Da´Il E´Ireann

Vol. 676 Wednesday, No. 2 25 February 2009

DI´OSPO´ IREACHTAI´ PARLAIMINTE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

DA´ IL E´ IREANN

TUAIRISC OIFIGIU´ IL—Neamhcheartaithe (OFFICIAL REPORT—Unrevised)

Wednesday, 25 February 2009.

Leaders’ Questions ……………………………… 381 Ceisteanna—Questions Taoiseach ………………………………… 388 Requests to move Adjournment of Da´il under Standing Order 32 ……………… 399 Order of Business ……………………………… 400 Treaty of Amsterdam: Motions ………………………… 411 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage ………… 412 Ceisteanna—Questions (resumed) Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform Priority Questions …………………………… 422 Other Questions …………………………… 434 Adjournment Debate Matters …………………………… 444 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (resumed) … … 445 Private Members’ Business (resumed) Banking System: Motion …………………………… 483 Business of Da´il……………………………… 507 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (resumed) and Remaining Stages ………………… 507 Adjournment Debate Tax Code ………………………………… 534 Health Services ……………………………… 536 Public Transport ……………………………… 538 School Staffing ……………………………… 539 Questions: Written Answers …………………………… 543 DA´ IL E´ IREANN

————

De´ Ce´adaoin, 25 Feabhra 2009. Wednesday, 25 February 2009.

————

Chuaigh an Ceann Comhairle i gceannas ar 10.30 a.m.

————

Paidir. Prayer.

————

Leaders’ Questions. Deputy Enda Kenny: Yesterday, the Fine Gael Party put forward a series of proposals to deal with the regulatory authorities and financial institutions in a constructive fashion and spirit of bipartisanship. I was disappointed but not surprised at the reaction of the Government. Be that as it may, the reputation of the country is at rock bottom and our international credibility is in shreds. This will not change unless decisive Government action is taken, which will not be easy for anybody given a deficit of \20 billion and increasing negative growth. This morning, the Ta´naiste, who is deputy leader of the Government and a senior economics Minister, said it is important not to talk ourselves into a deeper crisis. It is equally important that we do not talk ourselves into fantasy land. I listened in some astonishment to her engage in a wilful example of self-denial about the true state of the economy. She said Ministers, including, I presume, Ministers of State, are working very hard to save every cent. She said the decision on saving \2 billion had been taken, that was it for this year and we will move on to collecting \4 billion next year. She also said the pension levy was fair, equitable and not selective, there was no need for further cutbacks this year and the public finances were under control. As Head of Government, does the Taoiseach accept that the Ta´naiste was speaking on his and his Government’s behalf? Does he also accept that the public finances are under control?

The Taoiseach: Bringing stability to our public finances is a huge, ongoing challenge. It is a misrepresentation of what the Ta´naiste said to suggest that all our work is done either for this or future years. This is an ongoing situation which is evolving all the time. It will require continuing adjustment by Government to take whatever decisions are necessary to keep our public finances in a stable position going forward from a very difficult position. Public finance spending, fiscal policy, bank capitalisation and maintaining monetary stability are interlinked objectives, all of which must be supported. While the Deputy would claim to be in support of a recapitalisation policy in the banking system, he could not find his way to supporting the recapitalisation programme which was brought to the House.

A Deputy: The Government refused to give us the full picture.

The Taoiseach: We have to recognise that everything is linked and interdependent. We cannot bring order to our public finances unless we continue with the fiscal consolidation strategy we have only begun. We have said clearly that the \2 billion that was required, which 381 Leaders’ 25 February 2009. Questions

[The Taoiseach.] is consistent with the framework agreed with the social partners, was a necessary first step in terms of its benefits and the message it sent internationally. The answer to the Deputy’s question is simple. The Government brought forward measures to control spending last year and keep it within the 2008 allocations. We also brought forward an early budget to show the seriousness of our intent and raised \2 billion in 2009 terms as a result of these budgetary measures. We have brought serious control into the public finance position in terms of the rate of growth of public expenditure. As outlined, the Government also brought forward a \2 billion programme in the first two months of this year. This is being discussed in the legislation before the House this week as a necessary first step in a range of measures designed to bring stabilisation to our public finances over the coming years. That is our position and we will have to continue to assess and take decisions in line with those measures on an ongoing basis because we know the situation is not static.

Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: It clearly does not matter what the Ta´naiste says.

Deputy Enda Kenny: I am not deaf. Two hours ago, I heard the Tańaiste, who is sitting beside the Taoiseach, tell the Irish people the public finances were “under control”. Yesterday, I heard the Minister for Finance say there were stresses in the banking system. If the Minister for Finance is directly contradicting the Tańaiste, we are obviously not being told the full truth. The reason the Government has not been able to fix the jobs crisis is that it has not been able to fix the banking crisis. The reason it has not been able to fix the banking crisis is that action has not been taken at Government level to repair the economy. What the world outside wants to hear is that the Government is taking decisive action and has three and five year plans to ensure people here understand the scale of the problem and people abroad appreciate that Ireland is taking action to restore financial credibility to our system. The Tańaiste stated this morning that every Minister is spending a great deal of time in his or her Department trying to save every cent. It cost \190,000 to send the Minister for Health and Children, who is seated beside the Tańaiste, to the Superbowl, while \51 million has been spent on spin doctors in the Health Service Executive and \16,000 is spent each month on private advisers to the head of the HSE. Today it has been announced that a home for blind people in Drumcondra will be closed down. In addition, the HSE is deciding to cut \1 billion from its budget and we have not yet reached the end of February. Despite this, the Tańaiste tells us that we have reached the end of the cutbacks for this year and the pain has been taken. The Minister for Finance says there are stresses in the banking system while the Tańaiste says the public finances are under control. I will put two suggestions to the Taoiseach. Is he prepared to instruct the National Treasury Management Agency today to call all the banks together to revise strategy in view of the stresses the Minister for Finance has spoken about and the difficulties we are having with reputational damage abroad? It is about time we faced up to the fact that what the Government has done so far has been selective, unfair and not comprehensive. The Government should scrap the budget it introduced in October——

Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: It is gone already.

Deputy Enda Kenny: ——and face up to introducing a new budget for 2009 to provide some credibility by putting a broad, fair and comprehensive plan in place to move our economy forward.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Hear, hear. 382 Leaders’ 25 February 2009. Questions

Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: That is what we want.

Deputy Enda Kenny: I make those two suggestions to the Taoiseach in a spirit of bipartisanship, if we are serious about saving our nation.

Deputies: Hear, hear.

The Taoiseach: Deputy Kenny proposes that I scrap the budget that raised \2 billion in taxes.

Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: It is scrapped already.

The Taoiseach: The Deputy said we should scrap the budget, and before that he said our response was inadequate. He cannot have it every way. The bottom line is this. I want to cut through the nonsense. We have a gap in our public finances of more than \17 billion as things stand. We have indicated the scale of the adjustment that needs to be made——

Deputy Enda Kenny: And the Government is not dealing with it.

The Taoiseach: ——over the next few years in regard to taxation and expenditure.

Deputy Enda Kenny: It is tinkering around.

The Taoiseach: We have begun the process by introducing savings of \2 billion. We have also indicated through the McCarthy committee, which is examining all areas of public expenditure, and the Commission on Taxation——

Deputy Enda Kenny: The Taoiseach said it was under control.

The Taoiseach: ——that all aspects of taxation will need to be considered. We have agreed a framework with the social partners which outlines the areas we need to address.

(Interruptions).

Deputy Enda Kenny: Unfair.

The Taoiseach: We do not have a basis for re-engagement at the moment but we are clearly making the point that the Government must get on with governing the country. We want to see people get behind us in a national effort.

Deputy Enda Kenny: It is not fair.

The Taoiseach: What we have to do is to cut through the nonsense and face up to the fact that it is only through working together that we can implement the necessary measures.

Deputy Enda Kenny: It is an illusion — a fantasy.

The Taoiseach: We are committed to doing so and we will do so. Deputy Kenny agrees with many things in principle, yet he comes here and opposes everything in practice.

(Interruptions).

Deputy Jimmy Devins: The Deputies are speaking out of both sides of their mouths.

Deputy Denis Naughten: So much for a national Government.

Deputies: There is national Government. 383 Leaders’ 25 February 2009. Questions

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: A Government of national destruction.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: One of the things the Taoiseach tells us repeatedly is that the economic crisis we are experiencing is largely due to international factors which are outside the control of the Government. Some of that is true, but there are some things that are within our control. One of these is the state of our own country’s industrial relations. We are now facing into a spate of strikes over the next couple of weeks. Tomorrow the Civil Public and Services Union will take strike action, closing every tax and social welfare office; indeed, our own hard-working staff here in Leinster House will be on strike. On Saturday there will be a bus strike because the trade unions are concerned, under- standably, that at a time when it is official Government policy to increase public transport, bus routes are being dropped and bus workers are being let go. An all-out bus strike is planned from next Monday. Yesterday, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions took a decision to ballot for all-out strike action on 30 March. On Saturday, 120,000 workers were on the streets of Dublin. The anger felt by these workers is understandable when one considers that the lowest paid worker in a hospital is having his or her wages cut, while this week the Minister for Health and Children announced that the highest paid people in our health system — hospital consultants — are to get a major increase. That increase was announced on the very day the HSE announced it would cut front line services. On top of the banking problem, the job losses and the overall problems in our country, the last thing we need now is a period of industrial unrest and strikes. However, these can be avoided. The way to do this is to talk and get agreement on issues of concern. The general secretary of ICTU was on the radio this morning saying that he was willing to talk. The Taoiseach says he will talk to the trade unions, but only after he has put the pension levy through the House. When he has done that, however, there will not be much left to talk about. The Bill he is putting through the House does not allow for any subsequent flexibility in discussions. I suggest that the Taoiseach suspend the passage of the legislation through the Houses, have discussions with the trade unions, which they are willing to have with him, and at least make some adjustments to the pension levy to make it more fair. Everybody in this House understands there are some things that are manifestly unfair, inconsistent and anomalous in the pension levy arrangement. I ask him at least to attempt to reach agreement on those issues, change the proposal before the legislation is enacted and the door is closed on it, and avoid the strikes which are perfectly avoidable if discussions take place with the trade unions representing the workers concerned.

The Taoiseach: I do not believe industrial relations strife or strikes will contribute very much towards addressing the problems we have. They will contribute nothing, in fact. I recognise the right, in a democratic society, the right of any person to withdraw his or her labour or to protest; that is entirely within our democratic way of life. However, it does not add anything to the situation.

Deputy Emmet Stagg: That is what we are saying.

The Taoiseach: Regarding the question of discussions with the unions, I outlined before Christmas my preparedness to enter intense discussions during the month of January to consider a comprehensive framework for addressing the current issues, which was agreed on 28 January with the social partners. Unfortunately, we were not able to reach a consensus on the first item, which was the necessity, as I have clearly outlined, of implementing savings of \2 billion at the beginning of February in the interest of sending a clear signal to ourselves as a 384 Leaders’ 25 February 2009. Questions country and to the international community that we would take the necessary steps to start to bring some order back into our public finances, which have deteriorated considerably as a result of both domestic issues and the international crisis which is also faced by other economies. We decided to introduce a pension levy as part of that solution on the basis that we did not believe we should proceed with any reductions in current expenditure over and above what was agreed as part of the \2 billion package. We introduced the levy because we believed that in view of the security of tenure that public service workers thankfully have, and the value of their pension provisions compared to the serious losses being encountered in other areas of the economy in terms of the decimation of pensions, this was the best way forward at this time. We took into account that more than one third of our day-to-day expenditure is being borrowed this year and a large proportion of that is the pay and pension bill. I have heard no alternative offered from the Opposition with regard to what areas of current expenditure should be cut if the pension levy is reduced.

Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: We have heard lots of them. The Taoiseach is deaf.

The Taoiseach: What I have heard is agreement in principle with regard to the \2 billion but not agreement to proceed as we have outlined. I have said constantly, and I remain of the view——

A Deputy: My way.

The Taoiseach: ——that the partnership process has much to contribute in the context of the economic and financial crisis that confronts us. I agree with David Begg that it would be unwise to resume formal negotiations unless there is a reasonable degree of confidence that agreement on all the central elements can be found. While I remain available for dialogue with the social partners, the basis for a resumption of formal negotiations has not been established at this time. However, I will continue to be available for dialogue. I say to everyone that the Government is seeking to address this issue, and the magnitude of the problem we face, in a fair and equitable way on the basis of this first measure, which should not be isolated from the series of measures that will have to be taken in terms of both fiscal policy and further expenditure adjustments. The State is not in receipt of the revenues it had in the past and, therefore, must make adjustments with the aim not just of trying to re-establish industrial relations harmony, but of retain- ing jobs as far as possible — many jobs are being lost as we speak — and regaining competitiveness so that we can export goods and services in a way which allows us to maintain jobs at home to a greater extent than was the case up to now.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: The Taoiseach will have to make up his mind on how he is going to deal with the crisis we are now facing. He cannot say that he wants to bring everybody with him or invite the Opposition to be constructive if he swipes at us with a partisan kick whenever we try to be constructive.

Deputies: Hear, hear.

Deputy Dinny McGinley: Throw it back in our faces.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Similarly, he cannot say he wants to hold discussions with the social partners if, when they engage in discussions and reach agreement with him on the objective of cutting public expenditure by \2 billion, he then drops them the details after midnight without allowing time for consideration or discussions aimed at reaching agreement. He cannot have it both ways. 385 Leaders’ 25 February 2009. Questions

[Deputy Eamon Gilmore.]

Trade unions are willing to talk to the Taoiseach about this issue. This morning, the general secretary of Congress effectively stated unions’ willingness to hold discussions, reach an agreement and find a compromise. They want to see changes in this levy but the Taoiseach is saying that he will only speak to them when the deal is done and the legislation enacting the levy has passed through the House and cannot be changed. If he takes that approach, we will end up in a situation of industrial strife.

Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn: Hear, hear.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: He already had 120,000 angry people take to the streets last Satur- day and a spate of strikes is planned. This country’s reputation is on the line, and that is of concern to all of us. In light of all of the matters which are already damaging our reputation in the international community, the last thing we need is Ireland being closed down or various sectors going on strike. I speak as one who has already expressed to the trade union movement the need for restraint and a cautious approach to these matters. However, the problem is that if the Taoiseach on the one hand maintains that he is open for talks and wants to reach agreement but on the other hand, he cannot resist the temptation to roll up his sleeves and show what a strong man he is, the job will not get done. His method of handling the industrial relations situation will result in strikes, industrial strife and unnecessary grief. This outcome is avoidable, however. We do not need to see strikes across the country provided he speaks honestly and fairly to the people who are willing to discuss the issues and is willing to reach agreement with them. The problem thus far is his unwillingness to engage in that way and I strongly suggest that he should change tack in order to avoid some of these strikes.

Deputies: Hear, hear.

The Taoiseach: I agree with Deputy Gilmore in one respect but disagree in another. I agree in respect of the belief I have stated clearly in this House, on the numerous occasions on which I was accused of prevarication and being unprepared to make the necessary decisions or of holding discussions that were going nowhere, that the best way of solving the crisis facing this country is for everyone to get behind a comprehensive national effort on all the issues.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Hear, hear.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Where is it?

The Taoiseach: All the baggage has to be left outside the door.

Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: Some chance.

The Taoiseach: It has to address not only——

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Fine words.

The Taoiseach: I have listened respectfully to what Deputies have said and I am entitled to give my answer to the House.

Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: They are not behind you.

An Ceann Comhairle: Allow the Taoiseach to finish. 386 Leaders’ 25 February 2009. Questions

The Taoiseach: Excuse me Deputy McCormack, you are not involved in the conversation at the moment. I say that respectfully.

Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: I am a good judge of what you are at.

The Taoiseach: I am trying to answer Deputy Gilmore because a serious point is being made. I do not want to come here and simply roll up my sleeves, as he suggested. That is not my purpose. It is a reference to a political point that was being made.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Your words.

The Taoiseach: We cannot abdicate our responsibility to make decisions in a timely fashion. The criticism of those in Opposition was that we were not making decisions quickly enough. I made it clear at the outset of the discussions in January that we had to make decisions by the beginning of February and we all understood that. There was no question of people not understanding that to be the case. Pay and pension issues had to be examined and, if we could not reach agreement, that was unfortunate but the overall framework was agreed and it was understood that pay and pensions would have to be a large part of the solution. I am not suggesting that anyone acted in bad faith. It remains my position that everyone is seeking to act in good faith but sometimes the point arrives when decisions have to be made. Everyone knows that if those decisions were not taken, the signal that would have been sent to the international investment community and the financial community was that the Govern- ment or the country was incapable of making even one of the necessary decisions. While it was not the total picture, it was part of the solution. If we can find the basis on which new negotiations can take place, I am willing to negotiate a comprehensive framework in order to show the detail of what was agreed in broad principle regarding what is necessary. I have been fair, honest and open about that but the other issues also have to be addressed. The competitiveness of this economy has to be addressed.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: We have urged that for years but the Government never listened.

The Taoiseach: Our ability to compete in the new situation in which we find ourselves has to be addressed. These issues all form part of a comprehensive programme.

Deputy James Reilly: What about the banks?

An Ceann Comhairle: Let the Taoiseach finish.

The Taoiseach: If we are prepared to be radical on all fronts, we can sit down and find a solution to the problem. I agree that would be in the best interest of the country but in the meantime the Government must continue to govern and to make the necessary decisions. I do not act on the basis of not seeking co-operation and agreement but because I believe these are the best means by which we can successfully implement a strategy that will get us out of this crisis. I believe everyone is acting in good faith in that effort but any resumption of negotiations must be on the basis that everything is on the table in terms looking at every aspect of industrial and other policies for keeping jobs in this economy.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Give us the information first.

Deputy James Reilly: What about the banks?

387 Ceisteanna — 25 February 2009. Questions

The Taoiseach: That is our position and, as David Begg said this morning, it is unwise to resume formal negotiations unless there is a reasonable degree of confidence that agreement on all essential elements can be found.

Deputy Emmet Stagg: The people do not have confidence.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Come up with \1.4 billion.

The Taoiseach: We will remain available for dialogue. I am not opposed to social partnership but it must address all the issues and not just some of them.

Ceisteanna — Questions.

————

Ministerial Responsibilities. 1. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the responsibility of the Ministers of State of his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46594/08]

2. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach if he plans to change any of the functions or responsibilities of Ministers of State at his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3148/09]

3. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Taoiseach the manner in which it is intended to achieve the 10% reduction in costs in his offices and that of his Ministers of State, announced by him on 3 February 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [4744/09]

4. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach the way he will achieve the promised 10% savings in the costs of his office and that of the Ministers of State in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5672/09]

5. Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in asked the Taoiseach the roles and responsibilities of the Ministers of State in his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7052/09]

6. Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in asked the Taoiseach the savings and reductions in cost which have been undertaken in his Department, including in his offices and those of Ministers of State; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7053/09]

The Taoiseach: I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 6, inclusive, together. The Government appointed Deputy Carey as Government Chief Whip and Minister of State at my Department and at the Department of Defence. Deputy Roche was appointed Minister of State at my Department and at the Department of Foreign Affairs with special responsibility for European affairs. As Chief Whip, the Minister of State, Deputy Carey, is primarily responsible for the organisation of Government business in the Da´il and for the Government’s programme for Da´il reform. He also oversees preparation of the Government’s legislative programme. In addition, my statutory functions in relation to the Central Statistics Office have been delegated to him. I have also assigned to him responsibility for the active citizenship initiative in my Depart- ment. His role will be to drive the initiative forward, oversee the implementation of the recommendations of the taskforce on active citizenship and, critically, promote the concept of active 388 Ceisteanna — 25 February 2009. Questions citizenship in all spheres of Irish life. He will be supported in this work by a steering group chaired by Ms Mary Davis. In my Department, the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, chairs an interdepartmental co- ordinating committee on European Union affairs. The committee keeps under review, and works to ensure coherence on, the full range of issues on the EU agenda. The committee has a particular focus on the correct and timely transposition of EU legislation. In addition to these duties, the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, represents Government at a wide range of EU and international meetings, most recently at an informal General Affairs Council in Prague. The Minister of State plays a central role in consolidating and further developing Ireland’s bilateral relations with EU member states. He also plays a key role in communicating the importance of the European Union to Ireland and thus fostering enhanced public understanding of EU issues. I have no plans to change any of the functions or responsibilities in respect of the Minister of State, Deputy Carey or Minister of State, Deputy Roche. I have asked the Ministers of State and management of my Department to identify savings of the order of 10% in the running of their offices and to report to me within the week on how these savings will be achieved. Further to the Government decision of 8 July 2008 to achieve a 3% saving in payroll costs and further efficiencies across the Department’s administrative costs, a number of measures were put in place to ensure that these requirements were met. These included the non-filling of staff vacancies arising so as to attain a 3% reduction in salary costs by the end 11 o’clock of 2009, the reduction or curtailing of certain costs across a range of administrative expenditure categories, including consultancy, advertising, PR, travel and telecommunications, efforts to achieve better value for money in the procurement of goods and services through improved procurement practices and the use of shared service facilities to reduce costs of payroll and financial processing systems. In total, savings amounting to in excess of \1 million were achieved by the end of last year through a combination of efficiencies across the administrative spend for my Department. Substantial savings were also achieved in the agencies which receive funding from my Department’s Vote arising from the implementation of similar policies. The 2009 Estimates allocation for my Department reflected the consequent level of savings on the Department’s administrative costs of the continued implementation of these efficiency measures throughout 2009. Further to my recent announcement with regard to the achievement of additional general administrative reductions, the Revised Estimates allocation for my Department will be reduced by a further \508,000. Measures to effect these savings have been identified across a number of subheads within my Department’s administrative budget through reductions for travel and subsistence, consultancy, telecommunications services, office equipment and office premises expenses.

Deputy Enda Kenny: I am not sure who wrote that reply. Has the Taoiseach received a report from Minister of State and Fianna Fa´il Party Whip, Deputy Carey in regard to when the Da´il reform package will be introduced in this House, a matter which comes within his remit as Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach? Also, has the Taoiseach received an up to date report from the Minister of State with responsibility for European Affairs, Deputy Roche, on the state of play in regard to the legal clarifications being prepared by the Czech Presidency? Perhaps the Taoiseach will clarify if he has received up to date reports on those two matters.

The Taoiseach: On the first issue, the Minister of State, Deputy Carey, is working with ministerial colleagues, some of whom are former Whips, in regard to the preparation of the 389 Ceisteanna — 25 February 2009. Questions

[The Taoiseach.] Da´il reform programme. Work on the matter is continuing following which the Minister of State will bring the issue before Cabinet and, in due course, before the House for consideration. The Minister of State, Deputy Roche, who is responsible for European affairs is in close contact with all of the institutions on a regular basis. Regarding the preparation of the legal text, these are, in the first instance, prepared by the Irish Government and dealt with by the legal council services and will be brought before the Czech Presidency and wider European Council members as soon as sufficient progress has been made on the text and as soon as the discussions have been brought to appropriate fruition. It is an ongoing process that is urgently being pursued.

Deputy Enda Kenny: The Taoiseach has been credited, rightly or wrongly, as being the chief negotiator in regard to the increase in number of Ministers of State. We have 20 junior Mini- sters who are costing the Exchequer \3 million per annum. In view of the comments made by members of the Green Party, represented beside the Taoiseach, that this number should be reduced and that the matter should be brought before Cabinet for decision, perhaps the Taoiseach will inform us if that matter has been discussed? I am not suggesting the positions of Ministers of State, Deputies Carey or Roche, who are assigned to the Taoiseach’s Department, be abolished. However, a reduction in the number of Ministers of State is a matter for the Taoiseach given he has been credited as the person who created the number of positions currently in place.

The Taoiseach: The 2007 negotiations in which I was involved related to policy matters in regard to the formation of this Government. On the question of the costs of Government, which is a legitimate issue, my view is that we need to reduce them. One such way of doing so is through reductions in personnel. Another way of doing so would be to reduce the cost of government itself. I believe that is the best way forward. There is a great deal of activity in this regard. We need to achieve more in those areas if we are to get the savings we want.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Arising from the Taoiseach’s response, in the context of perception and costs, will he agree what is needed is a substantial reduction in the number of Ministers of State?

The Taoiseach: This is an issue that arises all the time.

Deputy Enda Kenny: It does.

The Taoiseach: It is a matter for Government and for the Taoiseach of the day——

Deputy David Stanton: Deputy Cowen is the Taoiseach.

The Taoiseach: ——as to how Government is reformed and represented. We have this year begun the process of public service reform arising out of the comprehensive OECD report. I look forward to achieving the reorganisation of Government that will arise from this. In the meantime, we must ensure the costs of Government are reduced. I have done this by insisting on a 10% reduction in the running costs of each Minister of State.

Deputy Enda Kenny: The Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, led a cavalcade across the west last week.

Deputy Michael P. Kitt: That is good news for Mayo. 390 Ceisteanna — 25 February 2009. Questions

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I would like to pursue a little further the Taoiseach’s last response. I acknowledge, as did Deputy Kenny, that both Ministers of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputies Carey and Roche, are doing real jobs. Also, the two Ministers of State present in the House are excellent Ministers of State. The Green Party, which is a partner in Government, has proposed a reduction in the number of Ministers of State. I would like to know if that proposal has been brought to Government and if the Government is considering reducing the number? I recall that when the proposal was made a number of Ministers of State volunteered their preparedness to step aside if such reduction was required. This is probably the only area of the public sector in which volunteers have presented in terms of reductions in numbers. Is the Government actively considering reducing the numbers of Ministers of State?

The Taoiseach: The Deputy will recall he was a member of a coalition Government in the past. He served as Minister of State with responsibility for fisheries and was, as far as I recall, a good Minister of State——

Deputy Eamon Ryan: Hear, hear.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I thank the Taoiseach for his remarks. He has made my day.

The Taoiseach: The people of Du´ n Laoghaire are forever in his debt. Deputy Gilmore will be aware that people and parties take various positions. However, what is important is that we reduce the costs of Government. The position I have taken is to ensure this happens not only in terms of payroll costs of Ministers and Ministers of State, who have taken a 10% wage cut and who are also affected by the imposition of the pension levy, but in terms of reductions in regard to the running costs of offices. This is an indication of the seriousness of intent. That people indicated their preparedness to step aside if asked to do so is an indication they are there for the right reasons. As I stated, it is a matter for the Taoiseach of the day to decide how Government is organised. I believe we have a crisis on our hands and that we need to get on with the job of Government. The workload is increasing rather than decreasing. People are aware that in bad times rather than good times we need to get on with the job and reduce the costs of Govern- ment, which is what we are doing.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: While the Taoiseach’s response is interesting, it does not answer the question I asked, namely, is the Government considering reducing the number of Ministers of State? The only interpretation I can put on the Taoiseach’s response so far is that the Government is not considering that proposal. I would like a straight answer to my question. Is a reduction in the number of Ministers of State an option under consideration and when are we likely to see a decision in that regard?

The Taoiseach: I have answered the question. I believe a reduction in the costs of Govern- ment is what is at issue.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Is the Taoiseach saying it is not a matter of numbers? Is that it?

The Taoiseach: One could have fewer numbers and the Government may cost more. Is that regarded as an objective to which the Deputy would subscribe? I do not believe so. This issue is the cost, effectiveness and efficacy of Government. Proposals are put forward in the interests of reducing the costs of Government. All proposals have been considered. I have put forward the means by which we could reduce the costs of Government. It is open to the Taoiseach of 391 Ceisteanna — 25 February 2009. Questions

[The Taoiseach.] the day to decide at any time how to organise his Government. If the Deputy ever has that privilege in the future, it is one he will preserve for himself also.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: Will that principle apply generally now? If that principle is to be applied to the numbers of Ministers of State, will it also apply throughout Government services, that if the cost of Government is reduced numbers are safe? Will that apply in the HSE? Is that the direction the Taoiseach has given to an bord snip? Has an bord snip been given this principle and told that if it can achieve reductions in the cost of Government, there is no need to achieve reductions in numbers?

An Ceann Comhairle: We are straying beyond the ambit of the question.

The Taoiseach: We are straying well beyond, but we are running a country with a GDP of in excess of \200 billion. The current and capital expenditure allocation tops \60 billion and we must ensure that there is proper political accountability for all such expenditure. The issue is what is government costing the taxpayer and how to make it as efficient and effective as possible. It is not left to any committee or anyone else to decide how the Government is organised. That is decided by the Government or the Taoiseach of the day. The Government must reduce its costs in the same way as every other area. The Deputy will find that the way to do so is a matter for judgment and for decision at any time. I have indicated that the quickest way of getting the costs saved is by a 10% reduction across all offices.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: The official job description of the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Pat Carey, includes the preparation of the weekly brief for the Taoiseach on legislation in preparation. Does the Taoiseach discuss the prioritisation of the Order of Business as presented here day after day and the prioritisation of legislation on a weekly basis with his Chief Whip, Deputy Pat Carey? Shortly, we will move on to the Order of Business where Members of the House continually raise promised legislation. At any time in his experience in the job has the Taoiseach ever taken on board any of the arguments or points in respect of delayed legislation raised daily by Members? What is the role of the Chief Whip in respect of the legislation committee and what is the relationship between the Taoiseach and that committee? Does the Taoiseach accept that there is not an awareness of the real cost of Ministers of State? It is the cost issue as against the numbers per se. Presumably, the two issues are inextri- cably linked, but nevertheless the issue is in respect of cost and what savings can be effected. It is not simply a matter of salary. Does the Taoiseach accept that it is also entails, for example, the “half car” as it is referred to jocundly by several Members on the Government benches? It includes the additional support for the constituency operations and the requirement for travel that occurs domestically and internationally, more the former I expect in Minister of State positions. None of this is ever shown. When the publication of expenses and costs relating to Members of Houses of the Oireachtas are printed from time to time——

An Ceann Comhairle: This is question time and the Deputy ought to seek information, not impart it.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: ——it refers to individual Deputies.

An Ceann Comhairle: Let us hope the Deputy learns. 392 Ceisteanna — 25 February 2009. Questions

Deputy CaoimhghıńO´ Caolaín: However, it never shows what is subsumed within a given Department’s overall budgetary provision. Does the Taoiseach accept that there is not a realisation of the real cost and that this must be an incentive to address it? We need transparency and the facts in respect of the true cost of Ministers of State. There must be appointments based on specific need and area of prioritisation, rather than as a means of appeasing the very large parliamentary bloc of the Fianna Faíl Party which, in election after election in the past 12 years, has appointed more Ministers of State than at any given time previously in the history of the jurisdiction.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Taoiseach will note there are several questions to be addressed.

The Taoiseach: I reject the patronising nature of some of those comments. The fact is that we must run a Government. This is a modern country with a Government with many responsibilities at home, in Europe, abroad, within Departments and throughout various areas of policy which are being developed. We introduced the idea of cross-departmental responsibilities which have worked very well for the elderly and for people with disabilities. These are all reforms that get away from the silo mentality in the delivery of public services. They are well respected by those who interact with the Departments, who represent those constituencies and who have seen the benefit of strategic planning by bringing forward such reforms with ministerial responsibility. If we were to take the logic of some of the Deputy’s arguments to its conclusion, we would have a technocracy. People are elected to the House to take on responsibilities and to discharge those conscientiously. There are many on all sides of the House who would have a contribution to make were they given sufficient mandate to do so. If we were to reduce democratic accountability according to the analysis of Deputy O´ Caola´in, it would take away from that. The Deputy is one of the main advocates who has come to the House on several occasions and discussed the need for political accountability, yet, when it suits, he puts forward the argument that we should not have political accountability in that respect. We must be straightforward. We must have an efficient Government and people must do their jobs which have value and worth. These people are getting on with the work and assisting Ministers in the discharge of duties, which are becoming all the more burdensome and manifold because of the nature of the challenges we face. Everyone in the House discharges those responsibilities conscientiously and to the very best of their ability. My job is to ensure that, in the context in which we live at present, those responsibilities are discharged in a way which is accountable to the people and which takes cognisance of the new economic situation. That is what I am attempting and seeking to do and we are not absolving those who hold ministerial office from the demands of the time any more than anyone else.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: While I note some of the points made, I reject the idea that my remarks were in any way patronising. What I am trying to instill in the Taoiseach’s thought processes is the importance of being open and transparent, and that we fully appreciate the cost of such a large number of Ministers of State.

An Ceann Comhairle: This is question time.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: Does the Taoiseach accept that? This is what I have attempted to expose because it is not only about salary situations. Altogether apart from tech- nocracies and so on, this is a whole “Il Duce” approach on the part of the Taoiseach. 393 Ceisteanna — 25 February 2009. Questions

The Taoiseach: That takes some doing taking into account the irregularities in the Deputy’s quarter.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: When the Taoiseach falls back on such a response, he clearly does not have the answers to the questions I am putting, or he does not wish to go there.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy continues to impart information.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Easy, take it easy.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: This is my final question. The Taoiseach can bullshit away for all he is worth, but these are valid questions that he is refusing to answer and he is doing so day on day. It is a very comfortable thing for the Taoiseach to keep his people in check, despite all the pressures on them currently. I refer to one final matter which has not been addressed in respect of the efforts within the Taoiseach’s Department to find savings. Has any consideration has been given, informally or formally, to the issue of reducing the number of committees within the Houses of the Oireachtas? Has there been any discussion informal or otherwise in respect of any of the committees that have been established? What would the raison d’eˆtre be behind any such consideration? What cost savings would be involved, altogether apart from the fact that people are here working anyway? The only additional cost that I can ascertain is in respect of the stipend for the chair of these committees. Will the Taoiseach note that I would have no objec- tion if such a ridiculous situation as the additional payment to chairmen of Oireachtas committees was abolished forthwith?

An Ceann Comhairle: This is a different story.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: That saving would be immediately written into the saving side of his efforts to better balance the books. The work of committees needs to be scrutinised more carefully than on the basis of savings alone.

An Ceann Comhairle: That is a different chapter. We are not opening other chapters now. The Deputy needs to stick to the questions on the Order Paper.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: The Ceann Comhairle has a role in that process also.

An Ceann Comhairle: Whether I do, there are no questions about the matter on the Order Paper.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: The Ceann Comhairle does have a role but there are no questions for him today. We must await another occasion.

The Taoiseach: The Oireachtas Commission deals with these matters and then discusses them with the Minister for Finance.

Deputy David Stanton: The Taoiseach has said the Chief Whip has several responsibilities, the first being to order Government business and the second, Da´il reform. Is it the Taoiseach’s policy to bring forward a comprehensive package as has been attempted and failed in the past 20 years, or does he agree that it is necessary to examine the daily procedures and privileges? There are proposals agreed by most parties under the auspices of the Ceann Comhairle. These changes could be made tomorrow, for instance, those relating to the Adjournment debate; it would only be a matter of swapping e-mails. A Minister comes into the House and responds 394 Ceisteanna — 25 February 2009. Questions to a Deputy without having heard him or her, which the Taoiseach must agree is ridiculous. Every day Deputies seek to raise matters under Standing Order 32 out of sheer frustration because there is no other way to raise current issues in the House. These two changes could be made immediately without any major fuss or bother.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Hear, hear.

Deputy David Stanton: It is necessary to examine the work we do here. The Canadian Parlia- ment held a national debate and introduced comprehensive proposals over time. The Taoiseach could make changes now, with the agreement of all sides, that would improve efficiency immediately and, in parallel, work on the overall package. Will he once and for all engage with us and let us see some genuine changes because this place is becoming more and more irrelevant by the day?

The Taoiseach: I do not believe the Houses of the Oireachtas are irrelevant but I do believe we need to update our procedures and reach agreement on how we can do this without anyone trying to jockey for advantage. That is always the problem.

Deputy David Stanton: We are not doing so. That is a fiction.

The Taoiseach: It is not. I have been a Member for 25 years and seen many proposals from various sides of the House.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Some good, some not so.

The Taoiseach: If we are interested in it, we should all commit ourselves to reform. The Chief Whip will bring forward a comprehensive set of measures soon and we should deal with them then.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Bipartisanship.

The Taoiseach: In respect of the simple changes mentioned by the Deputy, if we want a comprehensive set of measures, let us make them comprehensive.

Deputy David Stanton: Does the Taoiseach agree that this comprehensive package has been tried in the past 25 years and not worked? There is always something in it with which someone does not agree. Will he not open his mind to the suggestion of making some minor changes to procedure and let us do something now? If we are to await comprehensive measures, we will be here for another 20 years.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Correct.

Deputy David Stanton: All parties, with the exception of the Government parties, seem anxious to make changes and engage in conversation but there is no conversation, debate or engagement. The idea that we are all trying to gain an advantage is a paranoid fiction in the Taoiseach’s mind. Nobody is trying to do this. We want to make the place more efficient. We have said this time out of number. Even the Ceann Comhairle hints at it from time to time out of frustration. The Taoiseach is the only person holding it up.

The Taoiseach: That is not true. The Chief Whip will bring forward comprehensive measures. The plenary sessions could be improved. Unfortunately, much good work is conducted at committee level that is not relayed to the general public. I do not accept that we do not do 395 Ceisteanna — 25 February 2009. Questions

[The Taoiseach.] important work. There is an exercise in accountability here every day of the week. I am in the House every Tuesday afternoon and every Wednesday morning to answer questions in various ways, whether on the Order of Business or during Leaders’ Questions. That compares very favourably with the work of any other Prime Minister in a similar jurisdiction. We need to allow the Chief Whip to bring forward a comprehensive set of proposals and not just debate them but make some decisions.

Dublin-Monaghan Bombings. 7. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the work of the McEntee commission; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46597/08]

8. Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in asked the Taoiseach the further action he has taken on foot of the report of the McEntee commission, the report of the sub-committee of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and other instances of collusion in the State and the Barron reports; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7054/09]

The Taoiseach: I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 and 8 together. Judge Barron prepared reports on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, 1974; the Dublin bombings of 1972 and 1973; the murder of Seamus Ludlow and the bombing of Kay’s Tavern, Dundalk. The work of the commission of inquiry began in January 2000. Judge Barron completed his work in July 2006. The Oireachtas Joint committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women’s Rights considered all of his reports. The Government appointed Mr. Patrick McEntee, senior counsel, as sole member of a commission of investigation to examine specific matters relating to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of 1974, including aspects of the Garda investigation and missing documentation. Mr. McEntee handed over his final report on 12 March 2007. It was published on 4 April 2007. Following dissolution of the commission of investigation, the relevant confidential information remained subject to legal privilege. Its archive was transferred to my Department, where it is in secure storage. Following the recommendations of the joint committee, we held a debate on collusion in the House last year and passed a motion relating to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings on 10 July last. Arising from that motion, I understand the Clerk of the Da´il communicated the text of the resolution to the House of Commons, together with the report of the commission of inquiry and the Barron reports, and received a reply from the Clerk of the House of Commons. Any follow up to this should be considered in consultation with the parties and I understand the matter has been raised with the Whips.

Deputy Enda Kenny: Funding for Justice for the Forgotten ceases on 31 July. The group recognises the need for cutbacks and has made some adjustments. Family members and persons associated with families have approached the group in respect of the legacy commission about their entitlement to the proposed payment of \12,000. Many of the families concerned would prefer to have a group advise or assist them in dealing with such a commission. Does the Taoiseach see a value in having Justice for the Forgotten continue to liaise, assist or counsel families associated with the legacy commission and payments, if the commission is formed and a payment of \12,000 is made to families? 396 Ceisteanna — 25 February 2009. Questions

The Taoiseach: The suggestion made in the Deputy’s second point is premature. I do not know whether any bureaucratic or administrative issue would arise if that recommendation were to proceed. It is only one of several but has been the most extensively highlighted. I do not see what complexity would attach to the process or administration of payments to those affected by the conflict that would require another support system to interact between the individuals or families concerned and the commission set up to disburse the money. The remembrance fund commission ended on 31 October having been extended for several years. I understand the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has written to Justice for the Forgotten regarding its funding and that his Department is providing \125,000 for next year.

Deputy CaoimhghıńO´ Caolaín: Will the Taoiseach accept that the primary reason for continuing to fund Justice for the Forgotten is to allow it to continue to play its role in campaigning and searching for truth and justice in respect of the events that occurred in this city and in Monaghan town on 17 May 1974? Does the Taoiseach accept that it would be wholly and absolutely wrong and unacceptable if the Government were to withdraw critical funding from Justice for the Forgotten, as it endeavours to do its core work, in the immediate aftermath of the 35th anniversary of those events, which will fall in May of this year? When did the Taoiseach take the opportunity to raise directly with the British Prime Minister the decision of the Houses of the Oireachtas to unanimously endorse various reports, including the sub-committee’s report and the MacEntee report? Does he have further plans to raise these matters directly with the Prime Minister? I refer, for example, to the response received by the Clerk of the Daíl, Kieran Coughlan, from his Westminster counterpart, which was that this is a matter in the first instance for the UK Houses of Parliament. It has been suggested that the House of Commons will need to address the substantive statement involved in the unanimous decision of these Houses. Has the British Prime Minister indicated to the Taoiseach that the decision of the Daíl and the Seanad is scheduled to be addressed in Westminster? Will he undertake to revisit this matter with the British Prime Minister at the earliest opportunity? Does the Government have any plans to mark the sad occasion of the 35th anniversary of the tragedy that visited Dublin and Monaghan, which will fall within a matter of weeks?

