andMr. Tully asked the Minister for Transport the reasons CIE failed to take up the full capital allocation of £24 million estimated in the public capital programme 1980 and left the sum of £1.34 million outstanding; the areas in which this money was not expended; the number of jobs which were not created as a consequence of the non-expenditure of this money; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle I propose to take Questions Nos. 6 and 7 together.

The shortfall in the outturn on the capital expenditure allocated to the transport sector is attributable to a shortfall in the expenditure by the air companies and CIE.

The allocation for the air companies' capital programme in 1980 was £21.35 million. The actual outturn was £18 million resulting in a shortfall of £3.35 million. This arose from the exercise by the air companies of tight control of capital expenditure in 1980, which resulted in a reduction in the expenditure originally proposed on aircraft modification, workshop development and spares.

So far as CIE are concerned, I understand from the board that the difference between the actual capital expenditure in 1980 and the capital allocation of £24 million arose in connection with the Dublin suburban rail electrification programme. CIE have informed me that provision had been made in the original allocation for possible down-payments which it was expected would be requested by some suppliers but these down-payments were either not requested or did not arise until early 1981. In other cases there was some delay until 1981 in the supply of materials in respect of which delivery was originally expected late in 1980.

CIE have indicated that the job creation and employment levels in the project were not adversely affected by these factors.

In view of the success of the management of CIE in minimising the take up of funds in relation to the suburban rail programme, are the Department now prepared to reward that good management by enabling CIE to increase their current account subsidy this year from approximately £65 million to the credit of at least £1.34 million?

I understood that the question referred to capital allocations for 1981. It must be remembered that for 1981 it is £49 million. That is a very sizeable increase on what it was last year. That is a show of good faith by the Government.

Perhaps the Minister's unfortunate recent accident impaired his hearing. In case he has not heard my question I will ask him again. If the management in CIE have been able to save £1.34 million worth of money, whether it is capital or current, are the Department now in a position to reward good management by increasing the available sums of money to CIE in this current year?

There is nothing wrong with my hearing at all.

I am delighted to hear it.

The situation is that the Government have made adequate funds available to CIE to maintain services and to provide the necessary capital allocation for 1981 to the level of £49 million. This, I suggest, is a great advance on what it was last year. It is to be hoped that CIE will make the best use possible of the money made available to them.

Is the Minister of State aware that the Chairman and the Managing Director of CIE are this afternoon meeting representatives of the unions involved to discuss the effect of the cut-backs in the real amount of money available to CIE to see what services and jobs may be terminated, reduced or lost with the Government's programme now of job reduction? Finally, if a State company save money by good management, may we take it that good management is going to be rewarded by that money being taken away? Are the Government not, in fact, taking away the incentive to good management by not allowing them to transfer those funds on to the current account requirement which they need of at least £80 million, and not the £65 million that they are currently getting?

I am aware that CIE management are in constant negotiation with the unions concerning all matters relating to their operations. I understand also that the main part of the Deputy's question was concerned with the capital programme and I have given a fair and honest answer to that.

Ceist 8.

In other words, good management gets the hammer.

Good management is always rewarded by Fianna Fáil.

The party are in some trouble now.

There is now an incentive for State companies to lose money.