wishes to change the emphasis. Different political persuasions had the same idea, so it is not just that I or the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, have had a bright idea. It has been on the books for some time. I thank the Deputy for his compliment about rail safety. Previous Governments did not engage in a root and branch examination of it, as we did, and come up with the sum of money required.
The report from the chairman last November said "up to 2006"; he did not say it would all appear in 2006. At that time, he also mentioned £127 million in leveraged borrowings. However, the Government has decided to have an independent review of CIE property which is surplus to operational transport requirements. We will then proceed on the basis of that review.
CIE is a public transport company which brings people and goods from A to B, safely and efficiently. By its very nature the company is not a public property developer. The original legislation established CIE as a public transport company. It has some good ideas about property involvement, working within the private sector, and where such ideas are in train I have no plan to disturb them. They will be part of the leverage borrowings the company will be able to make against the redevelopment of property. By and large, CIE's main activity is bringing people and goods from A to B, and I want to encourage that. I am glad we are doing it.
It appears from what I can discern that while Ministers for Finance have had the same idea, Ministers for Transport of different hues and political persuasions did not appear very enthusiastic about the matter over the years.
Current safety requirements are so huge – as well as the huge development requirements that we will have – that I want to seek every way to get money for the programme. The Government has decided that there will be a yearly Exchequer input into that programme.