The Taoiseach: As I said when I answered questions on this matter during a previous Ques- tion Time, the problem that has arisen relates to the conduct of their work by the commissions of inquiry. Mr. Justice Barron has conducted his work. Mr. MacEntee, who was the sole member of the commission of investigation, handed over his final report in March 2007. It was published in April of that year. Some relevant confidential information remains subject to legal privilege. In line with the sub-committee’s recommendations, a debate on collusion was held in the Daíl last year. A motion was passed by the Daíl on 10 July 2008. The Clerk of the Daíl communicated the text of the resolution to the House of Commons. A reply was received from the Westminster authorities. I am sure this issue will continue to be addressed at official level. I have not raised it specifically with the British Prime Minister, Mr. Brown, at any of the meetings I have had with him on specific issues. We all recognise that this is one of the problems that has arisen from the Troubles of the past. Despite the best efforts of everyone, including most eminent legal counsel and judges, there has been a failure to get to the full truth of everything. They have brought it as far as they can bring it, unfortunately. We will continue to see what can be done in addition to what has already been achieved.

397 Ceisteanna — 25 February 2009. Questions

Deputy CaoimhghıńO´ Caolaín: The acoustics in this Chamber are not always great, so the Taoiseach will forgive me if I misheard him. Did he indicate that he has not had an opportunity to raise the specific decision of the Houses of the Oireachtas on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, and the series of reports on the bombings, with the British Prime Minister? If I understand correctly that these matters have not been raised, why is that the case? Independent Members and Deputies from all parties in this House made a unanimous decision to adopt a motion that called for full disclosure and co-operation on the part of the British authorities. That decision was communicated by the Clerk of the Daíl to his counterpart at Westminster. We are still waiting for a formal response, other than the acknowledgement that the communication was received, from the Westminster authorities. Why has the Taoiseach not raised the matter with the British Prime Minister? Will he undertake to raise it in the serious manner that is required? Will he consider the suggestion that has been made to him on many occasions that he should arrange a specific meeting with the British Prime Minister to discuss the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and all other matters pertaining to collusion? A proper summit of the leaders of both Parliaments is required if this matter is to be addressed in a real and concerted way.

The Taoiseach: This has been an ongoing matter.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: It has been going on for 35 years.

The Taoiseach: Yes. It is an ongoing matter. We will never get to the bottom of — to the truth of — many things that happened during the Troubles, unfortunately. I refer not only to the matters raised by the Deputy, but also to a range of other issues of equal concern. I do not suggest that this is not a matter of import. I do not mean to lessen in any way the importance of the all-party motion that was passed by the Da´il. The Government and its predecessor instigated mechanisms and procedures to seek to address the issues that arose during the Troubles to the greatest extent possible. I was personally acquainted with one of the people who were murdered in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. I am not unaware of the situation. We will continue to pursue this matter as best we can. There is always ongoing contact between the two Governments on these issues. While we are disappointed with the response we have received to date, we will continue our efforts, as I have said. We will continue to see how we can bring this matter forward.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: Will the Government continue to support Justice for the Forgotten?

The Taoiseach: I have indicated that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has made an allocation of \125,000 for that group this year.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: Is that for the remainder of this year?

The Taoiseach: If the Deputy wants more detail, I suggest that he should table a parliamentary question to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Funding was provided to the group mentioned by Deputy O´ Caola´in to help it to deal with various issues. Commissions of inquiry, etc., were established by the Government as part of an effort to answer the questions asked by the group. Those proceedings have been brought as far as they can be brought, as far as the Minister, Mr. MacEntee and Mr. Justice Barron are concerned.

398 Requests to move Adjournment of 25 February 2009. Da´il under Standing Order 32

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: Surely the whole point is that they have not been brought “as far as they can be brought”.

The Taoiseach: They have been brought as far as the mechanisms I have mentioned were able to bring them. I understand that funding was provided to the group to enable it to interact with the mechanisms that were set up for these purposes. I have indicated to the Deputy that, for the purposes of this year, the work of those commissions of inquiry, etc., has been concluded. They have brought it as far as they can bring it.

Requests to move Adjournment of Daíl under Standing Order 32. An Ceann Comhairle: Anois, iarratais chun tairisceana a dheánamh an Daíl a chur ar athlo´ faoi Bhuan Ordu´ 32. We now come to requests to move the adjournment of the Daíl under Standing Order 32.

Deputy Paul Connaughton: I seek the adjournment of the Da´il under Standing Order 32 to discuss an important matter, namely, the proposed closure of agricultural colleges throughout Ireland, including the colleges at Mountbellew, Clonakilty, Pallaskenry and Gurteen; the proposals to significantly curtail the Teagasc advisory service and its research facilities, which are needed to service an agricultural industry that may help this country through its darkest economic period; and the fact that if the Franciscan agricultural college in Mountbellew closes, there will be no agricultural college in the west of Ireland.

Deputy Seań Sherlock: I seek the adjournment of the Daíl under Standing Order 32 to debate a specific and important matter of public interest requiring urgent consideration, namely, the impending announcement of significant job losses at the Sanmina-SCI plant in Fermoy, which is supported by IDA Ireland; the need to ensure those who lose their jobs will be helped to upgrade their skills and access their social welfare entitlements immediately; the need for officials from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Tańaiste to visit north and east Cork to meet representatives of Sanmina-SCI and other companies, such as Kostal, to try to stave off further job losses; and the need for the Government to intervene directly to assist companies in the region that are under severe financial pressure at this time.

Deputy James Bannon: I seek the adjournment of the Da´il under Standing Order 32 to raise a matter of national importance, namely, in consideration of the spectre of “blue ’flu” which is still hanging over the country, the perceived threat of further action as off-duty gardaı´ are forced to march to Da´il E´ ireann this afternoon to highlight the legitimate grievances regarding the pension levy.

Deputy Finian McGrath: I seek the adjournment of the Da´il under Standing Order 32 to, first, discuss an issue of national importance and concern, namely, the urgent need to support all public sector workers in their efforts for justice and equity on the pension levy issue and, second, call on all Members of the Oireachtas to support the Irish Congress of Trade Unions social solidarity pact as a strategy to resolve this matter.

Deputy Terence Flanagan: I seek the adjournment of the Da´il under Standing Order 32 to raise a matter of national importance, namely, that problems with apartment living have reached crisis point with the revelation that many developers are refusing to pay service charges for unsold units which are subsequently being charged to apartment owners; and the urgent need for the Bill on multi-unit developments, which will regulate property management com- 399 Order of 25 February 2009. Business

[Deputy Terence Flanagan.] panies, to be brought forward immediately to protect apartment owners from crippling service charges.

An Ceann Comhairle: Tar e´is breithnithe a dhe´anamh ar na nitheardaithe, nı´l siad in ord faoi Bhuan Ordu´ 32. Having considered the matters raised, I do not consider them to be in order under Standing Order 32.

Order of Business. The Taoiseach: It is proposed to take No. 11, motion re proposed approval by Daíl E´ ireann for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the establishment of “Eurodac” for the comparison of fingerprints (back from committee); No. 12, motion re proposed approval by Daíl E´ ireann for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the member state responsible for examining an application for international protection (back from committee); No. 13, motion re proposed approval by Daíl E´ ireann for a Council Decision on the establishment of the European Criminal Records Information System, ECRIS, (back from committee); and No. 23, Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill 2009 — Committee and Remaining Stages. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the Daíl shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. tonight and business shall be interrupted not later than 10.30 p.m; Nos. 11, 12 and 13 shall be decided without debate; and the proceedings on the Committee and Remaining Stages of No. 23 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 10.30 p.m. tonight by one Question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall, in relation to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Finance. Private Members’ business shall be No. 60, motion re banking system (resumed) to conclude at 8.30 p.m. tonight, if not previously concluded.

An Ceann Comhairle: Is the proposal that the Da´il will sit later than 8.30 p.m. tonight agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. 11, 12 and 13 without debate agreed?

Deputy Enda Kenny: It is not that I want to disagree but this proposal seeks approval by the Da´il of these three motions back from committee. Will there be an opportunity for the House at some stage to discuss these motions because they are important? I am aware they are agreed by the committee but will they be discussed in this House?

The Taoiseach: The purpose of having the committee system is that issues such as these, which are quite specialised and specific, are discussed in committee. The urgency is for them to be agreed before the justice and home affairs committee meeting scheduled for the end of the month. We are looking for them to be referred back from committee for today and therefore we need to adopt them formally in plenary session.

An Ceann Comhairle: Is the proposal agreed?

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: On a point of order, it is important that when matters like this are being discussed at the committees, there should be a mechanism for notice to be given at the discussion in committee that the matter may require a plenary scrutiny. I believe that would help. I have no difficulty with these ones but we should facilitate it if the matter goes beyond what is a technical issue. 400 Order of 25 February 2009. Business

The Taoiseach: That is a matter that can be considered by the Whips.

An Ceann Comhairle: Is the proposal for dealing with No. 23 agreed?

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: The Labour Party does not agree to this proposal, which is that all of the remaining Stages of the Bill dealing with the so-called pension levy in the public service should be guillotined at 10.30 p.m. tonight. There are a number of reasons we are opposing the guillotine. First, there are 51 amendments that have to be considered and there will not be sufficient time to consider them in the time that has been allowed. Second, the Government, and the Minister for Finance in particular, has indicated on a number of occasions that there would be some tweaking of the pension levy. None of the amendments tabled by the Minister for Finance provide for any such tweaking. The amendments tabled by the Minister are purely of a technical and drafting nature. I know that many Members on the Government benches who would have been seeking to give some comfort to their constituents in the past few weeks would seek to get at least some minor changes made in the levy. That is not provided for in these amendments and if the Bill passes, as is the Government’s intention, at 10.30 p.m. tonight, any changes which would have to be made subsequently to the pension levy, that is, either changes sought by members of the Government side or changes which might be negotiated afterwards with trade unions, would have to be the subject of separate legislation brought before the House. This proposal is providing for a situation where the passing of the legislation will make the pension levy a done deal which would then not be amenable to amendment and will be presented, presumably, by the Government as something that has been enacted by the House. In those circumstances, the Labour Party cannot agree to a guillotine of this debate at 10.30 p.m. tonight.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: I, too, wish to object to the taking of this legislation by guillotining all remaining Stages by 10.30 p.m. tonight. The Bill, the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill, is misnamed. It proposes to introduce a public services pension levy. It is not a levy in respect of public service pensions but a tax on public service, which is totally objectionable. What the Taoiseach is proposing to do is further close down one of the critical areas that must be addressed if we are to see true national partnership in operation once again. The Taoiseach said earlier this morning that everything must be on the table. Everything must be on the table regarding this proposition by the Government and the devastating consequences it spells out for people in public service across all areas, from nurses to gardaı´, teachers and all of the various sectors——

An Ceann Comhairle: We cannot have speeches now.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: ——including people in service within this institution. This is completely wrong. The Government is driving legislation through the House that will spell serious outcomes for families who are already stretched beyond belief. It should be withdrawn immediately.

Deputy Enda Kenny: I object to the guillotine as a matter of principle and I will vote against it.

The Taoiseach: First, this is an urgent matter. The Bill needs to be enacted so that it can be brought into effect from 1 March. Second, we have indicated the reasoning behind it and the options that were available to Government. Third, the suggestion that all this should be with- 401 Order of 25 February 2009. Business

[The Taoiseach.] drawn and held back would serve to indicate both at home and abroad that we were not prepared to make the necessary adjustments which clearly are the minimum in present circumstances that are required. Fourth, with regard to the suggestion of tweaking or whatever in regard to the levy itself, when asked that question at the time of its announcement I said we were not closing our minds to looking at things, but on the basis of the \1.4 billion being provided for within the context of the levy. No such proposal has been forthcoming in that respect. It has also been made clear that it is not possible to deal with this issue, nor would it be possible for people to deal with this issue in isolation from the wider framework which could provide for a basis for an agreement were negotiations to be resumed or were a basis to be found upon which negotiations could be resumed, and I have already spoken on that matter earlier.

Question put: “That the proposal for dealing with item no. 23 be agreed to.”

The Da´il divided: Ta´, 80; Nı´l, 73.

Ta´

Ahern, Dermot. Kirk, Seamus. Ahern, Michael. Kitt, Michael P. Andrews, Barry. Kitt, Tom. Andrews, Chris. Lenihan, Brian. Ardagh, Seań. Aylward, Bobby. Lenihan, Conor. Blaney, Niall. Lowry, Michael. Brady, A´ ine. McEllistrim, Thomas. Brady, Cyprian. McGrath, Mattie. Brady, Johnny. McGrath, Michael. Browne, John. McGuinness, John. Byrne, Thomas. Calleary, Dara. Mansergh, Martin. Carey, Pat. Martin, Michea´l. Collins, Niall. Moloney, John. Conlon, Margaret. Moynihan, Michael. Connick, Seań. Mulcahy, Michael. Coughlan, Mary. Nolan, M. J. Cowen, Brian. ´ ´ Cregan, John. O Cuı´v, Eamon. Cuffe, Ciarań. O´ Fearghaı´l, Seań. Cullen, Martin. O’Brien, Darragh. Curran, John. O’Connor, Charlie. Dempsey, Noel. O’Flynn, Noel. Devins, Jimmy. O’Hanlon, Rory. Dooley, Timmy. Finneran, Michael. O’Keeffe, Batt. Fitzpatrick, Michael. O’Keeffe, Edward. Fleming, Seań. O’Rourke, Mary. Flynn, Beverley. O’Sullivan, Christy. Gallagher, Pat The Cope. Power, Peter. Gogarty, Paul. Power, Seań. Gormley, John. Grealish, Noel. Roche, Dick. Hanafin, Mary. Ryan, Eamon. Harney, Mary. Sargent, Trevor. Haughey, Seań. Scanlon, Eamon. Healy-Rae, Jackie. Smith, Brendan. Hoctor, Maíre. Treacy, Noel. Kelleher, Billy. Kelly, Peter. Wallace, Mary. Kenneally, Brendan. White, Mary Alexandra. Kennedy, Michael. Woods, Michael. 402 Order of 25 February 2009. Business

Nı´l

Allen, Bernard. Lynch, Kathleen. Bannon, James. McCormack, Pa´draic. Barrett, Seań. McEntee, Shane. Behan, Joe. McGinley, Dinny. Breen, Pat. McGrath, Finian. Broughan, Thomas P. McHugh, Joe. Bruton, Richard. McManus, Liz. Burke, Ulick. Mitchell, Olivia. Burton, Joan. Morgan, Arthur. Byrne, Catherine. Naughten, Denis. Carey, Joe. Neville, Dan. Clune, Deirdre. Noonan, Michael. Connaughton, Paul. O´ Caolaín, Caoimhghıń. Coonan, Noel J. O’Donnell, Kieran. Costello, Joe. O’Dowd, Fergus. Coveney, Simon. O’Keeffe, Jim. Crawford, Seymour. O’Mahony, John. Creed, Michael. O’Shea, Brian. D’Arcy, Michael. O’Sullivan, Jan. Deasy, John. Penrose, Willie. Deenihan, Jimmy. Perry, John. Doyle, Andrew. Quinn, Ruairı´. Durkan, Bernard J. Rabbitte, Pat. English, Damien. Reilly, James. Feighan, Frank. Ring, Michael. Ferris, Martin. Shatter, Alan. Flanagan, Charles. Sheahan, Tom. Flanagan, Terence. Sheehan, P. J. Gilmore, Eamon. Sherlock, Seań. Hayes, Brian. Shortall, Ro´ isıń. Hayes, Tom. Stagg, Emmet. Higgins, Michael D. Stanton, David. Hogan, Phil. Timmins, Billy. Howlin, Brendan. Tuffy, Joanna. Kehoe, Paul. Upton, Mary. Kenny, Enda. Wall, Jack. Lynch, Ciarań.

Tellers: Ta´, Deputies Pat Carey and John Cregan; Nı´l, Deputies Paul Kehoe and Emmet Stagg.

Question declared carried.

Deputy Enda Kenny: I have two questions for the Taoiseach. I suggested this morning that the Taoiseach might ask the NTMA to call the banks together to put in place a strategy to deal with the current situation. That might be something he should consider in view of ongoing concerns. In view of the fact that the HSE is attempting to cut \1 billion off its budget for this year, I give the Taoiseach notice that I have asked my party’s Whip to seek at the Whips meeting this evening that the Government provide adequate time next week for a debate on the human consequences of the scale of what is involved.

An Ceann Comhairle: The debate is a matter for the Whips.

The Taoiseach: On the first matter, the National Treasury Management Agency has a continuing responsibility and is in constant contact with all the relevant institutions, including the Department of Finance, on these matters and the Minister of Finance is directing work in that area on an ongoing basis. 403 Order of 25 February 2009. Business

[The Taoiseach.]

The second matter is being considered by the HSE and the Minister for Health and Children. It is important to point out that over \14.7 billion is being spent on health services this year, an increase, taking account of the nursing homes repayment scheme, of \580 million compared to last year. It is a question of seeing what way budgets can be continued with on the basis of pressures relating to a reduced health levy, higher unemployment, the higher number of medical cards that will emerge as a result of the worsening economic situation and the other issues that obviously bring pressures to bear on budgets, in addition to other matters. The full gamut of pressures that are arising must be addressed by the HSE. Deputy Kenny speaks about the consequences, but the consequences of not maintaining budgets is another issue that we must take into account also. Considerable savings in terms of value for money were found last year, totalling \280 million, which continue into this year. In its service plan, the HSE is seeking a further \250 million. It requires co-operation 12 o’clock and assistance from everybody in the health service to meet this challenge. I ask in that context that we see the Health Service Executive supported in trying to maintain health services within the allocations we provided, given the deteriorating financial situation in which we find ourselves.

Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I support Deputy Kenny’s request for a debate in the House next week on the implications of the cut in the health service budget for next year. It has already been stated that this will affect front line services. We need to debate that in the House and I hope the Government would agree to the request from the Opposition parties for a debate next week. Several Ministers have stated in recent days that it is their wish and intention that people who have been involved in wrongdoing in the banks be identified, punished, etc. However, the Government seems to be moving very slowly on a number of items of legislation dealing with white collar crime. There was a European Union agreement in 2003 on combating corruption, particularly in the private sector, while the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Bill 2008 has been moving slowly through the House — it is on Committee Stage. What is the Govern- ment’s intention regarding progressing that Bill? The 2005 money laundering directive, which was agreed by the European Union, has not yet been transposed into Irish law. I understand it is now the subject of an approach by the Com- mission to the European courts because of the Government’s failure to bring in the legislation to give effect to it. When will that legislation be introduced?

The Taoiseach: I understand that legislation on the money laundering directive is due during the course of the next session and the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Bill 2008 has been referred to committee for further discussion and progression. On the issues under investigation, the Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland Act 2004, which amended previous Acts of 1942 and subsequently, and the companies legislation, comprehensively set out those areas for which there would be legal sanction in the event of that being deemed appropriate by the independent investigative authorities, which are proceeding with that process.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: I wish to ask about the legislation to amend the NORA Act 2007 to provide for the establishment of a national bio-fuels obligation scheme and also to provide for amendments to the Act in light of the developments to facilitate NORA’s ongoing 404 Order of 25 February 2009. Business activities. This relates to the energy area. I saw the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources there a few moments ago, but he must have disappeared again.

An Ceann Comhairle: That does not matter.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Will the Taoiseach inform the House if it is possible to introduce the Bill as a matter of urgency in order that we can discuss high fuel prices? Prices at the pumps and for home heating oil are still almost as high as when oil was more than $100 a barrel, even though it now costs $38 per barrel.

The Taoiseach: The legislation will be introduced later this year.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Always later.

Deputy Paul Connaughton: Will the Taoiseach tell the House if the Minister for the Envir- onment, Heritage and Local Government has brought the file on the European Union habitats directive on the 32 raised bogs to the Cabinet? We sincerely hope it will not lead to thousands of turf cutters being driven off the bogs of Ireland. Has a decision been made? The Taoiseach represents a constituency with a large number of bogs, as I do, which perhaps qualifies us as two bog men.

An Ceann Comhairle: We do not want to get bogged down in the matter.

The Taoiseach: The then Minister, Sı´le de Valera, successfully obtained a derogation of ten years when the directive was announced.

Deputy Paul Connaughton: I am talking about the current position.

The Taoiseach: I am just about to bring it to the Deputy’s attention; I was giving some background information because there are others who are not as acquainted with the habitats directive as the Deputy and me. Correspondence has been forwarded to Deputies in the House who have raised the matter by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Govern- ment, stating the Department, in consultation with the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, is considering the appropriate legislative and procedural response to a judgment of the European Court of Justice on the implementation of the directive on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment with respect to certain classes of agricultural development. There are no proposals to bring forward further legislation regarding the designation of bogs and the banning of turf cutting on them.

Deputy Paul Connaughton: Can we cut turf this year or not?

The Taoiseach: It depends on the weather. We will see how it looks in the morning.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: They can use the slea´n but not the sausage machine.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: A day is a long time in politics. Yesterday on the Order of Business I sought to raise the need to address the HSE’s signalled \1 billion in cuts in health spending in the current year.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy cannot raise it now.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: The Ceann Comhairle threatened me with the door then but he had no such difficulty with Fine Gael and the Labour Party making the point on the Order of Business this morning. 405 Order of 25 February 2009. Business

An Ceann Comhairle: It does not matter who made it.

Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: We would all appreciate fair play. In the context of the signalled further contraction of funding for the provision of health delivery systems in the State, when is it intended to bring forward the long awaited eligibility for health and personal services Bill? There has been no explanation from the Department or the Taoiseach for its continued deferral.

The Taoiseach: The heads of the Bill are being worked on but there is no date for its introduction. A lot of health legislation has been introduced in the House, apart from this Bill.

Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn: I listened to the Ta´naiste this morning speaking about the desire for light regulation in recent years whereas now we are looking for enforced regulation. She was perhaps inadvertently referring exclusively to financial regulation. The matter about which many complain is the incomprehensibility of labour law legislation on the Statute Book. The Government promised to bring forward a consolidation Bill to remove the inherent contradictions in labour law. What progress has been made with that Bill? A factor in the defeat of the first Lisbon treaty referendum was the perception that there had been an erosion of workers’ rights, particularly the right to negotiate through a trade union. This was not imposed from Brussels, but it is a matter of domestic concern following a court judgment. We have six months before the probable date of a referendum; therefore, the Government cannot blame anyone but itself if cannot clear up this mess. When will we see the legislation arising from these judgments and when will it be enacted? Can I receive an assurance that if it is not done before Easter, it will certainly be done before June?

The Taoiseach: That is what the Ta´naiste would like to achieve in terms of the legislative timeframe she has in mind for the legislation. I am not aware of the stage the purported consolidation of labour law Bill has reached.

Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn: If the Taoiseach checks his files, he will see it was one of the many promises made by his predecessor.

The Taoiseach: It was probably made before him also.

Deputy Joe Costello: On the temporary agency workers directive from Brussels that the Government opposed for many years, now that it has gone through and we must implement it within three years, will the Taoiseach and Ta´naiste ensure it is brought forward in order that it will be in place before the referendum? The Taoiseach mentioned assisting people who cut turf on bogs. Ireland is the only country in the European Union that has put in place a total ban on eel fishing.

An Ceann Comhairle: We cannot discuss eels now.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: It is a slippery subject.

Deputy Joe Costello: This was done out of the blue and without consultation. Will the issue be reopened because the European Union is imposing a total ban? It should be discussed.

An Ceann Comhairle: We cannot go into that matter; it must be dealt with by another method. The Taoiseach can answer on the first issue. The Deputy knows the second is not in order and that he must find another way to raise it. 406 Order of 25 February 2009. Business

The Taoiseach: It would not be realistic to expect legislation on the first issue to be enacted before the referendum. A consultation process with the social partners is necessary. We have a voluntary industrial relations policy in the State and trying to secure agreement between the partners on the issue would be an important consideration.

Deputy Joe Costello: The second issue also involves legislation because it deals with a directive of the European Union that will put in place a total ban on eel fishing.

An Ceann Comhairle: Is legislation promised as a result of the directive?

The Taoiseach: No legislation is promised.

Deputy Joe Costello: There must be at least a statutory instrument to implement the directive.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Taoiseach has just said there is not. Is secondary legislation promised?

The Taoiseach: Not to my knowledge but the Deputy can table a question to the Minister concerned.

Deputy Joe Costello: How can the Government ban something if we are not going to discuss the legislation to ban it here?

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy should table a question.

Deputy Emmet Stagg: A Member is entitled to ask about secondary legislation.

An Ceann Comhairle: A Member is but the problem is that the Taoiseach has said he is not aware of any legislation promised.

Deputy Emmet Stagg: If the Taoiseach does not know the answer today, he can answer tomorrow.

An Ceann Comhairle: He can; that is what the Standing Order states, but the Taoiseach says he has no knowledge of it.

Deputy Joe Costello: Is there no legislation or is the Taoiseach unaware of any legislation on the issue?

The Taoiseach: I do not have the detail on the eel fisheries. I will come back to the Deputy.

Deputy Emmet Stagg: That is better than saying the Deputy should table a question.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: I welcome the indication from the Government that we may be given time to discuss service cutbacks promised by the HSE because of the cutback in its budget. I tried to raise the issue with Deputy O´ Caola´in yesterday. The House established the Health Information Quality Authority with support from all sides. It is now drawing up standards for homes for the elderly and people with disabilities. These standards are not yet ready but already the HSE is using them to close homes for the elderly around the country and people with disabilities in the Dublin area. In counties Carlow, Waterford, Wicklow, Cork and other areas elderly people are being put out of their homes because these standards are coming down the line. 407 Order of 25 February 2009. Business

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy should put a question on legislation.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: Does the Government stand over the fact that the HSE, instead of upgrading these facilities, is using the forthcoming standards literally in order to put elderly people and people with disabilities out of their homes?

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy knows very well that we cannot go into that now. It is not on.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: There is opposition to this right across the political spectrum.

An Ceann Comhairle: If the Deputy has a question on legislation she should ask it or otherwise raise the matter in another way.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: I am asking about the secondary legislation to establish these standards.

An Ceann Comhairle: Is legislation promised in that area, Taoiseach?

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: Does the Taoiseach support the fact that these standards are being established to close homes?

An Ceann Comhairle: Is legislation promised in that area?

The Taoiseach: I will have to come back to the Deputy on this matter. I do not have any detailed knowledge of whether there is legislation involved in this issue.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: There are standards on secondary legislation.

The Taoiseach: There were standards sought in this House for the purpose of ensuring that we had adequate provision for people who are held under care or supervision. We have to apply those, obviously.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: Which is right, but they are being used to close homes.

The Taoiseach: We apply those standards in a pragmatic way but I also acknowledge that they were brought in for a purpose, to try to ensure that basic conditions were adequate. The Deputy raised another matter relating to the health services. The fact is that an allocation of \14.7 billion has been made for a service plan that was adopted.

Deputy Michael Creed: I bet the Taoiseach wishes he was back in Angola now.

The Taoiseach: There are issues arising in relation to the deteriorating economic situation and its effect on funding the health service, including these health levies and the increased cost of providing medical cards and drugs in demand-led schemes. This has to be managed. Is it the contention of the Labour Party spokesperson that all health services should simply be demand- led and that we should just proceed and pay whatever it is?

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: No, I did not say that. I said I wanted a debate on it.

The Taoiseach: She also said she wanted a debate on it because she wants to complain about the fact that it is their job statutorily, under the law——

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: I did not use those words. 408 Order of 25 February 2009. Business

The Taoiseach: ——and agreed unanimously by everybody in this House at the time, that the service plan provision was the best way in which we could try to build year-on-year a health service that was sustainable in terms of its budgets. Every time an issue arises, however, people wish to oppose that which is the fundamental basis of the legislation that was introduced in the first place.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: As public representatives we have a duty to protect public services.

An Ceann Comhairle: I am not having a debate on that now. I call Deputy Bannon.

The Taoiseach: No one is suggesting otherwise but we are also saying that we cannot have it every way.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: The Taoiseach cannot have it every way.

An Ceann Comhairle: We cannot have a debate on that now. There are several ways of raising that matter.

Deputy James Bannon: In so far as any assurances can be believed by this Government, the legislative programme assures us that the qualifications, education and training Bill will be published in 2010. In light of the growing unrest in the third level sector, can the Bill be brought forward and published this year?

The Taoiseach: That will be next year.

Deputy James Bannon: Everything is next year.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Man˜ana.

Deputy Simon Coveney: Three weeks ago the Taoiseach and his Minister promised an energy price review as a priority measure in Government. Last week, I tried to ask the Ta´naiste about the status of that review and whether there was to be regulation or secondary legislation on that. The Irish regulator must be the only one in Europe who is keeping prices artificially high.

An Ceann Comhairle: We cannot go into that now.

Deputy Simon Coveney: If the Ceann Comhairle will let me finish, both the ESB and Bord Gaís are seeking to reduce their prices but are not being allowed to do it, by regulation. There is a problem because we have a Minister who seems to think there is an advantage in keeping prices artificially high. I believe the Government genuinely wants to try to reduce domestic and industrial energy prices. Will the Taoiseach please ensure that the energy price review happens quickly? We could make a decision tomorrow that would allow the ESB to compete aggressively with Bord Gaís in the electricity sector, as well as Bord Gaís doing the same in the gas sector.

An Ceann Comhairle: Is any regulation promised in that area?

The Taoiseach: The call to regulate this sector was practically uniform in the past.

Deputy Michael Creed: The past is a different country.

The Taoiseach: I am aware of that but maybe if I get to the second sentence I will be able to follow the Deputy’s thought patterns.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Can we follow the Taoiseach’s? 409 Order of 25 February 2009. Business

The Taoiseach: The competitiveness issue is an important one. We have indicated to the regulator the need to conduct a review, which is taking place with all parties in this sector with a view to seeing in what way we can ensure that energy prices will be more competitive than is currently the case, vis-a`-vis those with whom we are trading. That must be done in the context of the existing regulatory framework. It is being conducted as a matter of urgency.

Deputy Liz McManus: The question was when it will be completed. Perhaps the Taoiseach can answer that. I have questions on two pieces of legislation. Yesterday, I asked the Taoiseach not to proceed with the Broadcasting Bill. He suggested that I should table an amendment which, with all due respect to the Taoiseach, is not an adequate response to what is needed, particularly in the current economic situation. In light of the communications (regulation) Bill, will the Taoiseach ensure that we do not establish another quango, but that we will have one regulator for the telecommunications and broadcasting sector?

An Ceann Comhairle: We cannot go into that now. The Deputy should ask a question.

Deputy Liz McManus: That is one question. The other question concerns postal services. This morning the Joint Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources had a meeting with An Post. The EU directive that requires liberalisation of the market has serious implications for such services, particularly in rural Ireland. It would clearly require legislation, which is long overdue. I do not think we have had proper postal legislation since independence. Are we to have legislation on our postal services that meets the needs of the 21st century?

An Ceann Comhairle: Is legislation promised in that area?

The Taoiseach: I do not believe any of that has been promised as yet, as far as I am aware. As regards the other matter, before the second piece of communications legislation comes before the House for consideration, there will be many opportunities for the Deputy to bring her views to the Minister’s attention through parliamentary questions and otherwise.

Deputy Liz McManus: In the meantime, we squander money.

Deputy Joan Burton: What progress, if any, has been made to bring forward legislation on management companies? The situation is deteriorating rapidly. There are apartment blocks where only three or four apartments have been sold.

An Ceann Comhairle: We cannot go into that now at 12.30 p.m.

Deputy Joan Burton: The management company situation is in complete chaos. These tenants are young people and the situation is also stopping people buying apartments.

An Ceann Comhairle: We cannot go into that now.

Deputy Joan Burton: Does the Taoiseach have any idea when this legislation is coming in? Will the Taoiseach clarify the amending Bill for the national pension reserve fund and the \7 billion for Allied Irish Bank and Bank of Ireland? Is that legislation being published today and when does he expect it to come before the House?

The Taoiseach: We expect that legislation to be published at the end of the week. The other legislation the Deputy asked about is being drafted and should be brought forward in the next session.

An Ceann Comhairle: I call Deputy Creed, finally. 410 Treaty of Amsterdam: 25 February 2009. Motions

Deputy Joan Burton: I am sorry but I am not sure what the Taoiseach just said.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Taoiseach has answered the question.

Deputy Joan Burton: Did he say that the legislation on management companies is to be brought forward to the next session?

The Taoiseach: The Bill is currently being drafted and will probably be brought forward in the next session.

An Ceann Comhairle: Finally, I call Deputy Creed.

Deputy Joan Burton: If the Taoiseach wants to revive the housing market, he should get his people to do something.

Deputy Michael Creed: Last but not least, the legislation before the House today provides a legal framework for the State unilaterally to tear up a contract with farmers under the farm waste management scheme. In a reply to a parliamentary question yesterday, the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food confirmed that 40% of the moneys would be paid in 2009. My question to the Taoiseach is in respect of the Estimate for the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, which provides only \125 million for farm waste management.

An Ceann Comhairle: This is not relevant.

Deputy Michael Creed: With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I will ask a question that is relevant to the Order of Business. The Estimate provides for only \125 million under farm waste management. It requires in the region of \230 million to facilitate a payment of 40%. I think the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food would confirm that that figure is about correct. Will there be a supplementary Estimate to deal with this matter in the Depart- ment of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food?

The Taoiseach: It will be dealt with in the revised Estimates volume.

Treaty of Amsterdam: Motions. Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Deputy Pat Carey): I move:

That Da´il E´ ireann approves the exercise by the State of the option, provided by Article 3 of the fourth Protocol set out in the Treaty of Amsterdam, to notify the President of the Council that it wishes to take part in the adoption and application of the following proposed measure:

a proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the establishment of ‘Eurodac’ for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of Regulation (EC) No. [. . ./. . .] [establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining the application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person],

a copy of which proposed measure was laid before Da´il E´ ireann on 5th January, 2009.

Question put and agreed to.

Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Deputy Pat Carey): I move: 411 Financial Emergency Measures 25 February 2009. in the Public Interest Bill 2009

[Deputy Pat Carey.]

a proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third- country national or a stateless person,

a copy of which proposed measure was laid before Da´il E´ ireann on 5th January, 2009.

Question put and agreed to.

Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Deputy Pat Carey): I move:

That Da´il E´ ireann approves the exercise by the State of the option or discretion provided by Article 1.11 of the Treaty of Amsterdam to take part in the adoption of the following proposed measure:

a proposal for a Council Decision on the establishment of the European Criminal Records Information System (ECRIS) in application of Article 11 of Framework Decision 2008/XX/JHA,

a copy of which proposed measure was laid before Da´il E´ ireann on 28th November, 2008.

Question put and agreed to.

Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage.

NEW SECTION. An Ceann Comhairle: Amendment No. 47 is related to amendment No. 1 and they will be discussed together.

Deputy Joan Burton: I move amendment No. 1:

In page 4, before section 1, to insert the following new section:

“1.—(1) This Act shall expire on the day that is 2 years from the date of its passing unless renewed by resolution of both Houses of the Oireachtas.

(2) Any such renewal shall be expressed to be for a period not exceeding 2 years.”.

This amendment provides for a sunset clause for the levy which would be for two year’s duration. If the Government of the day wished to renew it, it would have to be brought before both Houses of the Oireachtas. As the Labour Party pointed out on Second Stage, the Bill is full of anomalies which the Minister for Finance, in his concluding speech last night, did not address. The Bill will apply to all Civil Service incomes, no matter how much or how little a civil servant earns. Civil servants on low incomes or who work part-time will be subject to the full rigour of the levy in the same way as the mandarins at the top, some of whom earn well in excess of \200,000 a year. Low-paid civil servants being subject to the levy is a critical issue of fairness. 412 Financial Emergency Measures 25 February 2009. in the Public Interest Bill 2009

Civil and public servants are realists. They understand the Government has landed the country into an appalling economic mess in which much of the prosperity for which we all worked hard to produce has been squandered. It has been frittered away by the Government in its handling of the banking crisis and, particularly, the Minister for Finance through his failure to address the corporate failures, scandals and abuses that occurred in Anglo Irish Bank. At the end of September 2008, the Minister for Finance and the Taoiseach decided the taxpayer should rescue the bank when, in fact, they were aware of the goings-on in it from the day they took up their respective offices. I have no doubt that the former Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, was more than fully aware of the goings-on in the bank, seeing that he was particularly wont to hang around with golden and privileged circles——

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): Will the Deputy repeat these allegations outside the House?

Deputy Peter Power: The Deputy is making serious allegations.

Deputy Joan Burton: The Minister may wish to look at the newspaper records and listen to the recorded conversation when the then Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, described the former chairman of the bank as his friend Seanie when they were on the same platform. It would inform the Minister of all he needs to know about the closeness of those circles. Civil and public servants are realistic. They want to see the unfair pensions levy attaching to low-paid public servants addressed. They also want to see proportionality. They will be paying the levy, in part, to bail out the banks. They want to see action taken to deal with the wrongdoing in Anglo Irish Bank. The Minister’s invitation to say this outside the House is accepted. I have said it inside and outside the House on many occasions and will continue to do so until such time as the wrongs Anglo Irish Bank has inflicted on the Exchequer are addressed and the moneys recovered and restored to the taxpayer and public services. The Minister has a cheek to threaten me in that manner.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I did not threaten the Deputy.

Deputy Joan Burton: I am not an easy person to threaten. If the Minister wants to threaten me to repeat what I said outside the House, I will do so any time he likes.

Deputy Peter Power: The Deputy made serious allegations about people who are not in the House.

Deputy Joan Burton: I am not afraid. I took on the Minister’s colleague, the late Liam Lawlor, for many years in Dublin West. I know all about Fianna Fa´il and its threats. I am not intimidated by the Minister or the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power.

Deputy Peter Power: The Deputy made serious allegations.

Deputy Joan Burton: I have more experience of being threatened by Fianna Fa´il than the Minister of State thinks. The Minister has some knowledge of the way the system operated in Dublin West; therefore, the Minister of State should not threaten me.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Noel O’Flynn): I ask Deputy Burton to confine her remarks to the two amendments. I ask her to desist from making other disparaging remarks about other Members. I also ask the other two Members to do the same. 413 Financial Emergency Measures 25 February 2009. in the Public Interest Bill 2009

Deputy Joan Burton: I thank the Acting Chairman for his protection. Public servants realise the country is in a hole and what caused the massive deterioration in the public finances. Despite the Minister’s earlier promises to address the anomalies in the Bill, his amendments are purely technical in nature. The first anomaly is that low-paid public servants will have to pay the levy. The second serious anomaly is that the levy will be applied to all reckonable income, including income which is not reckonable for pension purposes. Public servants will pay the levy on all income, even though much of it may not be reckonable for pension purposes. In that sense, it is not really a pension levy but an income levy, an additional tax. The third anomaly which the Minister promised to review but did not address in his concluding speech on Second Stage is that a public servant earning \30,000 will actually pay more after tax than someone earning \50,000. The Minister brushed this aside by claiming it was a function of the way the tax bands operated and a matter addressed by taxation. That is not good enough. There are serious issues concerning equity and how the levy is structured. One mechanism for addressing this would be through a sunset clause, whereby the Bill would be withdrawn after two years or, if the Government wished to reinstate it, it would be subject to a resolution of both Houses. As a parliamentary device, that would make sense because this is rushed legislation. As all Members are aware, rushed legislation is oftentimes bad legislation. I presume that some of the anomalies contained in the Bill inevitably will be subject to challenge, possibly in the courts. It is important that there should be a mechanism for reviewing the legislation on a regular basis. Government Ministers, particularly those who represent Fianna Faíl, have referred in recent days to everyone working together. They even suggested — probably more so to Fine Gael rather than Labour — the concept of a national Government. However, there continues to be an arrogance in the context of the intellectual response. There is a suggestion that the Opposition should not suggest any amendments because those in power are not listening. If we are serious with regard to everyone in the country working together, it must be remembered that those in opposition seek to be every bit as conscientious in respect of their patriotic duty as are those on the Government benches. However, it is very difficult to be patriotic when one is presented with Bills such as that before the House which contain profoundly unfair anomalies. The fourth matter that arises in the context of the Bill relates to when, if ever, the pension levy will be removed. In an extraordinary interview on RTE radio this morning, the Tańaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Coughlan, spoke at great length about how, in her belief, our economic difficulties have largely been solved. That is what I heard the woman say. If that is so, why not include a sunset clause in the Bill? Last weekend’s Sunday Independent contained another extraordinary and long interview with the Tańaiste. It is obvious that she is considering what the Government has done. In the interview to which I refer, the Tańaiste, when commenting on Government policy relating to the budget, stated: “The six-point differential was mad, the big psychology of it was that everybody went across the border to shop, which was a total disaster.” She further stated: “...for my own area, on the border, the VAT has been a nightmare.” Therefore, the second most senior officeholder in Government is basically saying that a key element of the Government’s budget strategy “was mad”.

Deputy Arthur Morgan: It was mad.

Deputy Joan Burton: Yes. When the budget was debated, we highlighted to the Minister for Finance that his proposal was crazy. The Minister rushed to increase the VAT rate by 0.5% 414 Financial Emergency Measures 25 February 2009. in the Public Interest Bill 2009 and did not take any advice from those Members who informed him that it was not the wisest action to take. Among the Members to whom I refer was Deputy Morgan, who told the Mini- ster at the time that shoppers—Idonotknow whether they were male or female — were fighting over trolleys in the car park of Sainsbury’s in Newry. Anybody who has visited that store will know that one would not fight to get into or out of its car park.

Deputy Peter Power: It sounds as if the Deputy has some experience.

