Mr. Paul Kelly:

First, it is important that we look at the scale of this issue. As the scheme was funded from capital money, it had to be designed to cover capital costs. Personal protective equipment and things like that could not be covered under the adaptation grant because of Government financing rules. The scheme only covers assets. For example, a Perspex screen could be covered but a mask could not. A hand sanitiser unit could be covered but the hand sanitiser liquid could not. That is because it is capital funding that we had to allocate and we were trying to get it to as many businesses as we could as quickly as we could to help cover those costs. There may be a misunderstanding regarding the amount of money involved. For example, the average amount allocated to pubs that do not serve food is €1,000, while restaurants get an average of €2,500. It is important to recognise that the grant will not be the difference between closure and survival for these businesses. The level of funding is probably dwarfed by what is available through the Covid restrictions support scheme and it is definitely dwarfed by the extended wage subsidy scheme, etc. I do not want people to think they have been excluded and will miss out on €5,000, €10,000 or €15,000 as a result. That is not why the fund is there. It is a relatively small amount of money and it can only be drawn down if the business has spent money on those types of assets. That is a requirement of the grant.