Chuaigh an Ceann Comhairle i gceannas ar 2.30 p.m.

Paidir.

Prayer.

Ceisteanna - Questions.

Northern Ireland Issues.

1. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he has had any recent telephone contact with President Bush of the United States; his plans to meet President Bush; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16577/02]

2. Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet the President of the United States of America; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17114/02]

3. Mr. J. Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the US Administration. [17116/02]

4. Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the recent contacts he has had with US President, George Bush; his plans to meet President Bush before the end of 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18116/02]

5. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on recent developments in the Northern Ireland peace process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18650/02]

6. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting in Dublin on 11 October 2002 with the then First Minister, Mr. David Trimble; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18651/02]

7. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet the British Prime Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18657/02]

8. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the discussions he has had with the British Prime Minister regarding the decision announced on 14 October 2002 to suspend the institutions in Northern Ireland. [18923/02]

9. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will consider the reconvening of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation, especially in view of the political vacuum created by the suspension of the political institutions in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18925/02]

10. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach when he last met the President of Sinn Féin; if at this or other meetings he has raised with Sinn Féin representatives allegations that members of the republican movement have continued to be involved in paramilitary assaults and political and security espionage and that members here have continued to be involved in criminal activities; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18927/02]

11. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his meeting with the President of Sinn Féin, Mr. Gerry Adams MP, on 16 September 2002. [18930/02]

12. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his meeting with the then Deputy First Minister for Northern Ireland, Mr. Mark Durkan, MLA, on 13 September 2002. [18931/02]

13. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his recent meeting with US envoy, Mr. Richard Haass, on 7 September 2002. [18932/02]

14. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach when he last met the leader of the UUP, Mr. David Trimble MP, MLA, to discuss the situation in Northern Ireland; when he plans the next meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18933/02]

15. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach when he last met the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, to discuss the situation in Northern Ireland; when he plans the next meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18934/02]

16. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach his assessment for the prospects of political progress in Northern Ireland, in view of his meetings with political leaders over the summer; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18935/02]

17. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach his views on the implications for political developments in Northern Ireland of the motion agreed at the meeting of the Ulster Unionist Council on 21 September 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18937/02]

18. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the outcome of the discussions held with the British Government and the political parties in Northern Ireland at Hillsborough in July 2002. [18938/02]

19. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the outcome of his meeting with a delegation from the SDLP on 26 September 2002. [18939/02]

20. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the outcome of his meeting with a delegation from Sinn Féin on 26 September 2002. [18940/02]

21. Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on his meeting with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, on 9 October 2002. [18941/02]

22. Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his role in recent developments in the peace process. [19035/02]

23. Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach the discussions he has had with the Northern Ireland First Minister, Mr. David Trimble, since the Ulster Unionist Council meeting on 21 September 2002. [19036/02]

24. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent meetings with the political parties in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19037/02]

25. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet the British Prime Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19038/02]

26. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on recent developments in the Northern Ireland peace process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19039/02]

27. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his discussions with the pro-Agreement parties at Hillsborough Castle in July 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19040/02]

28. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet the leader of the UUP, Mr. Trimble; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19041/02]

29. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the British Prime Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19042/02]

30. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on recent developments in the Northern Ireland peace process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19043/02]

31. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting in Dublin on 8 October 2002 with the President of Sinn Féin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19044/02]

32. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting in London on 9 October 2002 with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Blair; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19045/02]

33. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet the British Prime Minister; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19046/02]

34. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his meeting in Dublin on 26 September 2002 with the Sinn Féin President, Mr. Gerry Adams; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19047/02]

35. Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the United States Administration. [19064/02]

36. Mr. Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the United States Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19173/02]

The Taoiseach: I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 36, inclusive, together.

In my statement to the House last week I set out in some detail the Government's position on recent developments in Northern Ireland and how we propose to take matters forward from here. Both Governments will be keeping in close contact and continuing our contacts with the parties in the period ahead. I expect to meet the British Prime Minister, Mr. Tony Blair, again at the end of the week at the European Council meeting in Brussels. It is clearly important that we should do so at this time in order that we can, together, manage the process and ensure our common determination to achieve full implementation of the Agreement is being advanced.

The British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference is meeting today under the co-chairmanship of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, and the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Dr. John Reid. The conference is the vehicle through which we can work together to address all non-devolved issues in Northern Ireland. It is the appropriate mechanism for ensuring the continued implementation of the non-institutional aspects of the Agreement. We intend to use this vehicle provided for in the Agreement to ensure all relevant issues are actively pursued by the two Governments on a regular basis. No one should be in any doubt of the relevance and importance that we attach to the work of the conference at this time and the opportunity it offers for both Governments, working together, to pursue the agenda of the Agreement.

Progress on issues of policing, human rights and equality will continue unimpeded. We must also ensure the work of the all-island implementation bodies continues uninterrupted and the conference is considering how this can be done. These bodies have operated successfully over three years in sectors economically vital on both sides of the Border and must be allowed continue their work.

I welcome the support of President Bush and the US Administration at this time. As I said last week, the President's statement of support underlines his continuing interest in the process. President Bush has been a consistent and committed supporter of the process and we value greatly the assistance of his Administration. I have not been in contact with the President recently and have no immediate plans to meet him.

With regard to the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation, Deputies will be aware that, while it continues formally to remain in existence, it has not, in fact, met since 1999. However, in view of the expressions of interest by parties in this House and Northern Ireland, I have asked that the possibility of reconvening briefly might now be explored.

Mr. Quinn: While I know the Taoiseach has been extraordinarily busy, I draw his attention to the first question asked, namely, if he has had any recent telephone contact with President Bush of the United States; his plans to meet President Bush, and if he will make a statement on the matter. We are being threatened with the possibility of war. Will the Taoiseach comment on the fact that the United States, a member of the Security Council, has circulated a draft resolution? Has the Government been consulted on the content of that draft resolution and does it meet some of the concerns expressed by the Government on previous occasions to allow diplomacy one last chance, as President Bush said this morning?

Would the Taoiseach like to complete his formal reply before taking the supplementary questions?

The Taoiseach: I answered a number of questions on this issue last week. To update what I said then, the country is a strong advocate of the system of collective international security based on the United Nations Charter. Under the terms of that Charter the UN Security Council has the prime responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security and all member states of the United Nations are bound by the UN Security Council decisions. Our colleagues in the Security Council and the Minister for Foreign Affairs are in contact several times a day. We are doing all we can to work in the growing international consensus that the Iraqi regime poses a potential threat to regional security. We will continue to work in every way we can to reach agreement on the return of the inspectors under the conditions laid down and the rapid commencement of their work on the ground. Progress has been reported in discussions between the inspection teams and the Iraqi authorities over the past 24 hours. We are ready to study these proposals on an ongoing basis until we achieve success. I replied that I had not met President Bush but I add, as I did last week, that I have had two meetings in recent months with Ambassador Haass.

Mr. Quinn: I have two questions, one on Northern Ireland and one on Iraq. Thirty-six questions have been answered in one comprehensive reply. On the question of Iraq, has the Taoiseach's office or the Department of Foreign Affairs been consulted on the draft text circulated initially by the United States for the other four permanent members of the Security Council? Following the meeting of the other ten members of the Security Council, has the Irish Government been consulted on the text? Can we have an outline of the content? What is the Government's attitude bearing in mind that recent opinion polls here have been resolutely in favour of the pursuit of diplomacy to the nth degree before engaging in war?

