Mr. Maurice Buckley:

I will respond first. I may bring Mr. Bourke in on the detail. We explained at the beginning that no decision has been taken yet. We are in dialogue with the convention centre and are getting advice from the various parties involved. As I am sure the Deputy will understand, we have a 30-year contract with the group and, until the issue is resolved and a decision taken and implemented, the contract carries on and we work it. If it is decided to reduce the payment for the years in question, that will be applied as soon as the decision is taken. There will be no loss to the State. It is a question of timing.

The bigger question is what decision we are going to make and what is the correct approach. Should that €1.5 million be deducted from the payment? The payments are very large. We are talking about over €20 million a year over a 30-year contract. This is an enormous project which covers the building, the maintenance and the operation of the building. We have to look at this in its totality. As I said earlier, the objective of the State is to successfully build up a convention business that brings tourism, and particularly overseas tourism and delegates, to the centre. The company in place was doing well and meeting the targets for business development until Covid hit. We can talk about the extent to which the risks of Covid should be taken or shared. The company is obviously concerned and it is now obvious that people will travel less for conventions, business meetings and so on.

However, surprisingly, the initial feedback is that the company has done quite well in restoring activity to the convention centre in the first period. We also have to take into account that the centre accommodated Dáil Éireann during those periods at no charge to the group. There are different factors involved. Something that might be interesting for Deputies to know and which has not really been in the public domain is that, a few years ago, we supported the operators in putting through a refinancing package for the overall operation. I believe I am correct in saying there was a saving to the State because of that, which is a separate matter.