asked the Minister for Health the reason for the delay in proceeding with the placing of a contract for the construction of an extension to the training centre for the mentally handicapped at Kilcornan, Clarinbridge, County Galway.

8.

asked the Minister for Health the reason a contract has not yet been entered into with the successful tenderer (details supplied) for the construction of stage two of Kilcornan training centre for the mentally handicapped which is run by the Brothers of Charity at Clarinbridge, County Galway.

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

A decision as to when a contract will be placed for the extension to the training centre for the mentally handicapped at Kilcornan will depend on the availability of capital resources.

I cannot, at this time, say when I will be in a position to indicate when work on the project will begin. The health capital programme is under review by the Government in the context of its review of public expenditure generally.

I should like to ask the Minister if it is not unusual that, where a decision had been made in the Department by a Minister to invite tenders for the construction of this much needed facility for mentally handicapped people, the brakes should now be put on? Will the Minister agree that it is unusual and strange, where tenders have been examined and the architect has informed the successful tenderer that he is to get the contract, that she should put on the brakes on a much needed project. Surely the Department would not have agreed to put the building out to tender if provision had not already been made for the capital expenditure involved?

I hope to be able to answer part of the Deputy's question when I am more aware of the capital resources available to me. I agree that a tender for the sum of £740,762.42p was the lowest and that approval has not issued so far but I hope, in the light of the resources available to me, I might be in a position to approve this tender in the very near future.

Is it intended to approve this tender before the end of the year? Will the Minister agree that the capital to commence this project was provided within the capital funds given by the former Minister for Finance to the Department of Health? Will the Minister agree that a decision not to go ahead with this project this year would mean the withdrawal of capital which is there and was voted for this project by the House? It is not a question of additional capital because the capital has been provided. In fact, an initial sum was to have been expended on it this year. Will the Minister agree that the question of providing capital resources for the adult mentally handicapped, something which is involved in this contract, must be a priority and that any of the facilities which can be provided within the resources available should be provided? Will the Minister agree that the facility in question was being provided within available resources which were voted by this House?

Resources are not available to me in this instance. I agree that as far as the mentally handicapped are concerned it is a priority and the care of mentally handicapped will be a priority with me. However, such matters can only be so considered in the light of the finance available to me. This finance is not available to me at present.

The Minister will recall that very frequently in this House over the years there was unanimous agreement that the provision of services for the mentally handicapped was probably the most urgent in the entire health services complex. Will the Minister further agree that this failure to proceed with this very necessary facility is a further manifestation of the cold reality of the monetarist policies being pursued by the Government? Will the Minister agree that in this concrete way we see the brutal reality of those policies and we see the results of letting the affairs of the country be dictated by ivory tower academic economists?

I stated in the written reply that the capital programme was under review.

It is very sad to see the Minister in this position.

I have said the matter is under review but I am not saying that the money will not be available.

Would the Minister agree that the money was actually provided for this project, was voted by this House and was there and that the money has now been taken back from the Minister? There is no other way in which this money could be unavailable at this point.

I do not agree.

May I ask a final supplementary question?

I have allowed too many supplementaries already.

As a result of the action of the Minister for Finance a large number of people have been put out of work. We will support the Labour Party if they stand up to it.