Concerning Question No. 10 on the Order Paper, about Northern Ireland, following the suspension of the Stormont administration because of allegations of espionage by Sinn Féin and the IRA can the Taoiseach confirm that the British Government showed him transcripts of conversations which took place between senior Irish and British Ministers about bi-lateral discussions, which were in the possession of Sinn Féin and/or the IRA? Will he confirm or deny that such information was shown to him by the British authorities? Will he make known to this House, the view that it is in all of our interests, that now, four and a half years after the Good Friday Agreement was signed and two and a half years after complete decommissioning was called for, it might be constructive and desirable if there was an all-party resolution passed by all of the parties in this House, that all paramilitary activities cease and all paramilitary organisations be stood down by their parent political organisations?

The Taoiseach: In reply to the first question, I have not been personally involved in this morning's draft resolution but work has been ongoing since the middle of last week, first with the permanent members of the Security Council and then with the wider group. We have been fully consulted and the Minister for Foreign Affairs has been involved in the process. We recognise its usefulness and we have been supporting the proposition of a new resolution clarifying the conditions under which the arms inspectors will operate. Discussions have taken place in the past few days with the permanent members and we await the results of those talks. We support a clear, full and unambiguous resolution so we do not have an ongoing exchange over what it does or does not mean. Our input was to make sure it was clear, not alone to the Security Council but-----

Mr. Quinn: Will there be one resolution or two?

The Taoiseach: In the format envisaged, it will probably work out at two. We were anxious that it be clear, not only to the Security Council but to the public at large, what the difficulties would be if the first resolution was not resolved.

Mr. Quinn: Will there be two resolutions?

The Taoiseach: That was the position as of last night. I reiterate that we agree totally with Kofi Annan that we should have as much support as possible for this from the wider public who, as Deputy Quinn pointed out, are concerned, as are those in other countries. The best way of avoiding problems is to make the resolution absolutely clear.

In relation to Deputy Quinn's second question, I was not shown any documents but I was briefed that documents and transcripts existed and I have no reason to believe that is not the case. They were, as he has outlined, sensitive documents.

Mr. Quinn: Were they of the scale I referred to? Was the Taoiseach involved in any of them?

The Taoiseach: The documents were of the scale the Deputy referred to, including transcripts of calls between myself and Prime Minister Blair.

Mr. Quinn: Will the Taoiseach make a comment on the-----

An Ceann Comhairle: Thank you, Deputy. I call Deputy Joe Higgins.

Mr. J. Higgins: Has the Taoiseach discussed with Ambassador Haas the national security strategy of the United States of America published on 17 September 2002 and has he discussed the implications of that document which is sinister, dangerous and arrogant in the sense of the United States now arrogating to itself the right to strike anywhere in the world to protect US interests?

Will the Taoiseach instruct the representatives of the Government on the Security Council and the Government itself to, for the first time, take an independent stand in relation to the threat of war against Iraq which is opposed by a huge majority in this country and by tens of millions of Americans? Does he agree that this would be a predatory war for control and oil, not democracy, since the US supports horrific dictatorships in the region such as Saudi Arabia?

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy should ask a question.

Mr. J. Higgins: Does the Taoiseach agree that the threats to attack Iraq and claim world domination is grist to the mill of those dark forces which slaughtered thousands of people on 11 September 2001 and the innocent people in Bali? Will he, for a change, stop the Government's subservience to the administrations in the United States and stand independently in front of the world, saying it opposes a war against Iraq and will not provide the facilities at Shannon airport for that? Will he declare that there should be a standing down of the criminal wastage of armaments internationally and that those resources should be turned to resolving the problems of humanity because that is how we will end conflict?

Does the Taoiseach agree that the invasion by dozens, if not hundreds, of police of the Sinn Féin parliamentary offices in Belfast was an unjustified, dangerous and anti-democratic strategy by the British Government? Despite the serious reservations some of us might have in regard to Sinn Féin's policy and strategy this invasion creates a dangerous precedent for democratic rights and the right of those elected by the people. Why did the Government not condemn it outright as opposed to making rather muffled noises?

The Taoiseach: I disagree with Deputy Higgins in regard to his question on the United States. The administration in Iraq has the power to remove the present tensions and end the suffering of its own people along with the concerns of everybody else. All it must do is meet in full and without delay its obligations under the Security Council resolutions. That would avoid any threat or escalation.

The Government welcomes the fact that President Bush went to the United Nations where he laid out the concerns of his country regarding the threat posed by Iraq's failure to comply with their obligations under the Security Council resolutions. We argued that was the best way to do it and we support what President Bush did. The Government welcomed Iraq's agreement to accept the return of weapons inspectors unconditionally and we look forward to seeing how that operates. We urge the Iraqi authorities to back words with action and to co-operate fully with the inspectors and hold nothing back. They should allow full, free and unfettered access to all places and to all relevant documentation and personnel. That is what has been set out and if that happens the concerns of Deputy Higgins will be avoided. Ireland will continue to support the Security Council and if Iraq does not comply we will support whatever action the Security Council requires. However, we hope it will not come to that. I have replied already to Deputy Quinn in regard to what is happening with the resolution.

The Government strongly condemned the way the Sinn Féin offices in Stormont were targeted, not the fact they were raided or examined, but the number of people involved. We were glad to see the change of attitude, which would not have happened in the past, when Chief Constable Orde made an apology for the way the raid was carried out. The Deputy will acknowledge that there are prosecutions pending in the case. We do not object that investigations were going on but at the number and force of those involved and we made that clear on the Friday afternoon about three weeks ago.

Mr. Sargent: Is it correct that the Taoiseach personally offered President Bush facilities at Shannon Airport for bombing raids on Afghanistan and perhaps now on Iraq? This is an amazing contrast to the basic denial of civil liberties at Shannon Airport when my colleagues Deputies Boyle and Gogarty and Patricia McKenna, MEP, were denied access to the terminal. This seems at odds with the Taoiseach's generosity towards President Bush. In the context of the probable war with Iraq, can the statement by the Irish ambassador to the United Nations be made clearer by the Taoiseach because it was not clear on 17 October?

Does the Government support the approach of the United States to the United Nations whereby it only wants one resolution in which action will be contemplated and allowed if arms inspectors are unable to carry out their work, or does it support the approach of the French who want two distinct resolutions, one relating to the inspectors and the other allowing military action if and when it is seen fit to take it? Which of the two approaches does Ireland support?

We are aware that a majority of the people have a huge concern about and do not agree with the policy of the United States on Iraq. Has the Government expressed any concern that the United States is targeting other countries in what it likes to call its axis of evil, such as North Korea? The reason it is referred to is because it possesses nuclear bombs. Does the Taoiseach support this widening of the scope of the wish of the United States to attack other countries?

On Northern Ireland, does the Taoiseach agree that the old terms of reference of the Forum for Peace and Reconciliation are outdated? If we are to make progress on Northern Ireland in terms of the involvement of all stakeholders, including the parties in the House, will new terms be drawn up in consultation with all concerned? Will they concentrate and focus on the issues which are stumbling blocks, such as the disbanding of paramilitaries, for example, the IRA? Will the Taoiseach focus on this and give the parties a chance to bring whatever progress they can to the talks? Does he agree that, as long as there is no involvement by the Unionist side or an equivalent forum for it, this gives licence to the republican side to sit on its hands, or, in the case of the IRA, its arms, and not move? Will the Taoiseach make the point forcefully to the British Government that we need disbandment of paramilitaries and that this needs to be done on as cross-community a basis as possible? Could the consensus between North and South on issues such as Sellafield be used as a building block towards community relations on common issues on which we can certainly fight without rekindling the old tribal divisions?

