Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)

I welcome the Minister of State and his officials and I welcome the Minister's speech. It was important to set this debate in its general economic context and note that Ireland has managed to maintain an exceptional economic performance over many successive years. Senator John Paul Phelan is wrong that we have lost competitiveness. I recommend to him an article on this subject in the ESRI's quarterly published not more than a week ago. It shows under several different headings, including in respect of growth, employment and public finances and particularly in respect of our market share in different industrial sectors, with the exception of the footwear and clothing sectors in which we have lost EU market share, that our market share has improved considerably and, in some cases, dramatically so over the past few years.

We all know that the division of the country into two regions was primarily to secure continued structural and cohesion funding under Agenda 2000. However, it was equally acknowledged in the Minister's speech that the breakdown does not reflect exactly the regional breakdown in income terms. According to the latest figures, which date back to 2000 and 2001, several counties in the south-east region, for example, have lower incomes per capita than some of the counties the Senators mentioned, such as Galway, Mayo and Roscommon.

Let us consider the real regional policy issue. The greater Dublin area has been the engine of growth for the economy in many respects and I do not in any way begrudge it this growth. However, income figures suggest that our major cities, including Galway, Limerick and Waterford, have a higher per capita income than some of the counties that do not have such strong centres. It is a real challenge to maintain a balance.

Some of the debates we have been having on transport and so on have proven that the greater Dublin area is capable of soaking up billions of euro. In that regard, I believe the contribution of the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Deputy Callely, was mentioned this morning on the Order of Business. However, it is also the case that relatively small amounts of money in comparison to the amount that could be soaked up by the greater Dublin area can make a considerable difference to the regions. I quoted an example pertaining to railways last week. There has been much discussion of railways although they do not necessarily comprise the only subject we should be discussing. The renovation and reopening of a certain length of line to Midleton would cost approximately €45 million while the renovation and reopening of a similar length of line, such as that going to Dunboyne, would cost approximately €145 million. The difference in price is largely due to the cost of land acquisition.

The Minister made the important point that the BMW region has grown by some 33% in the past six years and that 120,000 more people are in employment. He stated it is now the second wealthiest Objective One region. However, there is a catch. I keep making and clearly need to continue making the point that there is a difference between GDP per capita and GNP per capita. The former makes us look very good. It flatters us and makes us the third wealthiest country in the EU, but it is not actually real. Therefore, we should bear in mind the latter. I know many of the statistics are not measured in this way and therefore we need to keep our feet on the ground.

There is no doubt that since the introduction of the national development plan, significant extra industrial investment has taken place in many parts of the BMW region, although not necessarily in all parts. In the mid-1990s, all funds, apart from some which were spent on a major project in Clonmel, were pumped into the greater Dublin region. This has changed, which is for the good. On the other hand, colleagues from places such as south-west Donegal, where the electricity capacity is not really sufficient to support industry and where there are questions over the lines of communication, will state that there is a problem associated with attracting investment to such regions. North-east Donegal obviously has the advantage of being closer to Derry and can therefore benefit from major cross-Border energy plans.

Senator Paddy Burke referred to less glamorous matters that are very important for development, such as water treatment plants. There is very little political mileage in such projects but they are vital to underpin development.

Bearing in mind that there will be relatively little funding after 2007, the Minister asked for our views on whether there is value in having a national development plan. I believe there is because it provides an overall framework at which one can look. It would also be useful in the context of social partnership discussions. While there are multi-annual envelopes for various sectors and one can argue that it is not strictly necessary, the overview is valuable.

The Minister talked about not duplicating investment, particularly in the area of transport. Choice is a fundamental economic principle. One can spend two hours commuting each way in a car or half an hour in a train even if one must stand. In congested areas we need all possible modes of transport. The Department of Finance should not use this as an excuse to say that as there is a higher return on roads all the money should go into roads and we should forget about public transport. That is not happening but such an argument should not receive support.

Clonmel, one of the most dynamic towns in the country, was not chosen as a hub or a gateway in the national spatial strategy for reasons I do not understand.