Vol. 614 No. 2
104 Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs when funding from dormant funds for all three categories of disadvantage identified as applicable for funding will be released to the community and voluntary sector in 2006; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4728/06]
Disbursements from the dormant accounts fund are designed to assist three broad categories of people — people who are socially and economically or educationally disadvantaged and people with a disability.
Having consulted appropriate Ministers and obtained the approval of Government, I announced details on 4 January last concerning the allocation of €24 million in 2006 for the purpose of supporting programmes and types of projects tackling social and economic disadvantage. Details of the announcement are available on the website of my Department at www.pobail.ie.
The roll-out of the measures announced on 4 January has now commenced. In this regard, an invitation to the 45 RAPID area implementation teams, AITs, issued at the end of January requesting them to submit their priority projects for consideration. This measure provides for the ring-fencing of €11.5 million for priority projects identified by the RAPID AITs. On the other measures proposed, it is anticipated that they will be rolled-out on a phased basis over the coming months as operational arrangements are finalised.
With regard to the other two categories — educational disadvantage and persons with a disability — the consultation process required under the legislation is not yet completed. It is anticipated that further announcements will be made shortly on proposals under these headings when work ongoing in both the Departments of Education and Science and Health and Children is completed, subject to specific measures being submitted and approved by Government.
I am sure the Minister of State will agree he has a veritable crock of gold at his disposal for the coming year or two and I know he made his announcement on 4 January last. Under the old board, allocations were made on a regular basis. Will applications submitted while the old board was in charge of distribution and allocation stand? Will groups have to submit new applications? The Minster of State mentioned the RAPID groups. Is there a cut off date within which applications must be submitted by those groups involved with the socially and economically disadvantaged? When will applications be invited by the Departments of Education and Science and Health and Children from the educationally disadvantaged and the disability sector? Is a needs criteria established to ensure these grants are allocated on the basis of needs rather than any other basis?
Some €60 million has been agreed by Government with €24 million going to the economically disadvantaged. I do not know whether that is a crock of gold.
Some €60 million is a crock of gold.
It will go to many worthy projects. The old items dealt with by the previous board have been finalised. Decisions were made and those concerned got funding or did not get it. Anybody who got funding or who did not and who wants to try again will have to apply under the new system.
In regard to the cut off dates, as I said, we will roll out the different programmes as the year goes on. So far, we have asked the RAPID AITs with €300,000 required for the urban ones and €200,000 each for the ones in the provincial towns. They have been asked to send in their priority projects amounting to the amounts outlined. We asked them at the end of January and they must have that data in by late March. The other projects will be rolled out. That is the only cut off date at present within which the specific RAPID AITs must apply. We will give cut off dates for the others as we announce them during the year.
In regard to the other two categories, will the allocations be made to groups rather than individuals? Does the Minister of State expect the €60 million will be allocated between now and the end of this year?
It is divided up into three sections. The Department of Education and Science is working on its plan and the Department of Health and Children is working on the disability one. We expect the Department of Education and Science plan will be in within three or four weeks but it might take the Department of Health and Children a few more weeks. They will be rolled out as the year goes on. We cannot predict exactly what will be in their two plans. It will probably be roughly what we are doing but we must wait and see what plans they come in with.
105 Mr. O’Shea asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the discussions he has had with the national drugs strategy team in regard to the potential danger of the rapid spread of the use of crack cocaine; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4505/06]
I assure the Deputy that I am in ongoing contact with the national drugs strategy team regarding various aspects of the national drugs strategy. I am monitoring the situation with regard to the misuse of drugs, including crack cocaine.
No specific studies on the use of crack cocaine in this State have been carried out. The available figures come from the joint national advisory committee on drugs and the drug and alcohol information and research unit — Northern Ireland — drug prevalence survey. The survey showed that the use of crack cocaine was very low at that time — 0.3% reported lifetime use and 0.1% reported use in the past 12 months. It is intended that a new drug prevalence study will be carried out from perhaps this autumn to 2007.
Each of the drugs task forces has an action plan in place to tackle drug use in their area based on their own identified priorities and they continue to have ongoing contact with their local communities. These projects deal with supply reduction, prevention, treatment and rehabilitation for a range of drugs, including crack cocaine. We must be aware that most drug users engage in poly-drug use and, therefore, projects generally aim to address this pattern of usage rather than concentrating on one drug to the exclusion of others.
