Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)

——about this and that is why CLÁR is different because it pre-dates that section. I had reservations about the measurement of front-loading because it was spending under the national development plan. I felt, very simply, that it would be good to have a small fund that could be co-funded with other Departments to deal with all the myriad of small projects that came through as RAPID plans that could not be in the national development plan because they are too small, but are still needed. I thought this was a great idea and certainly the RAPID areas think it is fantastic because it is delivering on the ground fast. It is very special to them and it is interesting that people want to get into the RAPID areas.

The Deputy asked about the long term. The reality is that we do not have a national development plan after 2006 for roads, so nobody can say with certainty what the road programme will be like after that. Similarly, I cannot say on a technical level, since there is no NDP after 2006 and because this is linked to that plan, that RAPID as it is today will be exactly the same after that date. I do not doubt in my heart and soul that RAPID will exist in some form similar to what it is at present. I would not have put so much time and effort into it if I was not 100% certain that it would be. Finally, we have extended the whole RAPID thought process way beyond where we started, for example with dormant accounts. The figure I mentioned, 57%, was not in anything at the beginning. It was not part of the programme. The equal measure of €7 million was ringfenced. It is fair to say that Departments and Government agencies are now beginning to realise that RAPID is there and will continue to be for the long term and that it needs to be given priority across a whole range of issues, even those which were not part of the original idea.

See this speech in context