asked the Minister for Finance (a) the annual cost of servicing the national debt at 31 December 1980; (b) the amount of the national debt in currencies other than Irish pounds and (c) the increase in the cost of servicing the debt caused by the falling value of the Irish pound.

8.

asked the Minister for Finance the external debt in currencies other than the pounds sterling at 31 December 1980; and the cost of servicing it.

I propose, with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, to take Questions Nos. 7 and 8 together.

The estimated annual cost of servicing the national debt outstanding at 31 December 1980 is £882 million. The national debt in currencies other than Irish pounds at the same date was approximately £2,200 million using current exchange rates. Exchange rate movements from the date of borrowing account for approximately £18 million of the annual interest cost.

The external debt in currencies other than the pound sterling at 31 December 1980 was approximately £2,156 million using current exchange rates. The estimated cost in 1981 of servicing this amount is £215 million. In addition, external debt in the form of holdings by non-residents of Government securities denominated in Irish pounds amounted to approximately £445 million at 31 December 1980 and the estimated cost of servicing this in 1981 is £46 million.

Would the Minister not admit the truth, that is, that the national debt has more than doubled in the last four years, in other words, this Government borrowed more in four years than was borrowed the previous 55 years, from 1922 to 1977? Will he not admit he is putting the country in pawn and that our children's children will be paying for the money Fianna Fáil borrowed in the past four years?

No, the Minister will not admit that.

Of course he will not.

The policy of this Government has been adhered to——

Doubling the national debt? Fianna Fáil did not tell that to the electorate in 1977.

It has not been doubled but obviously Deputy L'Estrange is pursuing the same line as his leader who believes that when he goes abroad he should make damning statements about our economy. I want to tell those gentlemen of doom and gloom what this Government's policy has been, and will continue to be. During the last two days on the economic debate in which Deputy FitzGerald did not take part — despite the tact that he is now making so much noise — I explained our policy to this House. The position is that this year alone we have borrowed for productive investment purposes to improve our infrastructure. If mistakes were made in the past they were made during periods when such investment did not take place. We need improved infrastructure because it will give us increased activity and will give us a better chance of coming out of the world recession in a better condition.

The Minister said he adhered to Fianna Fáil policy. Has he read his action for national destruction document, the Fianna Fáil manifesto, which said that the Government were to borrow 10½ per cent of the gross national product in 1979 and 8 per cent in 1980? Now the Minister says he is adhering to this policy. Is he not prepared to admit that in 1979 he borrowed up to 14 per cent of GNP and in 1980 close to 14 per cent? If he continues as he has done in the past, it is estimated that he will borrow at least 16 per cent of GNP——

I would not accept the last figure given by Deputy L'Estrange. That Deputy is always giving figures out of his head but what——

I am quoting from the manifesto.

The Minister, without interruption.

I read the figures from the manifesto.

The last figure the Deputy quoted was not in the manifesto.

Was the figure given by independent economists wrong?

Senator Whitaker even admitted——

The Deputy should permit the Minister to reply.

Obviously, Deputy FitzGerald wants to reply.

He is able to do so.

Apparently Deputy Cosgrave did not think he was.

The little boy that Santa Claus forgot for a long number of years.

The Deputy should speak for himself.

The Deputy has raised the usual type of question we get from him in the House. The House must realise the serious downturn in world activities following 1977. I spelled out here in the last two days the increased cost of oil alone to our small open economy. We cannot be unaware of the world situation generally.

Hit me now with the child in my arms, is that the Minister's attitude?

I should like to ask the Minister what he expects will be the cost of servicing the national debt next year due to the fact that £882 million was the cost last year?

I presume the Deputy is referring to 1981. Obviously, at this stage, because so many factors are involved, it is difficult to estimate. I cannot at this stage give the Deputy the information he has asked for.

Does the Minister accept it as a satisfactory situation that a Minister for Finance cannot foresee, even approximately, eight months ahead the cost of the national debt? Would that be acceptable in an ordinary business?

Forward planning?

The Deputy must accept that there are many influencing factors which at this time of the year are difficult to determine. They make it extremely difficult to estimate accurately. I would prefer in the House to be as accurate as possible with information.

The Minister is supposed to be running the country.

They are ruining it.

I should like the Minister to clarify his original reply. There were a number of figures in it and I am anxious to make sure I got them right. Was I correct in understanding that he said the annual cost of servicing the national debt at 31 December 1980 was £882 million.

That is correct.

And that the extra cost due to changes in exchange rates on the foreign debt proportion of that, which itself is about one-quarter, is £80 million?

No, £18 million.

I thought the figure was a little on the high side and I wondered how it could have reached such an extraordinary figure. It is £18 million in respect of roughly one-quarter of the total national debt outstanding, which is a very substantial figure.

It is less than what the Deputy though originally but, of course, the Deputy is always confused with figures anyway.

And he could not care less.

The Minister cannot see more than one month ahead.

And the Deputy could not cover a count in Leitrim.