Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Has the Minister of State raised the issue of why so little was transferred to him in the first place? For example, I understand that the so-called greenways scheme, which is actually about black ways because one is talking about cycle paths which are fenced on each side, remain with the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport. The rural social scheme remains with the Department of Social Protection where, under the current Minister, there does not seem to be much of an appetite for it as does the farm assist scheme, which again seems to be anathema in the Department of Social Protection. Rural transport remains in the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport. God knows where marine leisure remains. When I asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine whether he was responsible for it, I received a fairly vague answer. Is it intended to give a real and wide remit to the Minister of State in respect of rural development? I do not see anything relating to regional development, which I take to mean county towns and developing all parts of the country equally. Can the Minister of State tell me whether it is intended to transfer more functions to him and to make this a real Department of rural development. Perhaps the Minister can answer that.

My second question is addressed to the Minister. I understand that she has responsibility for CLÁR, which used to run at about €20 million per year. She might tell me what the budget for CLÁR is this year. I understand that she has inherited responsibility for the Western Development Commission. I see that it has capital of €1 million. Is that right? Again, would the Minister not agree that it would be a good idea to make possibly €100 million available from the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund because the Western Development Commission was quite successful in picking winners - enough winners to cover the losers? Pension funds are 30-year projects and I have no doubt that the Western Development Commission would give it back with a profit to the State in 30 years' time if it was given the money. Would the Minister not agree that in terms of developing business in the west from Donegal to Clare, €1 million is a joke and an insult? Would she agree with me that the remit of that fund should be extended to cover Kerry and west Cork because they are equally as rural as Connacht and Donegal? In respect of Leader, could the Minister give me the breakdown between capital and current and the €40 million?

My understanding is that current expenditure this year will just pay staff wages. How much of the capital expenditure will relate to outstanding commitments under the old programme that might have to be wrapped up? How much relates to the new programme? I do not see any capital expenditure occurring in reality under the new programme this year. When will it go live? There is huge discontent in the whole Leader family over the reduction in funding and the total uncertainty over whether they were meant to be in with LCDCs or not. Generally there is considerable dissatisfaction with how the Government has rolled out Leader.

The Minister of State had responsibility for tourism and is now the big hope for rural development. What is the thinking in Government behind the decision to take land from a farmer, black-top it - effectively build a road - put two fences up and do it on a concessionary basis that can be revoked on either side at any time? On the one hand, the Department is investing millions of euro and, on the other, the farmer or landowner is not getting any compensation. If we are going to build these roads, which are called greenways for some reason but which are actually roads with permanent infrastructure, would the Minister of State agree that the land should be bought by agreement from the landholders at the market value as if it was for the purpose of building a road on which motor vehicles would travel? One would never think of taking land permanently from an urban dweller, even if it is only five feet from the front of a front garden, without fully compensating them for the market value of the land plus disturbance money and also restoring all the walls and fences to a very high quality.