The Taoiseach: The Deputy asked a number of questions, the first of which concerned overflight and landing facilities being granted in the event of an attack on Iraq. To date no requests for overflight or landing clearance have been received in the context of the current situation in Iraq. Any such requests would be considered in the light of the position of the UN Security Council-----

Mr. Sargent: Refuelling is against the law.

The Taoiseach:-----and in the context of ongoing efforts to reach a peaceful resolution of the issues. The Government gave permission previously under the Air Navigation (Foreign Military Aircraft) Order which allows the Minister for Foreign Affairs to grant permission to foreign military aircraft to fly over or land in the State. In the case of routine landings of military aircraft, confirmation is required that the aircraft does not carry arms, ammunition or explosives and form part of a military exercise and operation. As the Deputy knows, we have used this order a number of times.

In the case of the resolutions, I said we will support the position of the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, and have done so throughout the debate. It is more likely that there will be two resolutions, but that is to be concluded today or maybe overnight and we will stick firmly with the position. As I have already said, the purpose will be to clarify and make sure that whatever happens on the inspections is absolutely clear and whatever action may be necessary is also clear if the resolution is ignored, which I hope will not be the case.

The Deputies asked a number of questions on Northern Ireland. The institutions have broken down because once again trust has broken down between the parties. There would have been a suspension of the institutions even if the British Government had not acted because the Ulster Unionist Party was clearly going to pull out. In an honest and fair way, we now must try to build it up as quickly as possible working with all the parties because there is no use being involved in the blame game. We must move on and find the terms that will allow the parties to get back in partnership, working together in mutual trust and confidence. It is never easy to do, but I detect from all sides a willingness to try.

Our preferred option is to have that set up sooner rather than later. It would be bad if that were to drift out until the assembly elections next year, which we feel should take place at the beginning of May. Our considered view, which we share with the British Government, is that all paramilitary groups should be out of the equation. That would certainly help to build trust and confidence. That requires all sides, not just republicans, but loyalists as well. Most of the violence in recent times has been from loyalists not from republicans, but there is still the issue of trust and until all sides move away from that it will be very hard to get stable institutions, which is what we want to achieve.

The meeting of the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference today is to establish how to get a process that will start to deal with the issue of building trust and confidence and determine the outstanding issues all the parties and governments have that need to be addressed. This will allow us to get an agreement on all the outstanding issues. It will not work if we just try to satisfy just one party or any one government's agenda. The only way to do this is to look at the totality of the issues that are outstanding, which may be creating conflict, disharmony or breaking trust and try to deal with them all to see if we can get sufficient agreement - if not total agreement - from all the sides to address that with each other. As always, our position will be to act as an honest broker to try to get an agreement that allows us to go on and implement the one thing that is not suspended or in any difficulty and that is the Good Friday Agreement. That is what we will endeavour to do both at today's meeting, which is commencing now, and subsequently.

Mr. Sargent: The Taoiseach did not answer the question about the forum.

The Taoiseach: At this stage I am more anxious to organise a session of the forum and if it requires any changed terms, we can look at that. Even in its old format it would be very useful to allow people to engage and give their views on the issue. I would like it to meet before Christmas.

Mr. Kenny: Does the Taoiseach have any reason to believe that information from his own office and from other Government offices, including transcripts and communications, is not being filtered away to sources that should not have it? Has he carried out any analysis of the security of his own offices and Departments? The Attorney General has made a very cogent case at The Hague in recent days about what the Government described as the cataclysmic consequences of an explosion or terrorist attacks on the MOX plant in Sellafield. On 3 November 2001, British Nuclear Fuels Limited invited the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland, the RPII, to carry out a safety inspection of enhanced security measures at Sellafield following the 11 September attacks on New York and Washington. Why has the Taoiseach not taken this up directly with the Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, given that this would be the quickest way to get the two vital pieces of information that are missing. What enhanced security measures have been put in place at Sellafield? What evaluation has taken place of the possibility of a terrorist attack and the radioactive fallout that would result from such an attack? This vital information is missing and can best be obtained by the Taoiseach sitting down with the Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, rather than during an important though third hand PR exercise in The Hague. This is a matter of the gravest consequence for our country. Britain does not believe Iraq about its weaponry; why should we believe BNFL, a firm with a dubious history of deliberate falsification of data?

3 o'clock

Is the Taoiseach prepared to see to it that the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland goes to Sellafield to carry out a security evaluation? Is he prepared to raise directly with the British Prime Minister the evaluation of the consequences of, God forbid, a terrorist attack on the MOX plant in Sellafield? Why has the Taoiseach not raised this matter with the British Prime Minister directly in the last 12 months?

The Taoiseach: The reply to the first question is yes. Since the events of recent weeks there has been a full review of confidential and security papers in a number of Departments, including mine, to make sure such papers are not being leaked. There has been a general tidying of arrangements.

Regarding Sellafield, the Deputy will know that while debating other issues in several meetings in the last few years we have always raised the Sellafield issue. There has been much dialogue and exchange on Sellafield and that continues. Regarding security, the British Government informed us that it undertook a major review after 11 September. I am not privy to the precise security issues it dealt with but it gave us assurances that it had stepped up security.

The case in question is important and an enormous amount of legal work has been put into it. It will go on for some considerable time; this session will go on for most of the week and we will see where that brings us. Sellafield will remain a key issue on the Irish agenda with the British Government and for the other organisations which are pursuing it.

Regarding our own agencies, the Minister for the Environment and Local Government has been involved in this but I do not have details about that in this reply. I suggest the Deputy tables a question for the Minister regarding our nuclear agencies and their correspondence with BNFL. I do not have that information.

Mr. Kenny: At a meeting in July between the British Nuclear Installation Inspectorate and the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland information which was sought was not made available, specifically regarding the enhanced security measures. Obviously we do not need to know all the details. What evaluation was carried out regarding a possible terrorist attack on Sellafield? I understand the RPII is to meet again on 8 November with the inspectorate. Will the Taoiseach undertake to contact the British Prime Minister before then to encourage him to provide that information so that our independent nuclear safety analysts with the RPII can be happy that BNFL has brought in enhanced security measures? We should also be able to analyse what evaluation, if any, has been carried out regarding the consequences of a terrorist attack on the MOX plant.

The Taoiseach: If that has not already been done by the Department concerned I have no difficulty doing it. I will raise the case which is ongoing with the Prime Minister, Mr. Blair, when I meet him on Thursday night or Friday.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: Does the Taoiseach accept that the current crisis in the peace process does not have its origins in the raid on the Sinn Féin offices in Stormont - in which nothing incriminating was found - but rather in the Ulster Unionist Council meeting on 21 September when that party adopted what is, to all intents and purposes, an anti-Good Friday Agreement programme? Does he recognise that the purpose of that programme is to roll back the progress we have all made in the intervening period since the Agreement was endorsed by the people as a whole? Does he accept that the participation of Sinn Féin in the peace process, the Executive and the all-Ireland bodies is based on its electoral mandate alone and nothing less? Will he tell the House what programme his Government together with the British Government will lay out in order to implement the Agreement now that the institutions have been suspended?

On the issue of his contacts with the United States Administration, has the Taoiseach discussed Iraq and Afghanistan directly with the President of the United States, Mr. Bush? Can he indicate to the House the origins of the request to this State to allow US military aircraft to use Shannon Airport as a base and train in Irish airspace? Will he confirm that he discussed the use of Shannon Airport with the President of the United States?

