Kathryn Reilly (Sinn Fein)

I will not use all of my speaking time. Sinn Féin will support the motion and oppose the Government amendment. The motion is set against a particular backdrop. The Government has been tossing around the idea of selling off the family silver or, as Senator Norris suggested, the farm tractor for a while. Flogging State assets for a quick buck is not in the public interest. This is aside from the fact that the prices we are likely to get for such assets are unlikely to be handsome. The State is required to maintain minimum standards, particularly in certain service areas.

No one in the State would deny the national children's hospital will be strategic infrastructure or argue against the importance of developing it as soon as possible. Sinn Féin has called on the Government to match European Investment Bank funding with moneys from the discretionary portfolio of the National Pensions Reserve Fund, NPRF, and private pension funds to pay for a stimulus package, including infrastructural development projects. Selling State assets is a failed policy and would work against the public interest. If we want bang for our buck and are serious about economic recovery, we need to invest in the economy and not flog bits of it.

The Minister, Deputy Howlin, has stated he intends to use the upfront payment from the new national lottery operator to fund the national children's hospital, but some of the original commitments have been watered down. For example, just one third of the upfront payment will go towards the hospital project. Will the Minister of State, Deputy Perry, confirm what the Minister intends to do with the balance of the upfront payment and how the remainder of the project will be financed? The Minister stated the new licence contract would include a good causes clause to ensure current funding levels would be maintained. According to him, the 2011 level was 30.5%. As the House has been told, one third of national lottery sales provide funds for good causes. In 2010, these sales amounted to €244 million. Never more have those community goods and services needed to rely on that funding stream. If profits increase, will the good cause moneys increase too? How will the annual national lottery surplus be dealt with under these proposed arrangements? Why will this new licence be for 20 years when the last licence period was less than 20 years? Why such a long period when other opportunities such as online transactions could open up the national lottery? The Minister stated the lottery is doing more business online and that we need to provide for this. What regulatory changes will the Bill to amend the National Lottery Act 1986 provide? We believe this motion should be passed unamended and the Government should reconsider its policy in this area.