Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 26 Feb 2014

Vol. 832 No. 2

Other Questions

Capital Expenditure Programme

Kevin Humphreys

Ceist:

6. Deputy Kevin Humphreys asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will provide a breakdown of the amount spent on and nature of the stimulus projects introduced since 2011; their importance for the national economy; the breakdown at local and-or regional level of the various projects; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9306/14]

Michael McGrath

Ceist:

10. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of jobs that were created as a result of the July 2012 stimulus plan he announced; when the plan will be fully implemented; if a review of the plan has taken place; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9448/14]

Ann Phelan

Ceist:

40. Deputy Ann Phelan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will provide a breakdown of the amount spent on stimulus projects since 2011 in the areas of health, education, transport, child care infrastructure and so on; their importance for the national economy; a breakdown at local and-or regional level of the various projects; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9407/14]

I am trying to get a handle on how the stimulus proposals have impacted on a regional basis, how they have affected the national economy and the number of people who have been employed in each region.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 6, 10 and 40 together.

In 2011, my Department led a Government-wide review of the public capital programme which culminated in the setting of a new investment framework for 2012 to 2016. The framework includes investment of €17 billion across a range of sectors over that five year period. Since then, I have made a number of announcements in relation to additional capital investment, including in July 2012 a €2.25 billion stimulus package, which included a new €1.5 billion public private partnership programme involving projects across the education, roads, health care and justice sectors; in June 2013, a €150 million Exchequer investment in schools, energy efficiency and roads projects; and in budget 2014, along with the €200 million already committed to the national children's hospital, some €200 million from the national lottery licence transaction. Information on these projects was set out in my Department's announcement on budget day.

Activity on the PPP programme is well under way, with seven of the nine stimulus PPP projects already issued to market and the largest project in this phase, the N17-N18 Gort to Tuam road, due to reach contract award shortly. There has been active market engagement from investors and construction contractors, reflecting the growing confidence in the economy. We had great difficulty getting PPPs back on the agenda following the difficulties faced by the economy. Investment in the PPP stimulus package is expected to generate around 13,000 jobs. At this early stage in the process, most of the employment impact has been in the technical and advisory areas and a number of enabling works have also begun. This year, €45 million will be invested from the proceeds of asset sales to meet costs associated with those enabling works. Construction on the N17-N18 project is planned to commence during 2014, with accommodation projects starting before year end.

In relation to the €150 million Exchequer stimulus announced last year, €60 million was invested in 2013 on the roads and energy efficiency projects, with the remainder due to be drawn down by the end of 2015. It is envisaged that around 3,000 jobs will be supported through this investment. Expenditure on national lottery licence funded projects will commence shortly once the transaction has been finalised. I can inform the House that I expect that to happen tomorrow. Due to the wide variety of projects being supported, figures for employment impact are not available now but the types of works involved generally represent areas of high labour intensity.

As I have indicated, a review of the public capital programme will be undertaken this year which will include an examination of the scope for using non-traditional funding sources to further augment capital investment. I am very conscious that we are constrained in terms of the quantum of money that will be available to us. We are spending between €3 billion and €3.5 billion per annum on capital projects. For as long as we can see into the future, we will be constrained financially. We need to be constructive in terms of looking to PPPs and investment from other sources to ensure we get as much infrastructural development and jobs as we can.

The national children's hospital is welcome, as is the construction of new classrooms to replace prefabricated buildings. I acknowledge that a great deal of work is being done and welcome the 3,000 additional jobs. We are currently experiencing a housing crisis in the private sector and in the social housing area. I recently read in a report that there is pent-up demand for 80,000 units in the Dublin area alone. On top of this, there is a huge demand for social housing. In the context of the envelope available for investment, can additional funding be provided for the provision of social and affordable housing? A large number of people renting in the private sector would like to purchase homes and have families.

