asked the Minister for Finance if he has satisfied himself with the level of co-operation between the various Government Departments who have responsibility for administering the EEC-aided Border counties fund.

2.

asked the Minister for Finance the measures he proposes to take to ensure the better take-up of allocations from the Border counties fund by local authorities, Government Departments and State agencies.

While the Department of Finance have an involvement in this EEC scheme for the Border counties I tabled this question to the Taoiseach because I felt he should have responsibility for the various Government Departments involved in the scheme.

As the Deputy has often heard from this Chair, the Chair has no control over the transfer of questions.

The Department of Finance were equally guilty of not administering that scheme and I felt the Taoiseach should have stepped in with the four Departments concerned and should have seen that the money was taken up.

I ask the Deputy to allow Questions to go on.

I propose, with the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.

As the Deputy is aware, the Special Border Areas Programme, which is centrally administered by my Department, involves a number of Government Departments, local authorities and State agencies. I am satisfied with the level of co-operation between the various Departments and other bodies concerned. My Department have instituted a procedure for convening at regular intervals meetings of the various Departments to ensure that there is more effective co-ordination and co-operation in the administration of the programme.

As regards the take-up of the allocation from the Special Border Areas Programme Fund, there has been a considerable improvement in the position this year. At the end of 1982 there was an unused balance of over £2 million in the fund. With the 1983 allocation of £2 million the total available for use in 1983 was over £4 million. On the basis of the most up-to-date estimates from the various Departments and agencies concerned, I now expect that the total available in the fund will be taken up practically in full this year.

Was this improvement due to the Minister's intervention following the debate we had here on 21 and 22 June this year?

The improvements to which I have referred were already in train at that stage. I had a further review of the measures that were in operation following the debate we had this year and I believe it has helped us very substantially to ensure particularly that the agencies other than State Departments have been a bit more diligent in the take-up of the funds that have been made available.

Would the Minister agree that he was concerned on that occasion at the poor take-up and that it seemed to be a great pity, considering the state of the country in relation to unemployment, that this money was not taken up within the period? It is a five-year programme and in all probability we may not be able to get that extended when the five years expire.

During the debate to which the Deputy has referred and on occasions previous to the last debate we had here, I made it very clear that I was rather dissatisfied at the fact that the take-up of the funds was not what we might wish it to be. I am very glad to say that we will now arrive, as I said, at a situation this year where the total amount available in the fund for this year of £4 million will all or practically all be taken up during the course of this year. I hope we will be able to continue that for the remainder of the lifetime of the fund.

Would the Minister state if those co-ordinating meetings were taking place before that debate when I asked him to put in the boot wherever he felt there was some slackness? Were those co-ordinating meetings, particularly with the outside bodies, other than direct State control bodies, taking place before that debate?

Since the fund was set up my Department have been concerned to ensure that there was proper co-ordination between all the bodies. The co-ordination was, as I said, in train before the debate. Following the debate and the concerns expressed on both sides of the House we looked at it again with a view to ensuring that the co-ordination bit more deeply and had to a greater extent the effect we desired to see.

What does "in train" mean?

"In train" has a very particular meaning in English. It corresponds, as the Deputy knows, to the phrase en train in French and it corresponds to several other phrases in Greek and Latin with which, no doubt, the Deputy would wish to acquaint us.

Did co-ordination take place before that debate?

This does not seem to be relevant to the question.

I am asking the Minister did the co-ordination take place before that meeting?

Deputy Michael O'Kennedy.

I asked a question. Did meetings of this committee take place before that debate?

Deputy Michael O'Kennedy.

I am sorry, but I have rights here as a Deputy.

Will Deputy Wilson please resume his seat until I explain?

I will do that, but I will get up again to ensure that the question is answered.

Deputy Wilson asked a question. I paused for a reasonable time and then I called for another answer. I will not wait all day and obstruct Question Time.

Did the meetings of this co-ordinating committee take place before that debate?

I have already pointed out to the Deputy that from the period of the beginning of operation of this fund it has been the concern of my Department to ensure that proper co-ordination takes place. I would remind the Deputy of what I said in my reply to the original question from Deputy Leonard, which was that my Department have instituted a procedure for convening at regular intervals meetings of the various Departments to ensure that there is more effective co-ordination. The process of co-ordination has been there since the beginning of the operation of the fund.

The Minister did not answer the question I asked.

Would the Minister indicate that the money spent on these projects in the first instance is additional to what the Government would normally spend in the course of their capital programme in this region, as is the intention of the EEC Cross Border Fund? In view of the fact that a number of Government authorities, as he has indicated, are involved in this, can the Minister assure us that there will be no wasteful duplication in the course of the examination by these various authorities to ensure the maximum impact of these funds? May I also ask the Minister if the Government have designated the Border regions for special priority under the capital programme in view of the need to ensure that the infrastructure in those regions——

That seems to be a separate question.

No, it is not; it is related.

The Chair does not think it is related.

Will they give special priority to the Border regions?

Deputy O'Kennedy does not need me to remind him of the rules and procedures governing the operation of the Regional Fund in this country and the Special Border Fund is part of the overall Regional Fund. The intention of expenditures under that fund is to ensure that the total amount of capital investments that will be undertaken will be increased in each member state of the Community, including this State, by the amount that is made available through the fund on the simple proposition that without the assistance of the Regional Fund there would be less available in total for capital investment. That applies to the Special Border Areas Fund, which is in the non quota part of the Regional Fund, as it does to the overall Regional Fund. There is no doubt, and I know the Deputy is aware of this, that the assistance we get from the Regional Fund increases the total amount of investment that is carried on in this country. As to the question of duplication——

The Minister has not answered the question.

I answered the question fully, Deputy. As to the question of duplication, I am not sure what the Deputy has in mind in that connection. A number of different agencies are involved in the operations that are covered by the Special Border Areas Programme. We have a number of local authorities — for example Bord Fáilte — involved and each is involved in a different kind of operation. That is the case because the intention of the operations of the programme is to cover a variety of things and that is where co-ordination becomes important. I can assure the Deputy, however, that there is no duplication in the operation. As to the question of priority, the public capital programme each year is set out in accordance with what are considered to be the priorities for investment generally in the Community.

We have spent 15 minutes on this question and I ask Deputies to take a reasonable approach towards the questions.

The Minister will be able to ascertain in his Department that special priority was given by the Government to the Border regions by a decision around 1978 to ensure that the infrastructural developments in those regions which otherwise would be disadvantaged would be dealt with on different criteria from those for the rest of the country.

A question, please.

I want to be assured that that practice still applies under this Government, that special priority is being given to the Border regions.

The public capital programme is drawn up by the Government each year on the basis of a very clear view as to what the priorities for investment are in all parts of the country and with a view to what the availability of funding is. All the priorities and particular needs of parts of the country in relation to the types of operations covered there are considered.

The Minister is applying the same criteria to the Border as elsewhere.

Will the Minister please answer Question No. 3.

3.