asked the Minister for Economic Planning and Development how a figure of £26,000 per unit for inner city housing was obtained, as indicated in paragraph 5.8, page 43 of the Government's White Paper on National Development 1977-80.

The figure of £26,000 referred to in paragraph 5.8 of the White Paper is an estimate supplied to me by the Department of the Environment of the level of finished all-in-cost per unit of accommodation which may be reached in the case of one or more schemes in the Dublin Corporation's current city residential redevelopment programme.

Does the Minister agree that he has used, for the benefit of argument against the provision of inner city housing, the uppermost potential figure?

I do not accept that it is automatic argument against inner city development. It is perfectly valid to point out the cost that may arise in some cases.

Will the Minister make any further contact with the Department of the Environment to assess the basis and the criteria on which they came to this figure because if Deputy Quinn is right, on the face of it the figures given here for inner city houses would suggest that further development should be on the outskirts rather than in the centre?

May I simply say that there will be continuing contacts between the Department of the Environment and my Department? I see nothing wrong in stating a fact so long as it is a fact.

Would the Minister not in future use an average figure rather than the uppermost figure and request that an average cost is provided rather than the uppermost figure because the argument which subsequently emerges——

I think the Deputy is reading too much into the figures quoted. The purpose of the quotation was to illustrate the nature of the costs which could arise. There is no intention of indicating any settled framework policy of the future. Surely the whole context in which the statement was made was one in which we were indicating the need for a continuing review of policy in this area as in other areas.