I am very conscious of the issues raised by Deputy Humphreys. There are many large road projects under way in the transport sector. We also have large projects in the education sector because we need schools to meet the demographic change. We also need to invest in the Grangegorman project which I believe will be the flagship education project of this Administration. Housing is a new issue. It was for that reason I allocated, from the modest sum available in the budget for additional capital over and above the public capital programme, €30 million for housing. It is an issue I would like to revisit. I am aware the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, is concerned about rising rents and market forces pushing people out of the housing market. We cannot have a situation whereby we are chasing rising rents with more money from the Exchequer. I do not think that is the way to go. We need to return to some form of traditional house building. We are engaged in how that particular issue can be addressed.

My question is along a similar vein to that posed by Deputy Humphreys in that it relates to capital spending and the July 2012 stimulus package of €2.25 billion over a seven year period.

For me and, I imagine, for the Minister the key issue is jobs. At issue is not only construction jobs because many projects are also delivering sustainable jobs. On top of that, if the investments are strategic in nature, then there will also be long-term jobs by way of making the economy more competitive in terms of broadband. I am keen to hear the Minister's views on the matter but, to be honest, I am not confident about it because I have tried to track various announcements dating back to the previous Government as well as the current Government. The projects take so long. From the date they are announced until there are diggers on the ground takes several years. Let us consider my area in Cork. Certainly, a good deal of money is being spent on education and there is a new prison in Cork but other projects seem to get stuck in bureaucracy. Is there any initiative within the Department to review how projects can be rolled out with a view to accelerating them in order that we can get the job creation benefits for which they are intended?

I share the Deputy's concern in as much as public private partnerships take a long time to come to fruition. We had a major difficulty in the beginning because the market was so seared by the cancellation of PPP projects at the time of the economic collapse. We are going back to the same body of funders in the market and suggesting that we want them to bid for these projects and put in their money upfront. It takes a major effort. The first PPP we got over the line was the Newlands Cross and N11 project and that was almost totemic. Once we got that across, a growing confidence emerged.

I have a monthly monitoring system in my Department to watch all PPPs. I meet representatives from the National Development Finance Agency regularly and I will meet them again shortly. I met them last month as well. We are keen to ensure that there are no delays but there are several constraints. For example, I have asked for school bundles to be joined together where we have resources and if there is a market willing to fund it. Then, we have to deal with the construction capacity within the Irish economy to bid for large projects. I assure the Deputy that every possible measure that can be taken to ensure PPPs are delivered is being taken and I am confident that a good system is in train now.

My point was general and not specific to PPPs because there are still few of them in place in reality. The difficulty is with the capital budget, from the initial stage when it is announced to the design and through to construction. It seems to take forever. It is not only the delivery of projects. Let us look back. The Government announced in September 2011, two and a half years ago, that we would have a strategic investment fund on a statutory basis and that some money from the National Pensions Reserve Fund would be channelled into commercially feasible projects, but we are still waiting for the legislation. The Minister is responsible for capital expenditure and I would have expected that such legislation would have been fast-tracked. Instead, it seems to have simply got lost. I know we are expecting it shortly but we are two and a half years on.

That legislation does not fall within my remit but it will be published next month. That is no constraint. We have the agreement of Government to expend the money. We do not need the new legislation to allocate the funding and it has not been a constraint for me in pushing co-funding projects. That is not an issue.

Reference was made to non-PPP projects. There can be frustrations. For example, one project - I realise it is a PPP project - involves school bundles. Two of the planning applications were refused and that knocked things back and we had to start again. We were keen to have the children's hospital up-and-running by now but An Bord Pleanála made a decision on that. Then, we had to change the site and now it will take longer but it will be completed by 2018. We need to have construction started next year.

There is a frustration with these big projects. It takes time for the design, they must have careful planning, they must have the funding in place and they must have local community assent. That is the way we have. These things can sometimes cause difficulties. Even relatively small projects are faced with local opposition sometimes and those involved have to be dealt with, assuaged and encouraged, and the real concerns have to be addressed.

Reference was made to the Minister's efforts at job creation and the stimulus package. In particular, some points were made by Deputy Humphreys about housing. Does the Minister believe it is appropriate that Fingal County Council is currently offering staff an under-the-counter payment of €5,000 per employee to transfer out of the housing department? If we were to factor up that amount of money, it would be the equivalent of two full-time workers employed in the housing area.

