Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to speak to the revised capital expenditure programme published the week before last in the context of the upcoming budget. The fact that we must have a considerably downsized revised programme will be a source of disappointment for Members on all sides of the House and members of the public, particularly those whose jobs are very much bound up with a robust capital expenditure programme. Their disappointment is shared by Members of this side of the House. There is no Government which does not consider providing national infrastructure to meet future needs in the economic life and development of the country to be an essential part of its responsibility.

The Government is no different from any household in terms of its freedom to spend. Many householders look around to assess the state of their homes and see that money needs to be spent on them, whether it be on painting the windows, or renewing, enhancing or repairing their homes. They know that if they do not do this work, it will have repercussions in the future in that it might cost them more in that further repairs might have to be done. They know, however, that one cannot spend what one does not have or what one cannot borrow. That is precisely the position the Government is in; it does not have the money and cannot borrow it.

It is a tragedy that we cannot provide for the future needs of the economy in terms of the provision of infrastructure. There is no way to dress this up. A failure to invest now will limit our future growth prospects, make us less efficient and competitive. It will also mean we will fail to capitalise on the reduced cost of construction work. Sadly, it means many potential and existing jobs will be sacrificed and the loss of professional expertise and skills which we built up in the past 15 or 20 years. Many engineers, architects, quantity surveyors, carpenters, plumbers, welders and painters have lost their jobs and will continue to lose jobs in the coming years because of the need to cut back on our capital expenditure programme.

The loss of the skills we have built up is the saddest aspect. The tragedy of what was done to us is that we will lose the talented teams which gave us the Boyne bridge and the complex interchanges on the motorways. One of the good things that happened during the Celtic tiger years is that we built the inter-urban routes. We will also lose the teams which delivered the Luas. The people with these skills have gone abroad to build a prosperous future for other people in Canada, New Zealand, Australia and Africa. We are paying a heavy price as a country and as individuals for the mistakes and greed of others.

The reality is that we must remove €3.8 billion from the budget this year. This can be done only through cutting expenditure or increasing taxes. None of these options are ones which any Government relishes. What I am here to speak about today is the fact that we have €4 billion to spend this year, which is a great deal of money in the context of what is available overall. When one has a limited amount of money it is important to prioritise and spend it as it should be spent.

People were disappointed that funding was pulled from the metro project, particularly because so much money had been spent on planning it. However, a huge project like this is risky at the best of times and in the worst of times it would be far too risky even if one had the money for it, because if it went wrong it would go monumentally wrong, and would be tied around the necks of future generations like another Anglo Irish Bank. It was sensible to pull back from it.

I am pleased to see money will be spent on joining up the two Luas lines and extending the line to Broombridge which will allow for an interchange with the Maynooth line and the main rail network. What is important in public transport is not individual lines but that we provide a network of facilities.

Iarnród Éireann is probably disappointed with the unavailability of money for the DART underground but to be honest I have always had reservations about this. It is not that I do not think it is a great idea to join up the system because this is essential, but to do it underground in a small city is not a good idea. All of the evidence from abroad suggests that people will not go underground for very short journeys. I am not convinced this was ever going to be a good investment, notwithstanding that it is essential that we join up the network.

What we can do now, we should do. For instance, the Luas project to join up the lines was postponed originally because it would cause disruption in the city and we already had gridlock at that point. Now, at a time of recession when there is less economic activity, less traffic and less travel, is the time to do it, notwithstanding that it will cause some disruption.

I already welcomed the fact that in the years gone by we completed the inter-urban routes and what money is available now must be concentrated on public transport. Dublin Bus has had to reduce its services, which is being sold in Dublin as streamlining and it probably should have been done years ago. The fact that it could not replace buses meant it had fewer buses on the road. The investment in replacing buses was essential and was well-judged and focused on where it was really needed.

I urge the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport to look towards cheaper but very successful alternatives such as the rapid bus transport systems which are cheaper and offer greater flexibility in a built-up city and provide greater penetration in built-up areas. People may not feel it is as sexy as getting an underground DART or a metro but they work and are infinitely cheaper so we should consider them in terms of providing an overall network.

I will speak a little about health because it is in the news so much at present. I very much welcome the fact that although there is less money now and the choices are stark we are prioritising projects such as the children's hospital which is long anticipated and badly needed. I am pleased the Government is prioritising children through creating the role of Minister for Children and Youth Affairs and keeping them high on the political agenda. The funding mechanism for the national children's hospital is innovative as it involves selling the licence for the national lottery. I hope it works and that the troika allows us to keep the money from it. We probably need to get clarification on this in the new year.

I am also pleased that Dundrum Mental Hospital is to be replaced. When the old health boards existed, I was on the visiting committee and we visited many facilities in the area. The mental hospital in Dundrum was Dickensian. It houses many dangerous people but they are all patients. They are all sick people and to keep them in the conditions in which they have been kept for many years is unacceptable. Therefore, I am pleased money is being made available for this. I look forward to seeing the patients transferred to a new facility in Portrane.

I very much welcome the fact that a certain amount of the limited money available for education has been ring-fenced to provide for the many new schools we will need in the coming years to cater for our expanding population. We should view this expanding population as a plus; we need to replace ourselves as we do not want to end up in the same position as many other countries with an aging and expensive population. We need young people coming into the workforce in years to come - I hope in better times than these - to keep us all in our old age. I look forward to this and it is right that we spend our money now on education.

I am delighted to see that almost €500 million will be spent in the coming year on job creation. It is essential that we continue to invest through the IDA and Enterprise Ireland to attract businesses to Ireland. We must remain an attractive place to locate. It is not only money and grants which does this; the essential investment in a secure water supply, telecommunications and energy are also required if we are to continue to compete to attract a flow of inward investment.

See this speech in context