Deputy Joan Burton: The Minister would not take advice from us on the matter at that time. We are now advising him that a sunset clause relating to the pension levy should be included in the Bill. I would be fairly confident in predicting that he will not be Minister for Finance in two years’ time. He might, therefore, be glad to be in a position — probably from the Oppo- sition benches — to revisit the levy. If the Minister is asking everyone in this country to put their shoulders to the wheel and work together, he must start from the principle of fairness. Another reason to review the levy relates to the strategy — or what passes for one — which the Taoiseach put before the House and in which he has chosen to frontload support for the banks. That support includes the \7 billion that will be used to recapitalise Allied Irish Banks and Bank of Ireland and the untold amounts that will be required to pay for the nationalisation of Anglo Irish Banks. He has also chosen to impose the levy to which the Bill relates on public servants and to reduce the early childhood supplement. However, the Taoiseach has not chosen at any point to bring forward, as a priority, legislative measures which would close down the tax loopholes that are a continuing source of scandal to almost everyone in the PAYE sector. Some of the best tax avoidance experts in the country, particularly those from Price- waterhouseCoopers, PwC — I must declare an interest here because I trained and worked with that firm — are members of the Commission on Taxation. I could write these people’s recommendations on taxation now on the back of my copy of the Order Paper because I know that they will be. They will suggest that there should be more tax incentives, propose that there be headline closures of a few loopholes and put forward massive increases in all taxes relating to those on lower and middle incomes. The commission’s report has already been written. The Minister for Finance has offered no indication of the type of social solidarity he expects from the rich. Last week, the chairperson of the Revenue Commissioners disclosed to the Committee of Public Accounts that there are just over 5,000 people who classify themselves as tax exiles. These individuals are resident in the State but for tax purposes they are non-resident. Of those 5,000, some 440 are identified by the Revenue Commissioners as being high net worth individuals. These people have extremely large incomes and wealth and they reside in this country. However, they are not resident here for tax purposes. The Bill before us is a financial measure and there is, therefore, plenty of scope to address the issues of social solidarity and the contribution extremely rich people will make in the difficult times that lie ahead. The Minister for Finance and the Taoiseach have consciously chosen to ignore these issues. If a sunset clause were included in the Bill, in two years’ time we might know a little more about and be able to discuss what Fianna Fa´il proposes to do to close down the tax shelters and loopholes in which it has specialised in establishing since 2000 in particular. Until 2000, the Government was relatively moderate in its approach to tax shelters. After that date, it lost the run of itself with regard to such shelters. The consequence of this has been the introduction of massive imbalances in the context of those who pay tax in this country. On each occasion on which this matter is raised, the Minister for Finance states: “Ah, but high income tax payers pay the most tax.” As he is well aware, however, the high income earners to which the statistics he quotes refers are composed mainly of senior public servants 415 Financial Emergency Measures 25 February 2009. in the Public Interest Bill 2009

[Deputy Joan Burton.] who are married to other senior public service workers. Those people are in the PAYE system and all of their income is fully recorded. On the whole, there is no evidence that they make any significant use of tax shelters. What is the position with regard to establishing a social solidarity pact under which those who are extremely well off paying tax? Poorly paid public servants will be expected to pay, on average, a pension levy contribution of 5% after tax, while their better paid counterparts will pay approximately 7%. However, there has been nothing from silence from Fianna Fa´il as to the contribution the rich will be expected to make. I refer here to the kind of people who have served as directors of Anglo Irish Bank and other financial institutions. The directors of our major banks have, on average, earned well in excess of \1 million per year in the recent past. The current issue of Business and Finance contains an article which the Minister for Finance and his officials ought to read. It discusses the fact that many senior banking executives became players in property development and investment. Not only did they receive high salaries but they used them to trigger borrowing from their own banks and counter-party banks in the Irish system. Apparently, these banking executives became participants in a number of property development deals and availed of the tax advantages from which a number of them were structured to benefit. This is a very serious issue because it means that by the time the banks were rescued, the individuals in question had a vested interest both in their respective banks and the property deals in which many of the banks’ customers were engaged. They had moved from being bankers to players in the development system. Only time will tell us how much this practice contributed to the damage and destruction experienced in the banking system, particularly Anglo Irish Bank. The Minister is silent on the abuses which have led the country to its current position. In his amendments the Minister seems most unwilling to address the anomalies all speakers have raised. The proposed sunset clause would enable us to address some of the anomalies in two years and ascertain whether the pension levy will be permanent. If that is the case, the levy will not be funded in that the moneys raised will not be allocated to a fund earmarked or hypothecated to finance future public service pensions. Instead, they will be allocated to the Exchequer on a current basis, with the result that when we return to prosperity in a few years public servants will have no identifiable claims arising from their contributions to the levy to have their future pensions paid. The Bill and the manner in which the Minister has approached its structure are appalling. My party leader, Deputy Gilmore, indicated we were entering an uncertain period of industrial strife and strikes. Part of the reason for this is the refusal of the Government to address the fundamental issues of fairness and equity. While I do not know if it intends to return to consultation with the social partners, it must address equity issues if it proposes to do so. The Taoiseach, having invested considerable time in negotiating with the social partners, placed the pension levy on the table at the 11th hour. The levy is so complicated that it must have been worked on for weeks beforehand in the Department of Finance and other Departments. I note that last night the Minister profusely thanked a range of public bodies for the work they had clearly been doing on the issue for some time. Why was he not prepared to discuss with the social partners the anomalies in the levy which their members find pressing? It remains unclear when the levy will commence and whether the public service will be in a position to implement it, given the anomalies in the structure. How will the amount of pay on which it is based be calculated? How will local authorities, vocational education committees and so forth administer it? County council workers, for example, pay full PRSI and a complex formula is used to calculate their pension contribution as they only receive a small additional pension. Furthermore, many adult education teachers employed by the VECs work on non- 416 Financial Emergency Measures 25 February 2009. in the Public Interest Bill 2009 pensionable contracts but pay PRSI. This means they do not have pension entitlements because they work on a contact basis in special teaching services. Will these employees be subject to the levy and, if so, will all their income be affected? Will all allowances and overtime payments be included? The levy is fraught with anomalies. If the Minister is considering talks with public service unions and seeks to avoid strikes, it would be clever if he were to provide a mechanism for negotiation in order that the anomalies can be addressed.

Acting Chairman: Other Members are offering to speak. While I am aware that Deputies may speak for as long as they wish on Committee Stage, I am conscious that proceedings will be suspended at 1.30 p.m.

Deputy Richard Bruton: As amendment No. 47 in my name is in the same vein as amendment No. 1, the amendments have been grouped together for the purposes of debate. For this reason, I beg the Acting Chairman’s indulgence to allow me to address my amendment which I will not have an opportunity to discuss later in the debate. It would be appropriate to include a sunset clause in the Bill because the proposals effectively amount to a tax masquerading as a pension levy. No one would pretend that this is a pension levy in any true meaning of the word. The funds raised will not be placed in a pension fund to provide for future pensions and will not be related to the pension benefit which different public servants derive from the public service pension. The Minister provided some detail showing the substantial pension benefits some people enjoy. The actuarial value of the pension of an assistant secretary or Secretary General, for example, is probably between 40% and 50%, whereas the actuarial value of the pension of a public servant earning a relatively low income is comparatively small in percentage terms. If, under the proposed levy, a contribution was sought which was genuinely related to the benefit the employee stood to receive in later life, it would be structured in an entirely different manner. In addition, people would be able to understand the system and would expect it to be funded and we would move towards a different approach to the treatment of pensions in the public service. That is not the case, however, because this levy is simply a tax. It is important to realise, as Members on both sides have stated, that the structure of the proposed levy is unfair. It is worth examining the different structure adopted for the levy compared to other elements of the tax code. Those earning less than \18,300 per annum are exempted from paying the income levy — the “Lenihan levy” — whereas this same group will pay 3% under the proposed pension levy. Under the Lenihan levy, the 2% deduction of income does not apply until earnings exceed \100,000 and the 3% deduction is not levied until income exceeds \250,000. The Minister, when he had time to contemplate what was equitable in imposing the levy, took a view that the income levy should be steeply progressive, with those on high incomes paying three times the rate of those on low incomes. Those on very low incomes were not required to pay anything under the levy. After some mature reflection on his initial proposal, the Minister changed the structure. The manner in which the burden is spread in the proposed pension levy is an indication of the Government’s thinking on fairness. The pension levy has an entirely different structure from that of the income levy, with those earning the minimum wage and less facing a net charge of 3%, while those earning \300,000 per annum face a 5% net charge, rather than three, four or five times the rate facing the lowest income earners. No one would argue that this tax structure is proportionate to the benefit people will derive from their pension, their ability to pay or the family burdens they may have to bear. Like me, the Minister and the Acting Chair- man will have encountered harrowing cases of people experiencing major pressures arising 417 Financial Emergency Measures 25 February 2009. in the Public Interest Bill 2009

[Deputy Richard Bruton.] from mortgages and family obligations. They are struggling hard to make ends meet, and this is tipping them over the edge. The proposal has not been structured in a way that considers ability to pay, responsibilities carried, or benefits derived, and it does not contribute to the long-term health of pensions. We know this is an attempt to reduce the cost of the public service. We should be honest with ourselves in this regard. I do not believe it is a fair way of reducing the cost of the public service. If the Government wanted to reduce the public service pay bill it would not structure it in this way — it would not be looking to penalise those at the very bottom. The argument I am making is that it is not a fair, balanced, proportionate and long-term measure. The Government should recognise that it is a temporary measure. Many people on this side of the House and outside the House do not feel it is fairly structured. The Government seems determined to push ahead nevertheless and is not likely to entertain any 1 o’clock amendments in the course of the debate. Thus, at the very minimum the Minister needs to accept this amendment so that can we revisit this issue at a time when the economy, it is to be hoped, is in a stronger position, and we can recognise that all the anomalies and unfair aspects of the proposal should be changed. I am not happy about the fact that the Government has turned its face against attempts to tweak the proposal to make it fairer. I do not expect some of the amendments I have tabled for later in the Bill to be entertained, but this is one that should be entertained and I hope the Minister will support it.

Deputy Joe Costello: These two amendments from Deputies Burton and Bruton are probably the most important on this Stage. The Bill is entitled the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill. Anybody reading that Title would be led to believe there should be a sunset clause. There are in-built contradictions in the Title, but it gives the impression that what is intended is a measure introduced on an emergency basis, which would be terminated after a short period. The Taoiseach said today in the House he believed the social partnership should be the basis for moving forward, and he indicated that once he got this Bill out of the way everything would be on the table in terms of opening up talks once again with the social partners. We know the previous discussions had gone to the eleventh hour when all of a sudden the Taoiseach and the Minister pulled this rabbit out of a hat and put it on the table without any opportunity for response. There has been no proper consultation on this proposal and no opportunity to examine the anomalies, including those which have been raised and detailed in this House. It is an unfair Bill in the category of worker that it targets and in the crudeness of its divisions — 3%, 6% and 10% — and their application. People on and below the minimum wage and those on family support will be targeted by this legislation as much as people who are earning vast sums of money. There is also a provocative element in this legislation in that it pits worker against worker, because the public sector alone is targeted. That is seen as another unfair aspect of the legislation, and it clearly needs to be addressed in the context of social partnership. Unless there is a sunset clause, the social partnership process cannot examine it. The Minister is making it impossible for it to be put on the table for discussion in a meaningful fashion. In that context, what will happen next year when there is a target of \4 billion? Will it be this levy, which amounts to \2 billion for 2009, plus the \4 billion targeted for 2010? Will it be cumulative if we do not withdraw this legislation or put a sunset clause into it? Does it mean the public sector will have to bear the levy along with another levy that will cut across the 418 Financial Emergency Measures 25 February 2009. in the Public Interest Bill 2009 board, applying to other workers also? I ask the Minister to clarify whether there is a cumulative aspect to the proposal. Another issue that has been brought to the Minister’s attention a number of times in the House and which was raised again by Deputy Burton earlier is that of tax exiles. How can the Minister impose a levy of this nature on public sector workers, who have in no way been responsible for the mess we are in, and not propose any measure to tax those people who do not pay a penny of tax — who get off scot free? I am talking about the Bonos, the J. P. McManuses, and all the other fine philanthropists, either domestic or global, who jet into this country, do not pay a penny of tax here, and wrap the flag around themselves in presenting themselves as good Irishmen. Yet all they do is to provide, on a sort of charity basis, a contribution here and there. They do not do their civic duty. It is time to target them. The 120,000 people who marched last week want to see those people targeted. They want to see the tax loopholes dealt with and the tax exiles pay their share. Ensuring that happens is the Minister’s job and his responsibility, not just his entitlement. The intent of this Bill is to ensure the Exchequer gets adequate funds to keep the country moving, although it is not being done in a fair or equitable fashion. However, if the Minister does not put pressure on the existing financial institutions to lend out the necessary funds to maintain cashflow for small and medium-sized enterprises, what will happen? What is the purpose of going through this exercise if the banks are not providing for the lifeblood of the economy? We have nationalised Anglo Irish Bank and the Government is putting \7 billion into the other two banks, yet they are still refusing to give out loans. The latest survey on small and medium-sized businesses showed that around 48% of businesses, down slightly from 54%, were in desperate need of regular cashflow. What is the Mini- ster doing to ensure this is obtained? It is one thing to take cash from the public sector and put it into the Exchequer, but persuading the financial institutions, which are being funded to an enormous degree by the taxpayer, to provide the funding to keep the small and medium- sized sector — the lifeblood of the economy — going and prevent unemployment should be his priority. This is relevant in the context of the legislation. There is one sector, the Judiciary, that we cannot touch because of a constitutional impedi- ment. Its members cannot be obliged to pay this so-called pension levy even though they have public sector pensions. Has the Minister had any talks with them with a view to inviting them to join on a voluntary basis? They are some of the most highly paid people in the country. If he has not yet invited them, perhaps he might consider doing so.

Deputy Arthur Morgan: I strongly support the amendment tabled by the Labour Party. It is essential that we provide for a sunset clause in this Bill. I do not believe for one moment this is a pension levy. If it were a pension levy it would be paid into a pension fund, but the money is going into a black hole. I fully understand, therefore, why public anger is such that 120,000 people took to the streets of this city last Saturday afternoon. I believe public servants will march in ever greater numbers and we will face industrial strife and strikes. It is most unfortunate that the Government has brought us to this situation by forcing the social partners to go their separate ways. I cannot see any fairness in this levy. It is grossly unfair that a worker who earns \22,000 per annum will be made to pay a levy for which he or she will get no benefit whatsoever. A worker who earns \35,000 per annum will pay a levy of 6% whereas his or her boss pays a levy of only 5% despite earning \350,000. Will the Minister address that anomaly? Public servants such as the chief executive officers of several State agencies earn in excess of \350,000. People earning \35,000, which is barely the average industrial wage, will pay more in tax than the CEO of the 419 Financial Emergency Measures 25 February 2009. in the Public Interest Bill 2009

[Deputy Arthur Morgan.] ESB, who earns more than \500,000 per annum, or the head of Coillte, who earns more than \414,000. The fundamentally unjust nature of this measure is a reasonable explanation for the numbers who marched on the streets of this city last Saturday. I too heard the “Morning Ireland” interview with the Ta´naiste to which Deputy Burton referred. The Ta´naiste was satisfied that the public finances are under control but if that is the case, why do we need this pension levy and why are we debating this Bill? We have a range of means at our disposal for dealing with what we all recognise is an economic crisis created by the Government, bankers and speculators. Why is the Government not choosing reasonable options rather than attacking those on lower incomes? Standardising tax relief, for example, would provide \1 billion. That would almost reach our target in one hero’s leap. The budget made some progress on the PRSI ceiling but it did not go far enough. Certain Government Members are speaking about the need for consensus but what they really mean is that the Opposition should stay quiet. The Minister is shaking his head, but many of his colleagues have accused us of destabilising the market and scaring off international investors by calling it as it is.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: You are a long way from Government yet.

Deputy Arthur Morgan: His colleagues demanded that we stay quiet. Efforts are being made to hush Members on this side of the House rather than allow us to address the issues. Unfortu- nately, that is what obtained for far too long in respect of banking institutions and that is why were are in this predicament. Members on this side of the House are willing to engage constructively with the Government in the national interest. The talk about the green jersey does not impress me, however, because it brings to mind the analogy of the Taoiseach and Minister for Finance togging out for Ireland in the coming rugby match against England. Their efforts on the field in Croke Park would probably match their futile attempts to run the economy. I hope the Minister accepts this amendment because doing so would represent a gesture not only to public service workers but also to the trade union leadership that the Government is beginning to open the door to negotiations and agreement in order to quell the industrial unrest which will undoubtedly cause havoc otherwise.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: If the Minister were to agree to a sunset clause, he would go a long way in assuaging the feeling that currently exists among public servants that they have been unfairly singled out by a punitive measure. A sunset clause would at least allow people to understand that normality will return after this period of financial crisis. The Government probably underestimates the damage that has been done by the campaign waged against the conditions of public servants. I am sure the Minister, along with every other Deputy in this House, has received a storm of e-mails from public servants in reaction to this measure. Many of these correspondents took the time to explain their personal circumstances and outline their disposable incomes. An almost invariable theme running through these e- mails is that the levy is not fair, followed by which reference is made to people who are getting off scot free. As last Saturday’s march demonstrated in an extraordinary fashion, these attitudes are now deeply held by public servants and their families. If the Minister were to announce an intention to terminate this measure when this period of financial emergency ends, that would go some way towards repairing the damage that has been done. The campaign has been quite vitriolic in some areas but that is not true of the great preponderance of civil and public servants who are low paid. Contrary to the public propaganda, these people are contributing 6.5% of their salaries to their pensions and they feel very 420 Financial Emergency Measures 25 February 2009. in the Public Interest Bill 2009 aggrieved about the way they are being denigrated in the public arena. The real divide in this society ought not lie between public and private workers but between high and low earners. It would be welcome if the Minister felt able to take on board these two amendments, or whichever he considers the more appropriate. The amendment in the name of Deputy Burton on behalf of the Labour Party provides an opportunity for the legislation to be reviewed at the end of two years, which is sensible and reasonable. Deputy Costello drew attention to the name of the Bill which explains this is a crisis measure. If this is a crisis measure, surely the Government is not positing the case that we will be in crisis forever. If it believes we will come through this crisis, then there is a finite period involved. If that is the case, why then can we not provide that at the end of this finite period this measure will fall? I was struck yesterday to hear the Minister of State, Deputy Mansergh, state that this income levy is about clawing back benchmarking. If that is the purpose of this measure, the situation is entirely different. If it were a pension levy that was being paid into a type of national pension fund and so on, one could argue about it. Clearly, the pensions issue is an issue that is coming down the tracks at us and is one we need to address. However, nobody, including the Minister, has claimed this is about pensions. It is about savings in public expenditure. It is an income levy and a cut in pay. It is a pay cut and not a levy towards one’s pension. Given that is the situation and this is a financial emergency measure, why can we not agree to its termination after a fixed period? This would give hope to people who are currently demoralised and fearful of the future. We are in a serious, although it is hoped, temporary, crisis following which normality will return. Personally, I would have preferred to go down the road of a progressive increase in taxation. I believe this would not have stirred anything like the antipathy stirred in the heart of the public service that is leading, as Deputy Gilmore said, to a wave of industrial unrest with which the Government will have to cope. I tend to agree with the Taoiseach that industrial unrest will not, in current circumstances, contribute to a resolution of the situation in which we find ourselves. What public servants had to say in the storm of e-mails sent to Members is that they will pay their share provided other interests in society pay their share. That is not the current perception of the situation. It appears the Minister has set his face against a revamp of the budget given the figures now available to him. I am not quite sure what the Taoiseach meant when he said some tweaking could be anticipated. Glancing through the amendments, it is not readily apparent to me what tweaking is taking place. It is agreed on all sides of the House that there are internal inconsistencies in the measure as it stands, not least for reasons of the tax claw-back and so on. I am not sure that I can see what tweaking the Taoiseach is facilitating or what he meant by that statement at the time. There is a further reason the Minister should rethink his position on this amendment. We are making the presumption that the Minister will oppose this amendment while not knowing if that is the case. There is an extraordinary settled acrimony on the other side of the House which seems to be the resolution of a man who has his made up his mind. There is an additional reason this amendment should be accepted. A number of amendments tabled by my colleague, Deputy Burton, have been ruled out of order. Resort has been had to the ancient rule in this House that an amendment which imposes a cost on the Exchequer may not be discussed, which is intriguing in this case because the cost will not be imposed until the Bill has been enacted. I am not sure how it can be argued that Deputy Burton is diminishing revenues to the Exchequer. It is a pity the Labour Party amendments have been ruled out of order because some of them would address the manifest inequalities in the measure as it stands. 421 Priority 25 February 2009. Questions

[Deputy Pat Rabbitte.] I believe this is punitive on people with modest incomes. An amendment in the names of Deputies Burton and Bruton — it would be better for all if one of the Deputies had a different surname — which provides that an \18,000 threshold ought to apply would provide minimal relief. I regret the amendments submitted on behalf of the Labour Party in this area have been ruled out of order. I am glad the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, is in the House to provide backup for the Minister. It is remarkable how little backup he is getting from his backbenchers. I am fortunate to have a colleague in my constituency whose response to the e-mails in regard to the pension levy is to tell people he agrees with them. The implication is that when Hardy comes to Hardy he will man the bhearna bhaoil and vote with those of us who believe it is unfair. However, I would not hold my breath. That is what the Deputy concerned is saying in reply to the e-mails, which are curse if one pushes the wrong button as they are sent around the House generally rather than to the person designed to receive them.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: That may not be an accident.

Deputy Richard Bruton: Members must be receiving thousands of e-mails from me.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Given that so many of the amendments, which are designed to make this measure fairer, have been ruled out of order, I ask that the Minister rethink his position on this one. I cannot anticipate an argument for saying this is a permanent measure unless the Government has rethought the merits of the approach of the former Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, when he designed a benchmarking process, the basis of the calculations for which none of us can obtain from the archives as the material was destroyed contemporaneous with the publication of the results. If this measure is not a claw-back of benchmarking as suggested by the Minister of State, Deputy Mansergh, then what is it? Is it that the Minister believes the international audience will be impressed, admittedly at a time when we badly need to impress them, by the toughness of the decisions taken by the Irish Government or is it an economic measure designed to drive down wages in the economy generally? In fairness to public servants, neither of those arguments has been advanced as justification for this measure. I believe there are a great many public servants already in financial distress and paying the 1% levy who will expect from today’s debate some alleviation of the position as it relates to people on modest incomes.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.

Sitting suspended at 1.30 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.

Ceisteanna — Questions.

Priority Questions.

————

Drug Seizures. 38. Deputy Charles Flanagan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the action he proposes to take in respect of the significant rise in controlled drug offences in the most recent crime figures from the Central Statistics Office; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7751/09] 422 Priority 25 February 2009. Questions

39. Deputy Pat Rabbitte asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the quantity and value of seizures of heroin, cocaine, cannabis, and other drugs here during 2007, 2008 and to date in 2009; the proportion of the overall flow of drugs into Ireland which is believed to be represented by these seizures; the new initiatives he is planning to control the flow of illegal drugs into Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7754/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 38 and 39 together. The following tabular statement provides the latest available information on drug seizures for 2007 and 2008. It shows seizures of a total of \167.5 million in 2007 and in excess of \200 million in 2008. Given the covert nature of the activity, it is not possible to give a reliable estimate of the proportion of drugs coming into the country that these figures represent. While it is true that some international studies attempt to estimate the proportion of overall drugs seized to production, it is not a reliable guide to the situation in any particular country. In particular, such rule of thumb figures cannot reflect increased enforcement levels in a country. The most recent CSO figures referred to by Deputy Flanagan show an increase of 25.4% in the overall total of drugs offences recorded for 2008 in comparison with 2007. It is important to emphasise that, of their nature, drug offences are only recorded as a result of enforcement activity. For example, possession of drugs for supply is only recorded as an offence where the law enforcement agencies have detected the offence and pursued it. The statistics in question, therefore, represent increased levels of enforcement and should lead to commendation of the efforts of those involved. The House will be aware from media reports and elsewhere of the relentless action being taken, especially by An Garda Sıóchańa, in pursuing the activities of drugs gangs and the considerable success it has had through making major seizures and arrests. These successes are inevitably reflected in the recording of an increased number of drug offences, but it would be a pity if, through some misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the statistics, this was to be counted as a failure rather than a success of its enforcement strategies. That is not in any way to underestimate the extent of the problem of drug abuse and the need to devote considerable resources to tackle it, which is exactly what is being done. Through ongoing specific initiatives and intelligence-led operations, An Garda Sıóchańa continues to seize substantial quantities of illegal drugs and identify those involved in the importation, distribution, sale and supply of illegal drugs. At present some 379 members of the force are specifically attached to the divisional drug units and 60 gardaı´ are attached to the National Drugs Unit. They, in turn, are supported by the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation, the Organised Crime Unit and the Criminal Assets Bureau. I have secured increased funding of 15% for CAB this year. The Garda works closely with the Customs and Excise and the Naval Service under the umbrella of the Joint Task Force on Drugs as well as with international colleagues. Among recent and ongoing initiatives are the establishment of the Organised Crime Unit on a permanent footing, our involvement in the establishment and operation of the Maritime Analysis and Operations Centre in Lisbon, strengthened provisions in the Criminal Justice Acts 2006 and 2007 and the ringfencing of \21 million this year for Operation Anvil, which represents an increase on last year. I am confident the legislation that I will introduce shortly dealing with surveillance will be especially valuable in tackling drugs gangs. Members of the House will accept that we cannot tackle the problem of drug misuse through law enforcement measures alone. We must tackle the demand for drugs and, in this context, I can assure the House that my Department, and all the agencies under its aegis, are co-operating 423 Priority 25 February 2009. Questions

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] fully in the development of the national drugs strategy for the period 2009 to 2016, which is being drawn up by my colleague the Minister of State at the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy John Curran. The following table provides details of the quantities and estimated street value of the most significant drugs analysed by the Forensic Science Laboratory for 2007 and the provisional figures for 2008, up to and including 25 November 2008.

2008* Drugs seizures up to and including 25 November 2008:

Drug Type Quantity Estimated Street Value

Cannabis 828.950 kg 1,657,900 Cannabis Resin 5,102.530 kg 35,717,710 Heroin 161.700 kg 32,340,000 Cocaine 1,877 kg 131,390,000 Ecstasy 196,341 tablets 1,963,410

Total Value 203,069,020

2007 Drugs seizures

Drug Type Quantity Estimated Street Value

Cannabis 773.669 kg 1,547,338 Cannabis Resin 1,271.727 kg 8,902,089 Heroin 148.292 kg 29,658,400 Cocaine 1,763.548 kg 123,448,360 Ecstasy 275,082 tablets and 13.381 kg 2,884,630 Amphetamine 58.223 kg and 10,471 tablets 1,030,410

Total Value 167,471,227 *Statistics provided are operational, provisional and may change.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: The Minister has referred to measuring the success or failure of Government policy to deal with drugs. I suggest the policy, involving not only his Department but also the Department of Education and Science, the Department of Health and Children and the national drugs strategy has been a total failure. In the past four years there has been an increase in the number of drug offences recorded in the order of 75% and an increase in the number of offences in the matter of selling and supplying of drugs in the order of 60%. This represents a significant problem. Meanwhile, there is a cut in Garda overtime in the order of in excess of \20 million. Undoubtedly, that will result in a reduction in the availability of frontline services. For example, the dial-a-drug helpline which was available on a confidential basis for people to report activities of drug dealing to the Garda has been closed down. The service is no more simply because the funding is not available. The Minister referred to the maritime centre in Lisbon, but we can no longer rely on the EU to solve our drugs problem. The customs services in our island nation polices 4,300 km of coastline, but there is only one cutter for patrol. The Minister’s colleague, Deputy Conor Lenihan, in reply to a parliamentary question last week stated that is was not possible to be 424 Priority 25 February 2009. Questions precise about the timing of the second boat. That is long since promised, but has not been delivered. The south west coast is a renowned drugs gateway. We read about it all the time, but no effort is made to secure our coast line. What is being done to ensure the supply of drugs is cut off at the point of entry to the State, namely, our ports and coasts?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I accept the drugs issue is a significant problem in the country. The Deputy suggested that because there is a dramatic increase in drug offences brought to court amounting to 25% year on year, there is an increased problem. Nevertheless, the Deputy should commend the Garda, the Navy, the Revenue and the Customs and Excise which has primary responsibility in this regard for the job well done. However, we are not complacent and we must continue our efforts.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: What is recorded is the tip of the iceberg.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The Deputy made a political charge relating to Garda overtime. The fact is the Government will oversee an increase in the number of gardaı´ this year from 14,200 at the beginning of the year to 14,900 at the end of the year. In effect, by the end of 2009 we will reach the level of Garda numbers that the Deputy, in his famous endless contract, promised in the general election in 2007.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: There are less man hours, the Minister can forget about that.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: In the general election of 2007 the Deputy said that he would reach the level of 15,000 by 2012. We will reach that level three years earlier so he need not make political charges in that regard.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: It is a justified charge. The Minister is preventing them from entering Templemore now. He was there recently.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Please allow the Minister to finish.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I refer again to the point in respect of increased activities by the Garda and the increased success in respect of prosecutions brought. Let us extend the logic in the argument of the Deputy to its conclusion. The implication is that the greater the number of successful offences charged and convicted, the greater the problem. However, the fact is——

Deputy Charles Flanagan: It is the same with seizures, which are up 10%.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: According to the Deputy’s logic if there were no seizures and no offences there would be no drugs in the country. That is not the case.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: No, the seizures amount to 10%.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The Deputy makes political charges relating to it. The reality is the Deputy’s leader called for more cutbacks today.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: They are justified charges.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: We are putting extra gardaı´ into the system to prosecute these offences.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I call Deputy Rabbitte.

425 Priority 25 February 2009. Questions

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: I hope the Leas-Cheann Comhairle can assure me the Minister will not walk out today. I refer to this measure of success or failure. Surely, the only measure of success or failure is the extent to which communities throughout the country are polluted by illicit drugs. Surely, the only measure of success or failure is the extent of criminality, killings and petty vandalism that is accompanied by the drugs menace. Will the Minister indicate to the House three actions he intends to take in the coming year to address the endemic nature of the drugs crisis in our midst?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I refer the Deputy to the position in respect of increased resources. There will be extra dog units available to the Revenue Commissioners and to the Customs and Excise. There will be an increase of 379 gardaı´ entering divisional drugs units, representing a dramatic increase from recent years. These are new initiatives. A greater number of dog detection teams will be provided. Extra X-ray equipment is available to the Revenue Commissioners and the Customs and Excise at all major ports and airports. The level of maritime resources will be increased by the introduction of a second cutter sometime later this year. The Navy will be part of the overall process. It is not simply a matter of enforcement, although that has been very successful. The initiative undertaken during my time as Minister for Foreign Affairs and now in respect of our accession to the Maritime Analysis and Operations Centre-Narcotics, MAOC-N, in Lisbon has been successful. I read a comment in the newspapers recently about its success. For a relatively small sum of money this country is part of an intelligence gathering centre in Lisbon and we have had success with several significant seizures. Aside from enforcement, education and prevention, the treatment and rehabilitation of persons involved with drugs are important. We worked with other agencies and Departments and the Minister of State at the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy John Curran, to put together a new national drugs strategy for the period 2009 to 2012.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: What action is the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform taking to deal with the increasing number of drug-related deaths? Will the Minister join me in expressing shock at the attempt by a 13 year old boy to sell illegal drugs to a member of the Garda Sı´ocha´na? There is a serious problem and very little being done to solve it.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: We all abhor such incidents. That is why we are and have been beefing up our enforcement agencies.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: The Minister is withdrawing gardaı´.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Our record is second to none. Instead of criticising the level of resources the Deputy should encourage——

Deputy Charles Flanagan: What is the Minister doing?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The Deputy should commend the Garda and the agencies involved for being more successful than ever before in making seizures. The figures speak for themselves, even though the Deputy tries to twist them to show that the situation is getting worse. With enforcement——

Deputy Charles Flanagan: Is it getting better?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: With proper resources, enforcement is getting better. That is not the entire——

426 Priority 25 February 2009. Questions

Deputy Charles Flanagan: The Minister lives in the same world as the Ta´naiste.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: One cannot gauge the success or otherwise of the fight on drugs purely and simply by enforcement. We have to do away with the demand also.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Praise for the Garda Sı´ocha´na and the other agencies to which the Minister refers ought not be restricted to his side of the House. We on this side commend their work too. Is it not a fact that, according to Garda figures, only 10% of the drugs that come through or into this jurisdiction are seized? One cannot point to the figures as manifest evidence of progress. They are as likely to be evidence of an increased throughput of drugs, into and through this jurisdiction. How many new dog units are in place and where they are available? Can we go on tolerating the fact that young lives are being ravaged in every town, village and urban area because of the easy availability of drugs? They are ravaging communities, destroying young people’s lives and out of control. The voluntary agencies believe the Government no longer supports, philosophically or financially, the partnership built up in the early days between the community and State sectors.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I do not accept that. The good relationship has been clearly demonstrated by the ever increasing level of resources used, until this year, in the implementation of the old national drug strategy. The Minister of State with responsibility for the strategy, Deputy Curran, can supply the figures separately. They speak for themselves. It is not the case that the 10% seizure rate equates to 10% of the overall level of production.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: That is the Garda figure.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: It is not the case. If the Deputy looks at the figures——

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: It is in the answers to several parliamentary questions tabled before the Minister took office. Those were the answers we received. The word processor indicated a figure of 10% before the Minister came along.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I did not interrupt the Deputy. He should please let me speak.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: Are those the national or international figures?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Deputy Rabbitte was sniggering even before I answered the question.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: I was not sniggering.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The Deputy did snigger earlier.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: I was laughing at the Minister’s audacity in accusing this side of House of engaging in partisan politics.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The figures from the authoritative office dealing with drugs worldwide, the UN Office for Drugs and Crime, show that in respect of seizures, cocaine production accounts for a figure of 44%; cannabis, 28%——

Deputy Charles Flanagan: Are those the figures for here? That is not true.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: These are worldwide figures.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: We are talking about Ireland.

427 Priority 25 February 2009. Questions

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Opium accounts for a total of 25%; amphetamines, 7% and ecstacy, 4.7%. They are the international seizure figures.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: Worldwide figures have no bearing on what happens along the 4,000 km of unguarded coastline here.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: We want the Irish figures.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: A figure of 10% is a rule of thumb, from the top of someone’s head or drawn up on the back of an envelope, without any real research.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Those are the figures given by the Minister’s predecessors in the past 15 years.

Sentencing Policy. 40. Deputy Charles Flanagan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on the absence of guidelines for sentencing, the absence of a judicial council, the failure of the courts to fully implement mandatory sentencing as laid down in law by the Houses of the Oireachtas, and the inconsistent approach of the courts to sentencing; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7752/09]

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The Deputy is aware, from the details of my response to Question No. 1 in his name on 13 November, that the courts are, subject only to the Constitution and the law, independent in the exercise of their judicial functions and that the sentencing of offenders is clearly a matter for the presiding judge. The steering committee established by the Chief Justice to plan for and provide information on sentencing for the Judiciary continues to sit under the chairmanship of Mrs. Justice Susan Denham. It comprises judges from the High Court, Circuit Court and District Court and a university law lecturer with expertise in sentencing law. The project, known as the Irish sentencing information system or ISIS, involves an examination of the feasibility of providing a com- puterised information system on sentences and other penalties imposed for criminal offences in order to assist judges in their consideration of the appropriate sentence to be imposed in an individual case. A pilot project was established in June 2006 in the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court. A further pilot project commenced in the Cork Circuit Court in April 2008. An appropriate computer system is being developed and the outcomes from these initial pilots will be evaluated by Judge Denham’s committee in the coming months. In addition, work on the scheme of the judicial council Bill to build on the report of the Committee on Judicial Conduct and Ethics is being finalised, taking into account necessary consultation with the Judiciary. The main purpose of the Bill is to establish a system to provide for the investigation, with lay involvement in the process, of allegations of breaches of judicial discipline. My Department is funding the substantial work being carried out by Judge Denham’s steering committee which will assist in promoting consistency in sentencing. While the judicial council Bill may help to underpin the overall work of the committee, it will not replace it. It is still too early to come to concrete conclusions on the impact of the revised provisions on presumptive minimum sentences for possession or importation of controlled drugs for sale or supply with a value over \13,000 contained in the Criminal Justice Acts 2006 and 2007. Initial results, however, are encouraging. As I have previously informed the Deputy, Courts Service statistics for convictions in the Circuit Court in 2007 show that there was a 100% increase in the number of sentences of ten years or more imposed by the court for these

428 Priority 25 February 2009. Questions offences compared with that for 2006. The Courts Service is compiling the figures for 2008. We will continue to review legislation in this area.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: Will the Minister outline his views on the judicial council? I do not believe the Government is serious about it. It is ten years since an all-party committee of the House recommended its establishment. It is nine years since the former Chief Justice, Ronan Keane, made a similar recommendation. Recommendations since have come from within and outside the House, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the chairman of the Parole Board. What is the problem? Where is the legislation? When is it expected? Is the Minister serious about the concept?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I am very serious about it and recently consulted the Chief Justice on it. We await the Judiciary’s comments on the latest draft of the Bill. I treat it as a matter of high priority because the Bill will promote excellence in the performance of our judges, high standards and I hope deal with the effective use of judicial resources. It will involve lay people in the investigation of alleged breaches of judicial ethics. I told the Chief Justice recently that we wanted to push ahead with the Bill. As soon as we receive the latest deliberations from the Judiciary, we will proceed to finalise the drafting of the Bill.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: The Minister has said all that against the background of what has happened in the five years that have elapsed since the draft Bill was published. Surely he cannot describe this as a “high priority”. If it is, it says something about the manner in which he orders his priorities. What does he intend to do about the bail regime? Will the bail laws be reviewed? Many serious criminals commit further crimes while on bail.

Deputy Joe Carey: Hear, hear.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: This is a high priority. However, it is a difficult area, as the separation of powers of the Judiciary, the Legislature and the Government must be observed. Much of the debate with the Judiciary centres on this area. We must hear the comments of all judges, from the highest court in the land to the lowest, on what is being proposed. It is, once more, a question of deciding between light and heavy regulation. We need to consider whether the legislation should be detailed, or whether a lighter touch should be used when considering the extent to which outside lay people should be involved in the investigation of alleged breaches of judicial ethics. Since I became Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, I have said on many occasions that I am prepared to examine the bail laws which are being kept under review. Substantial changes to the bail regime were made quite recently, with the help of the people in a referendum. Some of the figures in that regard have started to come through in recent times. The granting of bail is now much more restrictive. The Garda now has the ability to apply to the courts to ensure bail is not granted. Such issues should be allowed to take their course. It is clear that some of the figures issued by Fine Gael in recent times predated the recent changes.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: That is not true.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Fine Gael was trying to make the case that bail was an issue.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: It is a real issue.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I accept that some people commit offences while on bail.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: That is clear when one examines what is happening in the courts.

429 Priority 25 February 2009. Questions

Deputy Dermot Ahern: We should give the legislation that was changed by us, at the behest of the people in a referendum, some time before we reach a judgment on how the changes are kicking in.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: The referendum was held 13 years ago.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: No, I am referring to changes we made a couple of years ago.

Departmental Agencies. 41. Deputy Pat Rabbitte asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on the future of the Equality Authority, having regard to the resignation of the chief executive and six members of the board; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7755/09]

Deputy Dermot Ahern: As I outlined in response to Question No. 2 of 18 December 2008 which was also tabled by Deputy Rabbitte, the Government is committed to the principle of equality and the elimination of discrimination. This has been enunciated in the many equality Bills passed by the Oireachtas. I reiterate that I am committed to ensuring the Equality Auth- ority has a secure and viable future. I am glad that the chairperson of the authority, Dr. Angela Kerins, recently corrected media reports suggesting the authority had closed. She has confirmed that it remains open for business at both its offices, in Birchgrove House, Roscrea, and Clonmel Street, Dublin. According to Dr. Kerins, the board and staff of the authority are more determined than ever to drive the equality agenda forward. They will do so in partnership with individuals and organisations committed to equality in society. I indicated in response to Question No. 699 of 27 January last that I had filled two vacancies that had arisen on the board of the Equality Authority, following the making of nominations by the Irish Business and Employers Confederation. Arrangements are in place to fill the remaining four vacancies. Twelve people are serving on the board of the authority. The board, as empowered by the Employment Equality Act, appointed a member of staff as acting chief executive on 17 December 2008. I accept that 2009 will be a difficult year for all public bodies, including agencies in the justice area. Like many other public sector bodies, the Equality Auth- ority has been given more modest resources this year with which to achieve its goals but it has taken up this challenge. I understand it has agreed its strategic plan for the period between 2009 and 2011. It will be launched and published within the next week or so. I commend and support the determination of the board and staff of the authority to fulfil its complex mandate.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: How can the Minister reconcile what he has just said with his decision to drive out the chief executive and six directors of the Equality Authority who believe the authority has been neutered and undermined? It has been killed off, in effect, in terms of its traditional role. Will the Minister answer the question he evaded the last time we discussed this matter? If his purpose was to save money, why did the Government add four directors to the board? Why did it decide last year to pay the 12 directors for the first time, at a total cost of \113,000? Why did it decide to pay them for the first time when their predecessors who served selflessly had to do their tremendous work without remuneration? How does the Mini- ster reconcile this with his stated desire to save money?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The Deputy has asked about the payment of fees to directors. I remind him that the board has a significant workload. Members of the boards of other public sector bodies and agencies are paid substantial stipends for their attendance at board meetings. Sanction for this payment was originally obtained from the Department of Finance in 2005. It was decided that relatively modest fees could be paid to board members from 2007. The logic

430 Priority 25 February 2009. Questions of the Deputy’s contribution seems to be that we should not pay fees to board members of other bodies. Does he believe we should give them nothing in return for their attendance at meetings of such bodies? Perhaps that could be done in the many agencies within the remit of my Department. It would save money. However, we need to be fair to people who are prepared to give of their time. It is only fair that some stipend should be paid. It is obvious that the situation has regressed in recent times. When the former chief executive of the Equality Authority met me, he admitted that a careful look was necessary. It was a calm meeting. I explained that things would be difficult for me and the authority. I referred to the budget available to me for 2009. I indicated that I was giving priority to the fight against crime. I mentioned that as many as possible of the Department’s resources would be used to that end. I assured him that bodies such as the authority would retain their core funding to allow them to proceed. Some members of the board disagreed with this. However, there are still 12 people on the board and two new members have been appointed. Ten remained on the board. They have been unfairly treated in some of the public commentary on the issue. They have agreed, independently of me——

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: How can it be said that there are 12 people?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: ——that they are fully committed to working on the core issues that need to be focused on if progress is to be made with the equality agenda.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I ask the Minister to allow Deputy Rabbitte to ask a brief supplementary question before the time for this question expires.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I will. I want to finish on this. I am confident——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Minister can incorporate the rest of his answer into the answer he will give to the supplementary question. I call Deputy Rabbitte.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: I am not sure I understand how there are still 12 people on the board, working as hard as the Minister says they are. He said there were four vacancies. Is it not the case that the Government cleaned out the original board before it drove out the chief executive? It added four directors, thereby increasing the size of the board to 12. Those 3 o’clock who supervised the authority’s previous body of work were all cleaned out. The Government did this before the vindictive sacking took place of the authority’s chief executive who can be very proud of the work he did. I would like to know whether six directors of any other semi-State body have asked a Minister to take his fees back — to stick them up his geansaı´. Can the Minister give me another example of an agency in which six directors have said they are quitting because they believe in the chief executive? He cannot defend his vindictive and disgraceful act. What would he say in response to Mr. Goodwin who was appointed to the board on behalf of the Carers Association? When he resigned, he said the new chairperson of the authority had clearly indicated her desire to diminish the role of professional people within the organisation and to move the organisation away from its role as an advocate for those who could not represent themselves. The Minister has utterly changed the purpose and role of the authority, as it was intended to operate and as it operated before he took the vindictive action to which I have referred.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: While Mr. Goodwin is entitled to his opinion, it is just one opinion.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Six former members of the board have the same opinion.

