Seymour Crawford (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on this legislation. While I may not be as positive as some of my colleagues, it is not for reason of being awkward. I come from the Border region where rates, insurance and so on have been major headaches. I am slow to agree to more levies that may push businesses further into difficulty. I realise that benefits will accrue from the BID scheme, but we must be careful. During a Dáil term when business broke down several times, it is unfortunate to rush this Bill through with little time to debate the nitty-gritty of the scheme.

To start with the end of the Minister's speech rather than the beginning, one statement was particularly interesting. Often, I have heard the Minister make statements that sound great. He stated: "All investment made through BIDs will be additional and complementary to the current level of services provided by the local authority." I welcome the various funding provided to the Border region, such as the IFI funding resulting from the Anglo-Irish Agreement, the peace and reconciliation funding resulting from the Good Friday Agreement and the INTERREG III funding.

The assurance given in respect of all the funding programmes was that, beyond a certain point, they would comprise additional funding based on the fact that areas had suffered dramatically due to the Troubles. I went to school in Clones, and every road around it was closed down. I will speak on valuations later, but the rates and insurance costs paid by businesses, such as hotels and filling stations, despite their economic difficulties, led to their closing.

INTERREG, peace and reconciliation and IFI funding were introduced as additional funding to ensure that businesses would get extra money to guarantee them a step up. Thank God for the funding. It was needed, but it certainly was not additional, and I am not the only person who has said so. The Taoiseach, who sat where the Minister is seated, admitted it to me across the floor of the House. Anyone who examines the figures knows that is the case. If the Bill is to be meaningful, it is important that the funding is additional and that, in one or two years, we do not find that it has become a replacement.

As the Chambers of Commerce of Ireland support the scheme, it has the backing of business people and industry. My colleague, Deputy Connolly, mentioned Mullaghmatt. While it is a housing estate, it differs from those for which this scheme is intended. However, I cannot help but support my colleague's cry for Mullaghmatt to be examined. While a great deal of money is being provided, it is a matter of keeping the scheme moving and ensuring the community's involvement. The community is prepared to get involved to ensure that the scheme works properly and that support is given for the work on the houses and walls. There could be community employment scheme involvement if the groups concerned worked together.

Money was allocated by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to build a back road behind Dublin Street in Monaghan to allow major development. There was, however, no mechanism to bring people together so it did not happen and the money was used for a road in Mullaghmatt. I see benefits in this legislation so I want to tease it out to see how it might work. That money was allocated and certain people in the area were enthusiastic but unfortunately it did not work.

Towns such as Ballybay, Clones and Castleblayney have been on their knees. Many businesses are not being utilised and many for sale signs are visible. The problem is that the moment someone tries to get reconstruction off the ground, some person arrives from the Valuation authority in Dublin. Immediately a high rate is placed on the property. I wrote to the Minister some time ago and received in reply a two page letter dictated by some of his Civil Service colleagues.

See this speech in context