The Taoiseach: Ambassador Haass is a regular visitor and in regular contact with us on Northern Ireland related issues. He dealt with the issue of Afghanistan in the past and is now dealing with Iraq. He is a good source of knowledge on these matters on which I have had a number of opportunities to be given an insight into the thinking of the State Department and the Presidency.

We have not received any requests relating to action against Iraq. We met requests regarding the campaign in Afghanistan under the Air Navigation Act------

Mr. J. Higgins: Will the Taoiseach share that insight into Iraq with the House?

An Ceann Comhairle: Please allow the Taoiseach to speak without interruption.

The Taoiseach: I shared it earlier and also last week. Through Ambassador Haass we have communicated our concern that this issue should be processed through the Security Council, which seemed unlikely some months ago. Many other countries made similar arguments to ours and it has now happened. I hope that will continue to be the case. I discussed the matter with Kofi Annan last month in Johannesburg. The Minister for Foreign Affairs also discussed it at the meetings of the United Nations last month.

Deputy Ó Caoláin asked a series of questions on Northern Ireland on which I do not wish to say any more than what I have said. I note the Deputy said no incriminating evidence was found. I have already replied to Deputy Quinn's question in response to which I outlined the information I was given. I have nothing more to add. I accept that the reason the Executive was suspended on 14 October was because the UUP was about to pull out. Once its conference stated in September that a deadline had been fixed for mid-January, it immediately created tensions. That is from where it emanated. It was on that basis that I indicated in my statement on that day that the outcome of the UUC meeting was unfortunate. We have now reached this point.

The Deputy would accept and appreciate that based on this fact there is a lack of trust and confidence. He will have seen the figures the other day from the poll of the Unionist community which show that its present level of confidence in the partnership arrangements is 0.6% in terms of support. Even allowing for the usual percentage level of error, that is a fairly damning figure. We, therefore, have a problem with which we must deal to the best of our ability.

On the position of the Governments going forward, we must make sure we continue to implement the Agreement in all its aspects on which we will not start to be selective, whether in regard to the equality or civil rights agendas. We must find a mechanism to deal with the implementation bodies, a matter that is on the agenda today, but it is our intention to remain engaged in all the issues and keep the agenda moving. I am anxious that we do not let any of it slip; I want to keep it going on all fronts with the involvement of the relevant Ministers here and those who have taken over the responsibilities of the Executive. In that regard, we have already looked at our programme up to Christmas in order to keep things moving.

On the other side, we must work with the British Government and all the parties involved to try to get the institutions back up and running, which is a separate exercise. We need to divide them, otherwise we will fall behind on work on implementing the Good Friday Agreement. As a separate exercise, we will do all we can in using the British-Irish Governmental Conference which was clearly devised for this purpose, it was devised to deal with non-devolved issues.

Several hundred people are working for the implementation bodies which have clear agendas, strategies and work programmes. It is our view - I stated this clearly to the British Government when I met Prime Minister Blair a fortnight ago tomorrow and will do so again this weekend - that we must move forward and continue to work those agendas to the full, but we have to clear the mechanism to do so. I hope that will be done this afternoon.

An Ceann Comhairle: A number of Deputies are offering. If it is agreeable, we will take questions from each and a final reply from the Taoiseach.

Mr. Quinn: I will try to be as brief as possible. Will the Taoiseach confirm that he has been informed to his satisfaction that the material seized by the British authorities in their raids on the Sinn Féin offices and related IRA and Sinn Féin offices in Northern Ireland was incriminating to the effect that it contained details of confidential conversations of a political nature between him and other senior political figures in the Irish Government and British Government Ministers and perhaps others? Does he believe that that kind of political activity undertaken by a party which purports to be democratic undermines the basis of trust on which the Good Friday Agreement was constructed?

Mr. G. Mitchell: On the same topic, were any of those arrested near Dublin recently in relation to alleged IRA membership in possession of intelligence of the kind referred to by Deputy Quinn? Were any of them agents for candidates to this House, some of whom were elected? Will the Taoiseach give an undertaking to the House that no member of the IRA is employed within the precincts of this House?

Mr. M. Higgins: Is it a fair construction of the Taoiseach's answer that the only resolution Ireland is likely to support at the Security Council is one that is a clarification of the terms of operation of the inspectors and that Ireland is against any resolution that would include an automatic right to strike? How many of the ten non-permanent members of the Security Council share his view on the appropriateness of the Security Council retaining for itself the right to evaluate the inspectors' report?

Mr. Timmins: With respect to Deputy Quinn who raised a supplementary question, will the Taoiseach confirm that the transcript was one of telephone conversations and will he outline the origins and destinations of the phone conversations if that was the case? Will he also confirm where these transcripts were found?

Mr. Allen: Various claims have been made by the US administration regarding Iraq's capabilities in relation to nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. Has the Taoiseach sought or received verification of these claims from the US administration?

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: There are several questions one would like to respond to at this point, but very briefly in relation to the Taoiseach-----

Mr. G. Mitchell: The Deputy probably knows more of the answers.

Mr. Quinn: Will the Deputy send us the transcripts?

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin: Deputy Quinn is not in the Taoiseach's chair, nor is he likely to be. Will the Taoiseach tell the House what the Government's policy would be in the event of a US attack on Iraq? Would it continue to allow our country to be used as a base for a foreign power that would be involved in a war in which we have no part? If so, how does that square with the Government's continual assurance that Irish neutrality is safe?

Mr. Kenny: I am glad the Taoiseach has confirmed enhanced security arrangements in his Department and that there will be no need to break into offices around here. Has the Taoiseach considered reconstituting the Forum on Peace and Reconciliation to allow the pro-Good Friday Agreement parties to continuously put forward ideas on how the institutions could be revived and the peace process pushed forward again? The forum was never actually stood down, as the Taoiseach knows.

The Taoiseach: In relation to the US and the UN, we want to see matters dealt with as quickly as possible, but in all these discussions we have totally supported Kofi Annan's position, that the UN Security Council should be used as a vehicle for deciding and winning support for the resolution, and that the resolution should work through the chief UN weapons inspector, Hans Blix, and the man in charge of nuclear inspections, Mohamed ElBaradei. They have set out their views on how the inspections should take place and the room that is needed to manoeuvre to carry out the inspections.

On the basis of the work of the UN weapons inspectors going ahead, there should be no military strike. Kofi Annan has always said that if the resolution is clear and unambiguous but is not adhered to, there would be a right to strike. He has made that clear-----

Mr. M. Higgins: What if it was adhered to?

The Taoiseach: If it was adhered to there should be no military strike. That has been his position and we have supported it for weeks on end. Whether we end up with one resolution or two, this principle still stands. Kofi Annan has worked very hard to achieve that position and it is the one we will continue to support.

Mr. M. Higgins: Does the Taoiseach support two resolutions?

The Taoiseach: The position might be clearer if there were two resolutions, but many people believe there should be one resolution. Kofi Annan's view is that this is perhaps possible but that the details would have to be carefully worked out and the arrangements laid out by Hans Blix would have to be very clear. I am not saying it would be impossible to address the issues in one resolution, and many countries argue that there should be one. I could see a final solution whereby one resolution would be set out in two parts that are very clear, but it would have to be based on the report of Hans Blix in the end. I cannot see how anyone can call this other than he. If he sets the arrangements he is the one person who can arbitrate whether the job has been satisfactorily done in accordance with his resolution. I do not see how anybody on the outside can determine whether the resolution has been fulfilled, and that is the difficulty in this.

Mr. M. Higgins: So it will not be Jack Straw?