My understanding was that under the Haddington Road agreement local authorities and organisations in the public sector were prevented from making any under-the-counter payments to secure deals on transfers. Will the Minister investigate this matter? The reality is that the local authority is proposing to use public funds to incentivise workers out of one area and to transfer to another area. Such moneys could have been used for job creation and at least two full-time jobs could have been created with the equivalent amount.

I know nothing about the charge the Deputy is making. It might be one that Deputy Daly may wish to bring to the attention of the local government auditor. I can only say to the Deputy that I am giving her a very fine new manager in Fingal County Council shortly. I will be sorry to lose Mr. Reid, who is the officer in charge of the reform unit in my Department. Deputy Daly will find when he gets out there that he will be an extraordinary asset to the county.

Will the Minister confirm whether under-the-counter payments were outlawed under the Haddington Road agreement?

I know nothing about that.

It is the Minister's deal.

The issue of under-the-counter payments never arose in anything. I have no idea what Deputy Daly is talking about.

Universal Health Insurance White Paper

Richard Boyd Barrett

Ceist:

7. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will report on his examination of the likely cost implications of universal health insurance and potential implications for sustainable public expenditure overall; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9312/14]

Dara Calleary

Ceist:

19. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform to set out his view on views expressed by his Department on the affordability of universal health insurance; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9446/14]

Richard Boyd Barrett

Ceist:

29. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform to outline his views on reported concerns within his Department regarding the potential cost implications of universal health insurance. [9313/14]

There has been quite a public spat, it would appear, between the Minister's Department and the Department of Health over the possible costs of universal health insurance. There have been suggestions that the Minister's Department believes the proposal could potentially threaten the financial stability of the State. There is talk of vast costs for people who would be brought into what is, essentially, obligatory private health insurance for prescription costs and so on. Figures have been bandied around of €1,000 or more per year for what would be, essentially, extra taxes to fund this proposal. Can the Minister tell us what he knows about the proposals that are being floated and their cost implications? When will the Minister pronounce on whether this scheme is actually a disaster? Some of us, as the Minister is aware, are strongly opposed to this model and believe we should go for a national health service model, not what is essentially mandatory private health insurance.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 7, 19 and 29 together.

The Deputies are referring to the White Paper, which is in draft form, on universal health insurance that is being developed by my colleague, the Minister for Health, Deputy James Reilly. Universal health insurance is a priority policy area for the Government. My Department, given its central role, is always engaged constructively with other Departments to ensure that policy development takes account of the impact on the economy, the Exchequer and the taxpayer. Universal health insurance is no different to any other policy area across any other Department. I am committed to working with the Minister, Deputy Reilly, and all the other members of the Government to ensure this policy is progressed. I understand that the Minister's paper will be submitted for Government approval and publication shortly. It will stimulate a debate on universal health insurance. That debate will be necessary and valuable and I look forward to contributing to it and to it determining the future for health delivery in the country.

As the Minister is aware, those of us who are opposed to this way of delivering health care have made the point that universal health insurance is mandatory private health insurance organised via the State imposing the system. It is similar to the United States or the Netherlands. Things that have to be factored in to the system include profit for the private health insurance companies, billing costs, administration costs, legal costs and advertising costs. Is it the case that the leaked White Paper and the associated comments from the Minister's Department indicate an awareness on the part of the Minister's Department that when we add in all these costs, the proposal will cost us an absolute fortune and that it is a mad project to embark upon? As much as universal health sounds wonderful, when we add in the word "insurance" and we mean private health insurance companies, then the costs blow up out of all proportion.

Those costs will be borne either by the services that are delivered or through extra taxes imposed on ordinary citizens who are already burdened with massive amounts of austerity taxes and cuts.

Quite clearly the Deputy will have a contribution to make to the debate when the paper is produced by my colleague the Minister for Health. Let us wait and see what the paper proposes. Let us then have that debate and consider the proposals from all sides, as we work together to form a health policy that will serve all the people properly.

As a former Minister for Health, I know the challenges facing every developed country to provide an affordable, quality health service. We all have a contribution to make to that debate.