431 Priority 25 February 2009. Questions

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I implacably disagree with it, as does the chairperson, the acting chief executive officer and the other members of the board. The situation may be more difficult from a budgetary point of view, but the Deputy is misleading the House by suggesting that Mr. Crowley was sacked. He was not sacked, but chose to leave.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: It was constructive dismissal.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The fact is that when the going gets tough, I would like to think that the tough get going and not walk off the pitch. Mr. Crowley made his decision, as did other members of the authority. I am not arrogant enough to think that people are indispensable, nor should the Deputy or anyone else.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: He was put off the pitch.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: No matter who is CEO of the Equality Authority, the authority will continue to do its work and to meet its core functions. The board members are adamant that they will continue to do that. They have been given the resources. In response to the accusation that the authority will be hamstrung on advocacy issues, it will have more money this year for legal advice and case representation by lawyers to prosecute cases before the Equality Tribunal, which received a 15% increase in its budget. The authority will receive more money this year as a result of an examination of the budget. That completely contradicts the allegation that the authority will have fewer chances to advocate the issue of equality. I strongly suggest that the people like the Deputies opposite do not bring in their ideological hang-up to bear on this.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: The Minister is the person with the ideological hang up.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: All of the legislation on equality issues have been passed when my party was on this side of the House.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: The Minister is the person who forced the man out. He did not even know about the legal case until the last day.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The Deputy can talk the talk, but he could not walk the walk when his party was in Government.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: The Minister did not even know about the legal case until he went back to his Department. How is it progressing?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I want to move on to Deputy Naughten’s question.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The Deputy did not do anything about these issues when he was on this side of the House.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: The Minister did not even know about it.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Minister, I call on you to answer——

Deputy Dermot Ahern: What did I not know about?

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: He did not even know about the legal case.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: What legal case?

432 Priority 25 February 2009. Questions

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Minister, the Chair will not be disobeyed.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: The Minister should be on the Abbey stage.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I call on the Minister to move on to Question No. 42.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I did not know about the Portmarnock case——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: If the Minister refuses to move on, I will adjourn the House.

Asylum Support Services. 42. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the plans the Reception and Integration Agency has to review accommodation contracts; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7753/09]

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The contracts engaged in by the Reception and Integration Agency of my Department for the provision of accommodation and meals for persons who apply for refugee status under the Geneva Convention of 1951 are kept under constant review by the agency, with a view to ensuring that the costs of accommodating such persons are kept to a minimum and to ensure maximum value for the taxpayer. On 21 October 2008, the Government agreed to a new round of value for money reviews for the period 2009-11. Spending by the RIA on asylum seeker accommodation is part of the Vote of the Office of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and is subject to such a review. The review will take place over the course of 2009, the results of which will be presented to the Oireachtas upon its completion. As is the case with value for money reviews, it has a steering committee, consisting of officials from my Department and the Department of Finance, and an independent chairperson. The first meeting of the review committee was on Monday, 23 February 2009.

Deputy Denis Naughten: Was it not a little late to hold the meeting last Monday? Should it not have met before now to discuss this issue? Is it not the case that there has been an 11% reduction in the costs of accommodation between 2002 and 2008, yet there has been a 200% reduction in the number of new asylum applicants coming into the country? In that period we spent \2.25 billion on the accommodation and asylum system in this country. We had the lowest figures for new applicants in 2008, yet accommodation costs increased by \15.5 million. Can the Minister give an assurance to the House that the targeted reduction of 22% in the current year will be achieved? Will it be achieved regarding the courts’ issues and regarding the Mini- ster making sure that leave to remain applications are dealt with in an expeditious manner?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: We would all like the decisions to be made in an expeditious manner, but we are not the author of our own destiny when it comes to the ability of people to take judicial review applications to the High Court. Sometimes this happens after a decision is made by every agency involved in the process. In the interim, we must provide the accommodation as required. There are 96 nationalities spread over the 60 locations in which people are housed. It must be said that any review of those locations indicates a good quality of accommodation. There will always be queries, especially when we deal with 96 nationalities. However, the UNHCR has indicated clearly that it is happy with the accommodation available. The accommodation is one the best provided in the OECD. We try to keep costs down as much as possible. The average daily cost in one of the seven State owned accommodation centres is \21. The average daily cost in one of the 53 commercially provided centres is \31. The Deputy should be compli-

433 Other 25 February 2009. Questions

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] menting the Government for reducing the costs, yet still providing high quality accommodation, food and so on.

Deputy Denis Naughten: The costs have not been reduced. An extra \15.5 million over the estimate was spent last year on accommodation costs. The Minister of State next to the Minister said on 3 December that part of this was due to the administrative delays. What steps are being taken to reduce the time delays involved in processing these applications? That question relates to the courts and the Department. It is costing \45,000 per annum to deal with each asylum application at the moment. We cannot afford to continue that at this stage. Will the Minister ensure that the review takes place and that we get action on decisions?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: There is a series of reviews on a number of headings across my Department. This is one area where we want this review to start — it has started — in order to ensure that we are getting value for money. With regard to cost issues, we are not the authors of our own destiny. We must provide accommodation for those people who present to us, whether they do so at the start or at the end of a process, including during judicial reviews. The only way to deal with these issues as expeditiously as possible is to pass the new immigration Bill as quickly as possible, which will ultimately streamline the decision-making process. In the last few years, we have presided over a system whereby people can go to the court at every twist and turn. When I started out in law, it was an exception to take a judicial review. However, judicial reviews in the High Court on asylum cases make up about two thirds of all judicial reviews. Hopefully, the passage of the Bill will change this.

Deputy Denis Naughten: What about the leave to remain?

Other Questions.

————

Anti-Social Behaviour. 43. Deputy Emmet Stagg asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of persons, broken down between children and adults, given anti-social behaviour warnings since the new system came into operation; the number of anti-social behaviour orders sought, in the same period; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7610/09]

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Part 11 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006, which provides for civil proceedings for anti-social behaviour by adults, was commenced on 1 January 2007. Part 13 of the Act, relating to anti-social behaviour by children, was commenced on 1 March 2007. These provisions set out an incremental procedure for addressing anti-social behaviour by adults and children. This incremental procedure was chosen in order to have maximum flexibility available to address unacceptable anti-social behaviour. In addition to these procedures to combat anti- social behaviour, there are also provisions for public order fixed charge notices and the Garda adult cautioning scheme. The main legislation dealing with anti-social behaviour is the Public Order Act 1994, and since 2002 over 520,000 public order offences have been detected under Operation Encounter. I am informed by the Garda authorities that from 1 January 2007 to 23 February 2009, a total of 988 behaviour warnings were issued to adults and 684 warnings to children. A total of 12 formal good behaviour contracts, which are used only in the case of children, have also been

434 Other 25 February 2009. Questions entered into. It is only where such warnings or contracts are unsuccessful that the question of seeking court orders arises. Members of the Garda Sı´ocha´na made eight applications to the courts for civil orders in respect of adults and behaviour orders in respect of children; six of these applications were successful, resulting in three civil orders and three behaviour orders being issued by the courts. The court refused one application for a civil order and one for a behaviour order. These provisions have been in operation for almost two years and they have made a significant contribution to addressing the problem of anti-social behaviour. Nevertheless, it is appropriate at this stage to review the operation of the legislation to see whether any improvements can be made. In this context, I am seeking a report from the Garda Commissioner on its operation over the past two years.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Has the anti-social behaviour order mechanism not been a failure? Given the scale of anti-social behaviour in so many of our communities, to talk about three civil and three behaviour orders being issued is absurd. So many of our communities are tortured by anti-social behaviour and people are targeted because they are vulnerable. Anybody who is different, older people, women living alone and people from diverse backgrounds are targeted. Last Saturday, I had a case in my clinic of two persons from two eastern European countries. They are married and the young woman is pregnant. They have been selected for persecution and targeted for harassment in the estate where they live in a local authority house they purchased through the tenant purchase scheme. They are in desperation. They can see no way out of this problem. The ASBO is a failed mechanism and has no impact, and we should begin by admitting that.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I do not accept that. The ASBO legislation has been in situ for only two years and I have asked the Garda Commissioner to review its operation in response, to a certain extent, to remarks by the Opposition. It is unfair to say it has been a failure when one sees the numbers of the various procedures set up before one goes for a court order. There is a sequence in how it is set out in the legislation. It was the intention of this House and the Seanad when we passed the legislation that the ASBO would be the last resort. That has been the situation in that hundreds of the other mechanisms, such as warnings, have been implemented by the Garda and have had an effect, because only in a rare number of cases have they gone to court. That is because the gardaı´ decided they did not need to do so. Contracts and warnings have been successful. It is wrong to say this has not been a success just because there has been only a handful of ASBOs. People such as the Deputy normally suggest we should examine other methods of dealing with people convicted of offences regarding rehabilitation and community work, etc. The gardaı´ should be commended for not going the whole way in many cases because they make their own judgments in this area.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Why does the Minister always shelter behind “the gardaı´ should be commended” as if somebody over here is criticising gardaı´. On the last day the Minister said the Secretary General is an honourable man. Of course he is. Can we leave that out and deal with anti-social behaviour? The Minister’s argument would have some validity if anti-social behaviour was not as widespread as it is at present. Does the Minister know the extent of anti- social behaviour, or is he too far from the real world? Does he know the extent to which ordinary communities are tortured by the behaviour of youths out of control creating mayhem in their areas?

435 Other 25 February 2009. Questions

[Deputy Pat Rabbitte.]

I will write to the Minister about the case I instanced if he will promise he might do something for me. In that case their car has been significantly damaged three times. That is not an unusual case. Anti-social behaviour is a much more complex phenomenon than ASBOs. The sequencing the Minister talked about and the reluctance of the Garda to make it work exposes the fact that the mechanism is having minimal or no impact on the scale of the problem, especially in working class communities.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Deputy Rabbitte may bring anything to my attention. He brought another instance of anti-social behaviour to my attention in the House and asked me to have a look at the issue. Now that the Deputy is attacking me, I have to say this. I investigated it and raised it with the Garda only to find that the person, Deputy Rabbitte’s constituent, was extremely annoyed that he had brought this to my attention.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: What is he talking about?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I will talk to the Deputy about it later.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: This is a distraction. It is a side show, a smokescreen.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: What is the Minister talking about?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: If Deputy Rabbitte does not recall the case, I will bring it to his attention afterwards.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: I received a letter from the Minister the other day about a petition. I brought no such case to him.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I will bring the file to the Deputy later outside the House.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Let the Minister bring it inside or outside the House.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I disagree on the ASBO legislation——

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: This guy would say anything.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I will bring it to the Deputy’s attention after the sitting. The ASBO legislation is working well. Members of the House feel there should be a league table regarding the number of ASBOs and that the more ASBOs and court orders we get, the more successful the legislation is, but I disagree. I rely on the gardaı´ and their good judgment to go to court when necessary, but not to overly criminalise people.

Deputy Joe Carey: I welcome the fact that the Minister has asked the Commissioner to review this because it is an admission that the provision is not addressing the problem of anti- social behaviour on our streets. Communities are under siege. The Minister needs to look at community policing. There are fewer than 700 community gardaı´ in this country. The Minister needs to put community gardaı´ into communities to work with them. In my town of Ennis, we have only five community gardaı´ for a population of 25,000 people. The Minister should focus on that in any such review.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The Garda Commissioner and I recently launched a new model of community policing to build on the existing community policing, which has been very successful. The last time I was in this House, the figures for community police in the country were

436 Other 25 February 2009. Questions

670; today they are in the region of 706, so the number is ever-increasing. The more gardaı´ one puts on exclusively community policing, the fewer one has for ordinary policing. The Garda Commissioner must make that judgment call but he is very conscious of the desire of people such as me and other Members of the House that our gardaı´ are very vigilant and visible in communities, that people know them and that they know the people they serve.

Citizenship Applications. 44. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his plans to address the delay in processing a citizenship application; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7674/09]

Deputy Dermot Ahern: There are 16,853 applications for naturalisation with the citizenship division of my Department that are still awaiting a decision. This is primarily due to the significant increase in the volume of applications received in the past number of years. In 2002, there were 3,500 applications, whereas in 2008 the number of such applications was 10,885. This upward trend seems set to continue and it is anticipated that applications for naturalisation will increase to 14,000 this year. Following the decentralisation of the citizenship division to Tipperary town, substantially increased resources have been made available to it to reduce backlogs and provide a better quality service to all applicants. This investment has also had a positive impact on processing times. The average processing time from application to decision for the generality of valid applications for certificates of naturalisation is 22 months, down from 30 months. It is expected that this will progressively improve over the coming year to an average timeframe of 18 months, which I regard as a reasonable target. In fact, the division is currently commencing further processing of applications received in mid-2007. It would be useful for me to set out for the House the procedures employed to assess applications for naturalisation. Upon receipt, an initial examination of each application is carried out to determine that the application form is completed fully and correctly and that all requested supporting documentation has been submitted. Passports and other documentation are then examined in detail and inquiries with the Garda National Immigration Bureau also are necessary to determine if the applicant meets the statutory residency criteria as set out in the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956, as amended. A significant number of applications are initially found to be invalid for a variety of reasons and these are now being dealt with and returned to the applicant within a week.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House Further processing takes place at a later stage and involves assessing an applicant’s financial status in respect of his or her ability to support himself or herself in the State. Inquiries with the Revenue Commissioners and the Department of Social and Family Affairs may be necessary in this regard. Investigations are also undertaken to determine if the applicant can be considered to be of good character. Depending on the complexity of any given case, these processes can take a lengthy time to complete. Once all inquiries are completed, the file is referred to me for a decision. The Deputy will appreciate that a certificate of naturalisation is an exceptional and important document that facilitates a non-national becoming a citizen of Ireland. Therefore, there is a limit to the reduction in the processing time that can be achieved as applications for naturalisation must be processed in a way which preserves the necessary checks and balances to ensure that the status of citizenship is not undervalued and is only given to persons who genuinely

437 Other 25 February 2009. Questions

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] satisfy the necessary qualifying criteria. The procedures involved have been developed and refined over a number of years and I am satisfied that they are necessary to maintain the integrity of the naturalisation process.

Deputy Denis Naughten: The Minister might come back to me with the number deemed invalidated at the start of that process. Why has the information on the Department’s INIS website not been updated to take account of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 2004? The website, which was launched as a one-stop shop in 2007, is supposed to give people information on how to go about applying for citizenship but it does not even include the changes that came into force as a result of the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 2004. In this era of e-Government, is it acceptable that such information is not available on the website? Is it acceptable that while the website was launched in 2007, the information had not been revised and has not been revised subsequently?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: That has not been brought to my attention heretofore. I will have it changed as quickly as possible. However, all the applicants know the information required, and they would be told clearly on application. As I stated, ultimately we must get the checks from the Garda, the Department of Social and Family Affairs and from other agencies, and this normally creates the delay in the application. At the same time people must accept that citizenship is not something that can be given out willy-nilly. The giving of citizenship of our country to somebody is a privilege. We must ensure that these people have loyalty and fidelity to, and are not a burden on, the State when they become naturalised. It is only fair. Any examination of systems in other country, I would hazard a guess, would show the process takes even longer than in Ireland. On the investment in Tipperary, I visited the decentralised office in Tipperary which has new technology and software available. They are able to make the decisions, and to return queries to persons who have applied, ever more quickly.

Deputy Denis Naughten: I put it to the Minister that the basic information of which we speak is like the third secret of Fatima. The reason I came across this information is because an applicant, married to an Irish citizen, who should have been able to apply did not know that they were legally entitled to apply for citizenship based on the Department’s website. Is it the case that the vast majority of these applicants numbering nearly 17,000 are persons who have contributed to the economy, who are married to Irish citizens or who are supporting critical jobs in the economy, mainly within the health service? Is it acceptable that information on the Department’s website that should have been revised nearly five years ago has not been revised? Does the Minister believe that is part of the reason so many of these applications are rejected in the first instance?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I do not accept that. From my dealings in my constituency on naturalisation applications, I am aware that people generally know what is required. It is not rocket science. They need an application and they need the supporting documents including passports and documentation on their legal stay while in Ireland. The issue of marriages is a complex area. It is one of the reasons there are delays. As I stated to Deputy Naughten and others who have attended the Committee Stage debate on the immigration Bill, there is significant fraud with marriages of convenience in this country, whether we like it or not, and that is one of the reasons the authorities, particularly the Garda and the Department, must be extremely vigilant on the type of information being portrayed to

438 Other 25 February 2009. Questions ensure that genuine cases get through. We should stamp out the practice where people, in effect, marry out of convenience in order to claim Irish citizenship or residency, and we are working with our EU colleagues in that respect.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: Given what the Minister stated in his reply, and having regard to the fact that queries are dealt with at the beginning of the application within a matter of months and the documents are returned as being invalid, would he accept that the vast majority of files awaiting approval go through? If so, and in view of what Deputy Naughten stated about those working and living in the State, many of them married to Irish citizens, would the Minister consider according those persons voting rights——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: It is a different question, I am afraid.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: ——particularly those from non-EU countries because those from EU countries may vote in the European elections in any event?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Minister does not have responsibility for voting. A brief final reply on the other matter.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I am not sure what the other matter is.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: Voting rights for applicants.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: No. That is not the Minister’s responsibility.

Legislative Programme. 45. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when the third EU anti-money laundering directive will be transposed into law here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7714/09]

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Legislation to give effect in Irish law to the third EU money laundering directive and the related implementing directive is being drafted and is at an advanced stage. This legislation also takes into account relevant recommendations arising from the Finan- cial Action Task Force, FATF, third mutual evaluation report 2006 on Ireland’s measures to combat money laundering and the financing of terrorism. I expect to be in a position to publish the legislation, following Government approval, in the first half of this year and my intention is that it will be considered by both Houses of the Oireachtas as soon as possible after that date. As the Deputy no doubt will be aware this legislation is relevant to, and affects, a wide variety of stakeholders and sectors, including not just the financial sector, but also the legal profession, accountants and a variety of other groups. For this reason, following Government approval last year to the drafting of this legislation, the proposals were published on my Depart- ment’s website and my Department, in conjunction with the Department of Finance, conducted an extensive consultation process with interested groups. This proved successful in identifying and clarifying a number of complex issues and was, I believe, an important part of developing the legislation in this case. Ireland already has effective anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing legislation in place. However, I look forward to building further on and strengthening this foundation through the provisions which will be contained in this legislation.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: Could I explore with the Minister the reasons for the inordinate delay in bringing forward this important legislation, which is of considerable significance having

439 Other 25 February 2009. Questions

[Deputy Charles Flanagan.] regard to the current banking and financial crisis? We are out of sync with our EU partners by not having ratified and enshrined in law the third EU anti-money laundering directive. In view of the heads of the Bill that were published, this Bill includes not merely the financial services industry, but also the gaming and casino industry. Is there good reason to suggest that the Minister’s friends in the gaming industry are being protected by the delay in bringing forward this legislation and this is in some way linked to the fact that there is no movement on casino or gaming regulation? Why is there such a delay in bringing forward this legislation?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I have no friends in the gaming industry, unlike some members of Deputy Flanagan’s party. The reason for the delay in proceeding with the issue of the casinos and gaming legislation is well known to Deputy Flanagan. I wrote to his party leader, as I did to the Labour Party leader, to try to follow on from the understanding I inherited. I understood that there would be a cross-party arrangement to look at that report but I have decided, because of the negative response from the Labour Party and prevarication on Deputy Flanagan’s party’s behalf, and some dissent within his party as to how——

Deputy Charles Flanagan: My question is about the Bill.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: ——to address the issue, I have decided to proceed. In view of this I have now asked my officials to proceed to include in this anti-money laundering legislation the regulation of gaming clubs. It will be included, as will other professions such as law, accountancy and the banking sector, in the anti-money laundering legislation. For the first time, gaming clubs will be regulated and will have to apply for authorisation to proceed under this legislation and they will be vetted. I would not let the message go out from this House that we do not have strong anti-money laundering legislation; the 2006 FATF review stated that Ireland has a high standard of legislation to combat money laundering.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: Will the Minister withdraw the slur he cast on Members on this side of the House? I do not expect that he will withdraw it but I would like it to be recorded that he did not do so.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: This is being treated as a priority by the Department and by the Office of the Attorney General.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: I would like it to be recorded that the Minister cast a slur on Members on this side of the House.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: The Deputy slurred me. I have no friends in the gaming industry.

Deputy Denis Naughten: Neither does anyone on this side of the House.

Deputy Conor Lenihan: It is like Fine Gael’s evidence about the ten, it is made up.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Minister of State will try to be orderly in the House.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: Like other Ministers of State, the Minister of State should have fallen on his sword.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: I preface my remarks by saying that I entirely accept the Minister would never have visited a casino in all of his life, or done anything like the things the rest of us might have done from time to time. I accept that he is a paragon of virtue.

440 Other 25 February 2009. Questions

Deputy Conor Lenihan: We will use that in the leaflets.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I know Deputy Rabbitte holds me in the highest esteem.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: I do. Did the Minister meet the people from the casino sector who are seeking regulation? They say a substantial number is employed in the casino sector and that they want to be regulated. They have been intervening with the Department for some considerable time for legislative reform in this area. The Minister might focus on my question now that I have given him complete absolution.

Deputy Conor Lenihan: He is telling me about his sins.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: The Minister of State, like myself, would have some sins but we are different from the Minister, who does not sin.

Deputy Conor Lenihan: We have been to the odd casino or two.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Has the Minister met these people or will he meet them? When might legislation come before the House to regulate the sector?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I decided to proceed in the short term to include a mechanism whereby the private gaming clubs that have mushroomed in this country would have to apply for authorisation. Under the anti-money laundering legislation which will come forward quickly, if those clubs are to go ahead, they must sign up to it so there will be an element of regulation. We plan to introduce legislation for the long-term regulation of casinos and gaming based on the report that issued some time back. We are looking at the legislation that was passed in Britain, which took some time but is a good template we can work from. I have received Government approval in the last two months to accept that the cross-party committee is dead.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: Is the Minister confirming that there is a direct link between the delay in processing this legislation and his own prevarication in respect of casino regulation? What response did the Government give to Commissioner McCreevy, when he wrote to the Government in July 2008 indicating the importance of enshrining this legislation in our laws? On the review, there was an advertisement for submissions last year. How many written submissions did the Department receive?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I do not have that information but the Commission has raised the implementation of this directive in a number of countries — France, Spain, Belgium, Sweden, Poland and Finland have not fully transposed it yet. We will transpose it in the next couple of months with the help of the House.

Immigration Controls. 46. Deputy Seymour Crawford asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the action he has taken to resolve ongoing difficulties in respect of the time delays in the processing of queues at passport control at Dublin Airport; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7701/09]

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Arrangements for disembarking passengers at Dublin Airport currently do not allow for the separation of passengers from domestic flights within the State and those arriving on flights originating outside the State. Consequently, all arriving passengers

441 Other 25 February 2009. Questions

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] must pass through immigration controls to ensure that those persons who, by law, require the permission of an immigration officer to enter the State are subject to the proper controls. The allocation of immigration personnel at Dublin Airport is designed to have the maximum number of staff on duty during peak periods. Every effort is made by immigration officers to exercise their function as speedily as possible but there may be occasions when delays will occur. A high number of flights within a contracted arrivals time period, and the consequent increased passenger numbers within these peak times, can impact on queuing times over these periods. While the immigration authorities at Dublin Airport have no control over the number of flights or their arrival times, management in the Garda National Immigration Bureau are engaged on an ongoing basis with all the stakeholders at Dublin Airport to ensure that passport controls are carried out in an efficient manner so as to ensure that waiting times are kept to a minimum. Staffing levels at Dublin Airport and all ports of entry to the State are kept under ongoing review by Garda management and recent additional resources, including management personnel, were allocated specifically to Dublin Airport. Apart from the management personnel, local supervisors liaise with the customer service staff of the Dublin Airport Authority on an ongoing basis, both on an informal — daily on each tour of duty — and formal level — weekly and monthly — at senior management level.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: The person who prepared that reply for the Minister, and the Minister having read it, display no understanding of what is happening at Dublin Airport. Since before Christmas, a serious situation has developed that is damaging business, trade and tourism and the ordinary movement of people in the State, with queues of up to two hours duration at the principal airport. Will the Minister at least look into the matter to see what can be done to resolve an intolerable situation that cannot continue?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: I have inquired about this with the Garda Commissioner on many occasions and I am conscious people are having difficultly. There is an industrial relations issue concerning a meal allowance that has been withdrawn but extra staff have been put into Dublin Airport. There are now 142 gardaı´, with 15 more arriving recently, although I accept there has been a detrimental impact on perception on occasion.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: Perception?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: On other occasions, I know for a fact and I discussed this with my officials before we came in here, people have come through the airport and said there were no particular difficulties. I monitor the situation to find anecdotal evidence and I accept it happens on occasion. I have raised the issue and have indicated to my officials that I would be open to looking at other ways of dealing with this issue, even by privatising control at Dublin Airport. The 142 full-time gardaı´ who are there on a regular basis are a resource that could be used elsewhere. I am looking at all options, have discussed them with my staff and have indicated to the Garda Commissioner that we will consider them.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: I thank the Minister for his reply, which was a far more informa- tive response than his initial reply. My only regret is that the Minister had to be provoked into making such a reply.

442 Other 25 February 2009. Questions

I am not sure about privatisation but I suggest the Minister considers civilianisation of the process, where immigration officers need not be fully-fledged gardaı´. Perhaps, however, there would be Garda aid or at least a supplementary Garda force. The Minister might consider immigration personnel from the civilian community.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: All those options, including civilianisation, will be examined. I have an open mind on these issues, which I have discussed with my officials. Primarily, however, there are gardaı´ involved who are doing a good job.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: A good job, but a slow job.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: They have the resources and the Garda Commissioner has dedicated more resources because of the anecdotal evidence.

Deputy Denis Naughten: I am amazed at the Minister’s comments regarding privatisation in the context of the forthcoming immigration Bill and the significant discretionary powers that are being given to immigration officers at our ports and airports. Will the Minister elaborate on the implications of those powers being given to non-members of An Garda Sı´ocha´na?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: My view is that the civilianisation of the booths could happen quite easily with oversight by a number of gardaı´.

Deputy Denis Naughten: That is different to privatisation.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: That is another option. I am open to all options, particularly in the context of the desire to have as many gardaı´ doing normal Garda duties on the streets, including fighting crime which, as I have said many times, is my first priority.

Deputy Denis Naughten: There is no point in letting them come into ports and airports either.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: I welcome that, Minister. We will be watching.

Citizenship Applications. 47. Deputy James Bannon asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his plans to review the eligibility criteria for a citizenship application; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7671/09]

Deputy Dermot Ahern: A general review of the framework for the acquisition of Irish citizenship is underway in my Department. This will be progressed in consultation with the Office of the Minister for Integration. Among the issues being considered as part of that exercise is the general question of whether current eligibility requirements are appropriate and also whether language and integration requirements should apply to naturalisation applications. In addition, it is necessary to take account of the proposals contained in the Immigration, Resi- dence and Protection Bill 2008, particularly those regarding long-term residence. In conducting a review of our citizenship requirements, it must be remembered that Irish citizenship is a great privilege. It cannot and should not be simply a matter of calculating periods of time in the State. On the contrary, it should be seen as a major and mutual commitment by the prospective citizen and the State. It is entirely appropriate in those circumstances that the State should require that the applicant demonstrate a real commitment to the nation. It is with this overarching principle in mind that the review is being conducted.

443 Adjournment 25 February 2009. Debate Matters

Deputy Denis Naughten: I accept the Minister’s point that citizenship is a great honour and should be treated in that manner. As I said, however, when we debated the issue of citizenship on Committee Stage of the Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill, there is no reliable information available to the public at the moment. It is like the third secret of Fatima, trying to find out what information is required and what criteria are being judged in considering citizenship applications. I gave the Minister one example concerning legislation that was enacted here in 2004, but which still has not been updated on the website. Is it not the case that many of the 30% of applications that are awaiting a response from the applicant could be dealt with far more expeditiously if that information was made available in the first instance? The current system is far too obscure in providing basic rules and information as to what documentation is required from a potential applicant. Is it not the case that we have people who want to contribute to our community and society, yet we are giving them the administrative two fingers as regards providing them with the criteria to be considered?

Deputy Dermot Ahern: That is not the case. Every case is different and there are different requirements in every single case. No two cases are the same. The conditions are well laid out in the legislation and are easily accessible.

Deputy Denis Naughten: That is not true. They are not easily accessible.

Deputy Dermot Ahern: Ultimately, the Minister may, at his absolute discretion, grant an application for a certificate of naturalisation, provided that certain statutory conditions are met. The conditions are simple and include being of full age, good character, having a continuous one-year period of residence in the State immediately before the application, and intending in good faith to reside in the State after naturalisation. Those are the general conditions and there are more specific ones depending on what category the person falls into.

Deputy Denis Naughten: It is causing huge problems.

Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.

Adjournment Debate Matters. An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I wish to advise the House of the following matters in respect of which notice has been given under Standing Order 21 and the name of the Member in each case: (1) Deputy John O’Mahony — the removal of the rural co-ordinator from a primary school cluster in County Mayo; (2) Deputy Joe McHugh — the outbreak of a massive number of burglaries in that part of Derry city’s hinterland which is in the Republic of Ireland, and the fact that An Garda Sı´ocha´na resources in Inishowen do not reflect the fact that much of Inishowen circulates Derry, which is the fourth largest metropolis in the country; (3) Deputy Martin Ferris — to discuss the recent staff reductions in the acute psychiatric ward at Kerry General Hospital, the failure of management to consult, as required by a Labour Court ruling, with the staff and unions in the hospital, and the need to conduct a full health and safety audit prior to any reductions in staffing levels being implemented; (4) Deputy Frank Feighan — further to parliamentary question 480/09 on behalf of person (details supplied), this person while recovering from kidney and pancreas transplant, unfortunately fell and broke both hips and is in severe pain; the family needs an extension of transport to enable her to travel to Dublin until her condition improves; due to her present condition she cannot travel in an ordinary car; transport is only required as a temporary measure; and I ask the Minister to accede to this urgent request; (5) Deputy John Perry — to ask the Minister for Education and Science, and the Minister for Health and Children to reverse the cuts proposed in nursing education programmes; in particular, it is proposed that at St. Angela’s College, Sligo, the

444 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) number of general nursing places will be reduced by 25% and intellectual disability nursing places will suffer a 40% reduction; at this time of massive job losses, cutting nursing training places is unwise, both economically and socially; (6) Deputy Kathleen Lynch — to discuss the current situation regarding the renewal of the bilateral adoption agreement between Ireland and Vietnam for the purpose of inter-country adoptions; (7) Deputy Cyprian Brady — the matter of the present status of the bilateral adoption agreement between Ireland and Vietnam, which is dealt with by the Department of Health and Children; (8) Deputy Willie Penrose — to ask the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he knew of the fact that the farm waste management grant payments are not going to be paid in a lump sum as anticipated in 2009, but will be paid over three years; if his Department will, in the course of issuing the letter of guarantee to banks on behalf of the 17,000 farmers who will not be paid in full, undertake to pay the interest outstanding on the amounts that will be due to the credit institutions in respect of the capital loans negotiated to pay for the farm improvements and which would not be arising if the full grants were being paid as promised; and if he will make a statement on the matter; (9) Deputy Pat Breen — the deterioration in the HSE’s budget for 2009 and the recent revelations that a number of hospitals, including Ennis General Hospital, face closure as part of a cost saving proposal; and the need for the Minister for Health and Children to make an immediate statement on the future of the hospital; (10) Deputy Joe Costello — the need for the Government to ensure that adequate funding is made available through the financial institutions so that small and medium-sized businesses have a regular cash flow; (11) Deputy Joe Carey — the impact on Shannon Airport and the mid-west area generally of the imposition of the \10 travel tax; (12) Deputy Thomas P. Broughan — the need to avert the disruption to bus services next week; (13) Deputy Tom Sheahan — the contraction of health services in County Kerry. The matters raised by Deputies Joe Carey, Tom Sheahan, Thomas P. Broughan and John O’Mahony have been selected for discussion.

Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed). SECTION 1.

Debate resumed on amendment No. 1: In page 4, before section 1, to insert the following new section: “1.—(1) This Act shall expire on the day that is 2 years from the date of its passing unless renewed by resolution of both Houses of the Oireachtas. (2) Any such renewal shall be expressed to be for a period not exceeding 2 years.”. —(Deputy Joan Burton). Deputy Pat Rabbitte: I essentially had concluded my argument which was that the insertion of a sunset clause, as we discussed this morning, would contribute to an easing of tension and restore some belief and confidence in public servants. This is an emergency measure, however, and will terminate after a defined period. The Government sent out the message that it will examine the tax option as a fairer way to deal with this issue in future. The fact that all income is encompassed is also very punitive for workers who tend to do shift and overtime work. Even members of the Garda Sı´ocha´na have indicated their displeasure and as we know many gardaı´ earn a considerable proportion of their incomes in overtime. They will also be disproportionately affected.

445 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

Deputy Emmet Stagg: On a point of order, a letter was issued from the Ceann Comhairle’s office to Deputy Joan Burton concerning amendments we had tabled. Amendments Nos. 38, 39 and 45 were deemed to be outside the scope of the Bill. I think that is a mistake and I cannot believe that it could be so.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: As we have not reached that part of the Bill, may I suggest that the Deputy might make direct communication with the Ceann Comhairle’s office to seek clarity on that matter before we reach it?

Deputy Emmet Stagg: That would be a positive suggestion coming from the Chair. I think it is an error rather than any deliberate political act.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I am not familiar with the reasoning and it would be impossible to rule from here, but if the Deputy would approach the Ceann Comhairle’s office we will seek to get clarity on that matter.

Deputy Emmet Stagg: Okay.

Deputy Joan Burton: The point is that the description of the Bill refers to serious disturb- ances in the economy.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: We cannot go into it now.

Deputy Joan Burton: It also refers to providing for the amendment of the Income Tax Act. My amendments that were ruled out included a proposal to amend the Income Tax Act so that people could not get big capital tax losses from the \451 million loan deal in Anglo-Irish Bank and a number of other matters.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I understand that the Deputy regards this as a very serious matter.

Deputy Joan Burton: I believe the Chair is misdirecting itself.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Can I suggest that clarity on the ruling might be sought before we reach that section? The Deputy or the Deputy’s party Whip might do that.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: As has been said, the scope of the Bill’s Title is so broad that we submit it ought, at least, to encompass some of the amendments that have been ruled out. Given that the Bill is a crisis measure, I cannot believe that its provisions should be of indefinite duration. There must be a finite period. The sunset clause intends to suggest that it ought to be for two years and I ask the Minister to accept it.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: While many points have been touched on, there are several issues I wish to raise. This is emergency legislation which normally means it should be a short-term measure. Public sector workers see the Government willing to give \3.5 billion to the two main banks, \7 billion in total, with no specific repayment date but an open-ended arrangement. The pension levy scheme which appears to be unfair and imbalanced is also open-ended. Public servants also believe they are paying for the banks’ mistakes and the imprudent management of the public finances. Amendment No. 47 tabled by Fine Gael proposes that the levy scheme be revoked in three years. I would like the Minister for Finance to take that time limit on board. We are looking at a national strike, the first in many years.

Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn: The first in decades.

446 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: Yes, decades. National strikes do not happen for the sake of it. The reason people are marching is they believe this scheme is unfair and that the Government has not taken control of the situation. Instead, it is progressing by fits and starts. Is it fair that a public servant earning \18,300 a year, the minimum wage, will pay a levy of 3.5% of his or her income while someone on \100,000 will pay 4.64% net? This is not a question of the public sector versus the private sector. It is about people paying their fair share and getting a return. I mean no disrespect but the President should pay the levy. Why should the Judiciary be exempt from it? The levy is fundamentally unfair on those on modest incomes. The Govern- ment is using it as a source of revenue collection, not for pension provisions. From a control viewpoint, this should be brought forward as an emergency measure to bring the public finances under control rather than being seen as a long-term revenue stream in respect of which the Government would increase the rates every few years. Amendments Nos. 1 and 47 are reasonable in seeking a sunset clause. It is important for public servants to know that control mechanisms are in place to get the public finances under control. The country is in an unparalleled situation regarding the public finances. What is needed is control to be shown at all levels, including the levy. However, the scheme is unbalanced, unfair and should only be seen as a short-term measure.

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I have provided for the inclusion of a review section in the legislation. Section 13 provides for an annual review of the operation of the measures included in the Bill, consideration of whether the provisions continue to be necessary and the making of findings, as the Minister thinks appropriate. A report on the review will be laid before each House of the Oireachtas. There is nothing to stop a Minister for Finance in the course of dealing with the annual finance Bill from dealing with matters which might arise from the review.

Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn: Will the Minister take a question on that matter?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: No, I will not. This is Committee Stage and I can take a question when I have completed my contribution.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Minister should allow the Chair to explain that we are on Committee Stage and will have a back and forward discussion.

Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn: The Minister’s attitude has answered my question.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Next year I will carry out a review of the operation, effectiveness and impact of the legislation having regard to the overall economy and national economic competitiveness. A similar approach has been adopted under section 11 of the Minimum Wage Act 2000 in which the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment takes account of these considerations when setting the minimum wage. I can consider whether any of the legislation’s provisions continue to be necessary having regard to the purposes of the Bill. I will make findings consequent on such a review and consideration and cause a written report on the findings to be prepared and laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. Given the situation facing us and that facing governments across the European Union and the world, I am not prepared to accept the amendment. I am not in a position to foresee the circumstances in which we may find ourselves in two years time. I would not care to prejudge the position as the amendment seeks to do. Instead, I will review the position on an annual basis and report to the Houses when I have done so. Consequently, I cannot accept the amendment.

447 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

Deputy Joan Burton: Those of us who over our corn flakes this morning listened enthralled to the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment suggesting on the radio that the problems in the economy had been solved are amazed that by afternoon tea the Minister for Finance has a completely different view.

Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn: Tweaking in Donegal is not the same as in Castleknock.

Deputy Joan Burton: Section 13 does not address the questions raised by either the Labour Party or Fine Gael. It provides for a review by the Minister. I am sure that, as a competent Minister, he reviews all sources of revenue available to the State on an annual basis for the budget. However, the review provided for in section 13 has no status. If the Minister decides to outsource it, presumably it will be through the creation of another little quango to ensure the Minister will be at arm’s length from any decision-making. It would probably end up as part of the bad habits of governance that have built up during the two recent Fianna Fa´il- led Administrations. It is unfortunate the Minister has failed to address the arguments in favour of a sunset clause. Public servants facing this levy are entitled to have an indication from the Minister as to how long it is proposed to have it in place. From his reply, it sounds as if this will be a permanent fixture, just as income tax was temporary for various wars but never removed. Once introduced, this levy will be in place forever. The purpose of the sunset clause would be to provide for a debating mechanism in the House. Regarding the ideology behind the pension levy, having wasted the whole summer when he took office and not having addressed the serious emerging economic issues, the Minister brought forward an emergency budget. Many braced themselves at the time that they would have to pay more in tax but they were quite surprised that nothing much hap- 4 o’clock pened in the emergency budget. Now, the Minister is undertaking this pension levy, with the income levy, in order that he can claim income tax, particularly for those in the PAYE sector, is not rising. However, with the way the levies are structured, the 1% income levy is equivalent to between 2% and 3% on the top rate of tax. In effect, the 41% tax rate has moved to 44%. For public sector workers, the net increase in tax rates for those earning under \35,000 is between 4.5% and 5%. Therefore, their basic rate of tax has gone up from 20% to 24%. For people paying at the upper tax rates who earn over \35,000, the net after-tax charge will be approximately 7% for those who work in the public service. This means they will be paying income tax at 48% rather than 41%. There will then be approximately three percentage points that will apply in respect of the 1% income tax levy. Consequently, workers in the public service will be paying, in effect and at a little over 50%, the top rate of income tax. Would it not be much more honest for the Minister to state he is increasing income tax? There is no other explanation for what he is doing. Most of the money that will accrue under the levy will be used by the banks. As far as we can discern, it will not be used to sustain vital public services. It is not hypothecated or earmarked. If public servants knew that this money would be invested in schools or hospitals, they might perhaps have a different attitude to the levy. However, that is not the position. Therefore, most public servants are of the view that they are being singled out to pay for what has occurred in the banks, particularly Anglo Irish Bank. The Minister decided — wrongly — that the latter was systemic and had to be saved, even at the expense of the two major banks which are most certainly systemic in the context of the creation and retention of jobs and the extension of credit in the economy.

