Mr. Martin Riordan:

I will start with the second question. In the case of Cork County Council, if one contrasts the drawdown of allocations for what we call standard housing, for want of a better phrase, in recent years we have drawn down more than the allocation because of our activity levels. Where Travellers are accommodated in standard housing, that is a charge against the standard housing allocation, so it will not appear under a Traveller heading. I am interested in the comments I have heard. Our understanding from the consultation is that Travellers are expressing a preference for that type of housing. I have listened to what has been said and, if that is not the case, then we have a problem at local level to make sure people express their views, because that is how we plan for the future. If we are told that the majority of Travellers are seeking standard accommodation or specific houses, that is what we are planning for. However, if that message as to what is required is not getting across to us at local level, it is important that it does.

The spend against standard accommodation housing is from the normal housing allocation fund but, unfortunately, that allocation has reduced drastically in recent years. We would have peaked at approximately €40 million a year on standard housing but we are now down to some €2 million to €3 million each year, so the building of standard housing has slowed down, and this needs to be addressed in the future.

I tried to summarise the submission in view of time constraints, so members might look at it in more detail. The message from our experience is that, if all the allocations are added up for whatever number of years is involved, it is not a simple mathematical exercise because all of that money was not available over that period of time. I tried to explain in the submission that we had a particular case where the allocation was €1.1 million, which was to resolve a particular problem. That was repeated the following year and, therefore, it appears in the mathematics as €2.2 million. If we look at the actual solution of that problem, however, it did not require €2.2 million. The point I would make is that the solution was found and the money was not required to solve that problem. Therefore, to judge the county council against it is not a mathematical judgment but, instead, a judgment as to whether the needs of that Traveller community were met. Given those needs were met with standard housing and a specific house for an awful lot less, in terms of Exchequer funding, I would suggest that money was not available because it was available for a particular problem and, as the problem was resolved at a lesser cost, we would move on to the next required solution.