There is more to it than that. Leaked documents suggest that, even though the paper is in draft form and the details are sketchy, it could cost €5 billion. We could be talking about an annual cost of €1,672 per person. There is even talk of €700 per year in drugs costs for medical card holders. These are terrifying figures. Will the Minister comment on them? From where do they come from and what does the Minister have to say about these costs? Is this an assessment of the potential cost of the scheme the Minister for Health, Deputy Reilly, is proposing? If so, it is terrifying.

I ask the Deputy not to terrify people.

That is what is being reported.

Do not believe everything that is reported.

So there is no substance to it.

The Deputy should wait until the paper is produced. He can then ask the questions and contribute to the debate, but let us work together to have an answer to one of the most intractable, difficult and challenging policy issues facing the governments of every developed country - that is, to provide an affordable, efficient, quality health service for a population that is ageing. We now enjoy longer life expectancy, thankfully, and while medicine is becoming more expensive it is capable of treating more conditions. Advances are being made in drugs and medical treatment generally.

We need to have an affordable system so that everybody can enjoy equal access to it. Let us have a debate about how that system can be constructed, but the Deputy should wait until the proposals are published. Leaks and comments will be made by all and sundry. I know people sometimes approach these matters with a partisan political axe to grind, but this is an important and fundamental issue for us to get right. Let us hear a frank and clear debate on the proposals once they are published.

Flood Relief Schemes Expenditure

Seán Fleming

Ceist:

8. Deputy Sean Fleming asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the measures that will be taken by the Office of Public Works to deal with the consequences of recent flooding; the total budget that will be spent on flood defences in 2014; the cost-benefit analysis that his Department applies when deciding on implementation of flood defence projects; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9441/14]

How does the Minister of State with responsibility for the Office of Public Works, Deputy Brian Hayes, propose to deal with the consequences of recent flooding? Does he consider that the budget allocation for this year is sufficient and has he carried out a cost-benefit analysis based on the information to date? How will he prioritise which projects go ahead first?

On 10 January, the OPW wrote to city and county managers in coastal areas indicating that it will accept applications, under its minor flood mitigation works and coastal protection scheme, for funding to assist with repairs to built flood defences and coastal protection structures which have been damaged by recent storms.

This is a once-off measure to reinstate built coastal defences to their pre-storm condition. Any work for which funding is sought will be carried out by the local authorities concerned. The Government decided on 11 February that funding of up to €70 million in total will be made available to local authorities to assist them with the repairs to damaged infrastructure. Of this total amount, and based on estimates submitted by local authorities, funding of about €20 million will be available to assist with repairs to damaged coastal protection structures this year.

It is also open to local authorities to carry out flood mitigation and coastal protection works using their own resources.

The OPW has been carrying out work to repair damage to the flood defence structures for which it is directly responsible and substantial progress has been made in this regard. The OPW does not provide direct financial assistance to individual property owners or businesses which have experienced flooding. Emergency financial aid and humanitarian assistance is available to households under the humanitarian assistance scheme operated by the Department of Social Protection.

The OPW is taking a number of key measures to deal with flooding generally. One is the progression of its programme of capital investment in major flood relief projects throughout the country. The OPW's budget this year for capital flood relief activities is €45 million and the biggest part of this will be used to progress ongoing and planned flood relief schemes in places such as Fermoy, Bandon and Skibbereen in County Cork, Ennis in County Clare, and the Dodder and Wad rivers in Dublin, as well as Waterford city, Templemore, Claregalway and Bray in County Wicklow.

A large part of the balance of the €45 million allocation will be used to progress other flood risk management work programmes which include the Catchment Flood Risk Assessment and Management (CFRAM) Studies, known as CFRAM.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House

The CFRAM programme is a core part of the strategy to deal with the most significant areas of flood risk nationally and involves a more sustainable, planned and risk based approach to dealing with flooding problems. Under the CFRAM programme, flood maps for these significant risk areas will be completed by the end of 2014 and flood risk management plans will be produced by 2016. The studies will consider the best possible options, both structural and non-structural, for dealing with the risks on a long-term basis and, when completed, will form the basis for decision-making on capital investment by the Government on long-term flood mitigation infrastructure into the future.

