Brendan Ryan (Labour)

We are at cross purposes. If significant public funds are due to be expended, nobody will dispute the Minster should have the final say but the issue is modification of the plans. Has provision been made to prevent a Minister modifying plans under section 7(3), 7(4) and 7(5) in a way that could increase the expenditure of the authority and reduce its revenue? I have no problems with the Minister approving the authority's plans because he or she is the principal funder but I have a problem with the authority drafting a plan based on its estimate of its income and expenditure and the Minister modifying it so that it affects the income or expenditure in a negative fashion.

I want to know why there is not an amendment to the effect that if the Minister makes modifications which increase the cost to the authority, the Minister must then fund them. It is a standard complaint on the part of many public bodies that they get increasing amounts of work from Ministers without matching funds. Every local authority in the country will scream blue murder about the degree to which its remit, but not its budget, has been extended.