Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I am glad to have the opportunity to contribute. I concur with my colleague, Senator Healy Eames, in supporting the Bill. Senator Quinn's contribution was interesting in that he went down a road I had not expected him to travel by questioning the value for money provided by the programme. He also asked whether at a time of economic despair the country can afford to spend €20 million on such a programme. However, the answer must be "Yes". One must consider the broader picture, both from the perspective that €20 million is not a huge sum in the context of the State's entire budget and because we must continue to make certain statements concerning our relationships with the United States and Northern Ireland, as well as regarding our recognition of those who have helped progress in this island over the past decade or so, one such person being George Mitchell. I appreciated Senator Quinn's comments as he questioned the expenditure of €20 million on a day when Members learned of further stress, strife and future difficulties in the education sector. However, every cent and euro that any Department might decide to allocate can be questioned and one always can find alternative ways to spend particular moneys. The question before Members is whether they wish to keep in place this programme, whether they can discern potential future value stemming from it and if so, whether they are willing to put their money where their mouths are. Consequently, I support the Bill.

This is a relatively modest stipend which will be necessary if the programme is to work. Senator Quinn also made the point that as a businessman, he considers the bottom line to ascertain whether it has worked to date. As it has been up and running for a decade or so, it probably is too soon to judge. Who knows what will be the input into Irish-American affairs, business links, commerce and job creation of the young people who have participated in the programme to date or who will do so over the next decade or so? It will take a long time before one can judge the so-called value for money question. The value for money question that I pose and which already has been raised by Senator Healy Eames relates to the management of the fund. It pertains to getting maximum value and so doing in a fashion whereby the initial investment is not put at risk. The entire world has changed, not simply within the past decade but in recent years. At the time of the fund's establishment and during its early years, fund managers generally were perceived as being almost godlike financial figures who could never get an answer wrong. It now appears as though most of them are unable to get an answer right and caution is required. Members must try to ensure the taxpayers' investment is managed cautiously. One recalls the financial and bank advertisements about cautious and aggressive funds and how people who took the cautious route were deemed somehow to be second-class citizens. However, those are the people who today at least are in possession of their own finances. Perhaps this is a matter which can be teased out on Committee Stage but Members must ensure, in so far as is possible, that this money is managed cautiously and conservatively.

I hope continued funding of the scheme will ensure the scholarship programme's continued operation. This issue relates to retaining a strong link between Ireland and the United States. I again listened with interest to Senator Quinn highlighting the point that other strong links exist. While this may be the case, one can no longer expect that Irish-United States relations will continue along the lines which obtained over the past two centuries because of the great competition that now exists for influence, investment and political advantage. As for the so-called 40 million people who declare themselves to be Irish-American of whom one reads, I am sure that when they voted in the presidential election of November 2008, neither Irish-American issues nor the question of which presidential candidate was best for Ireland was at the top of their agenda. Instead, they focused on domestic matters and issues. Many people who wave the Irish-American flag also have links with others such as the Italian, Greek, South American and Hispanic communities. The continent of North America including the United States comprises a highly complex jigsaw with many interwoven links and influence is not as easily obtained or kept today as it may have been 100 years ago. Consequently, we must take every possible advantage and try to strengthen it. On foot of this scholarship programme, over a decade or two a number of young people will have lived, worked and studied in Ireland and will have been influenced to a degree by Irishness, Irish culture and the Irish community. They will take this back with them, which cannot but be of advantage to this country.

Finally, it is important to retain the Mitchell programme as a political monument to Senator Mitchell in recognition of the tremendous work he has done. Members debated the issue of Northern Ireland last week and welcomed the most recent progress. They recognised and welcomed how it has changed as a place and as a political project over the past 20 years. This would not have happened without the input of a significant number of people such as Senator George Mitchell. This programme is a testament to his work and should be kept in place.