The emergency funding of up to €20 million being made available for repairs to damaged coastal protection infrastructure is additional to the €45 million OPW 2014 capital allocation for flood risk management.

Every major flood defence project either undertaken or funded by the OPW is subjected to a rigorous cost-benefit analysis and only schemes with a positive benefit-to-cost ratio are considered for further progression. Cost benefit is, of course, only one of the factors taken into account when decisions are made to progress schemes as a scheme needs to be environmentally acceptable as well as being acceptable to the general public in the relevant area. Schemes which will be advanced arising out of the CFRAM process will be subjected to a multi-criteria analysis before being progressed. These include technical, economic, social and environmental criteria.

This Government has prioritised investment in flood risk management by allocating some €225 million over the period 2012 to 2016 as part of its infrastructure and capital investment framework. This is a substantial financial commitment in current difficult conditions and underlines the priority the Government attaches to this area.

What moneys have been allocated by the Minister of State's Department? I understand he has a co-ordination role in this with other Departments, including the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, and the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. What moneys have been allocated to local authorities since the storms at the beginning of January? My understanding is that no money has been allocated. Local authorities have been spending on road works, sea defences, graveyards and piers, yet no hard cash has been allocated to them. Perhaps the Minister of State can outline what hard cash has been allocated to the various local authorities.

Substantial works have already begun, as the Deputy knows. Local authorities are already spending and have been told to keep on doing so, so that we can recoup the money for them after they have spent it. That has been the clear indication we have given to local authorities since the initial storm damage in the first few days of this year. The Government's assessment, based on local authority estimates, is that up to €70 million may well be required this year. We have a variety of schemes operated through my own Department, as well as the Departments referred to by the Deputy, whereby local authorities can apply for funds.

As regards the figure of €20 million allocated for flood defences, I will take the Deputy's own county of Galway as an example. According to the Galway county manager, we reckon that €1.25 million will be required for Galway city and county's flood defences this year. In that case therefore Galway city and county will apply to us under the minor works scheme. I have already told this House that I want those schemes turned around within ten days of hitting our desk in the Office of Public Works. That is what is currently happening. The moneys are already being sent to local authorities, but they must apply to us as is normally the case.

They applied to the Minister of State's Department in the beginning of January.

No, they did not.

The Minister of State says he told them to keep spending, but we know what will happen. They will send in the bills and the Minister of State will say, "Hang on a second, we did not agree to that particular project". They need a specific allocation of money. In discussions I have had with Galway County Council, officials made if clear that they require an actual commitment of cash. In other words, they want approval letters, rather than being told "You keep spending it, and you'll be all right". That is what is happening at the moment, but it is about time the Minister of State put his money where his mouth is. He should put the money on the table for local authorities. It is not a large amount of money because they will be slow enough spending it, but it is a huge exposure. I have been told that Galway County Council is out of money. It has used up every kitty to try to do emergency work because it has received no money yet from the Government for roads, piers or coastal defences.

I have to reply.

I call Deputy McDonald for a brief question.

I know the Minister of State wants to answer that question.

I do but the Deputy will not let me.

Will the Minister of State comment on the issue of insurance for homes affected by floods? Obviously, homes and communities affected in the most recent storms are of primary concern. Equally, however, as a Dubliner, the Minister of State will be aware of many communities - some of them in my constituency - that have been repeatedly flooded. It is not because they are on the coast - they are in the inner city - but because of the inadequate drainage system presided over by Dublin City Council.

I know the Minister of State has had discussions with the insurance industry. Can he, therefore, tell us briefly what progress has been made in that regard?

I hope to be in a position to make a public announcement about a new memorandum of understanding between the Office of Public Works and the Insurance Federation.

