Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

A number of questions were asked. I cannot speak for other Departments, but our administration costs represent approximately 6.7% of expenditure in our Department, which I confidently suggest is one of the lowest percentages in the Government. Most of our expenditure is on schemes and managing direct payments. The administration cost of running our Department in the past five or six years has decreased by nearly €90 million. We are performing well in trying to do more with less, which is what every Department and business must do.

When examining the figures, the one for IT jumped out at me as well. I asked Mr. Carroll about it. Last year, our IT section spent less than it would normally spend, leading to an increase this year. A part of the increase is linked with preparing for the new CAP. A new system is also required for rolling out the agri-environment options scheme, AEOS. IT is an important part of our infrastructure. If we get it wrong, we have a collapse in the system of payments, enforcement, mapping, etc., leading to a fine from the Commission. We spend a great deal of money on IT in terms of human resources and the systems being built. Most of our Department's IT is in-house whereas many other countries outsource both it and payment agencies. It is to our benefit that we have decided not to outsource because, in a crisis situation, we manage IT and the relevant skills. This work is expensive but, given the €1.6 billion or so in expenditure for which IT is responsible, the figure outlined is a reasonable one.

The Deputy is right, in that we give Teagasc a great deal of money, approximately €111 million per year, to run an advisory service, an educational service through agricultural colleges and, perhaps most importantly, a research and development programme that needs to make Ireland a world leader in terms of technology and innovation. Regardless of whether this is done in collaboration with universities or at facilities such as Moorepark, which specialises in dairy, or whether it involves the other beef, grass or management research being conducted, Teagasc is a major player in financing research and development in the food and nutrition sector. This is how it should be.

I do not tell Teagasc how to spend money, but it has an obligation to be consistent with Government policy on the food industry and on growth that is consistent with the Food Harvest plan. I speak with Professor Gerry Boyle regularly to ensure that Teagasc is spending accordingly, which I believe it is.

The Deputy knows my opinions on the horse and greyhound fund. Of all the sports in which Ireland is a world leader, horse racing is probably at the top of the list and has been for decades. This is not because of one or two individuals.

Rather, it is because we have a system and a climate that work for us. We breed, train and ride horses very well and I want to ensure we will continue to do so. If we fall below a red line in the funding allocation for this industry, we may well maintain a strong industry in Ireland, but in terms of meeting competition from abroad, we will lose our place and probably not get it back again. That is why I have been so adamant to keep a level of funding that I hope I will continue to be able to maintain. Even though there were reductions last year, they were small. I have already outlined the reasons for them.

We have more or less finalised legislation that will require Horse Racing Ireland and Bord na gCon to put together multi-annual expenditure programmes in order to draw down their funds each year. In other words, I want them to plan three or four years ahead all the time, rather than simply receiving an allocation each year plus or minus 5% and planning for that level of expenditure on a short-term basis. We want to see some longer term planning and thinking on how to build up the horse racing and greyhound racing industries.