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Higgins, I have tried to facilitate everybody who wished to ask a supplementary question and that cannot continue unless the Taoiseach is allowed to reply to all of them.

The Taoiseach: In relation to the matters on Northern Ireland, as I have said in reply to Deputy Quinn's question and a number of related questions, I did not see any information or any data on these matters. If I did not believe the people who told me, I would not have been able to work the process as I have done. My information in regard to the raid on one of the houses - as it is the subject of court hearings I do not wish to comment at length - is that included were sensitive papers and documents, including transcripts. In relation to the arrests in Bray and elsewhere, those matters are also sub judice and I will not comment on them.

An Ceann Comhairle: That concludes questions to the Taoiseach.

Mr. Timmins: It is important that the Taoiseach outline from where the 'phone conversation transcripts came? From where were they tapped? Was it from his offices in Dublin or did they come from Northern Ireland? That is vitally important so that we know the situation.

An Ceann Comhairle: Question No. 78 please.

Mr. Timmins: It is outrageous that we do not know whether the conversations were tapped in this building-----

An Ceann Comhairle: The Chair has no control over the answers to questions.

Mr. Timmins: It is outrageous.

Priority Questions.

Tourism Industry.

78. Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism his proposals to restore the competitiveness of tourism in view of his recent statement that tourism products are over priced and tourism has lost its competitiveness vis-à-vis our main competitors; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19322/02]

82. Ms Lynch asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the actions he proposes to take on foot of the economic study of tourism and the rising prices in the tourist sector published by the Irish Tourist Confederation; his plans to meet the confederation to discuss the report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19137/02]

Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism (Mr. O'Donoghue): I propose to take Questions Nos. 78 and 82 together.

I welcome the publication last week of the report by the Irish Tourist Industry Confederation on the impact of tourism on the Irish economy. The report is a comprehensive and analytical study of a sector that has enjoyed tremendous success and growth over the past decade but has recently come upon more difficult and challenging times. I look forward to having an early meeting with the Irish Tourist Industry Confederation to discuss the policy implications of the report.

The report highlights in an authoritative way the importance of the tourism sector to the Irish economy. The sector now generates nearly €4 billion in annual foreign revenue earnings and supports in the region of 150,000 jobs. The report also underlines the contribution the sector makes to balanced regional development.

I welcome the emphasis in the report on maintaining industry competitiveness and service quality levels. This reflects my recently expressed concerns about the importance of delivering value for money for the Irish tourism product.

There is also evidence from recent visitor attitude surveys conducted by Bord Fáilte that there is a deterioration in perceptions of value for money among visitors to Ireland, particularly from mainland Europe. Visitor concern with price levels here appears to relate to cost of goods and services consumed by them when they arrive here rather than the price of holiday offers, access or accommodation. This is borne out by the results of recent comparative studies of consumer goods, such as the Forfás study, which indicated that Ireland is the second most expensive country in the euro zone behind Finland. There is simply no refuting the fact that inflation rates in the restaurants, hotels and licensed premises sector and in the recreation and culture category are running considerably ahead of national figures.

While Government and its agencies have a role in supporting the further development of the sector, it is the tourism industry which plays the central role in keeping prices in check. In these more challenging times the industry must do all in its power to control costs, improve productivity, better manage its human resources and utilise modern technologies to best advantage.

The Government will continue to play its part in supporting the industry through a range of programmes and measures in the product development, marketing, training and human resource areas. I will look, in particular, to the new National Tourism Development Authority - combining the current functions currently being exercised by Bord Fáilte and CERT - to bring forward new thinking to help the tourism sector to confront the new challenges which they face. In this context, the ITIC report offers some useful guidelines which will be taken into account.

The more modest growth rates in the economy anticipated over the next few years should reinforce downward pressure on prices. The Government will continue to pursue appropriate macro-economic policies that serve to reinforce a favourable business environment. In this connection, Deputies will be aware that the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Harney, has recently announced concerted Government action to address insurance costs.

I am aware of the contention of many of those working in the tourism industry that indirect taxation may be putting upward pressure on prices. Having said that, our VAT rates on tourism services and our excise duties, are not out of line with those obtaining in North European countries. The reality is that the Southern European sun destinations that charge lower rates are not in direct competition with Ireland as a tourist destination.

Much of the debate in Ireland on tourism prices this year has been emotive and anecdotal. There is no doubt that Ireland continues to offer excellent value for money as a tourism destination when account is taken of service and quality. Ireland is not a low cost mass tourism destination. However, we must be vigilant in ensuring that our price competitiveness is not eroded, in order to enable the sector to respond vigorously and successfully to the changing dynamic of the marketplace. As I have already mentioned, I welcome the publication of the ITIC report as an important contribution to an informed debate on the future direction of the tourism sector which it is my intention to promote. Resolute action on the part of the tourism industry, in partnership with the Government, will do much to safeguard the future prospects of a sector that is so important in economic terms.

I will visit the United States this week to support Tourism Ireland's drive to promote Ireland as an attractive and value-driven tourism destination.

Mr. Deenihan: Is the Minister aware that the tourism industry is furious with his statement that it is responsible for hiking up the costs of tourism products here and that it is the reason for the lack of competitiveness in the industry? Will he agree that VAT rates on tourism products here are out of line with those of our main competitors? I disagree with the Minister that Spain, France and Italy are not our main competitors. That is where most Irish tourists go and that is where most German tourists, who came to Ireland, are going now. For example, the VAT rate on hotel accommodation in France is 5.5%, in Spain it is 7%. That makes a major difference. The only northern European country that has a higher VAT rate for hotel accommodation than Ireland is Germany. Will the Minister agree that Government policy during the past four years has driven up the real costs involved in the tourism industry and that it is forcing the operators to increase prices? For example, since 2001 wages have increased by 15%, in many cases insurance has increased by 200%, and ESB costs have increased by 14%. Will the Minister ask his colleague the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, to bring the VAT rates into line with those of other European countries which average 10%? At present VAT rates on hotel accommodation and other products stand at 12.5%. Will the Minister give an assurance that in the budget the Minister for Finance will reduce VAT rates in order to improve the competitiveness of tourism? Also, will the Minister clarify his statement regarding the accusation he made against the operators - those who built the industry more than any Government - that they are the reason for the loss of competitiveness in the industry?

Mr. O'Donoghue: I was commenting in the wake of a report by the Irish Tourist Industry Confederation. It has outlined the situation clearly and Deputy Deenihan is well aware of it. The position is that in terms of our competitors, people do not come to Ireland for the sun. People go to northern European states for a different reason. It is in that context that I say other north European states are in competition with Ireland in terms of attracting tourism numbers. The information available to me suggests that VAT and excise duty rates are not very much out of line with the rates in those countries. One can ignore the problem and hope it will go away or one can confront the problem and try to do something about it. It is the latter path I have chosen. Surveys conducted by Bord Fáilte show that people coming to this country have a perception that they are not getting the same value for money that they got, say, five years ago. That is due to a number of factors. It is true that if one books a holiday from a foreign destination the Irish package holiday is no dearer on the face of it than other package holidays. Visitors who come here say they have difficulty in two areas in particular. These are related to the question of the price of food and drink. It is true, whether we like it or not, that in recent years the price of food and drink in some restaurants has increased considerably beyond the rate of inflation. That is what the visitors are telling us and I am not prepared to ignore it. This is a wake-up call for the industry and there is a need to confront these issues. That is not to say there is not value for money in Ireland. There is, and many sectors offer very good value for money. However, these other areas have been identified by our visitors and they must be confronted.