That memorandum will relate to their understanding of what will be the position when we have concluded works on capital schemes and, in view of the funding we have invested, the fact that they will have a responsibility for reinsuring the communities involved. I hope to be in a position to make the announcement in respect of this matter in the next six weeks or so. I assure the Deputy that there is no lack of effort on the part of the staff of the OPW in respect of this matter. I hope the insurance industry will sign up to the memorandum to which I refer and accept its responsibility in respect of this matter, particularly in light of the significant amount of funding - some €250 million - that will be provided to the OPW over a five-year period in order that it might proceed with flood prevention schemes throughout the country.

I wish to reply to the rather long-winded question posed by my colleague from Galway West. He knows - because I already told him - but, for whatever reason, he does not want to accept-----

It is a political reason.

Obviously. In any event, the Deputy is aware that the Government has allocated €70 million in respect of this particular crisis. Local authorities apply to us in respect of existing schemes. We normally spend approximately €3.5 million on the minor works scheme. This year we will spend multiples of that. When the €3.5 million to which I refer is spent, we will obtain a Supplementary Estimate from the Minister, Deputy Howlin. That could happen in March, May or October and it will be based on the applications from local authorities. I do not want the nonsensical charge made by Deputy Ó Cuív to remain unanswered. We have spoken to the engineers and county managers on a daily basis and told them to get on with the task. We do not want any bickering or bureaucracy in this instance. They should spend the money and then recoup it from us. This has already happened in some instances. The Deputy might not want, for his own propaganda purposes, to accept it but we are getting on with the task of fixing flood defences. That needs to be done and it is our priority.

Capital Expenditure Programme

Éamon Ó Cuív

Ceist:

9. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the gross voted expenditure for 2006; the estimated gross voted expenditure for 2014; the major increases and decreases in the Votes across Departments for those years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [9300/14]

This question relates to gross voted expenditure - this includes expenditure relating to all Government Departments but excludes anything that is not directly voted for services - for the years 2006 and 2014. I will be interested in discovering how the two years compared, particularly as the level of expenditure in 2006 was supposed to be significant. I will be especially interested in hearing about the areas in which expenditure has increased and those where it has decreased.

Overall gross voted expenditure for 2006 - I am surprised the Deputy picked that year - amounted to just over €50 billion compared to a gross expenditure figure of €53 billion for 2014.  This represents an increase, in nominal terms, of €3 billion or 6% over the nine-year period the Deputy has specified.  The 2014 Estimate for gross current expenditure is €49.7 billion, a nominal increase of €6.3 billion or 15% over the period while capital expenditure has decreased in nominal terms by €3.3 billion or 50% since 2006. While overall expenditure levels show an increase between 2006 and 2014, it is important to note the rapid and unsustainable escalation of expenditure which occurred between 2006 and 2009.  I am sure this was in no way connected to the general election which took place during that period. Overall gross spending increased by over €13 billion or 26% during the period in question and stood at over €63 billion in 2009.

As the Deputy is aware, we have been undergoing very challenging economic and fiscal corrections which have necessitated significant expenditure consolidation.  The consolidation measures this Government has introduced have ensured Ireland's successful exit from the EU-IMF programme of financial support. To fully appreciate the scale of the consolidation, it must be noted that it has been achieved against the backdrop of being obliged to respond to increased needs for public services and supports. The numbers on the live register increased from 160,000 in January 2006 to just under 400,000 in January 2014. Pressure on primary social protection payments, such as pensions, working-age income supports, working-age employment supports and illness-related supports, also increased during the period. This pressure is reflected in the allocation of €19.6 billion to the Department of Social Protection this year. That is €6.1 billion above the amount allocated in 2006.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House

Consolidation of health expenditure has taken place within a context of significant demands for services. The numbers of medical and GP cards increased from approximately 1.2 million in 2006 to approximately 2 million at the end of 2013, a significant increase of over 800,000. While funding for the education and skills Vote has increased by €900 million between 2006 and 2014, this was primarily due to the national training fund and FÁS transferring to the Vote in 2011. During the period in question there have been increased demographic pressures on services with the number of students at primary and secondary school increasing from about 814,000 in 2007 to almost 890,000 in 2013.