I recently met senior members of the Garda Síochána involved in the drugs area. The feedback from them and other sources indicates that crack cocaine is not being used extensively in Ireland but is confined to small areas of the population.
However, I fully accept that a potential danger exists that the use of crack cocaine could spread rapidly and I assure the Deputy that I will continue to monitor the situation and will ensure any necessary steps are taken to address increased threats.
Does the Minister not agree that 80% of crack cocaine users go on to develop an addiction, usually within a fortnight of their first smoke, while 7% of cocaine users go on to develop an addiction, which can take up to 18 months? The "high" associated with crack cocaine is unparalleled. I understand that it can last for 40 to 50 seconds and never exceeds a few minutes. However, the "high" from cocaine lasts for half an hour and that from heroin for three to four hours. Hence, this is a particularly lethal and awful drug.
Recently, I read a report that suggested that Irish underworld dons are major players who bring untold amounts of cocaine into Britain. My basic point is that there are indications that crack cocaine is available here. There is plenty of cocaine in the country and establishing so-called cocaine factories is not particularly difficult. When one sees the rapidity with which cocaine use — and crack cocaine use in particular — spread in the United Kingdom, I am not convinced that the system outlined by the Minister of State is anywhere near adequate to deal with this issue. Cocaine appears to be available here and taking that extra step is not beyond the ken of the people to whom I refer. Ultimately, the problem is that people get addicted so quickly that the spread of crime and the consequences on the community at large would be enormous.
I agree this is a particularly lethal and awful drug. While it is obtainable in Dublin, thus far it has been largely confined to certain community groups. It is an open question as to whether it stays within those community groups or spreads out among native Dubliners. I agree this is a real problem. It is harder for the Garda to make seizures of crack cocaine because it might not be imported. Ordinary cocaine is processed or cooked into crack cocaine. However, we are aware of the dangers it poses. The Garda Síochána is aware of where it may be found, is monitoring the situation carefully and is trying to clamp down on it. Undoubtedly however, if it became more widespread, some of the Deputy's fears could well be realised, as it is a particularly lethal drug.
The problem with cocaine, either crack cocaine or the ordinary variety, is that unlike heroin, there is no substitute treatment for it. Hence one can only try to attract users who have become addicted to avail of services such as counselling or behavioural therapy. This is often difficult because some of the people concerned live fairly chaotic lives and it is difficult to attract them to avail of services. However, the situation is being monitored carefully and I hope the drug will not become prevalent in more mainstream communities.
While I thank the Minister of State for his reply, does he not agree that in terms of reassuring the public, he has said nothing that suggests the levels of urgency, alertness and keen observation that will be necessary to keep this situation under control? The impact of this drug far exceeds anything we have encountered heretofore. For instance, I have read that people of middle class backgrounds, particularly in the financial sector in London, have also been dabbling in crack cocaine. Hence, there is a need to impress on people the message about the awfulness of this drug. If one can become addicted to it within a fortnight, time is of the essence. People must be warned about the drug and there must be more urgent and focused preparations to prevent the awful plague that may result from its use.
I appreciate the Deputy's comments and assure him the Government is doing what it can. I do not believe the middle class people mentioned by the Deputy are those who are most at risk. As of now, it is more likely to be heroin misusers who have availed of drug addiction services. Consequently, they can be made aware of the dangers of this drug through such services. To some extent, people must also be aware of their own role and responsibility in this respect. However, we have conducted more widespread awareness campaigns, strictly targeting cocaine users in nightclubs, late night pubs and similar venues. Last year, we specifically mounted such a campaign to inform people of the dangers of cocaine and of crack cocaine in particular. They were informed that it is not a recreational drug and, as the Deputy has noted, that one can become addicted extremely quickly. This information should be widely disseminated.
Thus far however, crack cocaine is not a major problem here. The situation is being carefully monitored and while it may be in use within immigrant communities, individuals from such groups could easily and rapidly begin dealing it to the local population. Through community groups, local drugs task forces and different projects we make people aware of this drug's awfulness and of the potential damage it can do to them.