Ms Lynch: Taking on board what the Minister said, especially in relation to the ITIC report, will he agree that the introduction of the single currency has exposed Ireland in areas where we are completely over-priced? The Minister was a member of the last Government, one of whose first actions on coming into office was to remove the ceiling on the price of the pint, yet he is now telling us that these issues are important and that it is not just visitors who are raising them. I agree with the Minister in that regard. The cost of services and----

An Ceann Comhairle: A question please, Deputy.

Ms Lynch: As the Minister responsible for this area, what action does the Minister intend to take in regard to these issues? For instance, what action will he take in regard to the cost of travelling to this country, the cost of food and services, etc? What action will he take to ensure that the drop in tourist numbers will not continue into next year? Ireland does not attract tourists on the basis of its weather. Also, what is the status of the tourism development authority Bill, which we were told would be before the House before Christmas? Will we see it this session or will we have to wait until the new year, which will be too late for the next season?

Mr. O'Donoghue: In relation to the euro, there is a feeling abroad that since the introduction of the euro, prices increased considerably in some sectors. There is no question that the fact that continental visitors here use the euro in their own countries means that they are now in a position to make straight comparisons in terms of value for money. As the euro gathers strength against sterling and the dollar, which will happen in the short to medium term, the price question will become ever more stark. It is important to stress the value for money available in Ireland but it is of equal importance to ensure that in the areas where improvements can be made, we should seek to make them.

On the question of access, there is a need for a new quick turn around facility at Dublin Airport. The Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan, has met a number of people to see if this can be provided because it would improve access and thereby increase the number of visitors to this country.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: We must proceed to Question No. 79.

Ms Lynch: I asked a question about the tourism development authority Bill.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: There will be opportunities to pursue those questions when we come to deal with ordinary questions.

Mr. Deenihan: There were two questions in this slot.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I am aware of that but the time has been exceeded by 30 seconds. I have called Question No. 79.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I hope to bring forward the tourism authority Bill this session.

79. Mr. Ferris asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the steps his Department has taken to prevent the withdrawal of Ireland from the list of recommended tourist destinations due to the failure to maintain environmental standards. [19281/02]

Mr. O'Donoghue: There is no evidence of any perceived decline in environmental standards having had an adverse effect on tourist satisfaction levels as measured in Bord Fáilte's annual visitor attitude surveys. In fact, more than four in every five visitors would unreservedly recommend Ireland to others, and the proportion of people mentioning scenery, relaxation, a natural and unspoilt environment and attractive cities and towns increased in 2001 relative to 2000.

It is well recognised that the unique attraction of Ireland, as a tourist destination, has been the level and depth of contact with the Irish people, in a relaxed and clean environment, characterised by an unhurried pace of life and beautiful landscapes.

The provision of information for enhanced decision-making by those involved in the tourism industry is one of the main priorities of Bord Fáilte. As part of this remit, it has carried out comprehensive visitor attitude surveys since the 1980s. The 2001 survey confirmed that Ireland is still continuing to deliver holidays that match the expectations of overseas visitors. In fact, there was an increase in the number of people who cited scenery and relaxation as extremely important factors in their decision to come to Ireland, with mainland Europeans being particularly interested in beautiful landscapes and a clean environment.

The State tourism agencies and my Department, as well as many in the industry, have acknowledged for some time that with Ireland's economic success, especially in the last decade, have come new challenges, including addressing the pressures on the environment in tourism "honeypot" areas.

Arising from the mid-term review of the last Operational Programme for Tourism, 1994-99, some €3 million was made available for a pilot initiative on tourism and the environment. The overall emphasis was on tourism-led projects that could contribute to knowledge and understanding of best practice in terms of sustainable tourism and the lessons learned have been taken into account in terms of current policy information.

The objective of securing an environmentally sustainable tourism sector was clearly articulated in the strategy statement for the former Department of Tourism, Sport and Recreation published earlier this year. Achievement of this objective is being pursued through the tourism marketing and product development policies agreed with, and implemented by, the tourism agencies. Both Tourism Ireland Limited and Bord Fáilte regard spatially balanced tourism as a key component of their marketing strategies, with an appropriate emphasis on both seasonal and geographical spread of business.

The overall objective of Bord Fáilte's tourism product development scheme is to develop the tourism product in an environmental and sustainable way that widens the spatial spread of tourism, diverts pressure from highly developed areas and increases the Border, Midland and Western region's share of national overseas tourism revenue.

This will be achieved by concentrating support on a limited number of new visitor attractions, marketable clusters of existing day visitor attractions that have yet to achieve their full tourism potential, a series of special interest activities to meet identified niche markets and specific tourism and the environment initiatives in the more established tourism areas.

Mr. Ferris: Given the decline in our tourism industry in recent years, does the Minister agree with the survey carried out by Irish Business Against Litter, IBAL, which set up an all-Ireland anti-litter league, which showed that over a three month period, from Monday to Friday, there was an increase of 15% in cleanliness but that on Saturday and Sunday, that result was totally reversed? Will the Minister agree that litter management should be a seven day task? Will he agree also that some of the resources spent on public awareness would be better utilised in hiring more wardens and empowering them to deal with the growing litter problem? What steps does the Minister intend to take to prevent the withdrawal of Ireland from the list of recommended tourist destinations due to its failure to maintain environmental standards?

Mr. O'Donoghue: Despite an exhaustive search, I could not find any list of the kind referred to by the Deputy. Neither my Department nor Bord Fáilte is aware of the list to which he refers. However, visitor attitude surveys single out the poor standards of our roads, not litter, as the biggest negative difference for Ireland versus other destinations. Sign posting remains on the agenda also, with one in ten expressing concern, and while criticism of negligence with regard to litter has lessened since 2000, one in eight tourists look unfavourably on Ireland in that respect. I propose to explore further with Government colleagues, with whom primary responsibility for these issues lies, the way these shortcomings might be more effectively addressed. It would be better if there was less litter in the countryside. Measures to prevent littering are the responsibility of another Minister but I will certainly discuss this matter with my colleague to see if there are further measures which could be introduced to reduce this problem. In general, people find that the Irish environment is excellent. There is little doubt that visitors to Ireland are consistently impressed by the environment and there is a considerable amount of evidence to suggest that people come because they regard the country as clean, healthy and, to a large extent, pollution free. Yes, there are areas which could be improved and litter is certainly one of them.

National Sports Stadium.

80. Ms Lynch asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the expressions of interest from the private sector to provide funding for the proposed national stadium following his Department's advertisements in the media recently; if it is proposed to proceed with the national stadium on this basis; if a venue has been selected for the stadium; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19136/02]

81. Mr. Deenihan asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the current Government proposals for the provision of a national outdoor stadium; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19323/02]

Mr. O'Donoghue: I propose to take Questions Nos. 80 and 81 together.

Private sector investors interested in putting forward proposals to develop a national stadium on the State-owned site at Abbotstown were invited to submit expressions of interest to my Department by noon on Friday, 18 October. The response was very encouraging and 23 separate submissions were received by the deadline. These proposals are currently being examined by my Department in consultation with other Departments and agencies including the Office of Public Works, the National Treasury Management Agency and the Attorney General's office, following which I will report to the Government on the outcome of the process. It is as yet too early to say what the outcome of this examination will be and I do not wish to speculate about it at this stage.

Ms Lynch: Is it not incumbent on the Department to advertise in the Official Journal of the European Communities and to state very clearly what the Government has in mind, what is on offer and what type of contract will be available? I am sure the Minister has read, as I have, media reports about what might be on offer to the private sector in order to make the deal a little sweeter. Will he make a statement on this? Is it the case that the Government intends to offer additional lands to whatever developer eventually wins this competition, perhaps for residential or commercial purposes, alongside the national stadium?