While the provision and costs of public services remain the responsibility of the relevant Ministers and their Departments, my Department has introduced measures to help ensure that expenditure targets continue to be met and that public expenditure remains sustainable. The medium-term expenditure framework - with three-year ceilings for ministerial Vote groups - was placed on a statutory footing with the enactment of the Minister and Secretaries Amendment Act 2013. This provides greater clarity and certainty about expenditure allocations and allows for structural, medium-term planning and prioritisation within each area. On 14 January, my Department published a new public service reform plan which covers the period 2014 to 2016.  The new plan includes more than 200 actions, with clear timelines for delivery.  The implementation of the new plan, alongside the measures introduced to enhance expenditure management, will enable the Government build a new public service that is focused on protecting and improving public services within the constraints set by the overall national and EU level fiscal frameworks.

Is it accurate to state that the amount spent on education between 2006 and 2014 increased by approximately €1 billion? Interestingly enough, and despite the absolute chaos in the health service, the provision for health this year is exactly the same as that which was made in 2006. The allocations for social protection and education and skills have increased by somewhere in the region of €8 billion between them. Is this explained by the fact that there is a Labour Minister for Social Protection, a Labour Minister for Education and Skills and a Fine Gael Minister for Health?

No, it is not. The very significant increase in the social protection budget would not have happened had Fianna Fáil remained in government. That party had planned to cut social protection by a further €1.5 billion by now.

Fianna Fáil would have impoverished people. We did not do that and this Government took a consolidated and uniform view on the matter.

The Deputy referred to education and skills, the increase in respect of which over the period was €900 million. This was primarily due to the national training fund and FÁS transferring to the Vote in 2011. He will be aware that €500 million of the reduction in the health Vote for this year relates to the fact that we created the Department of Children and Youth Affairs and a new Child and Family Agency. The money in question has been transferred to the aforementioned Department.

Regardless of whatever Machiavellian construction the Deputy, for his own base reasons, wants to put on the figures, there is no doubt that we have taken the broken economy bequeathed to us after his party's sojourn in government and sought to fix it. By the time the 2011 general election took place, the then Government was barely constitutional because it contained only six or seven extant members. We have rebuilt public confidence in our capacity to turn our own affairs, exited the bailout into which Fianna Fáil placed us and maintained social spending at a decent rate.

The Government has done so by following the four-year plan we laid out for it.

Which Fianna Fáil was obliged to put in place.

Deputy Dowds should not be rude.

No one could accuse Deputy Dowds of being rude.

Before they went into government, those opposite derided that plan and stated that it was not necessary.

We renegotiated it.

Nothing of significance was changed. It was always going to be renegotiable because minor changes can always be made.

Fianna Fáil did not renegotiate it.

There was no significant renegotiation of the plan. The biggest renegotiation was done for the Government by the Greeks, who managed to have the interest rate reduced.

So it was the Greeks what done it.

Shame on those in Fianna Fáil. They wrecked the country.

We benefited from that. Will the Minister detail the renegotiation achieved in respect of the four-year plan?

If I had more than 25 seconds available, I would be very happy to do so.

I will give the Minister a minute.

I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle. Within our first 100 days in office we reallocated €500 million in respect of job creation in the tourism sector, with obvious effect. We tore up the promissory note which would have required us to make bullet payments of €3 billion every year for an extended period. Those in Fianna Fáil stated that this note was not renegotiable and could not be altered. Fianna Fáil also entered into a ridiculous agreement whereby we were charged interest on borrowings at 7%. We renegotiated this agreement so that the payments relating to it will be made over a 40-year period at an interest rate of 1%. We also renegotiated a reduction of 2.5% in respect of the interest rates relating to other loans. The Deputy stated that the Greeks were responsible for this and that it was nothing to do with us at all. When the Portuguese obtained a reduction of 1%, those in Fianna Fáil stated that we should seek similar. They indicated that we were a disgrace because we did not achieve a 1% reduction when in fact we obtained a reduction of 2.5%. That shows the level of our determination.

We were going to-----

We have not finished yet. We will put right the wrongs the Deputy's party have done to this country. Regardless of whatever way he and his colleagues might want to try to reconstruct history, they should remember that the people of Ireland are not fools.

Written Answers follow Adjournment.
Barr
Roinn