106 Mr. Boyle asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the fact that hill walkers are being restricted and pathways are being blocked by farmers in the northwest of the country; and the implications such actions have on reaching agreement on access issues. [4503/06]
I established Comhairle na Tuaithe in February 2004 to address the three priority issues of access to the countryside, the development of a countryside code and the development of a countryside recreation strategy This decision followed consideration by the rural and agri-tourism advisory group of a report presented by the consultation group on access to waymarked ways. The establishment of a countryside council was the key recommendation of the report.
Comhairle na Tuaithe comprises representatives of the farming organisations, recreational users of the countryside and State bodies with an interest in the countryside. They have approached their work in a spirit of co-operation and through working groups, which further components of these aims. To achieve its work programme, Comhairle na Tuaithe has established separate working groups, which report regularly to the full comhairle to address the three specific areas of its mandate. The group working on the issue of access to the countryside, is chaired by an official from my Department and consists of a representative of the Irish Cattle and Sheep Farmers Association, the Irish Farmers Association, the Mountaineering Council of Ireland, Keep Ireland Open, Fáilte Ireland and Comhairle na hÉireann.
The Deputy will agree that the access working group representation takes in the varying concerns and opinions of those with an interest or stake in this issue. It has met on eight occasions since it was established. Through discussion, debate and the application of a pragmatic willingness to co-operate, it has agreed a set of access parameters which Comhairle na Tuaithe has formally endorsed and which it believes will act as a basis for conflict prevention and will integrate a variety of needs and responsibilities. The access parameters agreed by Comhairle na Tuaithe state that access to the countryside must be based on mutual respect and: acceptance of the rights of farmers and landowners over access to their land; acceptance of the need of recreational users to have reasonable access to the countryside and uplands; acceptance of the aspirations of recreational users to lobby for legislative change; acknowledgement of the concerns of farmers and landowners in respect of insurance and liability; opposition to the use of any form of violent or threatening behaviour in relation to conflicts over access and where a conflict arises, rapid positive efforts should be made to resolve it by all parties involved; recognition of the value that recreational activity brings to the rural economy; and acceptance that recreational users in the countryside must be responsible for their own safety.
As for the Deputy's reference to the north west of the country, the Deputy may be aware that the national waymarked ways advisory committee of the Irish Sports Council is the body which is primarily concerned with the development of waymarked trails in Ireland and that it is represented on Comhairle na Tuaithe.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
One of the fundamental principles underpinning the development of these trails is that they are only developed with the consent and full support of all landowners. The staff of the advisory committee, in reply to an inquiry from my Department, indicated that there are currently five national waymarked ways in the north west. There are two in County Donegal, namely, Slí Dún na nGall and the Bluestack Way and three in the Sligo-Leitrim area, namely, the Sligo Way, the Miners' and Historical Trail and Slí Liatroma. Between them these trails cover almost 570 km of walks. The national waymarked ways advisory committee has informed my Department that it is not aware of any difficulties or blockages being experienced on these routes.
I am aware that some landowners in the Sligo-Leitrim area have placed signs on their land prohibiting access. However, I have made clear my view that a local community-based approach is the way forward where issues of access to the countryside arise. Where it is not possible to reach agreement, in a particular location, alternative routes should be explored and developed so that landowners' rights over access to their lands are not interfered with. Any proposal for Exchequer payment for access would not be acceptable.
It is almost two years since the establishment of Comhairle na Tuaithe. Is the Minister satisfied there has been perceptible progress on the issue? Relations have deteriorated on the ground between all sides with an interest in the dispute. My reference in the question to the north west had nothing to do with the legal history in the area. A number of incidents were brought to my attention and that of other elected representatives in Counties Donegal, Leitrim and Sligo. For example, a walking club journeyed to north Leitrim. The members planned a route which they discovered passed through agricultural land and they changed their route to use a public right of way, which passed through commonage. When they reached the commonage, they were stopped by the landowner. He not only said they could not pass because he owned the commonage but he also identified himself as the secretary of the north Leitrim branch of a farming organisation. He stated that not only was he expressing his strong personal reservations about the walkers passing through, he was following the policy of the farming organisation, which was involved in negotiating on an individual basis a compensation package for its members to allow access to their lands.
This represents a disincentive for people to travel to rural areas and for the promotion of rural tourism. In addition, the perception is that the Government is being manipulated by one organisation in the wider negotiations. Ultimately, this issue raises questions about the effectiveness of Comhairle na Tuaithe. I would like the Minister to address these issues.