448 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

The Minister made a mistake when he introduced the bank guarantee scheme. On Private Members’ business last night he pretty much acknowledged this by stating being an early mover in respect of banking reform was not necessarily the wisest move. However, I recall him and the Taoiseach coming before the House to inform Members that their early and absolute move in respect of the guarantee scheme was extremely clever. With hindsight, that move now appears to be the equivalent of Georgia invading Russia, namely, not very clever at all. The introduction of the guarantee scheme got up the noses of those in international markets because it was done in the absence of consultation or collaboration. The public finances are in their current state partly as a result of the decisions made by the Minister. We still do not know the background to them. Through their representative trade unions, public service workers have repeatedly stated they are not unwilling to share part of the burden. However, they want to be informed that others will also share that burden. The others to whom I refer in this regard are the very wealthy, those who are tax exiles, people who have availed of the huge number of tax breaks designed to aid the construction sector and the elite group of 15 to 100 customers of Anglo Irish Bank who are uniquely privileged in having had an entire tax code written for them. The Minister’s failure to introduce a sunset clause will not assist industrial relations with the public service unions. We do not want the country to return to a period of strikes and industrial unrest. The Minister should be able to find a way to find the money he is seeking in a more honest manner. He should also deal more honestly with the public sector and not make those who work in it the scapegoats for the failures of the bankers.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: We should move on with our deliberations because it is clear the Minister has set his face against the concept of a sunset clause. There are other important matters to be discussed. However, this is also an important matter in the sense that pickets will be placed on Leinster House tomorrow morning. Gardaı´ demonstrated outside the gates to the complex earlier today and the civil and public service unions have balloted their members in respect of strike action. All of this is a result of the disaffection felt by public servants in the context of their being singled out and in respect of the unfairness of this measure. It would do a great deal to allay their fears if instead of adhering to the traditional review mechanism, the Minister were to state the levy will only be imposed for a defined period. If this is an emergency measure, it ought to apply for a defined period only. The signal the Minister is sending by not accepting these amendments is that the levy may well remain in place. As I argued, most thinking people will state it will be subsumed into a reform of the taxation system when the next budget is presented to the House. In the light of the scale of the problems relating to the public finances, we can anticipate serious changes in the tax code. Most presume that, in a progressive way, those who can afford to pay will pay most under those taxation changes and that the latter will absorb and replace the measures presented here. In such circumstances, the inclusion of a sunset clause would seem reasonable and would do much to allay the division in society which has led to public servants being of the view that they have been unfairly singled out. If the Minister at least stated the levy will apply for the duration of the crisis only, many — perhaps even a majority — of those public servants would be prepared to grin and bear it for that limited period.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I am disappointed the Minister is not willing to accept the amendments. While it is impossible to know whether, in two to three years’ time, the issues that have prompted the Minister to believe the levy is the right way forward will have been resolved, it is important to recognise that this is unusual and exceptional legislation. The levy is not founded upon a fair allocation of the burden and does not relate to pension benefits. In that context,

449 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Richard Bruton.] the money that will be collected will not be set aside for pension purposes. In essence, the Minister is using the levy as a mechanism to reduce the public service pay bill. The Minister referred to the levy as a temporary measure and outlined the reasons for its introduction. If there were a sunset clause, he would be obliged to come before the House to explicitly renew the levy. Under the review mechanism, the levy will be renewed each year, without exception, and there will not be a requirement on the Government to come before the House to seek its renewal. The Minister’s commitment in that regard is secondary in nature. He has indicated that it is a temporary measure and that all such measures need to be reviewed. However, people would accept his commitment as being much more serious if he set down a date by which he would be obliged to come before the House and state he was renewing the levy because the various items in the citation remain causes for concern. The Minister should be willing to shoulder responsibility in this regard and not proceed with his extremely watered- down review.

Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn: There are 50,000 primary school pupils who attend classes in prefabs. There are people whose children sit in the very prefabs in which they sat 25 or 30 years ago. In our experience, temporary measures tend to have a certain degree of longevity that creates certain doubts in people’s minds with regard to the nature of such measures. I ask the Minister to consider what, in most people’s experience, is meant by a temporary measure. The wording used in the amendments tabled by my party and Fine Gael may not be acceptable to the Minister. That is perfectly fine. However, Report Stage is due to be taken before 10.30 p.m. If the Minister wants to avoid the industrial unrest that has not been manufactured but which manifestly is apparent, I urge him to reconsider his position. The statement he insisted on reading belittles him. Referring to the review of a review being outsourced to PricewaterhouseCoopers or some other firm is way below the competence of his Department or that of the public service. I will not be present in the House later this evening. However, I put it to the Minister that — in the context of both the sunset clause and the remarks made by the Taoiseach during Leaders’ Questions earlier — he cannot realistically respond to the olive branch offered by David Begg who, when speaking on radio this morning, accepted in principle that some form of levy was probably necessary. He also indicated, however, that the definition, context and application of the proposed levy needed to be reviewed. The Ta´naiste may have gone on a solo run when she went even further in her definition of tweaking. The Minister should indicate that he will be able, by way of regulation rather than review, to alter and vary the terms of the application of the levy. What was manifestly absent from his statement was reference to the use of secondary legislation to alter the application of the terms and conditions of the review. This is my understanding of the Minister’s statement on first hearing, although I may be misinformed. I accept this debate may not be the appropriate forum in which to provide an answer. I ask the Minister to consider the 50,000 children being educated in prefabricated school buildings. Many of these children are the second generation of their families to find themselves in this position. The word “temporary” means “permanent” for many people in this society. I also ask the Minister to consider introducing a mechanism to enable dialogue to commence between the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and the Government about the application of the pension levy. While most people believe in principle that this measure is probably necessary, they do so on condition that it is perceived as fair.

450 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

The Minister varied the proposal to remove medical cards from those aged over 70 when he changed the original blunderbuss measure and a more refined proposal ultimately emerged. He must use a similar mechanism before 10.30 p.m. to find a similar degree of flexibility, particularly as he will need all the flexibility he can get.

Deputy Finian McGrath: On the broader issue of the economy, we must accept that the country faces a major crisis. In recent days, the term “economic treason” has been used. I share this view of recent actions in the financial services sector, specifically the banking industry. It is all very well to be critical but rather than calling for heads — this issue can be addressed on another day — I am interested in finding solutions to help the vast majority of the population. I call for economic patriotism. I welcome the events of yesterday when the Garda entered Anglo Irish Bank, although I would favour taking a stronger line and calling in the Criminal Assets Bureau to deal with the issue. I hope the necessary process of cleaning up the banks has started. We need to rebuild the economy. Members of the public are demanding that we do not play party politics. By international standards, income tax revenue remains low in Ireland. Increas- ing the standard rate of income tax to 22% and the top rate to 45% would raise \2 billion per annum. While they may not be sufficient to address our current problems, such increases should be considered. We should focus on higher incomes and take a tough and fair approach to raising taxes. To this end, the Minister should consider taxing second houses, which I would not describe as second homes.

An Ceann Comhairle: While I hesitate to interrupt the Deputy, the House is debating an amendment to insert a sunset clause in the Bill. If the debate veers off on tangents, we will not have time to discuss the amendments.

Deputy Finian McGrath: I raise these issues because they are important in the context of the broader debate on the economic crisis. I completely oppose the introduction of a pension levy on public sector workers whom I fully support. Figures show that 165,000 people from a population of more than 4 million pay more than half of income tax. We must focus on reducing waste and bureaucracy rather than cutting essential services.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy will have to raise those issues when the appropriate amendments are discussed.

Deputy Finian McGrath: I strongly support the solidarity pact proposed by the ICTU as a way to solve the current crisis.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: The ICTU solidarity pact does not require a statutory mechanism. Such a mechanism is not required for re-engagement to take place between the social partners and the Government.

Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn: A variation in the levy is required.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: On the matters arising from the amendments before us, I emphasise that the obligation to conduct the review is on the Minister for Finance. Words such as “consultation”, “consultant” and “subcontract” have been used. Under section 13, the obligation to do the review is imposed on the Minister. Clearly, the review must be done before 30 June 2010.

451 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Brian Lenihan.]

This is not temporary legislation but emergency legislation. It was never expressed to be temporary legislation and is designed to deal with an economic emergency which is increasingly being acknowledged on all sides of the House.

Deputy Kathleen Lynch: May we assume the levy will be permanent?

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: Is it similar to the Offences against the State Act?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: It is not temporary legislation and because it is emergency legislation——

Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn: May I make an observation?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Yes.

Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn: To the best of my knowledge, the Emergency declared in 1939 lasted until 1975.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Yes.

Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn: Is a similar timeframe envisaged here?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: The Deputy refers to an emergency under the constitutional provision in Article 28. This is not an emergency under the constitutional provision in Article 38.

Deputy Joan Burton: It is called an emergency.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: It is called an emergency because it is an emergency. While the Deputy may have been pleased to see the banks go west last September or the economy go west now, these important decisions must be taken now. This is the reason the legislation is before the House this afternoon and the reason the Government intends to implement it. This legislation must be enacted. Questions were raised about whether income tax could have been used as an alternative to this legislation. I assure the House that the levy introduced under the income tax code, which was outlined by Deputy Burton, will be supplemented in due course by income tax changes to be announced in the budget later in the year. Deputy Burton insists on suggesting that the purpose of this levy is in some way to fund the banks. That is wholly without foundation.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: We have no evidence to the contrary.

Amendment put.

The Da´il divided: Ta´, 73; Nı´l, 81.

Ta´

Allen, Bernard. Byrne, Catherine. Bannon, James. Carey, Joe. Barrett, Sea´n. Clune, Deirdre. Behan, Joe. Connaughton, Paul. Breen, Pat. Coonan, Noel J. Broughan, Thomas P. Costello, Joe. Bruton, Richard. Coveney, Simon. Burke, Ulick. Crawford, Seymour. Burton, Joan. Creed, Michael. 452 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

Ta´—continued

Deasy, John. Noonan, Michael. Deenihan, Jimmy. O´ Caolaín, Caoimhghıń. Doyle, Andrew. O´ Snodaigh, Aengus. Durkan, Bernard J. O’Donnell, Kieran. English, Damien. O’Dowd, Fergus. Enright, Olwyn. O’Keeffe, Jim. Feighan, Frank. O’Mahony, John. Ferris, Martin. O’Shea, Brian. Flanagan, Charles. O’Sullivan, Jan. Flanagan, Terence. Penrose, Willie. Hayes, Brian. Perry, John. Hayes, Tom. Quinn, Ruairı´. Higgins, Michael D. Rabbitte, Pat. Hogan, Phil. Reilly, James. Howlin, Brendan. Ring, Michael. Kehoe, Paul. Shatter, Alan. Lynch, Ciarań. Sheahan, Tom. Lynch, Kathleen. Sheehan, P.J. McCormack, Pa´draic. Sherlock, Seań. McEntee, Shane. Shortall, Ro´ isıń. McGinley, Dinny. Stagg, Emmet. McGrath, Finian. Stanton, David. McHugh, Joe. Timmins, Billy. McManus, Liz. Tuffy, Joanna. Mitchell, Olivia. Upton, Mary. Morgan, Arthur. Varadkar, Leo. Naughten, Denis. Wall, Jack. Neville, Dan.

Nı´l

Ahern, Dermot. Harney, Mary. Ahern, Michael. Haughey, Seań. Ahern, Noel. Healy-Rae, Jackie. Andrews, Barry. Hoctor, Maíre. Andrews, Chris. Kelleher, Billy. Aylward, Bobby. Kelly, Peter. Blaney, Niall. Kenneally, Brendan. Brady, A´ ine. Kennedy, Michael. Brady, Cyprian. Kirk, Seamus. Brady, Johnny. Kitt, Michael P. Browne, John. Kitt, Tom. Byrne, Thomas. Lenihan, Brian. Calleary, Dara. Lenihan, Conor. Carey, Pat. Lowry, Michael. Collins, Niall. McDaid, James. Conlon, Margaret. McEllistrim, Thomas. Connick, Seań. McGrath, Mattie. Coughlan, Mary. McGrath, Michael. Cregan, John. McGuinness, John. Cuffe, Ciarań. Mansergh, Martin. Cullen, Martin. Martin, Michea´l. Curran, John. Moloney, John. Dempsey, Noel. Moynihan, Michael. Devins, Jimmy. Mulcahy, Michael. Dooley, Timmy. Nolan, M.J. Fahey, Frank. O´ Cuı´v, E´ amon. Finneran, Michael. O´ Fearghaı´l, Seań. Fitzpatrick, Michael. O’Brien, Darragh. Fleming, Seań. O’Connor, Charlie. Flynn, Beverley. O’Flynn, Noel. Gallagher, Pat The Cope. O’Hanlon, Rory. Gogarty, Paul. O’Keeffe, Batt. Gormley, John. O’Keeffe, Edward. Grealish, Noel. O’Rourke, Mary. Hanafin, Mary. O’Sullivan, Christy. 453 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

Nı´l—continued

Power, Peter. Smith, Brendan. Power, Sea´n. Treacy, Noel. Roche, Dick. Wallace, Mary. Ryan, Eamon. White, Mary Alexandra. Sargent, Trevor. Woods, Michael. Scanlon, Eamon.

Tellers: Ta´, Deputies Paul Kehoe and Emmet Stagg; Nı´l, Deputies Pat Carey and John Cregan.

Amendment declared lost.

An Ceann Comhairle: Amendment No. 2 is consequential on Amendment No. 9. Amend- ments Nos. 2 and 9 may be discussed together.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I move amendment No. 2: In page 4, between lines 15 and 16, to insert the following:

““Act of 1970” means the Health Act 1970;”.

The purpose of this amendment is to relieve the burden on those who are most adversely affected by the levy. It specifically refers to the possibility that people with medical cards would be excluded from the requirement to pay the levy. The 3% levy on people earning the minimum wage is seen as a significant burden. The issue can be addressed in two ways. In a later amendment, we propose that those earning less than the minimum wage would pay 50%. Alterna- tively, earnings could be considered on a family basis. This amendment proposes an exemption for those who hold medical cards. As matters stand, medical card holders are exempt from other levies, such as those for PRSI and health. A principle appears to have been established, therefore, that medical card holders as a category should be exempt from measures such as this. Even in a time of emergency, a balance must be found in the provisions we introduce. The point has been well made that people would regard this levy as achieving a fairer balance if contributions were made across the board. However, a broader programme of fiscal reform has not been put in place and it seems unfair that medical card holders, for example, must contribute even though the State is stepping in to assist them in their medical costs and existing levy obligations. By considering this amendment sympatheti- cally, the Minister would contribute to greater consistency and a more balanced way of identifying families who should be exempted from this burden.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: The Labour Party supports these amendments. People who are unfam- iliar with the medical card system are always surprised to discover the low level at which the threshold is set. The proposition that medical card holders should be exempted is reasonable and we support it.

Deputy Arthur Morgan: On behalf of my colleagues in Sinn Fe´in, I express my support for these amendments and endorse the remarks made in respect of them.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: It would be inappropriate to exempt public servants in receipt of medical cards from this deduction, which applies to a wide base. As Deputies are aware, the purpose of a medical card is to ensure those with medical needs have access to health care without undue financial hardship. The guidelines for determining eligibility allow for the application of discretion over and above the income guidelines and allowances under that scheme can be made in cases of individual hardship. Therefore, the conditions for determining eligi-

454 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) bility under the medical card scheme should ensure that payment of this deduction will not result in low-income public servants being denied access to essential health services.

Deputy Richard Bruton: The Minister did not advert to the fact that the existing medical card provisions are not solely designed as a way of deciding on access to medical cards. It is a long-established practice in his Department to confer exemptions from paying levies to medical card holders. There are close parallels between this and other levies in terms of giving exemptions. Is the Minister willing to consider any form of low-income relief? Deputies on this side of the House are trying to find ways of opening access to relief, even if some sort of compensatory mechanism is required. That is the intention behind the amendment I have tabled to provide for a 50% relief for those earning less than the minimum wage which would be compensated by those who are higher on the scale. Even within the terms of this Bill, I would be willing to contemplate exemptions or reliefs at the bottom which would be compensated by higher payments further up the scale because the latter are the major beneficiaries of public service pensions. I am not convinced that a levy structure which ranges from 3% at the bottom to 5% at the top on a net basis is anything like commensurate with the alleged benefit of public service pensions. In my view, it does not constitute a fair adjustment in the public service pay bill. Is the Minister willing to entertain some form of relief at the bottom end or are we wasting our time arguing the toss on this and other amendments? I cannot understand why, within the targeted savings of \1.4 billion, he would refuse to contemplate changes at the bottom which would be compensated by increases at the top. If a proposal such as this commands the support of the House, it would appear to meet the Minister’s requirement in terms of telling the outside world that he has delivered savings while demonstrating his sensitivity to the concerns expressed on both sides of the House about the present structure of the levy.

Deputy Joan Burton: I support the amendments proposed by Fine Gael. Certain categories of people who work in the public service earn very low incomes. For example, lone parents who work part time in the public service often do so because they have child care commitments. If they work only part time they can continue to receive part payment in respect of the lone parent’s allowance and qualify for certain benefits such as medical cards. It is foolish in the extreme to create a huge amount of unnecessary administrative complexity in respect of the imposition of this levy on people on low incomes, some of whom, if working full time and in receipt of low income, may, if they have a couple of children, qualify for the family income supplement. What will be achieved in financial take from people on low incomes will be lost in the plethora of appeals that will ensue from people in that category to retain key benefits such as medical cards. A later amendment on behalf of the Labour Party seeks to provide that income below \18,000 be exempt from this levy in line with the 1% levy. The Minister would be wise to introduce disregards or exemptions for people in the low income category. The cost of administering consequence means tests in respect of medical cards will far outweigh the income collected from the levy. Also, this might result in people being deterred from taking up employment, contrary to the Government’s policy for the past 20 years of getting people back into the workplace, even if only part time or lone parents with child care commitments. The policy has been to encourage such people into employment rather than have them remain dependent on social welfare benefits. In that sense, the levy will create a poverty and employment trap, an issue on which there have been many studies.

455 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Joan Burton.]

The Minister could, in one fell swoop, either by adapting this amendment or the Labour Party amendment, exempt the first \18,000 of income. I support the Fine Gael amendment. For the sake of public administration, the Minister would be wise to consider adapting both amendments to address the burden which this levy places on low paid public servants. The Minister will be aware, from budget submissions from the Society of St. Vincent de Paul during the past five years, that the burden now borne by the working poor has become the heaviest burden. Taking into account housing benefit, a person in low paid employment, whether in the private or public sector, is entitled to far less than a person in receipt of social welfare payments and additional benefits such as rent supplement. The Minister will turn what is already a disincentive to people to remain at work, even if only on a part time basis, into a poverty, income and employment trap. I appeal to the Minister to accept the amendment or, alternatively, prior to Report Stage to consult with his officials on the Labour Party amendment in regard to exemptions for people on incomes below \18,000. The money required could be taken from those on higher incomes in order to ensure fairness in respect of this levy.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe: I support the amendment. It is a disgrace that we are focussing on poor sections of our community. The medical card has been always considered to be the standard by which we judge a person’s needs. A person employed in the public service who qualifies for a medical card on income and, perhaps, medical grounds is being forced to pay this levy. Another group which the Minister and his officials might consider is retained firemen, voluntary part-time firemen who work for local fire brigades. The Minister might not understand their situation as Dublin is privileged to have full time fire officers. In country towns, fire brigades are manned by volunteers who receive an annual retainer in respect of their work. These people, of which there are 3,000 in the country, are known as retained firemen. Many of them are happy to remain involved in a semi-voluntary capacity and to receive their annual retainer. However, when they retire, they receive no pension. These people are not demanding a pension but are asking to be exempted from putting money into a pension fund. They receive only one lump sum when they retire. The case they make is a fair one. It is wrong that people operating in a semi-voluntary capacity, who are paid a retainer fee plus over-time payments if out all night fire-fighting and so on, should have to pay this levy. I would appreciate if the Minister would request his officials to examine this situation.

Deputy Sea´n Barrett: I, too, support the amendment. Does the Minister have any idea of the cost, in terms of numbers, of accepting this proposal? Will he explain what adjustments would be required to the other bands to compensate for the loss of revenue? The Minister is asking people who qualify for family income supplement to make a contribution of 3%. Are these people to return this supplement by way of pension levy? Perhaps the Minister will provide us with an indication of the cost of this proposal. As Deputy Bruton correctly stated, the imposition of an extra 0.5% on a person in receipt of \100,000 extra gross will not break the State. We are not asking that the Minister reduce the amount he hopes to collect but to adjust the bands to compensate for the loss of revenue down the line. It appears stupid that people who qualify for family income supplement and in receipt of \15,000 will be required to pay \450 gross by way of pension levy.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Deputies opposite insist on characterising this measure as a tax and are debating it in taxation terms. The measure is described in the legislation as a contribution,

456 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) against which tax relief is available. I do not know of any form of taxation against which tax relief can be claimed other than, for example, local rates and elements of corporation tax. In regard to the cost of exempting persons in possession of a medical card, from our initial inquiries there are so few public servants in possession of medical cards, in all probability, the cost involved would be marginal. This bears out the point made in my initial reply that the bulk of medical cardholders in the public service are people in receipt of a discretionary medical card rather than a medical card under income guidelines. On the wider issue, there is no person in the public service who is paid less than the minimum wage. Deputy Burton was careful in this regard and used the phrase “low earner”. Deputy Bruton suggested that people below the minimum wage should be exempt. No public servant is paid less than the minimum wage. If a person is earning less than the annual amount that a full-time worker would earn on the minimum wage, it is because the person is working part- time in the public service. Regarding Deputy O’Keeffe’s query concerning firefighters, I will have the issue examined. A discretion is conferred on the Minister by section 8, which deals with exceptional circumstances. I am not saying I will accede to the matter, but I will have it examined.

Deputy Jim O’Keeffe: That is a good start. I thank the Minister.

Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Deputy O’Keeffe is correct on that matter. The provision for part-time firefighters was introduced during my time as a Minister of State in the Department of Social Welfare. The flat rate or average was arrived at to ensure that the State could almost have the benefit of a full-time service, but with very little input. It was believed that it was good value from the point of view of the State. The case which can be made in those circumstances is that a person who depends entirely on the firefighters payment must work locally to be available for fire services. The new directive from the Minister on 4 December overrides that stipulation. The person must now be available to work in other areas and regions. As the Minister is aware, it is not easy to obtain work in other areas or in the local area. The position should be reviewed, because the local authorities and the public have received very good value for money. There was sufficient remuneration from the Department of Social and Family Affairs to encourage those dedicated fire service persons to continue to provide fire services.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I am pleased the Minister recognises that this proposal is of marginal cost. Surely, the corollary is that he would be willing to accept the amendment because only a very small number of people are affected and these are people who are deemed by the chief executive of the HSE to have significant financial burdens to meet. Let us not 5 o’clock forget that the test for a medical card is financial. If someone has an illness, that person must produce the costs of medication and treatment. Such a person is awarded a medical card on the basis of such costs, not because he or she falls into a certain category of illness. It is because the cost of supporting oneself and treating the illness is such that he or she is not in a position to bear the burden. Let us leave aside the minimum wage; we will come to that presently. The Minister has convinced me that this is not expensive. It is reasonable and fair to people in this category which, thankfully, is small. I hope the Minister will accept the amendment.

Amendment put.

457 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

The Committee divided: Ta´, 72; Nı´l, 82.

Ta´

Allen, Bernard. Lynch, Kathleen. Bannon, James. McCormack, Pa´draic. Barrett, Seań. McEntee, Shane. Behan, Joe. McGinley, Dinny. Breen, Pat. McGrath, Finian. Broughan, Thomas P. McHugh, Joe. Bruton, Richard. McManus, Liz. Burke, Ulick. Mitchell, Olivia. Burton, Joan. Morgan, Arthur. Byrne, Catherine. Naughten, Denis. Carey, Joe. Neville, Dan. Clune, Deirdre. Noonan, Michael. O´ Caolaín, Caoimhghıń. Connaughton, Paul. O´ Snodaigh, Aengus. Coonan, Noel J. O’Donnell, Kieran. Costello, Joe. O’Dowd, Fergus. Coveney, Simon. O’Keeffe, Jim. Crawford, Seymour. O’Mahony, John. Creed, Michael. O’Shea, Brian. D’Arcy, Michael. O’Sullivan, Jan. Deasy, John. Penrose, Willie. Deenihan, Jimmy. Perry, John. Doyle, Andrew. Quinn, Ruairı´. Durkan, Bernard J. Rabbitte, Pat. English, Damien. Reilly, James. Enright, Olwyn. Ring, Michael. Feighan, Frank. Shatter, Alan. Ferris, Martin. Sheahan, Tom. Flanagan, Charles. Sheehan, P. J. Flanagan, Terence. Sherlock, Seań. Hayes, Brian. Shortall, Ro´ isıń. Hayes, Tom. Stagg, Emmet. Higgins, Michael D. Stanton, David. Hogan, Phil. Tuffy, Joanna. Howlin, Brendan. Upton, Mary. Kehoe, Paul. Wall, Jack. Lynch, Ciarań.

Nı´l

Ahern, Dermot. Dempsey, Noel. Ahern, Michael. Devins, Jimmy. Ahern, Noel. Dooley, Timmy. Andrews, Barry. Fahey, Frank. Andrews, Chris. Finneran, Michael. Ardagh, Seań. Fitzpatrick, Michael. Aylward, Bobby. Fleming, Seań. Blaney, Niall. Flynn, Beverley. Brady, A´ ine. Gallagher, Pat The Cope. Brady, Cyprian. Gogarty, Paul. Brady, Johnny. Gormley, John. Browne, John. Grealish, Noel. Byrne, Thomas. Hanafin, Mary. Calleary, Dara. Harney, Mary. Carey, Pat. Haughey, Seań. Collins, Niall. Healy-Rae, Jackie. Conlon, Margaret. Hoctor, Maíre. Connick, Seań. Kelleher, Billy. Coughlan, Mary. Kelly, Peter. Cregan, John. Kenneally, Brendan. Cuffe, Ciarań. Kennedy, Michael. Cullen, Martin. Kirk, Seamus. Curran, John. Kitt, Michael P. 458 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

Nı´l—continued

Kitt, Tom. O’Connor, Charlie. Lenihan, Brian. O’Flynn, Noel. Lenihan, Conor. O’Hanlon, Rory. Lowry, Michael. O’Keeffe, Batt. McDaid, James. O’Keeffe, Edward. McEllistrim, Thomas. O’Rourke, Mary. O’Sullivan, Christy. McGrath, Mattie. Power, Peter. McGrath, Michael. Power, Sea´n. McGuinness, John. Roche, Dick. Mansergh, Martin. Ryan, Eamon. Martin, Michea´l. Sargent, Trevor. Moloney, John. Scanlon, Eamon. Moynihan, Michael. Smith, Brendan. Mulcahy, Michael. Treacy, Noel. Nolan, M. J. Wallace, Mary. O´ Cuı´v, E´ amon. White, Mary Alexandra. O´ Fearghaı´l, Sea´n. Woods, Michael. O’Brien, Darragh.

Tellers: Ta´: Deputies Paul Kehoe and Emmet Stagg; Nı´l: Deputies Pat Carey and John Cregan.

Amendment declared lost.

An Ceann Comhairle: Amendment No. 3 is ruled out of order because it is consequential on amendment No. 12 which is not relevant to the provisions of the Bill. Therefore, we move to amendment No. 4 in the name of Deputy Arthur Morgan.

Amendment No. 3 not moved.

Deputy Arthur Morgan: I move amendment No. 4:

In page 4, line 18, after “Finance” to insert “on behalf of the Oireachtas”.

I am disappointed that amendment No. 3 was disallowed because bank executives and chief executives of State bodies need to be reined in and the amendment would have gone some way toward achieving that. The purpose of amendment No. 4 is to try to focus the Minister for Finance somewhat on the Oireachtas. In January, when we nationalised Anglo Irish Bank, the Minister had information which he did not share with us. That refers to the PricewaterhouseCoopers report. He also let us down badly in respect of the terms and conditions of the bank guarantee scheme soon after many people on this side of the House had voted with the Government on the bail out scheme. We did so in good faith that the Minister would use terms and conditions as a useful mechanism to rein in banks. Unfortunately, we were let down badly in that instance too. Earlier, we highlighted several measures proposed in the budget in October as serious errors and the Minister had to change those very soon thereafter. It is a pity the Minister would not listen to speakers on this side of the House because we would have saved him a great deal of trouble on each and all of those occasions. There is a benefit in listening to us but the Minister is obviously not well disposed to doing so. There is a propensity on this side of the House to be constructive and helpful. That opportunity is not being taken up by the Minister, as was exemplified when he refused to accept the two previous amendments, which were very reasonable and rational. The Minister knows that big, medium and small businesses across this land are struggling and facing serious difficulties. Jobs are in danger as a result.

459 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Arthur Morgan.]

I am concerned that this measure will damage the trade union movement. The leaders of that movement want to be reasonable and rational. I am careful not to say anything that might damage the movement or put its leaders under any more pressure. The way the Minister handled the talks with the trade union movement over recent weeks and months left a lot to be desired. It is obvious that industrial unrest, which would have a further negative impact across this land and beyond, is almost inevitable. Nobody is asking the Minister to reduce the amount of revenue he wants the Exchequer to get from this scheme. We are all on the same side in that regard. However, the Government is going after families with small and medium incomes that cannot afford the levy, or wage cut, that is to be applied, which augurs serious times for us all. I echo and support the comments made by Deputy Bruton a few moments ago. We are asking the Minister to take a certain amount of money off the bottom end of this levy scheme. If he decides to recoup that money substantially further up the scale, where people can afford it, we will have no problem with that. I do not understand why the Minister is rejecting that notion, which is the essence of this amendment. I do not expect the Minister to accept it, given his disposition on this project to date.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: It is not clear what Deputy Morgan has in mind in proposing this amendment. While he has made clear what is on his mind, in general, it is difficult to understand the intention of this amendment, which proposes to change the definition of “Minister” in this Bill from “Minister for Finance” to “Minister for Finance on behalf of the Oireachtas”. That would be a departure from the usual definition of “Minister”. It would call into question the authority and powers conferred on the Minister for Finance under this legislation. It would render the operation of the legislation somewhat convoluted and impractical. Each Minister is a member of the Executive. Ministers are not accountable to the Oireachtas — they are accountable to Daíl E´ ireann. They are appointed by Daíl E´ ireann. That is the position when it comes to the accountability of Ministers. Under our strict constitutional practice, Ministers are not accountable to Seanad E´ ireann, although they attend Adjournment debates in that House as a matter of courtesy. I am responsible to this Chamber, of course. If he wishes to use strict constitutional parlance, Deputy Morgan should be proposing to change the definition of “Minister” in this Bill to “Minister for Finance on behalf of Daíl E´ ireann”. That would be unprecedented, however, because Daíl E´ ireann appoints Ministers in the first instance. While the Deputy is free to make his own judgments in respect of the trade union movement, I assure him that no member of that movement has suggested that my conduct during negotiations with the unions left a lot to be desired.

Deputy Arthur Morgan: As I said, I tabled this amendment to try to get the Minister to focus his mind on this House. I regret it if I did not make that point sufficiently clear. That is the purpose of this amendment. I do not intend to spend much more time dealing with it. I wanted to make the point that the Minister needs to be encouraged to face this House now and again. He needs to listen carefully to what Deputies say. More importantly, he should take on board what we say occasionally.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 4a:

In page 4, line 22, after “Oireachtas” to insert the following:

“or of a local authority (within the meaning of the Local Government Act 2001)”.

460 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

The purpose of this amendment is to provide explicitly for local authority members to be included in the definition of “public servant” in section 1 of the Bill. While it can be argued that they are covered in the definition as it stands, some doubt is cast by the fact that they are referred to as “members” in the Local Government Act 2001. It is not clear if a member of a local authority holds an office or position. It is prudent, therefore, to specifically include members of local authorities in the definition of “public servant”.

Amendment agreed to.

Deputy Joan Burton: I move amendment No. 5:

In page 4, line 30, to delete “as amended by” and substitute “inserted by”.

This is a technical amendment. I am advised that Chapter IVC of Part V of the Defence Act 1954 was inserted by the Defence (Amendment) Act 2007, rather than amended by it. The Bill states that the definition of “public servant” does not include “the President, a member of the judiciary or a military judge”. There is a profound case for asking why the Government decided to exclude the President, the Judiciary and military judges from the levy. I do not want to hear senior counsel arguments from the learned Minister for Finance to explain why judges, the President and military judges should be exempt from a measure that will affect hospital cleaners and men who work on shovels for local authorities. It is unfair that people who work hard but are paid low incomes will have to pay the levy, while an exemption is afforded to those who are paid the most and have the most support services. They have an elegant way of life and an elegant support system. They are given cars, for example. If the Minister, who is a senior counsel, tells me that judges will take the State to court if they are required to pay this levy, I will respond by saying “bring it on”. If the judges object to participating in the scheme, they are welcome to take a case to court. They will not be able to argue that the levy will reduce their income unless, contrary to what the Minister has said, it is actually an income-reducing device. As this is a charge, it should be paid by those who willingly pay all their taxes, pay their income taxes and pay every other charge that is levied on them. It is extraordinary that the Minister has decided to exempt some of the highest-paid people in the land from this charge. He might remind the House that some of the people in question have offered wage cuts voluntarily, but I would argue that voluntary wage cuts are neither here nor there, to be honest. If the Minister is to collect the kind of money he is interested in collecting and to nurture a sense of social solidarity, I suggest that he should include the President, the Judiciary and our military court judges in this scheme. I am confident that they will be proud to pay the charge being paid by their fellow Irish citizens. They are not like tax exiles who run away from paying tax. The Minister needs to explain why he is taking such a cowardly way out. Why has he decided to exclude high-flying people, who enjoy high- flying pay and conditions, from a levy from which county council workers and ward orderlies will not be exempt?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Deputy Burton will be aware that I sit in this House as a Deputy for the same constituency as her. I am not here in any professional capacity. The Government takes legal advice from the Office of the Attorney General. The advice it has received in this instance is that it would not be in accordance with the Constitution to apply this measure to the President, to members of the Judiciary or to military judges. When the members of the Government decided, following last autumn’s budget, to make a voluntary gift of 10% of their salaries to the State, the President promptly announced that she would follow suit.

461 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Brian Lenihan.]

The advice I have received from the Attorney General on the general position under this legislation is that Article 35.5 of the Constitution prevents the Government from reducing the remuneration of a judge during his or her continuance in office. There is a similar provision, in an earlier section of the Constitution, in respect of the President. While it is not expressed in the same terms, it is the same in substance. There is a constitutional bar on doing what Deputy Burton has asked me to do. As she is perfectly well aware, I have two options in such circumstances. One is that the judges would consider the option of a voluntary gift. I assume that is a matter they would not entertain until these Houses complete their deliberation on this Bill. The other option is the question of a referendum on the subject.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: Does the Minister accept that the pension levy is a reduction in salary for all other public sector employees?

Deputy Joan Burton: That is the logical conclusion.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: Yes. If it is not the logical conclusion and it is not a reduction in remuneration for the ordinary public sector worker on modest income, then I cannot see how it would be contrary to the Constitution that members of the Judiciary pay the pension levy. The Minister needs to clarify this point. Does he now admit that the pension levy is a reduction in remuneration?

Deputy Joe Behan: I support Deputy Burton’s contribution on this issue. Unfortunately, I did not get a chance to speak on Second Stage. Regrettably, that seems to be a recurring problem since I changed my status. In future, I hope to get further opportunities to give views on matters that come before the House. I was shocked that the Government, while referring to a fair package of proposals, would state that some of the highest paid public servants in the land should be excused from paying this contribution to their own pensions, as has already been mentioned by the Minister and the Taoiseach. Do judges currently make any contribution to their pensions? Is this the reason it is not being included? It might be the first time those judges make a contribution from their salary towards their pension. If they already make a contribution, I cannot see the difference in making an additional contribution. It seems to me to be the same as the PAYE set up. Do judges actually pay tax? I presume they do. On “The News at One” last week, a gentle- man with legal expertise made the point that, in the past, a judge’s widow brought a case to court claiming that her husband should never have been paying tax. The judge in the court threw the case out, which was the reasonable thing to do. We are in a great emergency and we all want to see social solidarity, so it is unbelievable that judges would claim that they should not be subject to the same contributions that lower paid public servants make. It is an indication of the disconnect between some Government decisions and the real needs of the ordinary people of this country. I appeal to the Minister to think again on this matter.

Deputy Sea´n Barrett: I am flabbergasted by this. Can we imagine a scene where the clerk of the court sees his wage deducted, while the judge on the bench does not make any contribution? The section refers to making a new deduction from the remuneration of public servants who are members of a public service pension scheme. Judges are either in a public service pension scheme, or they are not. If they are in a public service pension scheme, then they should pay like the rest of us. They should be included in this Bill, and if somebody wants to take a case, then let us await the result. However, it does not make sense that the garda standing in the

462 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) court must pay the levy, yet the judge does not have to pay anything. It is certainly not a great example to others.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: The standard position on the specific queries is that judges can pay a pension contribution if they opt into the spouses’ and children’s pension scheme. The same constitutional provision applies to that particular scheme. The constitutional position is clear and the Government has been advised by the Attorney General on this issue. It is not a matter the Government has any power to vary. The only basis upon which it could be varied would be by a referendum of the people. The constitutional provision is very clear, as it is remuneration that cannot be reduced. The view of the Attorney General is that the contribution is a direct deduction from the remuneration.

Deputy Sea´n Barrett: So it is PAYE.

Deputy Joan Burton: No, it is a charge.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Unlike tax, the contribution does not apply in general to citizens, but only to some citizens. Therefore, it is quite different from the tax regime. Deputy Behan referred to a decision involving the widow of a former Supreme Court judge, who tried to argue that the imposition of increased tax on the salary had been unconstitutional. The view taken by the court was that taxation on a judicial salary is in accordance with the Constitution. At the time of his departure from our party, Deputy Behan expressed his admiration of the views of Mr. De Valera and Mr. Lemass. Of course, Mr. De Valera originated this particular provision in the Constitution of 1937, and he lived to regret it himself somewhat. He asked the judges at one stage to engage in pay restraint, but they refused. His only remedy was to prevent a pay increase for many years.

Deputy Joe Behan: Is it the case that judges can opt in to this if they want to be part of a spouses’ and children’s scheme? If they do not want to have such a pension element, is it the case that they do not currently make any contribution to their own pension?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: That is the case.

Deputy Joe Behan: Perhaps this might be an opportunity to appeal to their patriotic duty. If they are acquiring very generous pensions as a result of their public service, having been paid very generous salaries, then they might consider opting into paying pension contributions. Many public servants throughout this country, who are going to feel the pain of this levy, will certainly look askance at the news we have received from the Minister today.

Deputy Joan Burton: Will the Minister make available the advice of the Attorney General on this matter? I have been advised that it would be possible to include a clause in this Bill which would allow for a voluntary opting in by the Judiciary to this arrangement, and by the President as well. I have no doubt that the President would opt in to such a scheme, and I believe that the majority of the Judiciary would also opt in to such a scheme. It is astonishing that the Minister has not been more innovative in providing for this. High Court judges earn well over \200,000. They have tipstaff and allowances for a car, and their remuneration package is very attractive. It may not be as much as they earned as leading senior counsels, but by the standards of some of the people who will pay this levy, their earnings are extraordinarily high. All this proves to me that the view of the Attorney General is essentially that this levy has nothing to do with pensions, but is rather a charge on the income of one class of persons, namely, public servants. As such, it is a substitute for taxation. Were the Minister to raise the

463 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Joan Burton.] top or bottom levels of PAYE, I understand that the President and the judges would be automatically subject to those increased rates of tax. There is such a thing as a moral authority in any country. I cannot understand how the Government can do stuff like this while talking to us about a national emergency. Nothing in law prevents the Minister coming forward by Report Stage tonight with a voluntary arrangement, an amendment to this Bill to make specific provision to allow the President, Judiciary and military court judges to opt in. That is my legal advice. They are all very learned legal people and if they have a problem with that, there are plenty of lawyers to take the case.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: While there may be plenty of lawyers to take cases, as we all know, I have to follow the advice of the Attorney General. I have been advised that it would be improper for me to comment on the position of the Judiciary until the legislation is enacted. The legislation has not been enacted. It is subject to the legitimate debate and argument of the House. If it is a matter of contention between the parties it would be improper of me to request that the judges endorse Government policy.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I move amendment No. 6:

In page 6, line 10, after “servant” to insert “and excludes non-pensionable payments”.

