To date my Department has not received any application from Dublin Corporation for funding the proposed works at this location. I understand, however, that the reconstruction of these roads would cost in the region of £1.2 million. It is a matter in the first instance for local authorities to provide the funding required to meet their statutory obligations in respect of non-national roads in their areas, although they may supplement their own resources by using the annual State grants provided by my Department.
The discretionary block grant of £3 million which the corporation will receive in 1996 is a considerable sum of money which is being made available by my Department for maintenance and improvement works on non-national roads in our capital city. It will allow the corporation, in conjunction with the £3 million it will provide out of its resources, to undertake a considerable amount of work during 1996. It is still necessary for the corporation to determine its priorities and to face up to the difficult choices which present themselves in this context but this is no different to the problems faced by every local authority.
I should explain that in the case of county councils, discretionary grants from my Department are generally calculated on the basis of mileages. This approach would not make a lot of sense in the case of urban authorities, however, which can have low mileages of non-national roads but with considerable demands being made on them because of the higher volumes of traffic and general usage. Because of this, discretionary grants for urban authorities are allocated on the basis of population size within bands. Under this system, block grants to urban authorities will range in 1996 from £40,000 to £3 million in the case of Dublin Corporation, with the next largest grant after Dublin Corporation amounting to only £1 million. It is clear from the foregoing that the corporation is fairly treated in this regard.
The argument has sometimes been advanced that urban roads generally are disadvantaged when it comes to the distribution of non-national road grants, as they are outside of the restoration programme which applies only to such roads in county council areas. I categorically reject this suggestion. It is universally accepted that the major problem with non-national roads lies in county council areas. I categorically reject this suggestion. It is universally accepted that the major problem with non-national roads lies in county council areas and that, relatively speaking, urban roads are in a more satisfactory condition. Because of this, the Government has decided to concentrate the restoration programme on the areas of greatest need, namely, regional and county roads in county council areas. This does not mean that the problems with urban roads are not recognised or that State assistance for these roads has, or will be, reduced due to the county focused restoration programme. In fact, while roads in urban areas constitute 3 per cent of the road network, State grants for roads in urban areas in 1996 will amount to over 8 per cent of the total grants available for non-national roads. This demonstrates clearly that not only are urban roads not being neglected, they are being treated favourably.
An additional source of funding available for non-national roads is the EU co-financed scheme of specific grants for improvement works which promote employment and economic activity. Allocations in respect of individual projects put forward annually by local authorities are determined by the Minister following an assessment of their individual merits and their compliance with EU approved criteria relating to the grants scheme. The Operational Programme for Transport, 1994-1999 provides that road investment on such improvement works on non-national roads amounting to £225 million will be co-financed by the EU over the period 1994-1999.
Under this scheme Dublin Corporation received grant payments of £38,000 in 1994 and £54,000 in 1995. The Beach Road/Strand Road project was not included in the corporation's proposals for funding in either of those years. The allocation to the corporation under the scheme for 1996 is £800,000 for road works in the Custom House Docks area. Again, the scheme which is the subject of this debate was not included in the Corporation's applications submitted for consideration for funding this year. As I have indicated, the EU scheme will remain in operation up to the end of 1999.
On 4 September, 1996 my Department invited local authorities to submit applications for consideration for funding in 1997. The corporation has yet to submit its proposals. It is open to it to consider whether to include this proposal for funding in any or all of the remaining years of the EU co-financed scheme.
However, I must point out that decisions on funding for projects submitted under the scheme are based on the strict EU eligibility criteria governing the scheme, the priority attaching to different projects, the needs of different areas and the limited funds available. In this regard therefore, it would be a matter for the corporation to determine its priorities in selecting projects under this scheme and to submit appropriate proposals to my Department.
Non-national road grants have been fully allocated this year and there are no monies available to the Minister from which an additional grant could be made to Dublin Corporation for this scheme or, in fact, to any local authority. I have outlined the various sources of funding available to the corporation and I am sure that the House will agree that it is now a matter for it to decide on how to progress with the proposal.