Is Abbotstown the only site on offer? Has the special group set up by the Department at the end of July produced a report and, if so, does it indicate that there should be other sites available for the stadium, perhaps within the city limits? My other question concerns the money that was on offer from J. P. McManus. If a private consortium eventually builds the stadium, will that money still be on offer? Will it be used for that purpose? Will it be a down-payment on the national stadium? I ask the Minister to clarify how much the project will cost; whether Abbotstown is the only site on offer; whether additional lands will be offered to whoever wins the competition and, if so, whether that will be discussed in advance; whether the offer of a donation from J. P. McManus is still available and whether there are other offers in the pipeline.

Mr. O'Donoghue: There is no question of State land being made available to any developer to enable him to make a large profit at the taxpayers' expense. That is not the object of the exercise. The object is to see whether there is sufficient interest in the private sector to enable the project to go ahead. There has been a considerable amount of interest. It must be remembered, however, that the advertisement sought expressions of interest and not tenders. It will be necessary, in the event of the projects going ahead, to advertise in the Official Journal of the European Communities. Deputy Lynch asked whether Abbotstown was the only site available. The working group set up in July investigated a number of alternative sites but for reasons of scale, cost and so on it favoured the Abbotstown site.

There have been no discussions with Mr. McManus about whether his offer will be available in the event of the projects proceeding through the private sector. It must be stressed, however, that Mr. McManus's offer, to the best of my knowledge, was made on the basis that the State would construct the stadium. It is clear now that the State will not do this because of budgetary constraints. I intend to have the expressions of interest examined by a panel to see how the project may be advanced. I propose to ensure that the Department of Finance, the National Treasury Management Agency, the office of the Attorney General, the Office of Public Works and my Department are represented. After the evaluation of the expressions of interest we will decide whether the stadium is to be constructed by the private sector.

Mr. Deenihan: Did any of the five final bidders for Campus Stadium Ireland also express an interest in this project? Has the Minister considered the possibility of providing funding to the IRFU and the FAI to build their own stadium? I am sure the Minister agrees that what we need is a stadium for rugby and soccer and not one for hurling and Gaelic football because we have a super-stadium for those two sports. Could the Minister give us an idea of the time it will take for him to make up his mind? The IRFU and the FAI are in a vacuum and I hope we are not now entering into a charade like the one that was kept up for three or four years over the "Bertie Bowl".

Mr. O'Donoghue: There was no charade, but I will not go into that with Deputy Deenihan. I have had discussions with the IRFU and the FAI and they are very anxious that a stadium be provided. Twenty-three national and international companies and consortiums have expressed an interest in proceeding with this project and we must assess and evaluate all those expressions.

Mr. Deenihan: Does that include the five that expressed an interest in the "Bertie Bowl"?

Mr. O'Donoghue: I have indicated before that it is my intention to be up front about whether we will be in a position to provide two stadiums for the European Championships in 2008. We know the decision in this regard will be taken in Switzerland around 12 or 13 December by which time we must be able to inform UEFA whether we can or cannot provide the stadia. It would be best if there could be a definite decision in regard to the stadium before that date in order that we can give an indication of our position one way or the other.

The building of a stadium by the private sector is not predicated on our getting the European Championships in 2008, actually it is the opposite. I would like to have the position evaluated and assessed by the end of November in order to have a clear idea of where we are going. We could then see whether it will be possible to tell UEFA that we can provide the necessary facilities for the European Championships in 2008. If we can do this, I will be pleased to do so. If we cannot and it still appears possible that the stadium can be provided, we will indicate to UEFA that it would not be certain that the stadia will be ready on time for the 2008 European Championships.

Ms Lynch: Will the Minister agree that on the basis that more people watched the World Cup than voted in the last general election sport is vitally important to the people and that there will be huge disappointment if we do not host Euro 2008? Have there been any discussions with GAA officials in regard to Croke Park and the 2008 European Championships on the basis of the amount of money given to the GAA, rightly so because it is a fine stadium? Were there conditions attached to the granting of the money in regard to our bid for the 2008 European Championships?

Mr. Deenihan: I would like if the Minister could answer my question. Do the 23 consortia which expressed an interest include the five final bidders for the "Bertie bowl"?

Mr. O'Donoghue: Will the Deputy name the five?

Mr. Deenihan: Dublin International Arena; the Australian consortium, Prospero; US event management company, SFX; the German Walter Group and Multiplex, developer of Stadium Australia in Sydney.

Mr. O'Donoghue: I will clarify the position in that regard later because some of the applicants may or may not involve some of the companies named by the Deputy. In some cases there is a consortium involved.

Mr. Deenihan: Surely if they do not bid, it is not an expression of confidence in what the Minister is trying to do. Will he give some indication of what incentive the Government will provide for the private operator to build a stadium? Surely there must be some tax incentives. The Minister has ruled out free land, but there must be some incentives. Surely it would be better to give the money directly to the FAI and the IRFU and tell them build a stadium.

Mr. O'Donoghue: Some or all of the companies to which the Deputy referred may or may not be involved in some of the consortia which have made an application. Since I would not have the names of the companies if included in the name of a consortium, it would not be possible to give the Deputy the kind of details he is seeking as to whether companies were or were not interested. That is the reason I would prefer to deal with the question later. It relates to the minutiae of the situation. Suffice it to say that there have been 23 expressions of interest. I never said there would be no question of the Government not giving some incentive. What I said was that we were not in the business of enabling any private investor to make a killing at the taxpayer's expense. I will ensure that will not happen.

Question No. 82 answered with Question No. 78.

Other Questions.

National Sports Stadium.

83. Mr. Durkan asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the position in regard to the building or adaptation of national stadia; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19069/02]

90. Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the total projected cost of all elements of the Campus and Stadium Ireland development according to the latest figures to hand; the breakdown of all costs incurred to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19075/02]

108. Mr. J. Higgins asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism if he will make a statement on Stadium Campus Ireland; and the details of all moneys expended to date on this project. [17126/02]

114. Mr. Allen asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the Government's proposals to provide a new stadium for soccer and rugby here; the response there has been from the private sector for the proposals to provide a stadium; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17127/02]

118. Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the reasons the Government abandoned Stadium Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17128/02]

Mr. O'Donoghue: I propose to take Questions Nos. 83, 90, 108, 114 and 118 together.

I refer the Deputies to my earlier response to priority questions on this subject. Although the agreed programme contains a commitment to develop a world class national stadium, the Government decided last month that in current economic circumstances it was not in a position to provide any Exchequer funding, in the medium term, for a national stadium. Accordingly, the Government decided that the feasibility of providing a national stadium at Abbotstown with private sector funding should be explored.

While the receipt of 23 separate expressions of interest is a gratifying response, it is far too early to speculate on whether they will provide a robust basis for going forward with the project. They must now be evaluated by an inter-agency group comprising my Department, the Department of Finance, the Office of Public Works, the National Treasury Management Agency, Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Limited and the Attorney General's office. I will report to the Government on the outcome of this evaluation following which it will be decided whether to proceed further with this initiative

Exchequer expenditure totalling €66 million has been incurred on Campus Stadium Ireland, over the three years 2000, 2001 and 2002 to date. Of this amount, a sum of €55.6 million relates directly to the construction of the aquatic and leisure centre; €7.7 million relates to administrative and ongoing running costs of the company, including executive services, project management, consultancy costs and VAT payments, most of which is related to the aquatic and leisure centre. The balance of €2.8 million relates to planning, site survey work and general preparation and development of the entire campus site.