This amendment raises the issue of the categories of people and the types of payment included in this. The amendment sets out that the remuneration would exclude non-pensionable payments. We were just discussing retained firefighters but there are other categories, such as people providing home help services, who have no pension scheme. There are significant numbers of people working for the public service, on a contractual basis or otherwise, who are not covered by a pension scheme. The issue is what elements one includes. The other issue that arises is whether the Minister intends to include overtime payments, even though pension entitlement would not relate to them. Many people are on very low incomes, which they supplement by working unsociable hours. Many of the submissions we see reflect the fact that people have undertaken to work unsociable hours for which they get no pension cover and that they are being treated in the same way as others who, perhaps, are on the same pay but have that pay entirely pension-covered. There is a sense of injustice because the only reason some people are getting into certain categories is that they work very unsociable hours or take on work that otherwise would not be done. If this is to be confined, excepting judges, to people who have pensions, if in public service, is it not fair to exclude people such as home helps and certain categories of payment if they do not contribute to a person’s pension rights?

Deputy Arthur Morgan: I support the amendment. The anomalies emerging from this legislation on Second Stage and this afternoon are astonishing. Almost every time the Minister stands up to speak he confirms that this Government is intent on pursuing those low-income families and excluding the higher-income families at every stage. That is sad.

Deputy Joan Burton: Many low-paid people in the public service are in for the shock of their lives when they find out they are subject to this levy. I want to talk in particular about those who work as outdoor staff for the county councils and the many people working in the Houses here who are not civil servants, but might be called industrial civil servants. They pay full PRSI for a contributory old age pension. They also pay a reduced rate of superannuation on their

464 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) gross incomes less twice the old age pension to give them a small top-up pension when they retire, based on 40 years service. My father worked for CIE, and many of us who have families or parents who worked for bodies such as the county councils are very familiar with this system of a small additional pension. One pays PRSI, one’s main income on retirement is the old age pension and one receives a very small, but very welcome, additional pension through the top- up from the extra superannuation one paid on one’s gross income less twice the old age pension. That is broadly how it is calculated. From the Minister’s interpretation such people will pay the levy on their entire gross incomes, even though if they earn, say, \700 per week gross, and twice the old age pension is \400, they pay their superannuation at a reduced rate based on \700 minus \400, which is \300. They will pay the levy on the whole amount. That will bear disproportionately on them. They may have overtime and other special payments, and there are thousands of special payments in the public service, as the Minister knows, particularly in the health and county council areas. Most of these people do not know yet that they will be subject to the levy. Deputy Bruton mentioned home helps. The Minister probably knows there are two categories of home helps: those directly employed by the HSE and those who work as ward assistants. They are very often in the same category, although they are on a higher hourly rate. According to the Minister, they will be subject to the levy if paid directly by the HSE. However, if they are paid by an organisation which receives a grant-in-aid from the HSE they will not be subject to the levy. The room for chaos regarding very low paid people is profound. We are offering the Minister a variety of ways out of this because administering this will be costly, by the time one sorts out the different entitlements. There is also a basic unfairness. I will draw the Garda situation to the Minister’s attention. This applies to a lesser extent to the Defence Forces. Most gardaı´ have to serve only 30 years to get a full pension. Therefore at a certain stage they are contributed out, if they stay for 40 years. For many of those who have between 30 and 40 years service and might be at sergeant or inspector level, once this levy comes in on all their overtime earnings, the Minister is creating an enormous financial incentive for them to retire early, take their lump sum and get some other part-time or full- time employment. I see the Minister nodding his head. If he tells me these people will not be subject to the levy that is different. In the Garda at the level of sergeant and inspector there are probably approximately 1,900 such members. The Minister is clearly charging them for a pension benefit which will give them no extra entitlements. The same is true of people serving in the Defence Forces. We still have not clarified whether all of the various allowances paid to members of the Defence Forces and the Garda at different times will be subject to the pension levy. I strongly suggest that not ironing out these anomalies is deeply unfair. There will be consternation in the ranks of the lower paid, particularly in local authorities and in the old health board systems, hospitals, etc., when they find out how this will operate. It is the 11th hour but I plead with the Minister to sort it out. I am still not convinced how in the HSE, or the old health board structures where there is not a unified salaries computer system, the Minister will implement the complications inherent in the levy as proposed. When will it be implemented because it will be an administrative nightmare for IT sections?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: It will be implemented from 1 March on income accrued after that date. On the amendment tabled by Deputy Bruton, section 2(1) is the crucial section in the application of the Act. It applies to a public servant who is a member of a public service pension

465 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Brian Lenihan.] scheme, is entitled to a benefit under such a scheme, or receives a payment in lieu of membership in such a scheme. As I understand the position, home helps are not in such schemes but I am subject to correction on that.

Deputy Richard Bruton: Are they caught under section 10?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I do not have to rely on section 10 — that is the crucial point — to exempt such persons because if they are not members of a pension scheme in the first place, section 2——

Deputy Richard Bruton: Section 10 deals with the charge to people providing a service.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I am sorry, I was thinking of the exemption. I was thinking of a different section.

Deputy Joan Burton: It is not clear.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Section 10, “Reduction of other payments”, relates to professional services. It gives power to the Minister to make regulations. It is a precondition of the operation of section 10. The section does not relate to the contribution. It is a different section altogether, section which provides the foundation for the Government implementing the decision of the 8% reduction in professional fees.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I do not want to——

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Section 8 is the exemption section. I am sorry for confusing the matter.

Deputy Richard Bruton: Sections 9 and 10 extend it to services provided to the health authority and other services. Will most of those persons, if they are low-paid workers such as home helps, be caught in the same terms as——

Deputy Brian Lenihan: No. The precondition for the operation of section 9 is a regulation of the relevant Minister, the Minister for Health and Children, with my consent and the intention is not to apply through section 9 the operation of this contribution system to persons who are not entitled to a pension arrangement. The fundamental point is that under section 2 the status of the person must be such that he or she is entitled to a pension and section 9 will be implemented in that context.

Deputy Richard Bruton: Does the Minister wish to comment on, for instance, overtime payments and payments that do not make up the pension?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: They are captured. That is the real point of difference between us, Deputy Bruton is quite correct. The legislation is clear on the question of the home helps and persons who are not entitled to a pension. It is also clear on the question of non-pensionable payments, which his amendment would take outside the scope of the levy, and which include overtime and allowances. Such payments are a significant element of the public service pay bill. They simply cannot be ignored given the necessity to reduce the public service pay costs by some \1.35 billion in a full year. If we were to remove non-pensionable pay from the deduction we would have to increase the deduction from pensionable elements proportionately.

466 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

Deputy Joan Burton: Could the Minister clarify the position for persons such as gardaı´ and members of the Defence Forces who must serve a lesser number of years, 30 years, to acquire a pension? Somebody who is a member of the Garda for, say, 35 years stops paying his or her pension contribution after 30 years and cannot accumulate any extra pension benefits. Will such persons, who no doubt are definitely in receipt of a public service pension entitlement but who have served sufficient time, be subject to the full levy on all of their earnings and overtime even though, as I stated, they have contributed the maximum amount contributable to their pension?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: They will pay the contribution. As I outlined yesterday evening in replying to the Second Stage debate, the cost of funding that pension is way in excess of any contribution that is made towards the pension by more recent members who have joined the force. The purpose of this levy is to make a contribution towards the eventual pension which is paid. Of course, the member is not in receipt of the pension if he or she is in service.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Section 1 agreed to.

NEW SECTIONS.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I move amendment No. 7:

In page 6, before section 2, to insert the following new section:

“2.—The Minister shall lay before each House of the Oireachtas the annual cost on an actuarial basis of the total pension liability in each Government Department and specify the actuarial costs as a percentage of pay in each major category and grade within each department.”.

It is important that the context of this payment is widely understood. There has been a great lack of understanding or knowledge of the true cost of public service pensions and it would be useful in this context to have this information clearly stated. Indeed, Departments ought to be more cognisant of the pension implications of decisions when they take them. It is a fair criticism of Government accounts generally that they fail to take into account the pension obligations that they incur, just as they fail to take into account the true cost of capital which they use. We should, over time, move towards a system of budgeting that shows those true costs, which the taxpayer must furnish. Showing the actuarial costs of different categories of employee would be important also because the pension levy we are considering is probably not fairly graded in accord with the benefits that accrue from public service pensions. If this was being reviewed in a year or two when there still were emergency conditions, people would expect that it would be graded more clearly in accordance with people’s benefit from pension and ability to pay. It would be useful to have this information laid before the House, perhaps with the Minister’s review and perhaps even in the Estimate volumes or the annual reports Departments provide to the Oireachtas, so that we could have a clearer picture of what is going on.

Deputy Sea´n Barrett: I support this amendment. I have always felt it is a matter that should be inserted into and debated in conjunction with the Estimates for each Department. It is an actual cost.

467 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Sea´n Barrett.]

It could lead to greater efficiency if Departments realise the cost of the pension liability. There are many areas where savings could be made if Departments knew that they were responsible and the costs attaching to the pension liabilities were clear. At long last, this is an amendment that the Minister could find his way to accept. It will not damage in any way the amounts of money that will be collected. It is an attempt, once again, by this side of the House to be constructive and to help in the overall presentation of the costs of each Department year by year. It can do nothing but good in making people aware of the reality and perhaps in some way lead to savings or make people conscious of the need to make savings.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I agree with Deputies Bruton and Barrett. This is an excellent suggestion. In fact, my Department is in the process of considering improvements to the presentation of the financial statements of Departments and offices. This raises complex issues and will require careful consideration. On pensions, however, the Department and I have decided to include an estimate of the accrued pension liability for the total public service in the annual finance accounts. This will provide a view of the total accrued liabilities in respect of all of the public service. This will be a major addition to the information available on the cost of public service pensions. On specifying the actuarial cost of each grade in every Department, however, there are hundreds of grades in the Civil Service and six major sets of pension benefits. It would not be appropriate at this stage to undertake to carry out the thousands of complex and separate calculations that would be needed to specify the pension cost at each grade. The actuarial cost of pensions for specimen grades of the public service is calculated as required, for example, as part of the recent benchmarking body exercise. I would be open, in addition to providing for the total accrued liabilities as part of the financial accounts, to give some information on the specimen grades.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I assume the Minister is not accepting the amendment but that he is willing to commit to it.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I accept it in spirit.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I welcome the Minister’s commitment, which will give a greater understanding, but I would like each unit or Department broken down in order that we can see the picture.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: We must build on the initial exercise of the total figure to look at specimens and in time break them up into general categories. I am not totally satisfied that doing this according to Department would be a good idea but one could take a substantial body of personnel in the public service, like the gardaı´, the Defence Forces or teachers, and see if a separate computation could be made.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I move amendment No. 8:

In page 6, before section 2, to insert the following new section:

2.—The payment of any pension levy which accrues as a consequence of this Act shall not be included in any financial assessment of means for the purposes of eligibility for any state service.

468 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

This arose in our earlier discussion of people who pay the pension levy receiving family income supplement. It should be treated as a deduction from their income so those on low incomes would receive a supplement of 60 cent in the euro under the family income supplement scheme. If it is clear that means tests will be adapted, it would provide some relief and would not constitute a significant cost. Many schemes are means tested on a net income basis, such as medical cards, family income supplement and rent supplement. It would be wholly unfair if the other Acts under which means tests are applied did not have included within them the deduction of the pension payment. Otherwise people who work in the public service would be treated unfairly in respect of means tested provisions compared to those in the private sector. These are designed to help families with specific needs, be they medical or because they are on low incomes or have family commitments. I hope the Minister accepts this or will arrange for the suitable amendment of other Acts that provide for means tests to take this into account.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I thank the Deputy for raising the issue but, as I understand it, the Bill already provides for what the amendment seeks to achieve. The Bill provides for an amendment to the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 whereby income chargeable under Schedule E will be reduced by the amount of the deduction. It also provides, crucially, for amendments to regulation 41 of Statutory Instrument No. 559 of 2001, which is the crucial statutory instrument in the area of the family income supplement and the definition of an allowable contribution under that regulation to include the new deduction within its scope.

Deputy Richard Bruton: Where is that?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Section 15 deals with the issue, amending the Income Tax Act and the Income Tax (Employments) (Consolidated) Regulations 2001, which has the effect of including the contribution for social welfare purposes, which means the deduction will be disregarded in full before means from earnings are assessed for welfare purposes. I agree with the Deputy that it would not have been transparently obvious from the face of section 15 that was the case and I understand why he tabled the amendment. However, the effects of section 15(1) and (2) are that the deduction will be disregard in full before means from earnings are assessed for welfare purposes, which will alleviate the effect of the deduction for low income families and receipts of a range of welfare payments or where the spouse or partner is in receipt of them.

Deputy Richard Bruton: Will it apply equally to means tests under the various Acts?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Yes. These core provisions in the 1997 Act and the Income Tax (Employments) (Consolidated) Regulations 2001 are the reference points for such schemes.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendments Nos. 9 and 10 not moved.

Acting Chairman: Amendment No. 50 is consequential on amendments Nos. 11 and 15a, where amendment No. 15a is a technical amendment to amendment No. 14 and amendment No. 19 is related to amendment No. 14. We will take amendments Nos. 11, 14, 15a, 19 and 50 together by agreement.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I move amendment No. 11:

In page 6, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following subsection:

469 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Richard Bruton.]

“(3) No deduction shall be made under this section in respect of a person whose remuneration is below \18,000 per year.”.

This amendment will provide an exemption for those earning less than \18,000, the figure the Minister used in the other levy he introduced this year. On Committee Stage of the Finance Bill, he decided the levy, which was originally set at a flat rate, with everyone paying, should have an exemption up to a threshold of \18,304. The tenor of the discussion suggests the Minister’s more enlightened view when we discussed this at that time does not apply now, but I would like to hear his response.

Deputy Arthur Morgan: The purpose of amendment No. 11 is clearly to exempt those on the minimum wage. Surely that is a reasonable ambition for any Deputy in the House? I support the amendment.

Deputy Joan Burton: I thank my colleagues for moving this amendment. This will put the Bill in line with the 1% income tax levy, where the Minister exempted people with an income of less than \18,304. That made sense on administrative grounds alone. The Minister should do the same here. The administrative burden will be significant anyway and there will be a huge number of anomalies. I welcome what the Minister said earlier, that he will try to address some of the issues for very low paid workers. He should bear in mind, however, that where people work directly for a VEC and particularly the HSE, there are complex employment grades and conditions and people who work part-time. As the Minister said, no public body pays less than 6 o’clock the minimum wage. However, one finds that workers employed by agencies who are specifically mentioned as being subject to the Bill will inevitably end up being caught, unless the Minister gives an undertaking to be benign in drawing up the regulations to exclude such persons. In the lists of exempted bodies at the front and back of the Bill, which include the VECs and the HSE, one State-owned body is conspicuous by its absence — Anglo Irish Bank. We own it and are paying through the nose for it, but it is neither in nor out. Given that it is not mentioned, its employees, including its highly paid top people, are out.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I will have to get the Deputy to assist the commissioner in his investigations.

Deputy Joan Burton: From the Minister’s face I know that this comes as an awful shock and that he would like nothing more than to apply the levy at the top rate to persons in the State owned Anglo Irish Bank. To be honest, it would be a small piece of poetic justice. We know that in a former life the Minister was a skilled senior counsel. I rest my case and wait for him to bring forward an appropriate amendment.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Jack Wall): Before the Minister replies, amendments Nos. 14, 15a, 19 and 50 will be discussed with this amendment.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: There is an over-riding need to reduce public expenditure, of which public service pay is a significant element. That is why we are seeking to secure the maximum savings possible with the pension-related deduction. The principle behind it is that the deduction will apply to all persons who are members of public service pension schemes and entitled to benefits under such schemes or receive payments in lieu of membership of such

470 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) schemes. The deduction is a recognition of the preferential pension terms all public servants enjoy, compared to the generality of their private sector counterparts, both in terms of security and the terms available. I have tried to the greatest extent possible, consistent with the need to reduce the pay bill significantly, to ameliorate the effects on lower paid public servants through a banding approach. Public servants in this pay category are part-time employees.

Deputy Arthur Morgan: I am addressing amendment No. 14, in particular. If the House goes full term on this occasion, to 2012, I might begin to get my head around how these amendments are measured or deemed to be in or out. Amendment No. 12 has been ruled out of order, although it appears that it would be of substantial benefit, rather than a cost to the State. In it I was trying to deal with regulations to cap senior banking executives’ pay to a level approximately equivalent to that of a Government Minister. I was also trying to allow the Minister to make regulations governing a collection of bonuses paid to senior banking executives in each of the last three years. We would have had great fun going after this, but it should at least have been attempted. I also sought to deal with capping senior executives’ pay in some State bodies. I alluded to this matter and will not hold up the business of the House at length. In some cases CEOs of State bodies have received in excess of \500,000. Will the Minister assure me that they are worth it and deserve it? However, I remain to be convinced that such pay levels are warranted. When we measure the pay of hospital consultants against those of their European counterparts, we find that in Britain they earn about £70,000 per annum and \110,000 per annum in France. The highest sum paid is in the Netherlands where it goes up to about \120,000. There is a technical error in the amendment. I meant to put the figure at more than \70,000 for hospital consultants, but not much more — about \120,000 would be the absolute maximum, in line with what is paid in many European Union member states. The whole thrust of everything the Government does is to hammer low and middle income families at every opportunity, while protecting and enhancing the status of those on significant incomes, including the Judiciary. Every time we debate any such Government legislation it beggars belief.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: The effect of the amendments would be to delete the table setting out the rates at which the deduction is to apply and remove the Minister’s authority to make regulations to provide for the deduction. I appreciate the fact that the Deputy tabled the amendment to have a debate on the subject of rates. We do have a constitution, as Deputy Morgan is well aware; therefore, I am not going to deal with the rest of his argument.

Deputy Arthur Morgan: Yes, and it does not apply in this case, or else the Minister would be calling this a pay cut. It is one or the other, as Deputy Burton stated.

Deputy Joan Burton: I remind the Minister that people earning up to \18,000 a year will pay 3% on the first \15,000, which amounts to \450. They will pay 6% on the next \3,000, which amounts to \90. Therefore, somebody on \18,000 a year will pay \540, if I understand correctly the way the levy is structured. This amounts to more than \10 a week for somebody on the very lowest rung of the income ladder. It might not be significant for a judge, the President, a Minister, a Deputy or people in the top echelons of the public service, but it is certainly a significant amount for somebody on a very low income. My worry is that for some people on low incomes it will pay them to go on the dole, claim housing benefit and a range of other benefits, including a medical card. It constitutes an additional poverty and employment trap. We spent a lot of time trying to get away from such traps to make work not just valuable for the fulfilment it brings, but also to make it financially more rewarding that being in receipt of social welfare payments. Strategically, the Minister’s policy is wrong in this regard. The Labour

471 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Joan Burton.] Party amendment is reasonable, but if the Minister has a better version and wants to transfer the money lost to those in the higher income brackets, we will certainly support him.

Deputy Richard Bruton: My amendment is similar. .According to the Minister’s own statistics, there are not many people earning under \25,000. I think it is only about 20,000 in total. Therefore, the cost of making this concession would be extremely small. It goes to the heart of the matter. My original amendment which was ruled out of order provided that it be compensated for further up the levy structure but as that would constitute a charge on the people, the amendment was ruled out of order. My substitute amendment, No. 15a, was tabled so as not to impose that charge on the people. The principle is accepted across the House that, even on its own terms, the levy could be made fairer by some scheme of this nature. I calculated that, at most, it would cost about \5 million, which sum would have to be recouped further up the income scale. The cost of this concession would be \5 million out of a figure of \1.4 billion, which is not big money. The Minister could easily retrieve this sum further up the income scale. Even if only a small number of people were affected, it would show that the Minister was open to modifying his proposals. The Taoiseach said the proposals could be tweaked. The sum of \5 million would surely represent a tweaking. It would not be a substantial change.

Deputy Sea´n Barrett: In radio and television interviews Ministers all adopt the patter that the amount of money being sought through the levy cannot be reduced but, following their leader, there is room for tweaking. What does “tweaking” mean? When will we see it? No one on this side of the House suggested reducing the amount of money to be collected. All that is being asked is that those on low incomes be relieved from the provisions and the shortfall recovered somewhere else along the line. That would be my interpretation of “tweaking” but it could be very different to the Minister’s. I would like to hear from the Minister, before we tweak any further, what he and the Taoiseach mean by tweaking. The other night on “Questions and Answers”, the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, Deputy Cullen, made it clear there was some room for tweaking. Now it is tweaking time. Will the Minister explain to us what is meant by tweaking?

Deputy Arthur Morgan: Amendment No. 50 aims to address our public finance deficit on the basis of fairness and equality which does not involve imposing an unfair burden on low- income workers. Every contribution from this side of the House has been about reasonableness and fairness. Deputy Barrett is correct that it is simply a matter of tweaking of rather than major surgery to the legislation. It is unfortunate the Minister will not accept these amendments.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: This Minister is not for tweaking and I have to perform major surgery all the time. On the question about the cost of the levy to a public servant earning \18,300 a year, if I were to accept one of the amendments which simply provided for an exemption under that level, it would increase the step effect at \18,300 to include not just the PRSI and the income tax but the pension contribution. That in itself would be a substantial disincentive to work at that income level.

Deputy Sea´n Barrett: If the Minister is not for tweaking, then will he ask his ministerial colleagues to stop tweaking?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: The Deputy should ask them.

472 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

Deputy Joan Burton: After that remarkable recent interview with Deputy Gogarty, perhaps tweaking is what happens under the duvet between Fianna Fa´il and the Greens. Maybe we are looking in the wrong direction.

Deputy Arthur Morgan: It certainly gives us an insight.

Deputy Richard Bruton: Colbert, the famous financial adviser to the French King Louis XIV, said the ideal tax was one that produced the maximum feathers with the minimum squawk. Can we find this tweak to minimise some of the squawk? Will the Minister reveal where these tweaks dwell on the benches opposite? They have been remarkably scarce in the past four hours.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I know the Deputy is an avid fan of Adam Smith, so I will stick to equity, efficiency and simplicity at all stages.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Acting Chairman: Amendment No. 12 has been ruled out of order as it is not relevant to the provisions of the Bill.

Amendment No. 12 not moved.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 13:

In page 6, subsection (3)(b), line 33, to delete “that year” and substitute “the year concerned”.

The purpose of this technical amendment is to clarify the provisions refer to each following year, not just 2010.

Amendment agreed to.

Deputy Arthur Morgan: I move amendment No. 14:

In page 7, to delete lines 3 to 9.

Question, “That the words proposed to be deleted stand”, put and declared carried.

Amendment declared lost.

Acting Chairman: Amendment No. 15 has been ruled out of order.

Amendment No. 15 not moved.

Acting Chairman: Amendment No. 15a cannot be moved as it has already been discussed with amendment No. 11.

Deputy Richard Bruton: Can I clarify the Chair’s ruling on this? Does grouping an amendment mean it cannot be moved when it is reached later?

Acting Chairman: The directive is that it overlaps with amendment No. 14 and cannot be moved. The words already stand on amendment No. 14.

Deputy Richard Bruton: Deputy Burton’s amendment was lost but I am still entitled to move an amendment that was different to hers. We have not voted on the section yet, so it has not

473 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Richard Bruton.] been passed and established by the House. I would have thought I am still entitled to move my amendment.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I understand the Deputy used the same formula that is used for the minimum wage.

Deputy Richard Bruton: No, I had a 50% concession as opposed to a 100% concession. However, I will not press the matter.

Amendment No. 15a not moved.

Acting Chairman: Amendments Nos. 16 and 17 are related and may be discussed together by agreement.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 16:

In page 7, subsection (5)(b), line 12, to delete “or” where it secondly occurs.

Amendment No. 16 will delete the word “or” and amendment No. 17 proposes a new subsection to bring it in line with sections 9(1) and 10(1). It will cover areas not covered in paragraphs (a)to(c) of section 2(5).

Amendment agreed to.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 17:

In page 7, subsection (5)(c), line 13, to delete “arrangement.” and substitute the following:

“arrangement, or

(d) any understanding, expectation, circular or instrument or other document.”.

Amendment agreed to.

Deputy Joan Burton: I move amendment No. 17a:

In page 7, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following subsection:

“(6) Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this section, payments which are not reckonable for pension purposes are not to be liable for pension levy deductions under this section.”.

So many amendments have been ruled out of order, I am surprised this was accepted when resubmitted. Rather surprisingly some amendments submitted by the Opposition were allowed while others were ruled out of order for reasons about which we are in discussion with the Ceann Comhairle and the Bills Office. It may be that we have been allowed to resubmit this amendment. The purpose of this amendment is to provide that the levy does not apply to public sector income which is not reckonable for pension purposes, such as overtime and other such payments. I have also pointed out the anomaly where members of An Garda Sı´ocha´na and the Defence Forces have a shorter period for entitlement to pensionable service because of the nature of the employment. They often retire earlier than most on a full pension. As the Minister is aware,

474 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) many members of An Garda Sı´ocha´na and Defence Forces carry out dangerous duties. This entitlement was a social provision in recognition of the dangers faced in these occupations. If people have income that is not reckonable for pension purposes and the measure before us refers to a pension levy, why should they be obliged to pay a proportion of that income in the form of a levy? This goes back to the earlier argument that, in effect, this is a special tax on public service employees. The levy will be particularly onerous on those who are paid overtime, bonuses or other allowances which are not reckonable for pension purposes. What- ever about income on which people will be ultimately paid a pension or part of a pension, it is simply not fair to impose the levy on all of their income. The purpose of the amendment is to address that anomaly. I and others informed the Minister earlier that this country is facing into a spring and summer of industrial discontent. We do not want a situation to arise that would be similar to that which obtains in France, where people take strike action every second week in respect of public services. Enough damage has been done already to Ireland’s reputation as a result of what happened with the banks and what the Financial Times referred to as “cosy Irish capitalism”. If Ireland’s name is going to be up in lights in respect of continuous waves of public sector strikes, this will not help in the context of rebuilding our image, credibility and, above all else, our capacity to borrow cheaply on international markets. In this year alone, the cost of the interest payments on the public sector borrowing will increase by approximately \2 billion. While some of this increase relates to higher borrowings, the vast bulk of it is due to the fact that we are now paying interest rates way above those which apply in respect of Germany. If the Minister persists with a strategy which ensures that the country’s name will be up in lights for 30 seconds, 60 seconds or two minutes on the Bloomberg channel or some other business channel as a result of strikes taking place here, the cost of borrowing will continue to increase. We again ask the Minister to consider adopting a strategy that is fair, that will lead to people in different parts of the public sector being treated equitably and under which the greatest burden will be borne by those with the largest earnings. In his interview on RTE radio this morning, the general secretary of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, David Begg, made it clear that the trade union movement is willing to enter into negotiations with Government in order to reach a fair settlement on this issue. We recognise that this is an emergency and that we find ourselves in difficult economic circumstances. By not applying the levy fairly, the Mini- ster is going to cause industrial havoc. The cost of the latter will be that Ireland will be obliged to pay far more for its borrowings than the Minister will save by means of this levy, which contains a number of inappropriate and unfair elements.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Deputy Burton’s contribution was interesting and constructive. The Government would be prepared to re-engage with the social partners in respect of how the burden of adjustment which we must all shoulder — there is no point pretending that one or two individuals can carry it — might be fairly distributed. One of the crucial elements in reassuring friends of and investors in Ireland from overseas that we are in charge of our affairs is to show that we can, as a Government and a Parliament, send a clear message that we are prepared to bring public expenditure under control and stabilise it. Any change in the measure before the House would send out an entirely wrong signal regarding the determination of the Government to effect savings in respect of the public sector pay bill. Non-pensionable payments represent a significant element of the public service pay bill. In light of the absolute necessity to reduce public pay costs by approximately \1.35 billion in a full year, they cannot be ignored. If we were to remove non-pensionable pay from the equation, we would be obliged to increase the deduction from the pensionable elements proportionately.

475 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

Amendment put and declared lost.

Section 2, as amended, agreed to.

NEW SECTION.

Deputy Joan Burton: I move amendment No. 18:

In page 7, before section 3, to insert the following new section:

“3.—Funds received from the deduction under section 2 shall be paid into a fund under this section, to be known as the Emergency National Pension Levy Fund (separate from the National Pension Reserve Fund), the principal purpose of which is to pre-fund public service pensions.”.

The purpose of this amendment is again to seek to insert an element of fairness into the structure of this levy. The mechanism to which the Bill relates is referred to as a pension levy imposed in the context of financial emergency measures in the public interest. As stated earlier, the Tańaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment suggested on radio this morning that the difficulties relating to the public finances have been largely resolved. I do not know what brand of cornflakes she eats but they are obviously different from those consumed by everybody else in the House. It would be difficult to find too many people who would agree with the assertion that we are out of the woods financially. However, we possess the ingenuity, talent, skills and propensity towards hard work necessary to extricate ourselves from our current difficulties within a few short years. The amendment proposes that the pension levy be paid into an emergency national pension levy fund, the money from which could be then used for Government spending. When a return to better financial circumstances occurs, this fund could be then used to pay public service pensions. The Minister will state that the National Pensions Reserve Fund is somewhat similar to what I am proposing. Some years ago, Fianna Faíl Ministers objected vociferously when the Labour Party suggested that part of the latter might be used, on the basis of clearly identified returns, to finance certain public service projects. However, one of the Minister’s predecessors, Mr. McCreevy, was such an ideologue that he could not conceive of the National Pensions Reserve Fund being used other than as a way to invest either in the equities markets or in cash and Government securities. The consequence of this has been that the National Pensions Reserve fund has been obliged to pay in excess of \20 million to invest in equity markets throughout the world and, as a result, the value of the fund is now significantly lower. The amendment is couched in general terms because if the Minister accepts the general principle behind it, his officials will redraft it in a form to give effect to what we are proposing. Public servants are realists. The Minister is calling this mechanism a pension levy. When people pay such a levy or make contributions to a pension fund, it is implied that there will be a build up of funds which will be earmarked or hypothecated for the purposes for which the levy was raised. If public servants surrender this money, they want to rest assured that it will be available for the State to meet its pension commitments. If such an assurance is not forthcoming, they will wonder, having paid out their money, whether the State will meet those commitments. It is unlikely that Fianna Faíl will be returned to power after the next election. However, it may come back into office in approximately 14 or 15 years’ time. Will it decide at that stage that it does not want to pay public service pensions? On foot of what the Minister stated earlier, public servants will probably pay this levy indefinitely and will certainly pay it for the remaining

476 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) three and a half years of this Government’s term of office. It is estimated that this measure will raise \1.4 million gross per annum. This means public servants will contribute approximately \5 billion in the three and a half years left in the life of the Government but will not have a claim on the Exchequer to have this money utilised when the economy recovers. I firmly believe the economy will recover for the reasons I have outlined. If the Minister wants equity and fairness, it would be sensible to create a funded contribution and allow the proceeds of the fund to be paid out immediately for government purpose. However, the fund would, in American terms, be an earmark, in other words the Government would be required to return the money to the public service pension emergency fund as and when funds became available in the future. As a result, the fund would constitute a core funding element for public service pensions. The proposed levy confuses two issues, namely, how and at what rate public servants should contribute to and pay for the relatively generous pension arrangements many of them enjoy. With the exception of those at the top of the public service, pension arrangements for public servants are not as generous as those available to company directors in the private sector. As the Minister is aware, the contribution to company pension funds by way of tax relief is by and large far in excess of what many public servants will earn over a five-year period. The Labour Party seeks equity and asks the Government to give a commitment to public servants that it will guarantee, through the device set out in the amendment, that when times are better it will allocate the moneys raised from the pension levy to a fund for public service pensions. Equity would foster social solidarity as people would believe everyone is contributing. Lower paid public servants in particular will be heavily taxed under the proposed pension levy. Many of these employees are aged between 25 years and 45 years and will have bought a house at the height of the Celtic tiger. They will have mortgages of \1,400 or \1,500 per month and may have two or three children. They were encouraged by the banks we are bailing out to have two or three credit cards. Given the financial commitments they have as a result of the debts they have incurred, they face a severe decline in income. While it may be argued that it was unwise to incur so much debt, we should bear in mind that the former Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, called on young people to buy houses on the basis that prices were set to rise, said he would buy bank shares if he had money and advised those who talked down the economy to commit suicide. Many young public servants took their cue from the former Taoiseach who continuously advised people to borrow, spend and buy as well as invest in bank shares. Public servants are having to pay the price of this profligacy and mismanagement of the economy. The amendment proposes to make the levy a funded contribution and would go some way towards restoring equity. The proposed measure is cost free in the context of the likelihood of strikes and the damage they will do to our international reputation. If it is accepted, it would constitute a Government promise to public servants that when times improve they will get something in return for the sacrifice they are making, namely, a higher level of pension funding. It would also help to kick-start a debate on public service pension reform, a broader, complex issue which needs to be addressed. Notwithstanding a number of Green Papers and discussion documents, the Government has failed to address this issue.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I understand Deputy Burton’s position on this issue and there is merit in addressing how exactly we will approach public service pensions in the longer term. I believe the Deputy is putting down a marker that the contribution under the proposed levy should be treated as a longer term approach. Another concern in this regard is whether the

477 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Richard Bruton.] levy will pre-empt a longer-term approach. While I do not know what is the Government’s agenda for funding public service pensions in the longer term or whether hybrid pensions, an idea mooted in other sectors, is on its agenda, it would be interesting to hear the Minister’s views on how this emergency measure, which he does not regard as temporary, interacts with the longer term pension reform programme. The Minister and his predecessors have consistently refused to countenance any changes in the Finance Bill on tax relief for pension contributions for the low paid on the ground that the Government awaits the great day when a comprehensive programme will be delivered. This has not, however, precluded it from producing the proposed pension levy. I ask the Minister to comment on the longer term public service pension reform agenda and on how he envisages the pension levy will interact with it.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: Public sector employees regard the pension levy as unfair and want to know whether the moneys raised under the levy will be allocated to a public service pension fund. The National Pension Reserve Fund was established by former Minister for Finance, Mr. Charlie McCreevy, to fund public sector and social welfare pensions from around 2025 onwards. The problem with the proposed pension levy is that it appears to be a revenue collection mechanism and there is no indication that it will be used to fund pensions in the long-term. We have a pensions time bomb and the Minister must clarify the questions raised by Deputies Bruton and Burton.

Deputy Denis Naughten: The frustrating aspect of the proposed levy is that while the theor- etical objective of the measure is to support the cost of pensions, non-pensionable income such as overtime and allowances will be subject to the levy. Even income generated prior to the introduction of the legislation will be subject to it. The Minister must clarify his position on these issues and what measures will be taken to address the issue of pensions. As he indicated, the levy will not apply to certain semi-State companies, even though the State is liable for pensions which must be paid in that sector of the economy. Many people would have accepted in principle the introduction of a pension levy if it was proposed to use the fund to finance their pensions in the long term. This is not the case, however, and many people will be frustrated to learn that the income levy will be paid on the pension levy, which amounts to another form of double taxation. Those who pay the pension levy will not derive any benefit from it.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: A wide range of issues arises from this amendment. The effect of the amendment would be to put aside the proceeds of the levy in a fund which would be separate from the National Pensions Reserve Fund. In moving the amendment, however, Deputy Burton appeared to suggest that the fund would be more in the nature of an accounting device and the funds in it would be available to the Government for expenditure purposes in the current year. There is no intention at this stage, I take it, to invest the proceeds of the levy and use them to pre-fund public service pensions on an ongoing basis. The National Pensions Reserve Fund was established in 2001 to meet as much as possible of the cost to the Exchequer of social welfare and public service pensions to be paid after 2025. We will have an opportunity next week to discuss this issue at greater length. I do not propose to set aside the proceeds of the levy in an investment fund. The NPRF represents a strong response to the likely increase in the cost of social welfare and public service pensions in the medium to long term, with an amount equivalent to 1% of GNP paid into the fund each year.

478 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

In many years to date we were in the happy position of having a surplus from which such a sum could be paid.

Deputy Joan Burton: Not now.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Not this year, but in previous years we were in that position. This gives the lie to the constantly repeated accusation that the Government wasted all the money during the era of the Celtic tiger. In fact, it saved money, which is highly unusual in international terms. When there is no surplus available for investment in the NPRF, the State borrows the money to pre-fund the investment. That is an issue I have no doubt we will be discussing next week. I acknowledge that the return to the fund in 2008, as with pension funds generally, was most disappointing. However, an appropriate investment strategy for a long-term fund can lead to short-term volatility, especially in difficult market conditions such as we have experienced in the last year. The commission has stated many times that in seeking to meet the fund’s objective it has adopted an investment strategy primarily focused on building a diversified portfolio of equities, cash and other real assets. Such an asset allocation offers the prospect of superior long-term returns but can expose the fund to high levels of short-term volatility. One of the critical factors underlying the commission’s investment strategy is the fund’s long-term investment horizon. With no draw-down before 2025, it can afford to accept periods of volatility as a trade-off for achieving a long-term return that will make a real contribution to future pension costs and the sustainability of the pension system. It is unclear how the amendment would assist in that objective. Given the current emergency conditions, I do not believe it is possible to earmark the fund at this stage, but it does raise a question on which we can reflect in due course.

Deputy Joan Burton: We drafted the amendment in very general terms because the establishment of such a fund would be complicated and require bipartisan discussion with all parties in the House. What I am putting to the Minister is the principle behind the idea, which is that if the Minister calls this a public service pension levy and asks public servants to accept an extraordinary level of sacrifice — it is a big sacrifice for many of them, particularly the lower paid — the least to which he could agree is that when the economy returns to better circumstances, the Government will repay, by putting it into a fund for public service pensions, the amount deducted which over a three-year period — the Minister’s officials will have the figure — will probably amount to about \5 billion, or slightly less if there is a pay pause. The Minister suggested the gross figure would be \1.4 billion a year. It is to be hoped three years is the maximum period before the country begins an economic recovery. We may still have a deficit for up to five years; we know this from the figures the Minister has submitted to the European Union under the Stability and Growth Pact. He should remember, however, that people pay PRSI which is added to what is called the social insurance fund. A rough count is kept of what goes into the fund and the amounts paid out in unemployment benefit and so on. I mentioned the Beveridge report, according to which the contributory principle is a fundamental aspect of modern social and Christian democracy. Under this principle, people contribute to society through taxation. In respect of particular headings such as pensions or against the possibility of becoming unemployed, they make positive contributions which give them entitlements if they become unemployed or ill or when they retire. In other words, they take back some of what they have contributed. It is part of a social contract between the citizen and the State.

479 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

[Deputy Joan Burton.]

General taxation is different in that it is put to the purposes the Government which is elected by the people decides. Next week or next month the Government may decide it is in the interest of the State for Ministers to go abroad for St. Patrick’s Day. This is funded from general taxation. However, an individual’s PRSI contributions are earmarked for social welfare in order that if the unhappy day comes when one becomes unemployed, one is entitled to an unemployment payment. If one does not have social welfare contributions, one must undergo a means test to qualify. What I am suggesting is the creation of a funding concept that would mean public servants would be assured by the Government and the other parties in the House that they would have some entitlement to draw down their public service pensions. We can argue later how much of a contribution this constitutes with regard to the various public service pension benefits, but it would be the beginning of a funding idea, particularly for lower paid workers in the public service. It would help to remove some of the unfairness from the levy structure the Minister is imposing. In economic terms, it is a tax that is only being levied on the public service and in an unfair way because those who are lower paid will in some instances pay more than those who are higher paid. We left the wording consciously vague in order to offer the amendment to the Government in a bipartisan way to address the fundamental equity issues. It would also be useful in dealing with the public service unions. “Strikes in Ireland” will go up in red lights on news ticker displays — Bloomberg and so on — for 20 seconds, which will affect our rating as a country. I disagree with the Minister’s statement made a few minutes ago that if he were to tweak or make amendments to the levy in order to implement it in a fairer way, the international markets would downgrade Ireland. That is a load of rubbish. It would not take from the money being levied but would constitute a hypothecation of what public servants who pay the levy would gain by way of entitlements. The international markets would not interfere in a scenario in which the Minister made the levy fairer but which perhaps retained the same revenue-raising capacity. That would be an internal matter. I would go further and say that if we do not have widespread public sector strikes, the international markets will think a lot better of Ireland. We offer the amendment as a strategy for the Minister but are open to negotiation on the matter. The Taoiseach constantly challenges the Opposition to be positive. The challenge is to the Minister to respond positively to the amendment.

Deputy Joanna Tuffy: On a related issue, is there any possibility the levy could be imposed prior to the enactment of the Bill? It has been pointed out to me that the salaries of certain civil servants are paid in advance and fears have been expressed that the money will be taken before the legislation is passed. I presume that will not be the case but ask for confirmation from the Minister.

Deputy Denis Naughten: I understand the levy will be imposed on non-pensionable income, including overtime payments and allowances. The 1% levy applies to income that may have been generated prior to 1 January. I ask whether income generated before 1 March but paid after that date will be affected by the pension levy.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: To reply to Deputy Tuffy’s question, I understand the legislation will be in force by 1 March, from which point contributions will be in force——

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: For the month of March.

480 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

Deputy Brian Lenihan: ——on income received during March but not in February. It is the Government’s intention to table an earlier signature motion in the Seanad in order that the legislation will be signed by the end of the month, although I am advised that the financial resolution passed last night would secure the necessary payments in early March. Deputy Naughten is correct that overtime payments fall within the scope of the contribution. On the issues raised by Deputy Burton, I regard the tabling of the amendment as a constructive move in that it signals the need for clear thinking on how we pre-fund public service pensions. It has always been the Government’s policy to construct such a fund but, while we were able to do so during the good times, the borrowing now required for its continued funding gives rise to other issues. Equally, it is unrealistic to believe we could at this stage constitute as a fund the moneys which will accrue from this contribution. The Government will be empowered under the legislation which we will be discussing next week to invest in ordinary shares and take share warrants in the three banking institutions in the State listed on the Stock Exchange. The State will be in a position to make investments in these institutions which will inure to the future benefit of public service pensioners.

