asked the Minister for Finance if he will give details of the part of the total allocation of funds by the EEC which will be spent by the Office of Public Works; the schemes on which it will be spent; and the amount of EEC funds it is anticipated will be spent this year.

EEC funds to the extent of £5.5 million, that is, half of the total cost estimated at £11 million, were allocated for arterial drainage works in the west of Ireland to be carried out by the Office of Public Works. The programme approved by the EEC provides for arterial drainage schemes in the following catchment areas: Corrib-Mask-Robe, Counties Mayo and Galway; Boyle, Counties Roscommon, Sligo, Mayo; Bonet, Counties Leitrim and Sligo.

Works under the Corrib-Mask-Robe will probably start early in 1979 and on the other two schemes at a later date. There will be no expenditure in the current year.

The Minister supplied me with information I did not want but he did not get down to the core of the question as far as I am concerned. Will the Minister state if his Department or the Office of Public Works are continuing with their own programmes financed by State money in addition to the EEC money, or are the Department using EEC money on its own to carry out programmes on which the Department should be engaged?

I understand the Deputy has a similar question later on on the Order Paper. I suggest that it might be more appropriate to wait for that question. I might add that 50 per cent of the cost is met by EEC funds.

12.

asked the Minister for Finance why allocations from the EEC Regional Fund are channelled into the Central Fund and not necessarily used for the projects specified.

The regulation governing the regional fund allows member states the option of using contributions from the fund either (i) to supplement the national aid granted to the project in question; or (ii) as a partial repayment of national aid, on the basis that fund assistance is used to supplement the overall regional development efforts of member states.

As the Deputy is aware, it is the second of these methods which has been used in Ireland, receipts from the fund being applied to the financing of increases in the public capital programme.

I am still not convinced that the existing arrangements for using fund receipts are the best way of achieving the objective of demonstrating clearly that the moneys received are used to finance additional investment especially in the areas of greatest need. Accordingly, as I mentioned in a reply to a parliamentary question earlier this year, the matter is being re-examined at my request by my Department. This re-examination cannot be completed until the review of the fund regulation which is currently taking place at Community level has been finalised.

Does the Minister agree that the present method of redistribution is not satisfactory?

My dissatisfaction with the present method is that it does not demonstrate clearly that the regional fund money is being used in addition to national moneys. This should be clearly demonstrated and I do not think the present method does this.

In view of the fact that such moneys are averaging only something in the region of £6,500,000 in the past three years, does the Minister not agree that separate segregation and administration in the context envisaged by him at this time do not appear to be very fruitful until such time as the regional fund is of some consequence in terms of the public capital programme?

I do not think the principle is affected by the amount. While I do not have the figures here, I think the Deputy's version of £6,500,000 as an average is not accurate. Although it is extremely small by reference to what we would wish to have, it is considerably bigger than that.

Did the Tánaiste not say yesterday in the EMS debate in reply to Deputy FitzGerald that in the past three years the total income from the regional fund was £18.8 million and the total moneys sought were in the region of £38 million?

The Deputy is correct except that he did not grasp the point that I was not referring to the past three years but to the three years 1974, 1975 and 1976 when the Coalition Government were in office and had renegotiated the fund.

The Tánaiste will agree that in the last three years there has been no particular increase and that my average of £6½ million is correct?

No.

Question No. 13.

Would the Minister agree that it is completely against the spirit of the regional fund to have the money channelled into the Exchequer when it should be spent in the depressed areas of agriculture?

That question was asked twice already.

It was not.

It was asked today.

Obviously the Minister was wearing two hats when he was on this side.

When I was on that side I objected to the way it was being dealt with. I am still objecting to it and I am trying to change it.

The Minister is not doing anything about it.

I cannot do anything about it until the Community complete their review of the fund, which is expected to be shortly. When that is done I will deal with it, unlike the Deputy who attempted to defend the present position where it was being poured into the Exchequer. In my time, at least it is being used to top up. I am now trying to ensure that it is demonstrated, something which the Deputy and his colleagues were at great pains to conceal, because they knew the real truth in their time.

The Minister has done nothing about it and he has been in office for a year and a half.