Mr. Durkan: Given the projected costs envisaged previously and the fact that the original proposal is not now going ahead and that private enterprise will take up the slack, to what extent has an evaluation or assessment of costs been undertaken? Will the Minister indicate the cost factors involved and whether the same people from the private sector are likely to make donations towards the overall cost?

Mr. O'Donoghue: As I said, there have been no discussions with Mr. McManus in that regard. However, his offer was predicated on the Exchequer being utilised for the building of the stadium. Any estimate of the cost of building a stadium at Abbotstown will depend on its size, standard, specifications and location. The most recent estimates range between €307 million and €632 million, including on-site infractructural costs and provision for VAT, fees, contingency inflation and so on, depending on the size and standard required. I am anxious to place as much information as possible in regard to the project in the public domain in order that everyone can have an interest in what is happening and access information if they wish.

In regard to Deputy Lynch's question on disappointment with the GAA, there will be general disappointment if the stadium does not go ahead and we do not host the European Championships in 2008 because the games are of considerable importance. The estimated revenue generated as a result of holding them would be of the order of €50 million, with a projected figure of 90,000 visitors to see the games. In addition, it is the third largest sports event in the world. There would, therefore, be access to a television audience in the region of 7 billion. That is the type of advertising one simply could not purchase.

The GAA was written to in regard to whether it would make Croke Park available for the purposes of the European Championships. The Taoiseach wrote to it and there will be a meeting tomorrow between it and the Government.

Mr. Deenihan: Did the Minister ask the IRFU and the FAI to rethink about refurbishing Lansdowne Road in view of the fact that it is in a city centre location and would be favoured, by and large, by the rugby and soccer fraternity as the best location? I understand that if it was turned around 90 degrees, one could have a stadium which would cater for approximately 55,000 or 60,000 spectators. In the event of the IRFU and the FAI favouring such a development, would the Minister be in favour of providing funding to establish such a stadium?

4 o'clock

Mr. O'Donoghue: First, I thank Deputies Deenihan and Lynch and others on the Opposition side for their positive attitude towards the idea of the construction of a national stadium. As I said, I had discussions with the FAI and the IRFU. They are interested as I am in seeing whether the private option can be pursued successfully. If it cannot, then Deputy Deenihan is correct. The alternative would be to enter into discussions again with the IRFU and the FAI on the possibility of their being in a position to progress the construction or refurbishment of a stadium. However, that is for another day. At this point we are just looking at the situation with regard to the private sector and assessing and evaluating the expressions of interest received. We must try to reach a mature, reasoned and considered opinion as to whether the project can go ahead. I have no intention of delaying a decision for a number of years. If it is on, I will say so. Equally, if it is not, I will say so.

Mr. Boyle: In relation to the proposals now on the table from various consortia, is the Government keeping an open mind as to whether they will be fully financed by private sector money or whether the Government will go down the road of public-private partnerships. In that context, is there a danger that the long-term cost to the State could be far greater than originally envisaged? Second, does the Minister agree that the immediate need for a medium-sized stadium has become quite apparent from the doubt which has arisen over the holding of the centre-piece of the domestic soccer season, the FAI Cup Final next Sunday, due to drainage problems at Tolka Park? Does he agree that such events emphasise the need for a sports infrastructure to cater for events of a specific size, rather than the original proposal for a stadium of 70,000 capacity?

Mr. O'Donoghue: The question of Exchequer funding for the construction of a stadium has been totally ruled out. The only State involvement being considered is in relation to the possible provision of a site at Abbotstown and even that has not yet been agreed. Negotiations have to be entered into, if we are to go ahead with the project, to see how best it can be progressed. However, as I have been at pains to stress, this cannot be done at taxpayer's expense. We cannot have a situation where a private sector company or companies make a killing at the taxpayer's expense. Any deal which emerges has to be a straight one which represents value for money. That is crucially important. We will make certain of this. To that extent, there would be some involvement by the State, but any idea of Exchequer funding for a national stadium is now out of the question.

Mr. Durkan: How does the Minister propose to assess the potential of the various proposals submitted to him? Does he intend that his own office will carry out that assessment or will expert opinion be called in? To what extent, in the course of that assessment, will he have ongoing discussions with the GAA, the FAI and the IRFU?

Mr. O'Donoghue: It is proposed that the expressions of interest will be evaluated by a panel comprised of officials from my Department, the Office of Public Works, the Department of Finance, the National Treasury Management Agency, the Office of the Attorney General and Campus Stadium Ireland. I will be in contact on an ongoing basis with the panel which will report back to me. I am confident there is sufficient expertise in the group to make the necessary evaluation and assessment. With regard to ongoing consultations with the FAI, the GAA and the IRFU, the answer is most definitely, "Yes". Since my appointment, I have been in constant contact with all three organisations on this and other matters. It is very important that they are kept informed. In the course of advertising for expressions of interest, we indicated that people were welcome to approach the sports organisations to discuss their requirements with a view to accommodating them. Some of those in the private sector who expressed an interest in the construction of a stadium did just that.

Ms Lynch: Does the Minister accept that the stadium as originally planned was far too big and that what we need is a stadium of smaller capacity? Does he also accept that to take a donation from a person whom I will not name - although he has been named three times already today - and who resides outside the State for tax purposes would be an outrage? I refer to a person who simply flits in and out of Ireland to be seen on the arm of the Taoiseach at Galway races or at the Curragh, parading around the ring like a prize racehorse.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy should ask her question.

Ms Lynch: Does the Minister agree that it would be an outrage and an insult to taxpayers for the Government to take money from such a person?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: It is not permissible to make an allegation against a person outside the House.

Mr. Deenihan: Is the bidding process still open, following the receipt of 23 expressions of interest, or is it now closed? Having regard to the advertisement in the Official Journal of the European Union, is it possible that others may still apply? The Minister said that if private investors build the stadium, they will not do so at the expense of Irish taxpayers. Does he agree that the profit motive is the primary interest of any such builder? Will there be any guarantee of a ceiling on the rates charged to the FAI and the IRFU to ensure prohibitive charges are not applied, leaving those organisations in a worse position?

Mr. O'Donoghue: The construction of an 80,000 seater stadium was mooted originally and was subsequently scaled back to a 65,000 seater stadium, the size I would favour as being adequate. Above the 65,000 level, the escalation in cost is very substantial. With regard to the benefactor to whom reference was made, the Government is grateful for the generous offer of £50 million-----

Ms Lynch: It would be better if he paid his taxes.

Mr. O'Donoghue:-----and it would be very ungracious not to acknowledge this. It would also be remiss of me not to acknowledge the same gentleman's contribution to-----

Ms Lynch: Fianna Fáil?

Mr. O'Donoghue: No. I refer, for example, to his contribution to the racing industry in Ireland, among other matters. However, I do not wish to discuss individuals in the House, other than what I have just indicated.

With regard to the stadium project, once there is a decision - if there is one - to go to tender, we will have to re-advertise, including in the Official Journal of the European Union. At that point it would be open to any other companies to enter, not just those which expressed an interest. It is clear that nobody in the private sector will build a stadium unless he or she thinks he or she will make a profit. This does not necessarily mean that there must be a killing at the taxpayer's expense. When a deal is made, it is to the best advantage of both sides. That is what we will seek to do if the project goes ahead as suggested. It is possible that it will not proceed in this way. It may be declared not to be feasible. If that happens, I will inform the House.