Deputy Joan Burton: We will await the introduction of the legislation to which the Minister refers because, as he will be aware, the markets have become very averse to the notion of warrants and dividend income on preference shares. That is likely to produce a more negative response from the markets — if one follows them. Other governments have begun to change their arrangements in that regard, as I am sure the Minister’s officials are aware. I wonder whether we will see interest of 8%.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: We will have an opportunity to debate these issues next week in the context of the legislation mentioned. I take it that the Deputy is anxious that the taxpayer and pension fund beneficiaries of the future are safeguarded in any recapitalisation arrangements with the financial institutions.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Question proposed: “That section 3 stand part of the Bill.”

Deputy Denis Naughten: I understand the 1% income levy applies to income also subject to the pension levy. Depending on when the income is taken, there can be an element of double taxation. I ask the Minister to clarify the matter. Section 3 provides for regulations for calculating and collecting the pension levy. Why are semi-State companies such as the ESB, RTE, Bord Ga´is and VHI not covered? It causes significant frustration among public servants that some people will be subject to these rules whereas others will not.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: The income levy applies to gross income, as Deputy Naughten outlined. The 1% levy, in the typical case, is taken from gross income. Marginal relief is available for income tax purposes on the pension contribution.

Deputy Denis Naughten: It is, therefore, a form of double taxation.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I do not accept it is a form of taxation. We had that discussion earlier.

Deputy Denis Naughten: A double levy then.

481 Financial Emergency Measures in the Public 25 February 2009. Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed)

Deputy Brian Lenihan: The semi-State companies to which the Deputy referred are commercial in character. They make their own pension arrangements and the pensions of their staff are not funded by the Exchequer. Deputy Burton raised the interesting question of why a certain financial institution was not listed in the Schedule.

Deputy Joan Burton: Anglo Irish Bank is neither in nor out.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: It is not listed because, while the institutions listed in the Schedule have their own pension schemes, they are approved by the Minister. To date, no pension scheme has been approved by the Minister at the institution in question.

Deputy Denis Naughten: It is my understanding semi-State body defined benefit pensions are guaranteed by the State.

Deputy Joan Burton: That is why we sold Eircom to plug the pensions hole.

Deputy Denis Naughten: We had to make provision for pensions when we dealt with previous legislation providing for the sale of semi-State companies. If the State is guaranteeing the moneys, they will fall within the terms of the Bill.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Particular legal or political understandings may have been arrived at in respect of individual State enterprises but in general it is not correct to say the Exchequer funds these pensions.

Deputy Denis Naughten: Where such understandings obtain, should the enterprises not be caught for the pension levy?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: The circumstances to which the Deputy refers are very particular in character.

Deputy Denis Naughten: Peculiar or particular?

Question put and agreed to.

Section 4 agreed to.

SECTION 5.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 20 and 21 are cognate and amendment No. 23 is related. Amendments Nos. 20 to 23, inclusive, will be discussed together.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 20:

In page 8, subsection (1), line 27, to delete “contractual arrangement” and substitute “employment, office or position”.

The purpose of this and the following amendment is to bring the section into line with the definition of “public servant” which will include categories of people who hold office or other positions but are not covered by the term “employee”. An example would be a board member or a Secretary General. Amendment No. 21 has the same purpose as the previous amendment. I understand the Leas-Cheann Comhairle has also asked me to discuss amendment No. 23.

482 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Minister has moved amendment No. 20 but he can speak to amendments Nos. 21 to 23, inclusive. We will come to amendment No. 21 in due course.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.

Private Members’ Business (resumed).

————

Banking System: Motion.

The following motion was moved by Deputy Richard Bruton on Tuesday, 24 February 2009. That Da´il E´ ireann, recognising that: — reckless and incompetent management, regulation and oversight of the domestic Irish banking system has damaged domestic and international confidence in Ireland’s economy; — the Irish economy cannot recover from the deepening economic depression without a functioning banking system that enjoys the trust of depositors, international markets and the community at large; — there is growing market scepticism that the recently announced \7 billion recapitalisation plan for AIB and Bank of Ireland has been designed in a way that can restore the health of the Irish financial system and credit availability to Irish businesses and families; and — there is a public perception that the resolution of this banking crisis is being manipulated in the interests of powerful and wealthy elites and that unless the Government addresses this suspicion in an open and transparent manner, it will not have the legitimacy needed to gain the necessary support for the painful measures needed to put our public finances and economy back on a sounder footing; calls on the Government to: — take more decisive action to restore the financial health and reputation of the Irish banking system as a prudent and responsible manager of investors’ capital and depositors’ savings and as a reliable source of credit for Irish businesses; — engage more decisively with other EU governments to agree a common EU model of bank recapitalisation and bad debt resolution that ensures that losses are absorbed first and foremost not by taxpayers but by those who took on the risk of funding the risky lending policies of the banks; — replace the current board and senior management team of the Irish Financial Services Regulatory Authority, IFSRA; — give the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement the lead role in all investigations into recent transactions by banks and their investors and directors who may have breached both company law and financial regulation, given that IFSRA itself was at the centre of many of these transactions; — reveal the names of the “golden circle” of ten investors in Anglo Irish Bank, and outline what steps the Government and the bank are now taking to recover the associated \300 million in debts on behalf of the taxpayer;

483 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

— open up the appointment of the next Governor of the Central Bank to open international competition and scrutiny by the Oireachtas; — set a cap of \250,000 on the salaries (including bonuses and share options) of senior managers of financial institutions whose liabilities have been guaranteed by the State and/or in which the State has invested, until the guarantee has expired and the State investment has been repaid; — publish an abridged version of the PricewaterhouseCoopers report into the loan exposures of all the banks whose liabilities have been guaranteed by the State; and — insist that the banks provide a more credible estimate of their likely loan losses over the coming years prior to any form of State recapitalisation.

Debate resumed on amendment No. 1: To delete all words after “That” and substitute the following: Da´il E´ ireann: — notes that the Government has taken determined and decisive action to restore, through the bank guarantee scheme, recapitalisation and otherwise, the health and reputation of the financial system; — notes that the Government has engaged with the European Commission and the ECB on the development of a common framework on recapitalisation and has contributed to the development of a common approach to bad debt resolution; — notes that the Current Board of IFSRA is engaged in an extensive and personnel intensive investigation of issues which have arisen in Anglo Irish Bank in co- operation with the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement and the Garda authorities; — notes that the ongoing investigation has a criminal dimension and urges all Deputies to exercise the restraint essential to any successful prosecution as appropriate and otherwise; — affirms that the Irish economy needs a functioning banking system that enjoys the trust of depositors, international markets and the community at large in order to withstand the current economic and financial position; and — supports the Government’s structured and measured approach to the issues facing the financial sector and represents the best way to secure the position of the financial services sector generally while keeping in mind the requirements of the EU and the interests of the State. This approach includes: — the guarantee on deposits up to September 2010 to stabilise the funding position of the banks and add a further level of protection for depositors; — the recapitalisation programme of Allied Irish Banks and Bank of Ireland and the commitment to look at the needs of other institutions; — the nationalisation of Anglo Irish Bank, necessitated by particular circumstances at the time, to provide protection and support; — consideration of further interventions, including possible extension of the guarantee for limited purposes and the reduction of risk associated with assets;

484 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

— review and reform of the structures, role and functioning of the Financial Regu- lator and the relationship with the Central Bank in light of the current situation. The stated intention of the Minister for Finance is: — to bring proposals in this regard to Government as a matter of urgency; — the ongoing commitment to work with the EU to frame a common approach to the issues faced by the financial services sector; and — to progress work already commenced in relation to remuneration of senior executives and board members in Allied Irish Banks and Bank of Ireland in light of the report of the Committee (CIROC), headed by Mr Eddie Sullivan, which is due to report on this matter by 5 March 2009, and which will include a cap on the salaries of senior executives.

Da´il E´ ireann: expresses its confidence in the Government’s measures to stabilise and revitalise the banking system. —(Minister for Finance, Deputy Brian Lenihan). Deputy Pat Rabbitte: The motion before us in the name of Deputy Richard Bruton is a fairly broad and comprehensive resolution. It could be said this motion relates to the restoration of confidence in the management of our economy. The first element of the motion is the need to take control of the direction of the public finances, a debate which to some extent 7 o’clock we have already had. The second aspect is the banking crisis and the chicanery at senior level in some of the banks up to now, the crisis of confidence this has caused among the public and the disbelief it has caused among the international investment community. One gets an idea of how serious is the situation when one reads an article in last Monday’s The Financial Times wherein the author refers to what happened during the exchange rate mechanism when Britain eventually fell out of the system. Although he makes the point that clearly one cannot bet on exchange rates in a monetary union, he points out what can and is happening. The article states:

Thanks to credit default swaps you can place convenient bets on the break up of the eurozone. Last week speculators bet on an Irish default and these bets made it more expensive for Ireland to refinance its debt thus threatening to turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The gravity of this does not need to be underlined. The immediate impact of this is, of course, an increase to this State in the cost of borrowing. If the investment community were to target this country in that fashion, the situation would be so serious we would require the protection of other eurozone States. For this reason, we need to get our banking system right. So far, we have failed to do this. I heard on the news this evening that the Bank of Ireland has appointed a new chief executive, an internal appointee, Mr. Richie Boucher, whom I wish well. However, having regard to everything that happened, I would have thought we might have gone outside, at least the bank if not the country, to fill this position. Also, the bank has stated it will not disclose his pay rate. One wonders if any lessons have been learned. The former chief executive of Bank of Ireland complained on television that his income this year would fall below \2 million. Notwithstanding the notoriety those remarks attracted, the bank now says it will not disclose the remuneration of the new chief executive. The manifest

485 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

[Deputy Pat Rabbitte.] unfairness of this is driving people crazy in terms of the recently adjourned debate in respect of the pension levy. Tens of thousands of public servants have stated they do not mind playing their part if others play their part too. Now, the wealthy elite tell us the remuneration of the new chief executive is none of our business. I would like now to focus on the regulatory system. It is often said bankers who become greedy will do what some greedy bankers do. However, one would expect the regulatory system to police the banking system. Quite frankly, this has manifestly not been happening. Following the DIRT inquiry, then senior council Michael McDowell was brought in to draft a report on regulation. A tug-of-war ensued between the two parties in Government following which we had the hybrid creation of the Irish Financial Services and Regulatory Authority, IFSRA, which was neither stand-alone nor within the aegis of the Central Bank, although in many senses, and in more senses than the obvious, was under the roof of the Central Bank aggravating the cosy club mentality that exists between senior bankers and regulators in this country. While there are advantages to the smallness of Irish society, there are also disadvantages. I believe this to be a cosy club. The more one examines what happened the more likely one is to come to that conclusion. I do not say this by way of denigrating the decent people employed by the Regulator or in the Central Bank. How in the name of God could what has happened have happened with all of the adverse serious implications for our international reputation? How could the regulatory authority, with 388 people costing \58 million per annum, not for one, but for eight years, have missed the directors’ loans issue? It is clear from the statements from Irish Life & Permanent that people are massively aggrieved at the manner in which they are being treated in public, which will certainly raise a number of eyebrows. Why should they be aggrieved? They are aggrieved because they are under the impression that these practices between the financial institutions were, if not approved, condoned and tolerated. There is a good deal of evidence to suggest that the word went out that a blind eye would be turned if the green jersey was donned and these transactions between the financial institutions were carried out. One can say the transaction that caused everything to eventually blow up was that of Irish Life & Permanent misrepresenting two significant lodgements as a normal depositor’s transaction some few hours after the bank guarantee was introduced and on the same day as the financial year end. One could suggest that was a step too far but the view in some circles is that this was condoned, that inter-transfers to support the banking system were given the green light by the regulatory authority and acquiesced to. All of the evidence to date — we may change our view when we have all of the evidence — suggests that was the case. This is a serious situation for us. Why the regulatory authority is now involved in investigating what went on defeats me. Currently, three investigations are taking place. How can one expect the regulatory authority to investigate its own role? This was a case of regulatory capture. The regulator was captured by the banking system, got too close to it, sailed too close to the sun in good times, came acroper in these times, and as a result we need to, as the motion provides, remove the board of the regulatory authority. Also, we need a new stand-alone regulatory mechanism, preferably with an international dimension. The same people are in place, as the appointment in Bank of Ireland this evening bears out. The bank did not search outside; it appointed one of its own. He may be an excellent manager; I hope he is and wish him well, but that is the way things operate in this country. We need a new stand-alone regulatory authority and the current board should be moved aside. I do not wish to cast any reflections on the people who work there, but the culture that has obtained up until now has put us into very deep difficulty and seriously

486 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion and adversely impacted on the reputation of the country abroad. That change is critically important in terms of the future solvency of the country.

Deputy Beverley Flynn: I wish to share time with several Deputies.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: They are Deputies Moynihan, Conlon, Byrne, O’Brien, Fahey and Dooley.

Deputy Beverley Flynn: I am pleased to speak to the motion. It is very important to give confidence to international markets about our financial sector and long-term future. It is critically important that we do so at this time. There is little point in coming to the House and providing bank guarantees and for recapitalisation of the two main banks at a cost of \7 billion to the taxpayer if we continue to talk down the financial sector causing a loss of confidence, domestically and internationally. Everyone in the House has a responsibility to stop doing so. There have been outflows of funds from Ireland which can only create further damage to the economy due to a lack of liquidity. This helps no one. It is important that everyone in the House recognises that point and seeks to provide the necessary solutions and attempts to do so collectively. People must stop making political hay at the expense of the country. We are all aware that regulation is grossly inadequate. The previous speaker made reference to this fact. Everyone acknowledges it and it must be dealt with. We are also aware that senior bank executives are paid far too much. As Mr. Barack Obama said in the United States today, that day is over. It is over in Ireland too. It is outrageous that a senior bank executive could earn more than the Taoiseach, the most senior individual in the country. It is hard to believe any bank executive could earn more money than him, even though he is running the country.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: It is not over, Deputy Flynn.

Deputy Beverley Flynn: It is because the people are demanding it. We have a collective responsibility to ensure it becomes a reality. It is also important that those found guilty of wrongdoing are brought to justice. The people must see that these issues are being addressed as a matter of urgency. The Government and the House will do so, but there is a collective responsibility on all Members to do so in a responsible manner and in the best interests of the country and the economy. We should reaffirm that the bank guarantee scheme is operational until September 2010. This provides a further layer of security for depositors who have money in the banks. I say this with a view to assuring those people who have money in Irish banks that it is secure. It is important that we acknowledge that a further extension of the guarantee scheme may be considered, if and when needed. It is worth remembering that the country still has an AAA rating. The international rating agencies which have put us on the watch in negative terms view the \2 billion cuts in public expenditure agreed to by the House very positively. This augers very well for the country in accessing money at favourable rates.

Deputy Michael Moynihan: I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. As is the case on many occasions, the debate taking place in the House is very important. In the light of the events and revelations of recent months, this is one of the most crucial debates. We have reached a crucial point. In the time available to me I could deal with a raft of issues relating to the monetary situation and our credit rating in international markets. However, I refer to regulatory matters and especially the absolute breakdown of regulation. It was said in the debate last night that financial regulation throughout the world had been very lax. It seems our regulatory system failed us completely.

487 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

[Deputy Michael Moynihan.]

In reference to any crisis or issue of recent years we must examine where mistakes were made, follow through and ensure what occurred is never allowed to recur. There has been reckless lending by some financial institutions which has led to very severe difficulties with the loan books and on borrowing sheets of the banks. However, we should bear in mind that there is another group of people who will spend the next 30 years, or perhaps longer, paying for the reckless lending engaged in in recent years. This group is especially made up of young couples who bought houses and are now in negative equity. We must examine their situation. Many are facing jobs losses because of the international downturn and some have lost their jobs already. Deputy Rabbitte alluded to the situation in Bank of Ireland, but there must be root and branch reform and a sea change. Some have said that between 1989 and 1990 the communist system collapsed worldwide. The world has collapsed in recent months. As the revelations unfold, not only in Ireland but throughout the world, there are serious difficulties emerging. It is time to examine these and look outside the box. We must make fundamental changes to the way banking operates in this country and throughout the world. We must examine the practices, culture, amount of money generated or lent and practices of some financial institutions which have come into the public domain. We must change this culture. The pay of the chief executives and others in financial institutions was mentioned. The public is incensed by the amounts of money earned. Last week we heard one person refer to a reduction in his salary, leaving him with an income of \2 million. Such pay must be capped. We must be seen to be responsible. We should bear in mind that the banks make profits from their customers, that is, from each and every individual throughout the country. However, they have a duty to look after their customers in a responsible and efficient way and in a way which is morally guided. The regulatory system was established with the Central Bank and there must be fundamental changes to it. Someone must take over the role of either the Governor of the Central Bank or the regulator. Whatever system is put in place should have someone at the top from outside with no allegiance to the current banking system or the Central Bank. Any new system must have an independent voice and authority to ensure the fundamentals are sound. The fundamentals of the financial services sector will serve us well in the coming years, if we manage change correctly. We should bear in mind that this is not the first time financial institutions have lent recklessly in Ireland — others have said as much. In the late 1970s and early 1980s the banks lent recklessly to the farming community. We did not learn our lessons at that stage. Many farms went out of business because of it. We must put in place a draconian regulatory system. I will support the Government in any attempt it makes to ensure such a draconian law is enacted to ensure we will never again end up in the position in which we find ourselves.

Deputy Margaret Conlon: Gabhaim buıóchas as ucht an deis labhairt anocht. Du´ irt me´ cheana feín sa Teach go raibh an tı´r seo i gcruacha´s. Ta´ sin fıór fo´ s. Is eol du´ inn uilig go bhfuil cu´ rsaı´ go dona, ach caithfimid obair le cheíle chun reíteach a fhaíl. Caithfimid admhaíl gur ar mhaithe le leas na tı´re a to´ gadh an cinneadh an Banc Anglo Irish a naísiu´ nu´ .Ta´ fadhbanna lena´r bancanna, ach ta´ pro´ iseas ar siu´ lfe´ la´thair agus nı´ feídir cu´ iseamh a dheánamh ar dhuine ar bith. Caithfear gach rud is feídir a dheánamh chun ainm an tı´r seo a ardu´ arı´s agus nı´lan dara rogha ag an Aire. Ta´ fiosru´ chaín ar siu´ l chun a fhaíl amach ceárd a tharla agus chruthaigh an tAire nach bhfuil na bainc saor o´ n dlı´. Cuirfear an dlı´ orthu ma´sga´. Inne´,nı´ raibh ansin ach an cheád ceím.

488 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for the opportunity to speak on this motion this evening. Reports of what happened in Irish banks, especially in Anglo Irish Bank turn one’s stomach. The behaviour of these people and their contempt for our national banking system, their share- holders and, above all, the people raise serious questions. Where is the nation moving? There is an obsession with wealth and money, with cultivating an image, with building a vacuous persona based on loans, gambles and hedged funds which have proved to be vulnerable, weak and debilitating foundations. When people of influence in Irish and international banks with millions of euro start cutting corners and taking short cuts and a recession hits, there is a serious and grave fall out. We are in a global recession. Other countries are in recession. They were not in a property bubble or experiencing malpractice at the top of their banks. We need to start focusing on the problems, their causes and the solutions. The Minister for Finance has one of the most difficult jobs in the country. People want us to work together to find real solutions, not fluffy, populist headline grabbers such as “Nail the Fat Cats”. We cannot have kangaroo courts. We must have due process and allow for investigations to be conducted and any sanctions which law enforcers deem necessary must be enforced. No one is above the law. The Opposition has complained, argued for leadership, for change and reform, and that is its job. There is a serious lack of confidence among purchasers and consumers which leads to fear of spending money. It may lead to a fear among investors but money is available. Thank- fully, many people are still working. A new phenomenon in this economic crisis is that America, the United Kingdom and most of Europe are in the same boat. There are businesses crying out for funding. We have helped the banks and now they must help businesses survive. We need to take stock of where we are, what we have done well, and examine the errors so that we can get the most efficient and effective return on all future investments. Our banks have shaken the confidence of people here and overseas in our banking system and our economy. Naming the so-called “golden circle” and sacking anyone with power in the banks are knee- jerk populist wishes. Will that get us where we want to go? We need solutions. When we look back in 15 or 20 years’ time, will we regret denying due process and natural justice to satisfy a media frenzy? We want true justice and would be failing as legislators if we were to jump to the tune called on any given day. People who deserve it must be sacked, fined or jailed. We need to build confidence in our banking system and send out a strong message that Ireland is open for business.

Deputy Thomas Byrne: I am glad to have the opportunity to take part in this debate and to participate in this Da´il, whose primary focus is to address the loss of jobs. One way to do so is to restore the country’s financial reputation, which I am convinced the Government is trying to do. There has been serious action on investigation. Deputy Michael McGrath and I wrote to the Garda Commissioner a couple of weeks ago to ask him for more resources for the Director of Corporate Enforcement. That has been done. We politicians must now step back from the investigation and let the investigators do their job. They must find the evidence and, if it is sufficient, charge the appropriate people and have them brought to court. We have a different job. We must keep the money in the country and in the banks. The Minister for Finance has said he is concerned that money has left the banks. That was not helped last week by the flurry of scandal, rumour and speculation started by the Opposition that someone on these benches was involved in the alleged “golden circle”. That was a disgraceful episode, devoid of evidence or purpose and it was no help in dealing with the difficult

489 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

[Deputy Thomas Byrne.] situation for the country and its job market. We legislators must get real and do our job and let the investigators do theirs. The credit default swaps market has recently become a conversation point. This small group of international speculators who attempt to create a self-fulfilling prophecy in their speculation has replaced the currency speculation of the past from which we suffered. Action must be taken against these people at EU level. While it is probably necessary to have some sort of insurance schemes for them to have such a dramatic effect on our economy and our ability to borrow they must be called into question. It is surely immoral and wrong that someone could profit from that. Let us get on with the job, keep the country moving, get it working and keep the money here by getting the banking system back on track.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien: I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak in support of the Government amendment to the motion on our approach to the banking situation. The crisis is not specific to Ireland. This is a global financial crisis in which Ireland is affected by what happens abroad and in larger markets. It is incumbent on the Government to do all we can to protect our banking system and, most important, the wider economy. I want to put to rest the accusation that Government measures, from the deposit guarantee scheme to the recapitalisation of AIB and Bank of Ireland, and the nationalisation of Anglo Irish Bank, have been bank bail-outs. Nothing could be further from the truth. This misinfor- mation and spin from many in the media, and some members of the Opposition, does great disservice to the public and the country. More than 250,000 people work in the financial services sector. The viability and strength of the banking system and the financial services system are interlinked and it is crucial to ensure we retain and grow these jobs and this expertise. Without a viable and robust banking system all other areas of the economy are under threat. Govern- ment has been engaged not in a bail-out of the banks or bankers but in the protection of jobs, and of the country’s ability to trade internally and internationally. I welcome the Opposition’s more measured comments this week. This issue is far above politics and should not be the plaything of party politics. It is incumbent on us all to ensure our comments are responsible and that we do not make statements that can damage the country’s reputation. The recapitalisation of the two main banks to ensure they are robust is crucial to every job in the country. The main Opposition party’s suggestion that we let Anglo Irish Bank go to the wall, thereby causing it to default on its foreign bond repayments, was wrong and only made for short-term political capital. If any Irish bank, including Anglo, defaulted on its debt repayments the consequences would have been catastrophic for the rest of the banking sector and for the country. We would not have been able to access funds on foreign markets for Exchequer borrowing or would have had to pay a high price for them. The Government is committed to investing in infrastructural projects under the national development plan by way of a stimulus package. If it does not access funds this cannot happen. The Government’s policy on stabilising the banks has been consistent and measured. Every step of the way decisions have been taken for the good of the citizens. Deposits have been protected for ordinary savers and outstanding loans will not be forgiven. The 8% yield on the coupon with AIB and Bank of Ireland is significant. This type of return on investment for the National Pension Reserve Fund could not be attained anywhere else on deposit markets. The continuing focus on liquidity and lines of credit for small businesses must continue and further funds will come in as part of this recapitalisation. We are changing the way the banks are managed, and investigations are under way.

490 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

I commend the Government on taking decisive and necessary action at a crucial time for the country and its businesses, foreign and indigenous.

Deputy Frank Fahey: Fine Gael is playing party politics at a critical time for the economy. By engaging last week in baseless accusations, smear and innuendo, it sought to drag through the mud the good name of the Taoiseach and the Government. If it really had the national interest at heart, it would not seek to undermine measures we are taking at every opportunity for economic recovery. If they really had the national interest at heart, they would not seek to undermine at every opportunity the measures we are taking in the interests of economic recovery. They are determined to damage the name of Ireland as they pursue their own political agenda, regardless of the cost. Fine Gael is feeding the international frenzy to paint the country in the worst possible light. At least four German newspapers have published negative stories about Ireland today. Fine Gael’s refusal to put the national interest ahead of its own is damaging Ireland Inc. at home and abroad. Ireland’s financial position is not an exceptional one in an international context. The main story in the German media today is the bail-out of the ailing HSH Nordbank by two German La¨nder by means of a capital injection of \3 billion and a guarantee of \10 billion. The media in Germany have been extremely critical of the decision, particularly the state oversight arrangements, which sounds familiar. The German media are also giving extensive coverage to the ongoing crisis at Opel, as the German car manufacturer tries to gain more autonomy from its US parent company, General Motors, and secure its financial future. Most German newspapers are reporting that the federal government has no plans to provide capital for Opel. A number of newspapers have reported on a further drop in confidence in the German business climate, to levels not seen since the 1980s. Much of what is happening in Germany is similar to the problems we are experiencing in Ireland. Why is there so little about Germany in the Irish media at a time when Ireland is being heavily featured in the German media? Why are the Irish media saying so little about the major problems in the United Kingdom and the United States? Today’s edition of the German newspaper, Frankfurter Allgemeine, contains headlines such as “The Tiger in Crisis”. Die Welt reports that Ireland’s difficult recession has forced Irish politics into crisis. The largest selling newspaper in Germany, Bild, has commented that if Berlin did not have enough problems with its economic and financial crisis, it may now have to assist other eurozone states.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Deputy Fahey had a busy morning.

Deputy Leo Varadkar: He had.

Deputy Frank Fahey: The tone and style of the contributions made by Fine Gael and the Labour Party in the Da´il in recent weeks have contributed to such headlines. I can appreciate that Deputies Rabbitte and Varadkar take pleasure in the kind of negative approach evident in the House in the last two nights.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: The Deputy should take that back. I made no such comment.

Deputy Leo Varadkar: Neither did I.

Deputy Frank Fahey: On the issue of international confidence, it is worth noting that there are reasons to believe some UK-based foreign hedge funds are spreading false rumours about the state of the Irish economy. They are comparing Ireland to Iceland, for example, to try to force the sovereign default on which they have placed their bets. The approach of Fine Gael and the Labour Party is sustaining the hopes and aspirations of those involved with hedge

491 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

[Deputy Frank Fahey.] funds who want to do Ireland Inc. down. When Opposition Deputies throw accusations across the floor of the House and seek to undermine every initiative the Government takes to get the economy back on track, they should bear in mind that the world is watching. All Members have a responsibility to perform their duties appropriately and carefully. The economic stability of the country and the prosperity of the people depend on this. The motion tabled by Fine Gael and the contributions made by its Deputies in the last two days represent a major mistake. The outcome of that approach will be reflected in the coming weeks. If, in the weeks to come, Deputies Varadkar and O’Donnell notice a slight improvement in the Government’s performance in the polls, they will know why it is happening.

Deputy Timmy Dooley: I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this discussion. We have had a series of broad debates on the economy in the last few weeks. This debate relates particularly to the banking crisis. The country’s banking system is in a seriously compromised state, as we all know. As Deputy Fahey and others have said, there is nothing particularly unique about this. Virtually all other EU member states are in the same position, largely, as are other countries throughout the world, including Japan and the United States. The wrongdoing that has taken place in this country is not unique and we are wrong to continue to focus on it. We need to try to work through it, to get to a point at which we can draw a line under it. If we start to re-energise ourselves, we can show some confidence in the banking system and the country as a whole. It is necessary to do this. We have to re-establish trust and confidence, nationally and internationally, in our banking system and country. Perhaps these debates will give us an opportunity to do this. However, we cannot do it alone. The first steps that need to be taken are evident in the involvement of the Office of Corporate Enforcement and the Financial Regulator. I accept what Deputy Rabbitte has said about the regulatory issue. We need to beef it up considerably if we are to give confidence to the wider community. Other Members have spoken about the procedures that need to be followed as we root out the wrongdoing that has been perpetrated. However, I will not labour the point. Where there has been wrongdoing, effective prosecution is needed to provide confidence nationally and internationally. We must demonstrate to everyone that wrongdoing has no place in Ireland and its financial system. We must work with other EU member states to devise a robust regulatory regime. It should be constructed in a manner that takes account of the weaknesses being identified on a daily basis. In doing so, it is important to take cognisance of the decision taken by the country in last year’s Lisbon treaty referendum. More than ever, we now realise that we can be isolated on the basis of decisions we have made, albeit in a democratic fashion. There is a price to be paid. I am concerned that our rejection of the Lisbon treaty is being used in certain other member states and by various hedge funds mentioned to suggest Ireland is in some way dis- jointed from the European Union, or is not part of the central system. We will need to work on this. The Union needs to standardise its approach to regulation. It will have to take a lead role at the G8 and G20 to bring about a robust Europe-wide regulatory system and a much wider system throughout the world. We can clearly see what happened in the United States. Some have argued that the lending practices permitted in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac brought about an avalanche of distrust in the banking system. That has led us to where we are today. It has highlighted the fundamental weaknesses in various financial systems throughout the world. We are where we are and have to find a solution to the problem. We cannot be blamed individually or in isolation.

Deputy James Reilly: No, we could not have that.

492 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

Deputy Timmy Dooley: Similarly, we will not find a solution individually or in isolation. It will have to be done in a collective way. I am sure we will receive co-operation when the political games are out of the way. I do not intend to repeat the points made in that respect. Naturally, the Opposition has a role to play. Its period of political point-scoring is coming to an end. We have to work together collectively to find an effective solution, in the best interests of the people we represent and the country we hold so dearly. As a nation, we are not best served by some elements of the political system. I am glad that is coming to an end. We cannot allow ourselves to undermine the pillars of our own democracy. Clearly, we are doing this by ignoring the facts. Most accept that the Government is absolutely committed to rooting out wrongdoing. The statutory agencies charged with various responsibilities have to be independent. We want them to be so. Continued town-square flogging will further undermine the credibility of the country. As Ireland is a First World player, it has to act as a First World player and present itself as a First World leader. If we ignore the statutory agencies and get involved in public-square flogging, we will show Ireland to be no more than a Third World country. Some would like to exploit this if they had an opportunity to do so.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: I propose to share time with Deputies Varadkar, Reilly, O’Mahony, Breen and Clune.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: Far from playing politics, Fine Gael has taken a position. Ireland is probably experiencing its most difficult financial, economic and political problem in our lifetime. The problem is that the Government is engaging in paralysis. We are getting only soundbites and no action.

Deputy Jimmy Devins: Will the Deputy look at what we are doing?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Allow the Deputy to make his contribution.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: We have yet to see a five-year plan for the economy. There were discussions with the social partners for a number of months, yet the Government produced the document on pensions at the very last minute. That is no way to run a Government.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien: You did not want us to engage with the social partners at all.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy should speak through the Chair.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: The purpose of our motion is to get the banking and regulatory systems on a proper footing. A couple of things have disturbed me this evening. I see that Bank of Ireland has appointed Mr. Richie Boucher as its CEO, which is an internal appointment. We do not know of any cap on his salary. We propose external appointments, which do not send out the wrong signal, although this is nothing personal against Mr. Boucher. It would appear to international markets that we are putting people into the top tiers of the banks who were involved in the situation as it developed. That sends out the wrong signal. The Minister for Finance needs to clarify that point. Taxpayers’ money has been spent on the guarantee scheme and \3.5 billion is going into the recapitalisation of the Bank of Ireland. That is all we know at the moment.

Deputy Darragh O’Brien: It is at the rate of 8% per annum.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: If the 8% cannot be paid, it can be rolled into ordinary shares. Once again, the Deputy is playing with the facts.

493 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

[Deputy Kieran O’Donnell.]

It has been disclosed this evening that the Financial Regulator is assisting the Garda Sı´ocha´na in its investigations and certain matters involving Anglo Irish Bank have been referred by the regulator to the Garda. This is now in the public domain. If these matters are being referred to the Garda today, why were they not referred to the force a few weeks ago? Why has it come to the situation that these matters are being referred now that the Garda has been brought in? What matters were referred? Have these disclosures arisen on foot of contact made between the Financial Regulator and the Garda?

Deputy Darragh O’Brien: Has the Deputy anything against the Financial Regulator?

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: No.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Deputy O’Brien, nobody interrupted you and you were allowed to make your contribution. Please allow others to do the same.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: We want transparency and we want accountability. These are questions that need to be answered by the Minister. In all the contributions made by Fianna Fa´il Deputies tonight, I did not hear one mention of the taxpayer. This is fundamentally about protecting taxpayers’ money. We want the banking system to be fluid and functional, because the key feature in this recapitalisation scheme is about getting funds flowing to small businesses and to mortgage holders. Neither of these things has occurred. This is not about bailing out the banks.

Deputy Jimmy Devins: Recapitalisation has not occurred yet.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: The guarantee scheme was supposed to provide funds to small businesses and to mortgage holders.

Deputy Jimmy Devins: It was not.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: That is what was put forward.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I ask the Minister of State to allow the Deputy make his contribution.

Deputy Jimmy Devins: He is factually inaccurate.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: When the Minister of State checks the facts out, he will find that they are accurate. This is not about bailing out the banks, or keeping bankers in salaries or re- appointing people who created the problem. However, on both occasions that is what has happened in the banking sector. How can the Government expect the public to have trust? We have made a very straightforward proposal. If the proper regulatory system is not in place, the international markets will not have trust in our banking system. We propose that the board and management of the Financial Regulator step down, to be replaced by a new management and board. That would send out a strong statement from the Government that it means business. Apart from the financial regulation system, one of the key features is that operators from the international markets are looking at the state of our public finances and this has an important bearing on our banking sector. The Government needs to bring in a new budget. It needs to bring a proper economic plan before the House. It needs to bring in proper measures in the areas of job retention and job creation. We brought forward a proposal — well received

494 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion by the business community — to grant an exemption to employers’ PRSI for two years. I hope we hear practical suggestions at the Fianna Fa´il Ard-Fheis at the weekend, which can be followed up with job creation.

Deputy Jimmy Devins: The Deputy is more than welcome to attend.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: I have not got any invitation yet.

Deputy Jimmy Devins: Consider it granted.

Deputy Leo Varadkar: I will come too, if the Minister of State gives me an invite.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: Energy prices need to be brought down. The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources is not dealing with the issue. He could move in tomorrow morning and show that the regulator allowed the ESB to reduce its costs. We have put forward practical measures. We have called on the board and the management of the Financial Regulator to be replaced. We have called for a cap on salaries for top officials, yet tonight we see that Mr. Richie Boucher has been appointed as CEO of Bank of Ireland, while we have no details——

Deputy Jimmy Devins: This was reported last week.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I will ask the Minister of State to leave the House if he continues to interrupt.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: The Minister needs to come into the House to tell us how much Mr. Boucher is being paid. He needs to tell us if the Government is happy with his appointment, considering he was involved in the bank and created the problems. I commend the motion to the House, and I hope we get support from the Fianna Fa´il Deputies who proclaim to have such an interest in restoring the banking system.

Deputy James Reilly: A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, you will have to stop Mutt and Jeff inter- rupting all the time.

Deputy Jimmy Devins: Deputy Reilly is hilarious.

Deputy Leo Varadkar: I commend Deputy Bruton and Deputy O’Donnell for bringing this motion before the House. There can be no doubt that the Government has mishandled this banking crisis. It might have been in spite of its best efforts, but there is no question that it has been mishandled. When this crisis first broke late last year, the Government denied that there was any problem with the banks and claimed there was no need to guarantee deposits. The banks then got the Government guarantee, which happened late at night. We came into this House and we did not get the Bill until ten minutes before it was debated. We were told that the problems in the banks were just a liquidity crisis, and that there was no capital crisis at all. It was just a minor liquidity problem because the international credit markets were seized up and there was no underlying problem in the Irish banks. We know now that this was untrue. It is probably the case that we were being told untruths by senior Ministers at that stage.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy should not allege untruths.

495 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

Deputy Leo Varadkar: I will withdraw that. We were told things that turned out subsequently not to be true. Subsequent to the guarantee scheme, the Government refused to accept that recapitalisation was needed. The Government then brought forward its initial recapitalisation plan which included proposals to provide \1.5 billion in funds to Anglo Irish Bank for recapitalisation. That announced plan did not work and was then abandoned. In recent weeks, Anglo Irish Bank was nationalised and another recapitalisation plan for AIB and Bank of Ireland was announced, giving each of them \3.5 billion. If anybody has a reason to lose confidence in Ireland and its banking policies, it is not due to anything said by the Labour Party or by the Fine Gael Party, but due to the hames the Government has made in managing this crisis. It changes every week, and I predict that it will change again. I do not think that the recapitalisation plan will go ahead. It is likely that more radical measures will be taken in the next few weeks on AIB and Bank of Ireland, and the Government will abandon its banking policy yet again. That is why people have lost confidence in the Government’s ability to manage this crisis. Deputy Byrne referred to allegations made by Fine Gael Members last week. I was not involved in any debates last week, and I certainly did not make any allegations, but I know to what he is referring when he talks about smears and innuendo. Four of the ten names are in the public domain and anybody who knows anything about those four people will know of their very strong personal, financial and other links to Fianna Faíl. It is incorrect to pretend the names in the public domain are not part of the Fianna Faíl family. They are, and we need to be honest about that. For anybody who wishes to see it, there are plenty of e-mails circulating this city laden with information outlining the connections between the maple ten and Fianna Faíl. There is also plenty of photographic evidence to show how comfortable Fianna Faíl has been in the presence of these people. It is reasonable to examine the connections between Fianna Faíl and the banking sector over recent years. There was former Taoiseach Charles Haughey’s relationship with the banks. Fianna Faíl’s director of elections moved seamlessly from being head of the Irish Banking Federation to being Fianna Faíl director of elections and back to the Irish Banking Federation. Fianna Faíl cannot pretend no relationship exists there. The Government has consistently refused to properly resource the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement. The Government had plenty of money to establish robust agencies and to throw around at any project one could imagine, yet it consistently starved the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement of resources. That is because the Government is soft on corporate crime and, on a number of occasions, potentially complicit in it. The Government ensured a Financial Regu- lator was appointed who was not up to the job, despite the protests of the then PD Tańaiste. The Department of Finance said Mr. Sean FitzPatrick committed no crime, and the Govern- ment establishment a revolving door system whereby people who have destroyed their own banks are appointed to the board of Anglo Irish Bank and the Financial Regulator. There can be no confidence in the Government’s policies. Regime change is needed. We need the senior executives and the boards of the banks removed and replaced. We need the Central Bank and the Financial Regulator replaced. Crucially, we need to establish a bad bank to store those toxic loans so we can have proper functioning banks again. If we do not do that, we are going into the Japanese model and will have zombie banks for a decade.

Deputy James Reilly: I congratulate my colleague, Deputy Bruton, on bringing this motion to the House and I thank him for this opportunity to address the House. When I last spoke on the financial situation in this House I said it was the greatest financial crisis facing our State since its foundation, and it is clear to everybody that it was no exaggeration. We have nationalised Anglo Irish Bank, despite the fact that we did so with one hand tied behind our backs and half blind to most of the facts, which are slowly coming out. We are losing 40,000 jobs per

496 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion month at a cost of \1 billion to the Exchequer, we have put a further \7 billion into Allied Irish Bank and Bank of Ireland and our reputation internationally is in shreds. We now know how we got to this sad and sorry point. We got here because of an incompetent Government led by a Taoiseach who was full of bluster, was asleep at the wheel when he was Minister for Finance and allowed all those behind him to fall into a stupor, including his regulators. The nod-and-wink cronyism which has been at the centre of this Government for the last 20 years, bar two, is the ethos that has led us to where we are today. This morning the Taoiseach told the Da´il that last year the HSE made great savings of \280 million. He neglected to say the number of people lying on trolleys is as great as it was when it was considered a national emergency and that we have had a 30% increase in waiting times on the waiting lists and a 10% increase in cancelled operations. Well done to the HSE for budget balancing that hits patient safety and needs, but shows no sign of the redundancies of which the Minister for Health and Children spoke last year, which she now tells us are a matter for the Minister for Finance. How is that for progress after a year of talking about it? More plans for the future are being substituted for real action today. The Taoiseach gives the impression that his Government has a sense of urgency about our financial irregularities, but here is the reality. A year ago it knew about share transactions involving the golden circle trying to prop up the Anglo Irish Bank share price and manipulate the market. In October it knew about the transaction between Irish Life & Permanent and Anglo Irish Bank but sent in the fraud squad only yesterday because of public opprobrium and outcry. Up to this point this Taoiseach and his Government were happy with the three monkeys approach: hear no evil, see no evil and, above all, speak no evil. We all know how effective the Government is at looking where there is nothing to be found. We need only remember the Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern, looking up every tree in north Dublin. Owing to the short time I have been here I cannot outline Fine Gael’s plan for recovery as Deputy Bruton did so eloquently yesterday other than to say Ireland Inc. internationally has a stink. That smell will not be lifted until all those responsible for it are cleared out. That means the regulators who have failed us so miserably, the bankers, who with their cosy cartel and boards of directors have cleaned us out, Government agencies such as FA´ S which have mis- spent our money and, most of all, this Government because it has been embedded at the centre of this for the past 12 years. This Government’s public service levy has served only to divide our community between public and private sector workers and is a blunt instrument that hurts many people. We need strong leadership that unites, not divides, our people. We need a new Government with a clear mandate from the people based on transparency, accountability and fairness. All information should be laid out for all to see. There should be no more of this drip-feed and news management that has been so typical of this Government. It is no wonder the HSE alone spent \51 million on spin doctors instead of patient services. We all remember when Transport 21 was behind schedule the Government’s decision was to spend another couple of million euro explaining to the people why that was so instead of getting on with the job. A new Government should bring accountability. All those guilty of misdemeanours in the financial sector need to be brought to book, charged and dealt with by the law. Those found guilty should be punished and hurt where they feel it most, not just with jail but in their pockets. They should not be allowed to walk away with large pensions. The vast majority of people working in our banking service are hard-working, honest people and they are also victims of this sharp practice. A new Government should be based on fairness, so we can all join in this together to seek to bring our country back to its rightful place where it can deliver health, wealth and education

497 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

[Deputy James Reilly.] for all, where everybody shares the pain and, most importantly, when the turnaround comes, as it surely will, everybody shares the gain, not just the elite. I commend the motion to the House.