I refer to two basic principles, the first of which is that a landowner owns the land and he or she is not under a legal obligation to allow anybody on his or her land. The second is no compensation will be paid by the State for the provision of access to land. I have made those two principles clear time and again. It is, therefore, within a landowner's right to say he or she does not want a person crossing his or her land. Commonage in Ireland is not defined as it is in England where such land is community land. Commonage in Ireland is normally undivided land in which there are more than two shareholders. They are as much owners of the land collectively as a person who owns land outright. Rights of way are different. No one can be prevented from walking on a right of way.
The Deputy referred to the north west, which is home to a significant number of walkways on which full agreement has been reached regarding access. The national waymarked ways committee has a policy of ensuring it has the agreement of various farmers before it advertises walkways. The following walkways are accessible in counties Donegal, Sligo and Leitrim: Slí Dhún na nGall, the Bluestack Way; the Sligo Way, the Arigna Miners Way and Historical Trail and Slí Liatroma. They provide 570 km of walks and more walks will be developed over time.
One can always bring the horse to water but one cannot make the horse drink. If people feel it is not in their interest to promote rural tourism and so on in their areas, so be it because that is their right. However, we should advertise those areas where people are only delighted to attract rural tourists and are more than willing to allow them to roam the hills freely. That is the case in the vast majority of areas. If this is done in a focused way, a top quality product can be promoted without conflict and it can be marketed internationally in the knowledge that tourists will not only have the acquiescence of the landowner but also his or her encouragement to visit. That is the way it should be. A céad míle fáilte should be given to those who wish to visit our countryside. Plenty of communities would give a dhá chéad míle fáilte to anybody who wishes to visit their areas as long they respect the countryside code agreed with Comhairle na Tuaithe.
I appreciate the Minister's comments, which will be reassuring to many. However, he did not address the commonage issue, which should be addressed legally as soon as possible. If walkers travel across land owned by two or more people, seeking permission to access it will be very difficult. The Minister's Department must take the lead in resolving this issue and put thought into tackling it legally.
This is always a problem. The ownership issue was a problem when the commonages were destocked. In most upland areas, the landowners are more than willing to allow people cross them. The consensus in Comhairle na Tuaithe is that upland areas should be accessible and, as long as people are not doing damage, there should be no difficulty accessing them. There is a large number of mountains where I live and the tenure system in place means they are in commonages while other large mountains are in private ownership. The general approach to is treat them similarly and the owners tend not to object to people walking across the mountains. We should keep it that way and presume that, unless otherwise stated, there is no objection to crossing mountains.
The issue was discussed by Comhairle na Tuaithe and there is little difference between the landowners and recreational users. Crossing enclosed fields is a different issue as this raises safety concerns relating to gates, machinery, livestock and so on. The solution to this is a little more sophisticated. Where people want access from a road to a mountain I wanted to try to secure agreement with the landowners to build pathways through the granting of a licence or other arrangement such as the rural social scheme.
I have lived in the countryside for approximately 30 years and I am absolutely convinced that whatever chance there is of resolving this by dialogue, the heavy hand of the law will not resolve the underlying issue because a law which people do not buy into is unenforceable in a situation like this. We are going the tedious, slow way, but it will achieve the best result.
My other basic principle, which I have made clear to the farming organisations, including the organisation referred to by the Deputy, is if there are areas in which farmers do not wish to promote rural tourism, so be it. The vast majority of people living in uplands and areas of attraction for rural tourism recognise the benefits for them. The rural social scheme is helpful in this regard because it covers farmers and a large number of rural tourism Leader groups using the scheme are anxious to work on walkways. When the farmers are working on the walkways, it is unlikely their neighbours will oppose them.
107 Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the breakdown of the grades of staff within his Department who have expressed a desire to decentralise to the locations chosen by his Department; if he is satisfied that it will be possible to fill all the grades with existing staff from within his Department in the chosen locations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4729/06]
My Department is transferring its headquarters to Knock Airport and 13 posts to Na Forbacha. Seven Na Forbacha posts are in place and it is expected that the remaining posts will be filled by the end of 2006. My Department is scheduled to complete its move to Knock Airport by the end of 2007. It is also planned to relocate up to 70 posts in advance of the main move subject, inter alia, to the availability of suitable temporary accommodation in the general area. The Office of Public Works is seeking to source suitable accommodation and I hope that this advance move can take place from mid-2006.
Currently some 26 members of staff have indicated a willingness to transfer to Knock Airport. Additional staff are transferring into my Department from other Dublin Departments for decentralisation. In addition, a large number of applicants who are currently decentralised wish to transfer to my Department. With all of those staff, and with the adoption of appropriate HR and risk management responses, I believe I will have sufficient applicants to fill all posts, both for the advance move and for the next phase of my Department's decentralisation programme, namely, the relocation to the new permanent headquarters building.
The following is a breakdown of staff currently serving in the Department who have committed to decentralise to Knock Airport.
|
Sec. Gen. |
Asst. Sec. |
PO |
AP |
HEO+AO |
EO |
SO |
CO |
Services Officer |
Total |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
9 |
0 |
4 |
1 |
26 |
My question relates to the interest within the Minister's current Dublin-based Department staff to decentralise to the chosen locations. He is well aware of the importance of the wealth of expertise within his Department in regard to key areas such as drugs control, community development and so on. Will he agree that he will still need a continuity of this expertise after his Department has decentralised? Can he guarantee to the House that he can make up the numbers of all grades, from clerical officer to principal officer, who make up this expertise? Is he satisfied with the preparation that has been engaged in by his Department, and perhaps other Departments, for the people who will move from Dublin to different parts of the country? Are offices and accommodation available? I understand that a hotel complex, or part of a hotel complex, in the Minister's constituency, has been taken over to facilitate these people who are moving from Dublin to decentralised locations. Is he satisfied that this is the most economical, logical and practical way to deal with the issue, or will he agree that custom-built offices, suitable for their work should be prepared before the move takes place?
I am pleased the Deputy has given me an opportunity to correct an incorrect report in a Sunday newspaper, based more on fiction than on fact, despite the fact that we gave the details, and suggested they should contact the organisation involved, Pobal. In regard to these jobs, they are not civil servants. They are the staff of Pobal, which is a private company that operates under the aegis of the various Government Departments and gets administrative money from my Department.
I would like to put on record what is happening in Clifden. Some 20 new jobs are being created in Pobal to provide services for the rural social scheme and a new community services scheme that was the social economy scheme, which my Department has just taken over. These services are being provided on contract to my Department. The Deputy will be aware that it was agreed there would be decentralisation of ADM staff, now Pobal, to Clifden. It was decided to recruit these new staff for Clifden. We need them now because they must provide the services now. Pobal decided to recruit the staff and sought temporary accommodation in Clifden. The most suitable office accommodation was in the station house, a very large complex, including a hotel, apartments and many other buildings in Clifden. Some ten staff, who are extra employees, will commence work this month, with a further ten later in the year. These people are being recruited currently. Some journalists appear to think we are providing overnight accommodation, which is not the case. We are providing ordinary standard office accommodation.
The cost of the accommodation is €18 per square foot, which is approximately half of what the same accommodation, which would have had to be rented here for extra staff, would have cost. What was the point hiring staff to work in Clifden, bringing them to Dublin for a year or so while seeking permanent accommodation and moving them to Clifden? It would make no sense when they were hired to work permanently in Clifden. The obvious and cheapest way to proceed was to acquire the accommodation in Clifden.
I thank the Deputy for the opportunity to correct an incorrect report in the newspaper. I wrote a short letter to the newspaper to the effect that I hoped the newspaper would win the newspaper award for fiction.
Was it published?
No, it was a bit hard-hitting. It was a short letter stating that I hoped the newspaper would win the award for fiction writers whenever the journalists are presented with awards.
There is a challenge in all of this for the Department. However, many of the senior staff are already in place. Some 187 people in total are seeking to come into the Department, which is more than sufficient, but they do not match grade by grade. The grades in which there are deficiencies currently are HEO, assistant principal and principal officer. For this reason, we need a two year roll-in, in other words, 70 staff will be moved this year and the remainder will move the following year. There are plenty of COs, SOs, EOs and so on offering; the problem is with the three middle grades. However, I have no doubt that in the two year period the deficiencies in these numbers will be made up because people are continuing to apply for the CAF.
While it is a challenge for us this year, I have no doubt as we go through the year, the staff will rise to the challenge. There are already people moving out and moving in, which is good, because it is taking place ahead of the physical decentralisation. People are becoming accustomed to the job. It poses challenges but the Department is determined to ensure this move will take place with as little ripple as possible in terms of customer service. If everyone works together, we can achieve this, and I am determined to ensure it happens.
108 Mr. Boyle asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs his views on recent remarks made by a person (details supplied) the chairman of Integrated Rural Development, Kiltimagh, on a show (details supplied) regarding the changes in the dormant fund allocation system which he claims has made the system less accessible and accountable. [4504/06]
The Deputy will be aware that I have outlined in the House on a number of occasions the reasons the Government decided to make changes to the dormant accounts scheme. In summary, these were to fully address governance and accountability issues and to provide for greater transparency in decision-making on disbursements.
On 4 January 2006, I announced details concerning the allocation of €24 million from the dormant accounts fund this year for the purpose of supporting programmes and types of projects tackling social and economic disadvantage. Following this announcement, there was a certain amount of media coverage, including an interview on national radio with a representative from Integrated Rural Development, Kiltimagh, concerning the changes introduced by Government on dormant accounts.
There may have been an impression given in the interview that Pobal was previously the decision-making authority with regard to disbursements from the dormant accounts fund. This is clearly not the case. The Dormant Accounts Fund Disbursements Board engaged Pobal as a service provider to administer the initial round of funding on its behalf. In this regard, Pobal received and evaluated applications and submitted its advice to the board which then made decisions on whether applications should be approved or not.
Under the new arrangements recently put in place by the Government, applications will be received and assessed against published criteria by or on behalf of public bodies and the results of such assessments submitted to the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. The Minister will then submit the results of the assessments to the Government for approval. It is anticipated that Pobal will, in the main, be engaged as a service provider to again carry out the function of receiving and assessing applications similar to its role for the former board.
Will the Minister of State agree that this criticism, coming immediately after the first round of allocations under the new system, undermines many of the arguments the Minister has been making, particularly in the recent dormant accounts legislation? If a system is to be seen to be accountable and accessible, it does nothing for the Government's credibility if those who have had most experience of such allocations in the past, including personal direct experience in the assessment of allocations for communities, react in such a negative way immediately following a new system being operated. For those of us who criticised the new system of allocations as having the potential to be open to abuse, particularly with successors in the Department of Community, Gaeltacht and Rural Affairs, we now have confirmation on the ground that the system does not find acceptance, is not seen to be working and has none of the qualities described by the Minister of State in terms of being open or transparent.
I do not agree with Deputy Boyle. There was much favourable media comment after we made our announcements in early January. I am not sure if I heard that interview but I heard a few of them — I may have heard that one. Some people were all mixed up. Deputy Boyle may have drawn conclusions, or one interview followed another and people quoted things as gospel which were absolutely not so. I realise that person had previous experience and knowledge of ADM but some of the things I heard on radio were due to people not realising what was happening. We clearly explained the system several times and I think it will work and be accepted and appreciated by people as the schemes are rolled out during the year.
My question was specific. It related to a specific interview and the experience of a particular individual. If this person who has had direct experience of the assessment process in the past is unhappy about how the new system is working, that reflects greater unhappiness among the community and voluntary sector as a whole. It is an attempt to obscure the issue for the Minister of State to talk about the lack of knowledge apparent in other interviews. The Government is in difficulty on this issue and if it wants to bring credibility to this process it must urgently examine how these allocations are made and by whom so that those who make the applications know they are being assessed honestly.
The system we have introduced is in accordance with the legislation. It is very open and transparent. We have gone through that several times so I will not rehash the debate we had on the legislation. ADM was employed by the Dormant Accounts Fund Disbursements Board as a service provider in the previous round of funding. ADM is now called Pobal and it will have much the same role this time — as a service provider. It was not a decision maker in the previous round and it is not a decision maker this time. I cannot swear that I heard that interview and I did not listen to it a second time, but I believe that some people, perhaps including the person to whom Deputy Boyle referred, were a bit mixed up. The journalist may not have been all that well up on this area. There is no real change in the role of ADM.
That concludes Priority Questions. We now take other questions.