Deputy John O’Mahony: I am glad of the opportunity to make a contribution to this Private Members’ motion on the unfair, reactive rather than proactive and indecisive way this Govern- ment has dealt with the economic crisis that has befallen this country. I commend Deputy Bruton on bringing the motion before the House and for the consistent approach he has taken during good times and bad, always being constructive in his analysis. Only in recent times do people really appreciate how well he was aware of the warning signals in our economy when the Government continued to be in denial. A number of key issues have been at play over the last number of weeks for people on the streets of this country when the financial crisis stares them in the face when they get out of bed, if they are lucky enough to have a job to go to. They look to our Government and bankers for the leadership and action to deal with the issues in a proactive and competent manner. If this had happened it would have sent out a signal that would have given confidence across the board. If the actions taken are seen to have a positive effect and be fair, the confidence that brings becomes part of the solution. There is a self-fulfilling prophecy that whether we think we can or cannot, we are right. If that action is not taken, and if nobody seems to be taking responsibility or is made accountable for the irresponsible behaviour that has led us to where we are, people lose confidence and get angry. People are crying out to be constructive if they see fair and firm remedies being implemented. This motion is an attempt to bring that fairness and equity to the pension levy proposals and to make people accountable for the mismanagement and lack of regulation in the Irish banking system. Regarding the unfairness of the pension levy, we were told since these proposals were introduced that they would or could be tweaked as they were debated and brought through this House. We have seen no evidence of that. By the introduction of this levy the Government will encourage people on low incomes to give up their jobs and go on social welfare and encourage people who are near full service to retire to avoid the levy. The latter effect on the Garda could have major knock-on effects where there are many retirements at one end, of which I am hearing in my constituency, with the slowing down of recruitment at the other end. Another effect of the crisis and how it is being dealt with is that the Government has set the public and private sector workers at each other’s throats. In that kind of war there will be no winners. The Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance have consistently come into this House and asked for a unified approach to deal with the problems, and yet the measures 8 o’clock the Minister introduces will do anything but that. Where is the fairness in 17,000 farmers getting letters from their bank managers about the money they owe but not being able to get the grants they were pledged many months ago? Small businesses and employers cannot get credit facilities from the banks to keep their doors open or to stay in business. It brings to mind the saying, “Nero fiddled while Rome burned.” When we have an unprecedented crisis people need to be told the truth. I firmly believe that if they were in possession of the facts they would rise to the occasion and if that burden was seen to be spread in an equitable and fair manner, then the Irish public would not be found wanting. I commend the motion to the House.

Deputy Pat Breen: I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate tonight. Like my colleagues, I congratulate Deputy Bruton on bringing this motion before the House. Confi- dence needs to be restored to the banking system and the only way to do this, as Deputy Bruton stated last night, is by way of a comprehensive clean out in management of banks. We

498 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion all saw the pictures on television last night of gardaı´ raiding Anglo Irish Bank. It is a little late, like closing the stable door when the horse has bolted. Permanent damage has already been done to the image of our banking system worldwide and it is no surprise that the international community has lost confidence also. The crisis in Anglo Irish Bank exposes the failure of the financial regulatory system to protect the consumer and the taxpayer. The level of exposure to bad debt is now a considerable concern. According to last Sunday’s edition of The Sunday Times, 20 unnamed customers owe the bank a total of \11.4 billion, representing more than 25% of its total Irish loan book, while in Britain the top 20 customers account for 46% of the loan book. The PWC report published last week also described substantial exposure. The crisis in our banking system exposes the cronyism between developers and the Government which has destroyed our reputation and brought this country to its knees, and all those bankers who caused this are leaving with golden handshakes. It is grotesque, unbelievable, bizarre and unprecedented — words from the past. Is it any wonder there is such anger? We have not witnessed such anger in protests on the streets of Ireland since the 1970s. While all are willing to pay their fair share they want the same standards to apply to all, fairness and equality. Tonight the Government will force through the pensions levy while Fine Gael opposes it because it is unfair. It penalises the lower paid State employees. Unlike the income levy, for instance, there is no provision to protect those on low pay who do not receive any tax relief on it nor any pension benefits in excess of the State contributory pension. While the Government stumbles from plan to plan every sector of our economy is struggling. Look at what is happening in the HSE, which faces a \1 billion budgetary deficit for 2009. I understand that the HSE is considering the closure of a number of hospitals — four to 12. Tomorrow I will ask the Ta´naiste whether the HSE will close Ennis General Hospital because some people have stated that it has been discussed at a meeting. I am on record as stating that the HSE will use the HIQA report on the misdiagnosis at Ennis General Hospital to further downgrade and close the hospital. I am not scaremongering and I want clarity on this tomorrow. Returning to the banking crisis, it is quite clear that the lessons of the Ansbacher debacle have not been learned. Questions arose then on the effectiveness of our financial regulatory systems and it is vital that we put faith in and re-establish our banking institutions. Nobody wants to see our banks destabilised because of the actions of a few. We need to restore our international credibility because billions of euro have poured out of the country in recent weeks. I found the following quote from the great car maker Henry Ford the other night as I was researching this: “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” The people of Ireland are now only too familiar with our banking system. They are the victims of the system. It is time for the Minister for Finance to answer his own call to patriotic duty. I would appeal to the House to support the Fine Gael motion and help rebuild the Irish banking system.

Deputy Deirdre Clune: Not until such time as we get our banking system right will our economy begin to recover. We need to get to the bottom of the problems in the banking systems and then we can move forward. Nobody believes that we have got to that stage. We need only look at the share prices of our two main banks. It is quite evident that there is no international confidence whatsoever in the banking system in this country. It appears the \7 billion is not doing the trick. The redacted version of the PricewaterhouseCooper report that was produced last week certainly gave us an insight into the level of difficulties and the high

499 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

[Deputy Deirdre Clune.] levels of exposure in our banks, but we need to see that report printed in full and to know the exact state of our banks and the level of exposure they face. The motion concentrates on the banks and the regulatory system which has failed in its primary function to monitor the banks. The people are crying out for reform. We saw it on the streets of Dublin last weekend. Initially the protest centred on the unfair pension levy but there were people present who want to see our banks back functioning. The primary function of a bank is to lend on the basis of its deposits and we have not seen this in our banks for quite some time. Many of them have been acting as property developers and have lost the run of themselves. We want an end to the piecemeal approach from the Government so far. It started out with the bank guarantee scheme in September last, and then there was the nationalisation of Anglo Irish Bank and the recapitalisation programme. At this stage we want to see the bottom line. Exactly what is the level of debt? It is quite obvious that the efforts of the Government so far have done nothing to ensure international confidence in this country. The people want to see an end to the excessively obscene salaries, bonuses, payments and golden handshakes to senior bank executives and those sitting on boards of these banks. We now own one bank and we may have to invest further in other banks. The Minister, in his response to the motion, refers to another committee that he has set up to look at remuneration of bank executives. Why does he not just do it? It is within his power. The Executive has leverage in terms of the commitments that have been given to those banks and the people want to see an end to the excessive moneys that have been taken in remuneration from these banks. Yesterday we saw the fraud squad move into Anglo Irish Bank. The optics were great but, as has been stated here tonight, I wonder if it was not too late. I reiterate my support for this motion. We need to see action in this area. We need to get to the bottom of what is happening in our banks. Unless the banks are functioning properly then the economy will not begin to recover, finance will not be available to small viable businesses up and down this country which are being strangled and cannot function and which are being denied funds to get them over this difficult period. I commend the motion and look forward to Government support for it tonight.

Deputy James Reilly: May I make a point of clarification?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: There is no such thing. I take it Deputy Reilly wishes to make a point of order.

Deputy James Reilly: On a point of order, I wish to clarify for the record of the House that I may have stated a 30% increase in waiting times whereas I meant a 30% increase in delayed discharges.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I am sure that will be noted.

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Deputy Peter Power): I commend the Government’s amendment to the House. We in Ireland, like all countries in the developed world, are confronting the greatest financial economic crisis that the developed world has seen for well over 100 years. Before we can solve the crisis, which is what this motion seeks to do, we must look at its essential characteristics. What are they? The defining characteristic of this financial crisis and recession as distinct from those that have gone before it is its unpredictability. The nature of this crisis is changing all

500 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion the time, almost on a weekly basis. From the moment the American Government let Lehman Brothers go last year, it has been impossible to predict where the crisis is going. The perceived wisdom 12 months ago was that a 4% capital base ratio for our banks was sufficient. We now know that was incorrect, even though it was predictable at the time. The ratio is now estimated to be 9% and we have recapitalised the banks to that extent. What will it be in five months’ or nine months’ time? No one can predict that. Only in recent days President Obama signalled further massive underpinning of the American financial system, where this crisis began. Accordingly, because the situation is so fluid and is changing daily, the reactions must be also on a daily basis. There is one constant in all of this. Since last September when the Government had to intervene, with the support of the proposers of this motion, Fine Gael, the decisions that have been made have been in the national interest. Recent events have shown that the Government has not been influenced by golden circles or the malign forces that have been suggested within this very Chamber. Suggestions to that effect were made not alone without evidence or foundation but with a complete reckless disregard to the financial status and reputation of the country and its ability to raise finance in the capital markets. That is why those who speak about the crisis must do so in a measured tone. The Government’s approach to this crisis has been measured and decisive at each and every unpredictable turn in events. The approach has been structured.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: It has been slow and lazy.

Deputy Peter Power: No, it has been structured and considered. We had to act quickly in one instance in September and have acted in a measured way since in terms of the recapitalisation of the banks. Since we signalled recapitalisation as a policy, we could have gone for an immediate recapitalisation but instead we did a risk assessment of the loan books, which caused enormous controversy in Anglo Irish Bank, but we took a measured tone and recapitalised. At the same time, we came to an informed decision of the appreciated risk in the banks and that is why the PricewaterhouseCoopers report was commissioned, giving rise to the controversy of the past few weeks. In that controversy we should remember one thing. Despite all of the difficulties of the two main banks and the bad decisions which their chief executives admit, there is no suggestion or allegation of wrongdoing against the two most important systemic financial institutions in the country. We must recognise that.

Deputy Leo Varadkar: Reckless lending is wrongdoing. Giving out 110% mortgages is wrongdoing.

Deputy Simon Coveney: It is dishonest.

Deputy Peter Power: I accept that, but there has been no suggestion of corporate wrongdoing in those banks and we must support them notwithstanding the mistakes they have made. That is the Government’s position; it is a measured, timely, proportionate and decisive position and I commend the counter motion to the House.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: I commend Deputy Bruton on bringing this important motion to the House. The Government now admits that Ireland is in a fight for its economic survival. If we are to come through this and survive, we must have a clear understanding of how and why we got into the mess in the first instance.

501 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

[Deputy Charles Flanagan.]

The banking and financial crisis in Ireland was not caused by sub-prime lending in the residential mortgage market, although a small amount of that did go on, and it was not caused by the creation of, or purchase of, exotic financial instruments by the Irish banks. The economic crisis in this country was caused by a particular political way of thinking. The Fianna Faíl- Progressive Democrat ideology has brought this country to its knees. This was the Galway tent school of economics. Central to this ideology was the belief we could build a sustainable economic future on the back of an unsustainable property bubble. At the core of this Galway tent school of economics was a cosy cartel of politicians, property developers and bankers, supported by a raft of tax incentives and tax dodges. Its core principle was the pursuit of private gain at the expense of the common good. Charlie McCreevy was the cheer leader, promoter and high priest of this neo-liberal ideology. Its true nature was expressed in his infamous words “if you have it, spend it”. Spend it they did. The badge of honour was the private helicopter, flying between the Galway tent and the Fianna Faíl Ard-Fheis. Encouraged, supported and cheered on by the Government, property developers and bankers went on an orgy of speculation, borrowing, lending and indefensible practices. The banks became the property of the speculators through special investment vehicles that were kept off the balance sheets. A further risk was added when many senior bankers themselves became property speculators and developers in their own right, in addition to the day job. Any sense that there was a conflict of interest was abandoned. The actions of the Director of Corporate Enforcement yesterday are welcome, as are those of the Garda Sıóchańa, but yesterday’s show must be more than cosmetic. The Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement must be properly resourced and beefed up, the legislation in that regard must be changed. There is overwhelming prima facie evidence of serious wrongdoing that should be addressed not only by the Director of Corporate Enforcement but the Director of Public Prosecutions. I refer to section 17 of the Companies Act 1990, which lays out directors’ obligations, section 41, which deals with the prohibition of loans to directors, sections 42, 46 and 53 laying out the obligations of directors to notify their interest in shares, not to mention sections 197, 202 to 204, inclusive, and 242. I could go on. As well as 11 breaches of company law, I contend serious criminal fraud has been perpetrated and should be processed. The Criminal Justice (Fraud Offences and Theft) Act 2001 must be applied in full, with particular reference to sections 10 and 11 thereof. The market abuse regulations must be applied and honoured in full. Our money laundering and financial regulation procedures must be strengthened. The failure to transpose the third EU directive on money laundering into Irish law is a dereliction of duty on the part of the Government. The boards of directors of all our banks have failed in their fundamental obligation to super- vise their managers. This was starkly exposed in the dodgy money transfers between Anglo Irish Bank and the Irish Life & Permanent. The chairperson of Irish Life & Permanent, paid more than \400,000 annually to do her job, has admitted she did not know of financial transactions at her bank of more than \7 billion. She was not informed, she did not know and she still does not have the decency to resign. Where was the regulator when this toxic stew was bubbling away? The system of banking regulation and supervision is the creation of this Government. A light touch approach to regulation was supported and actively encouraged by senior members of the current Government and its predecessors in the Fianna Faíl-Progressive Democrat neo-liberal regime. Charlie

502 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

McCreevy boasted on numerous occasions about the lack of regulation and has been preaching the same dangerous gospel in Europe for the past four years. Despite corruption cases involving companies based in the IFSC, neither the Government nor the regulator took any action. Justin O’Brien, an international expert on corporate governance, warned the Government about this issue. He wrote in The Irish Times that international regulators were expressing “shock and dismay” that Ireland had abdicated its responsibilities for short-term advantages but no one on the Government side was listening. Despite the high profile court cases, despite the loss of reputation and despite the warning signs, the Government sailed on regardless. In September 2005, Deputy Michea´l Martin, the then Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, assured his audience at the annual IFSC lunch that he was further weakening the already lax regulations in this area and that the law in this regard would be further eased. He said he would be less prescriptive about the methods a company uses to review its compliance procedures and in not requiring a review of the compliance statement by external auditors. Of course, the rod of lax regulation as applied to companies based at the IFSC was also applied to general banking, with the disastrous consequences we now see. There is an urgent and compelling case for a root and branch reform of our financial regulatory system. There is a need for some outsiders who have no baggage, who will apply the rules without fear or favour. I recommend the Minister to look at Sweden or Canada as a source of such expertise. There needs to be a phased clear-out of senior managers at board level in all our banks. Likewise, there needs to be a clear-out of the board and senior executives in the offices of the Financial Services Regulator. Confidence must be restored and time is of the essence. We need to rid ourselves of the three “Cs” in banking: cronyism, corruption and criminality. If this Government is unable or unwilling to do the job that now needs to be done, it should stand aside and let others take over. I commend Deputy Bruton for his foresight in this regard, not only in recent times but also for issuing warning signs and ringing alarm bells. If this motion is defeated, and the indication from the Minister of State opposite is that it will be, that will not end the debate. We need resolve on all sides of the House to deal with this banking issue before moving on to deal with the general economic crisis we now face.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I wish to thank all of those who contributed to this important and timely debate. Since this motion was tabled there has been a growing realisation that we are fighting for our economic independence. I wish the Government well in confronting the economic and banking problems. However, wishing it well does not mean that I must suspend my critical faculties and pretend, as the Taoiseach and many Ministers do, that we should somehow suspend criticism and speak no ill of Government policy because it is perfect. That is not the reality. The Government should wake up to the fact that it was not pursuing sustainable policies and neither did some storm come from abroad to blow it off course. The Government was pursuing unsustainable, reckless, foolish and wasteful policies. That is the reality. People on the Government side of the House must realise that unless we face the failures that have grown up over the last seven years, we will neither confront our banking crisis nor our economic one. The economic crisis is at the core of the problem with banking. If there was confidence in Ireland Inc and the way in which the Government is managing the public finances we would not have problems in our banking system and we could withstand the pressures. We hear that people are moving their deposits or are at risk of doing so because they no longer have confidence that the Government has a grip on economic strategy. It is not just the Oppo-

503 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

[Deputy Richard Bruton.] sition that feels that. Respectable opinion on all sides, including unions and employers, is of the view that the Government has not grasped the scale of the challenge and has not put in place the sort of comprehensive strategy so that people will understand the crisis is real and must be confronted on a broad basis. That is what is missing because there is no such public conviction. If people at home and abroad do not believe it, then we are damaged and must correct that position. We cannot, as the Government seems to wish, blame the Opposition for asking probing questions. It is not the Opposition’s fault that misdemeanours were ignored, that when evidence was presented its implications were not understood, that Ministers did not read reports presented to them, or that regulators did not act on information in their possession. We are in this mess because probing questions were not asked in the past. People on the Government side of the House may feel uncomfortable when probing questions are being asked, but that is the duty of Opposition and proper regulation. There was a failure to ask those probing questions, however. A culture of Government grew up that was content to circle the wagons. It was a cosy arrangement whereby things were passed on a nod and wink. Reform was not faced up to and when problems arose they were bought out. The culture that grew up in the last seven years fathered the problems we now face. Until this House confronts those failures and begins a reform programme we will have failed to address the banking and economic crises. Fine Gael’s motion contains clear propositions, including a total regulatory clear-out. Who on the Government side can say they have confidence in the way the regulatory system perfor- med? Yet there has been only one token head which was given a golden handshake and moved on. That is not confronting regulatory failure. Let us be honest. We need a clean sweep to bring in a proper quality-mark with an international reputation that will be attached to our regulatory system. That is what we are seeking in this motion. We need proper disclosure so we will know what we are putting our money into. That has not been forthcoming, however, either from the banks or the Government which is in possession of some evaluation of those problems. We also need a clear-out within the banks themselves. We need a new banking culture with changes in the sort of people who lead banks, including the values to which they aspire. It is just not good enough to exchange Tweedledum for Tweedledee and pretend that things have changed. We need to see that sense of change within the banking system and that has yet to come. Hopefully it will come but if so, it is coming very slowly. As taxpayers we are now standing in the breach. We have provided guarantees to the sum of over \400 billion. We are proposing to put \7 billion of taxpayers’ money into the banks. I would seem that we are proposing to go further and offer an insurance to underpin some of the toxic loans. At this stage we are knee deep into the banks but the only way in which our commitment to the banks will succeed is if people believe that the guarantee offered by the Government is worth the paper it is written on. The Minister must face up to the crisis in the public finances in a broader fashion than he has done to date if he wants to give that signal of confidence at home and abroad. He needs to go beyond where he is. The notion that the October budget served the country’s interests in any way has now been blown out of the water. It was an inept budget whose timing was wrong and it failed to face up to the challenges. The Minister is now trying to retrofit changes to it, but that is not good enough. We need to see a proper reform programme in the public finances, not outsourcing to Mr. McCarthy or the Taxation Commission, but signalling the Government’s views as to how

504 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion we will move forward in areas such as taxation, economic renewal and public spending. We need decisions this year, not some time in 2010. Many people have spoken of politics needing to be renewed in the face of this crisis, and I agree. We have put up with archaic procedures in this House that are not fit for purpose. We have engaged in sham debate that does not countenance the real challenges we face as a country. We have ceased to be a forum where conflicts of interest are resolved. We have allowed that to slip gradually out of our hands. We have been elected by ordinary people around the country to take responsibility for these decisions. We cannot make those decisions by consensus, however, and anyone who believes we can do so in this crisis is fooling themselves. We need a Government that will act decisively and with authority. We need an Oppo- sition that will ruthlessly hold the Government to account and scrutinise its decisions. We need aDa´il that holds to account monopoly power in Government, in banking and everywhere else. We need to reform the way the House works if that is to happen. No commitment yet, however, has been made in that regard. The most vital Bills, such as that dealing with the nationalisation of Anglo Irish bank, are passed on guillotine motions with no single section considered in full. How does the Minister for Finance see this fitting in with a modern parliamentary democracy playing a meaningful role in the way decisions are made? Politics needs to be reformed. While we are in this economic crisis together we need to have a working parliament that confronts these problems. Under Deputy Cowen’s tenure as Taoiseach, this has not been the case, however. Since the House returned after Christmas, there has been no open, honourable or sensible debate about our economic problems. That is what is damaging politics today.

Deputies: Hear, hear.

Amendment put.

The Da´il divided: Ta´, 82; Nı´l, 74.

Ta´

Ahern, Bertie. Devins, Jimmy. Ahern, Dermot. Dooley, Timmy. Ahern, Michael. Fahey, Frank. Ahern, Noel. Finneran, Michael. Andrews, Barry. Fitzpatrick, Michael. Andrews, Chris. Fleming, Seań. Ardagh, Seań. Flynn, Beverley. Aylward, Bobby. Gallagher, Pat The Cope. Blaney, Niall. Gogarty, Paul. Brady, A´ ine. Grealish, Noel. Brady, Cyprian. Hanafin, Mary. Brady, Johnny. Harney, Mary. Browne, John. Haughey, Seań. Byrne, Thomas. Healy-Rae, Jackie. Calleary, Dara. Hoctor, Maíre. Carey, Pat. Kelleher, Billy. Collins, Niall. Kelly, Peter. Conlon, Margaret. Kenneally, Brendan. Connick, Seań. Kennedy, Michael. Coughlan, Mary. Kirk, Seamus. Cregan, John. Kitt, Michael P. Cuffe, Ciarań. Kitt, Tom. Cullen, Martin. Lenihan, Brian. Curran, John. Lenihan, Conor. Dempsey, Noel. Lowry, Michael.

505 Banking System: 25 February 2009. Motion

Mansergh, Martin. Ta´—continued

Martin, Michea´l. O’Keeffe, Batt. McDaid, James. O’Keeffe, Edward. McEllistrim, Thomas. O’Rourke, Mary. McGrath, Mattie. O’Sullivan, Christy. McGrath, Michael. Power, Peter. McGuinness, John. Power, Sea´n. Moloney, John. Roche, Dick. Moynihan, Michael. Ryan, Eamon. Mulcahy, Michael. Sargent, Trevor. Nolan, M.J. Scanlon, Eamon. O´ Cuı´v, E´ amon. Smith, Brendan. O´ Fearghaı´l, Sea´n. Treacy, Noel. O’Brien, Darragh. Wallace, Mary. O’Connor, Charlie. White, Mary Alexandra. O’Flynn, Noel. Woods, Michael. O’Hanlon, Rory.

Nı´l

Allen, Bernard. Lynch, Kathleen. Bannon, James. McCormack, Pa´draic. Behan, Joe. McEntee, Shane. Breen, Pat. McGinley, Dinny. Broughan, Thomas P. McGrath, Finian. Bruton, Richard. McHugh, Joe. Burke, Ulick. McManus, Liz. Burton, Joan. Mitchell, Olivia. Byrne, Catherine. Morgan, Arthur. Carey, Joe. Naughten, Denis. Clune, Deirdre. Neville, Dan. Connaughton, Paul. Noonan, Michael. ´ ´ ´ Coonan, Noel J. O Caolain, Caoimhghın. O´ Snodaigh, Aengus. Costello, Joe. O’Donnell, Kieran. Coveney, Simon. O’Dowd, Fergus. Crawford, Seymour. O’Keeffe, Jim. Creed, Michael. O’Mahony, John. D’Arcy, Michael. O’Shea, Brian. Deasy, John. O’Sullivan, Jan. Deenihan, Jimmy. Penrose, Willie. Doyle, Andrew. Perry, John. Durkan, Bernard J. Quinn, Ruairı´. English, Damien. Rabbitte, Pat. Enright, Olwyn. Reilly, James. Feighan, Frank. Ring, Michael. Ferris, Martin. Shatter, Alan. Flanagan, Charles. Sheahan, Tom. Flanagan, Terence. Sheehan, P.J. Gilmore, Eamon. Sherlock, Seań. Hayes, Brian. Shortall, Ro´ isıń. Hayes, Tom. Stagg, Emmet. Higgins, Michael D. Stanton, David. Hogan, Phil. Tuffy, Joanna. Howlin, Brendan. Upton, Mary. Kehoe, Paul. Varadkar, Leo. Kenny, Enda. Wall, Jack. Lynch, Ciarań.

Tellers:Ta´: Deputies Pat Carey and John Cregan; Nı´l: Deputies Paul Kehoe and Emmet Stagg.

Amendment declared carried.

Motion, as amended, put and declared carried.

506 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

Business of Da´il. Deputy Emmet Stagg: On a point of order, earlier today I raised a matter with the Ceann Comhairle in respect of the disallowance of questions. I thank him for the explanation provided. However, that explanation does not appear to agree with what is contained in Standing Orders. While I do not intend to pursue the matter now, I wish to place on record the fact that I intend to follow up on it with the Ceann Comhairle’s office.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy will certainly be facilitated.

Deputy Emmet Stagg: I thank the Ceann Comhairle.

Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill 2009: Committee Stage (Resumed) and Remaining Stages. SECTION 5. Debate resumed on amendment No. 20: In page 8, subsection (1), line 27, to delete “contractual arrangement” and substitute “employment, office or position”. — (Minister for Finance). An Ceann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 20, 21 and 23 are being taken together and the Minister was in possession.

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): As stated earlier, amendment No. 20 provides a revised definition of “public servant” to include a board member or Secretary General.

Amendment agreed to.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 21:

In page 8, subsection (3), line 34, to delete “contractual arrangements” and substitute “employment, office or position”.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 5, as amended, agreed to. SECTION 6.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 22:

In page 8, subsection (1), line 40, after “section 2” to insert the following:

“(other than in respect of a person to whom subsection (1)(b)(iii) of that section relates)”.

The purpose of this amendment is to exclude persons described at section 2(1)(b)(iii), namely, those who receive a payment in lieu of membership of a public service pension scheme, from the provisions of the Bill. This category of people will not have a superannuation benefit on leaving and if not excluded could seek a refund.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 6, as amended, agreed to.

507 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

SECTION 7.

Question proposed: “That section 7 stand part of the Bill.”

Deputy Denis Naughten: Section 7(1) states, “Nothing in this Act is to be read as conferring any additional benefit payable, or that may become payable, under a public service pension scheme.” Perhaps the Minister might be in a position to clarify a matter that has been brought to my attention. I am aware of a person who earns \36,000, who is the family’s sole earner and who has three children. As a result of the imposition of the pension levy and following the payment of family income supplement, there will be a net gain to the Exchequer of \25.38 per week, or \1,319.76 per annum. The difficulty is that this individual is not entitled to a medical card at present but will be so entitled after the enactment of this legislation. Deputy Reilly has informed me that the average cost to the Exchequer of each medical card issued is \1,700. The Exchequer will, therefore, incur a net loss of approximately \400 as a result of the imposition of the levy on the individual to whom I refer. If 5% of those in the public service fall into the same category as this person, there will be a significant loss to the Exchequer. Has an evaluation been carried out with regard to the implications of imposing the levy on those whose incomes are just above the thresholds that apply in respect of medical cards and certain social welfare entitlements? These people’s incomes will now come in below those thresholds and, as a result, they will be able to apply for medical cards and the other entitlements to which I refer. This will have a negative impact on Exchequer returns and runs contrary to the objective of the proposed levy.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: We anticipate some additional payment through the family income supplement. I will obtain the information sought by the Deputy and write to him about it.

Deputy Denis Naughten: The Minister understands the point I am making on medical cards and so forth.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Yes.

Deputy Denis Naughten: Given that significant costs could arise for the Exchequer, would it not make more sense to exclude from the levy the individuals to whom I refer? Surely this issue should have been evaluated before now.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: While I appreciate the point raised by the Deputy, I am advised that the impact will be marginal.

Deputy Denis Naughten: Will the Minister revert to me on the issue?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Yes.

Deputy Richard Bruton: On section 7, the Minister has indicated that gross receipts from the levy will be \1.4 billion. We have not yet been provided with a statement on the impact the collection of these moneys will have on tax buoyancy. The usual format is to provide a table setting out the gross receipts and the impact of a measure on taxation. We are informed that the Department of Finance anticipated exactly what the Minister had in mind and built it into prior tax forecasts but we have not yet seen the detail of this. Is the House not entitled to a statement analysing the impact of the measure on tax buoyancy in a manner which would allow Members to understand how it was calculated? The original intention was to reduce borrowing by \2 billion, whereas we now know the figure has been partially offset by tax calculations.

508 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

An Ceann Comhairle: I remind Deputies that section 7 provides that no additional benefit can arise from the Bill. For this reason, the valuable contributions Deputies have made are of doubtful relevance.

Deputy Denis Naughten: With all due respect, an additional benefit will arise under the Bill. The case I made was that someone would be financially better off as a result of the enactment of the legislation because he or she will receive a medical card. According to my figures, the Exchequer stands to lose out by about \6.6 million.

An Ceann Comhairle: I am aware of that. The provision that no additional benefit may arise from the Bill casts doubt on the relevances of Deputies’ questions. I did not say their contributions were not valuable but that there is a large doubt about their relevance. I do not know if the Minister can add anything to that.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I can try to assist the Deputies opposite. This matter was factored into the general tax prediction for the year as for some time it had been clearly settled policy to seek a substantial reduction in payroll costs through the relevant negotiations. With regard to the precise month by month analysis, my Department is finalising the detailed tax projections for the year and these will take account of the matters outlined by Deputy Bruton.

Question put and agreed to.

SECTION 8.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 23:

In page 9, line 22, after “employment” to insert “, office or position”.

Amendment agreed to.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 24:

In page 9, line 23, to delete “materially distinguish them from” and substitute “are materially distinguished from”.

This is a drafting amendment to tidy up the text and does not introduce any significant change to the Bill.

Amendment agreed to.

Question proposed: “That section 8, as amended, stand part of the Bill.”

Deputy Richard Bruton: Section 8 is an unusual provision in that it gives the Minister powers to modify the obligation under section 2 in any manner he sees fit. It is an arbitrary power and we have not yet seen how the Minister may intend to use it. According to the section, a group may be exempted from deductions or deductions may be modified in the event that, in the Minister’s opinion, some particular aspect or condition of the group’s employment materially distinguishes it from other classes or groups. The House is entitled to some indication as to how this power will be exercised. Is its purpose to deal with the group of firemen referred to by Deputy Jim O’Keeffe or other categories of employees who may be inadvertently caught up in the levy as a result of lax drafting? What is the precise nature of this provision? Can the Minister use this power without reverting to the House if he believes a group has been inadver-

509 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

[Deputy Richard Bruton.] tently included in the provisions and should be exempted from the levy? We often hear about the frailties of secondary legislation? Can the Minister act in this way with confidence?

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: On the same point, I presume section 8 was not inserted without the authors having something in mind. When I first read the section I concluded the Minister must have in mind providing an exemption for Deputies as a category.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Deputies will have no such luck.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: I then decided I had better warn him that if he were to exercise this power, he could well guarantee that the citadel will be stormed. Whatever chance we have of keeping our heads above water, the Minister needs to be careful what category he chooses to exempt. What does the term “materially distinguished” mean in these circumstances? Those who authored this provision must have in mind some category where the Minister believes his writ will not run. This provision will need to be exercised with great caution because there is enough public resentment without some seemingly well remunerated group managing to get under the wire by resort to this provision.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: This section was inserted on the advice of the Attorney General because the legislation deals with approximately 330,000 employees in many different settings in terms of contractual arrangements, collective bargaining and custom and practice. The advice was that we should, as a matter of caution, ensure that such a section should be 9 o’clock included in the legislation to deal with exceptional circumstances, that is, some particular aspect or condition of an employment which materially distinguishes a particular class or group from other classes or groups to which the section applies. In such circumstances, the Minister is given a discretion, if it is considered just and equitable to do so, to exempt this class from deductions or modify the deductions having regard to the nature and degree of the financial burden that would otherwise be borne by the group in question. Deputies will note from the reference to “financial burden” that it is clearly not with the intendment of the section to exempt persons who have substantial pensions within the public service from the operation of the Act. In fact, Members of the Oireachtas are expressly dealt with in the definition section as a group which falls within the intendment of the legislation. While I do not anticipate a need to use this authority, it is wiser to make such provision when legislating for such a wide and diverse group. Deputy Jim O’Keeffe raised the issue of firemen who work part-time for rural local authorities and do not have a pension but who may fall within the definition of public servant. While I did not undertake to exempt this group under this section, I undertook to examine the issue. I will examine issues that are raised after the commencement of the legislation and review them after a period. The section gives me power to remedy any exceptional circumstances which materially distinguish a particular group where it is just and equitable so to do.

Question put and agreed to.

SECTION 9.

An Ceann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 25 and 33 are cognate and will be discussed together.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 25:

510 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

In page 9, subsection (1), line 39, to delete “circular,” and substitute “circular or”.

This is a technical amendment to ensure the expression “or other document” refers only to an instrument and not to an enactment, contract, arrangement, understanding or expectation.

Amendment agreed to.

An Ceann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 26, 35 and 43 are related and may be discussed together.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I move amendment No. 26:

In page 9, between lines 45 and 46, to insert the following subsections:

“(2) Any regulation made under subsection (1) shall be approved by both Houses of the Oireachtas before it may take effect.

(3) Any regulation made under subsection (1) shall not take effect for a period of 45 days from its approval by both Houses of the Oireachtas and notice shall be served on each health professional affected by such regulation within 10 days of a resolution of the Houses of the Oireachtas under subsection (2).”.

These are unusual provisions. As I understand it, what the Minister is proposing under section 9 is to give the Minister for Health and Children the power to implement a reduction in fees where contractual relationships are already established. The issue of whether these provisions are open to legal challenge will undoubtedly come up for consideration. One of the possible sources of challenge would be whether we are effectively delegating powers of the Oireachtas to Ministers to implement taxes, levies or whatever the Minister is calling them——

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Deductions.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I am sorry, deductions. If we are breaking legal new ground, it is important that such measures be approved by both Houses of the Oireachtas before they are adopted. It seems to me, although I am not a lawyer, that it would give them more legal authority. I am sure the Minister will respond to this. It would seem advisable that the Oireachtas sees what is being proposed and vote for it positively. The intention, as the section is currently worded, is that such a proposal would be laid before the House and unless someone happens to table a Private Members’ motion to annul it, it will remain intact. We should protect against any legal frailties which have been suggested to be present by having this sort of provision. It is also important that the House oversees the use of this power. That is a sensible thing to do. When we spoke about these sections earlier, the Minister said they were qualified by section 2, inferring that only fees or services that gave rise to a pensionable payment could be treated in this way. I am not sure a reading of sections 9 and 10 makes that altogether clear. This has an important bearing on the Bill because when we discussed this earlier, the Minister gave me an assurance that people working as home helps would not be subjected to the levy because they do not have pensionable employment. However, they are in a contractual relationship with the HSE and they are delivering services. It would seem on a layman’s reading of these sections that such people could be subjected to the levy in the same way as others. I hear beautiful, calming music — we should have that here all the time.

511 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

[Deputy Richard Bruton.]

The other element of this amendment is that if we are amending contracts relating to fees — the Minister says we are doing this in the public interest, with all the citations he quoted at the beginning of the discussion — we must also give reasonable opportunity for people to put their side of the argument and have that assessed. I wonder whether the Minister should go further in providing a period of notice for consultation, as I have set out here, so that the provisions are seen to be robust. I did not follow the legal case, but was it not the case that last year a similar move by the HSE to put restrictions on the fees of chemists was found to be frail, and it was required to back off on that move? I ask the Minister whether he would consider making this proposal more robust by implementing the sort of changes I have suggested. It also would be more practical and fair to people who need to plan their businesses, as it would enable them to have reasonable notice of what is coming down the track.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Section 9 does not relate to the pension contribution. It is a separate matter. The purpose of this section is to allow the Minister for Health and Children to reduce the fees payable to service providers under the GMS, notwithstanding their existing contracts. This is, as I outlined, an emergency measure in the public interest, and therefore the State is taking to itself the power to abrogate contracts to ensure that——

Deputy Richard Bruton: Sections 9 and 10 are relevant as we are discussing two amendments together. There are wider provisions in section 10 applying to any service rendered.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I did not know we were talking about section 10 as well.

Deputy Richard Bruton: The amendments are grouped.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: They are grouped. I will deal with section 10 in a moment but first I will explain section 9. The fees and contracts for each of the service providers traditionally have been negotiated between their representative bodies and the Minister for Health and Children. It is now accepted that the Competition Act 2002 precludes representative bodies and the Minister from entering direct negotiations on payment and contract matters. The purpose of section 10 is to enable Ministers with responsibility for other sectors to apply, with appropriate modification, the provisions that the Minister for Health and Children may apply under section 9 in order to reduce payments for professional health services in their areas. It is envisaged that this section would apply primarily to professional services rendered to the Department of Social and Family Affairs under the optical, dental and audiologist benefit schemes, medical services in the prison service, and veterinary officers providing services to the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. The Government has made clear in making these savings that there will be real reductions in the levels of professional fees. We believed it was not in any way equitable, in allocating the burden of the adjustment of current day-to-day expenditure, to single out those public servants who have a pension. It is also important to address professional fees, and the Minister is given ample powers to deal with this under these provisions of the legislation. I have provided in section 9(16) that any regulations made under the section will be laid before each House of the Oireachtas, and either House will have an opportunity to pass a resolution annulling the regulations within 21 days, if it so desires. That gives the Houses ample opportunity to consider the implications of any regulations made under the section.

512 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

Deputy Richard Bruton: The way I read this section, I do not see any definition that confines the services concerned to professional services of the nature described by the Minister. The Minister said earlier in the debate that home help services provided by people under contract to the HSE could not be touched by this. My reading of section 10 is that these provisions could apply to a person providing a home help service. The term “professional service” is not even mentioned in the section, but only the word “service”, which is not defined to confine it in the way the Minister said he intends. It seems he is taking on a general power to impose this reduction on anyone providing services, which I presume could include a person renting a property to the Department or providing home help — in fact, any person or class of persons in respect of any service they render. I do not see that the Minister has circumscribed it in the way he assured the House. He definitely gave the impression earlier that home help service providers could not be touched because they do not have pensions. The Minister needs to clarify this.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I will clarify it for the Deputy. Section 9, as the side note points out, relates to reductions in payments to health professionals. It is clear from the first subsection that the powers of the Minister for Health and Children are with regard to rates of pay for health professionals or classes of health professionals. Section 10 is broader but does not apply to the Minister for Health and Children. I gave a practical illustration of what was envisaged under section 10. This section does not apply to the Minister for Health and Children but to any other Minister. That is clear from the terms of the section. If we consider section 10(4), for example, we will see that “a Minister of the Government making regulations under subsection (1) shall have all the powers enjoyed by the Minister for Health and Children under section 9 and shall likewise be subject to all the obligations imposed on the Minister for Health and Children under that section.” It is clear that section 10 is supplementary to section 9 and gives analogous powers to Ministers generally, which are circumscribed in section 9. In other words, home helps are not within the intendment of section 9.

Deputy Richard Bruton: We are discussing two sections together because we are grouping these amendments. I want to be clear on the Minister’s understanding of the delivery of a service. He stated that the Minister for Health and Children cannot be included under section 10 but presumably a number of people who provide analogous services to home help services in other Departments could come within the ambit of this section. Is definition not required of the categories on whom a tax is being imposed? The Minister for Finance stated earlier that he stands by Adam Smith’s canons of taxation, which emphasise certainty. There can be no certainty without knowledge of the intended subject of a tax.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Here we are, back to tax again. The pension contribution or deduction is not a tax and what is envisaged in sections 9 and 10 is certainly not a tax but a real reduction in public expenditure and the agreed contract prices over which the State is taking powers to vary under these sections. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the imposition of taxation. It relates to contractual arrangements entered into by the State and which the State now wishes to vary by way of reduction. This is an essential power for the State if it is to be able to address this economic emergency.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I am asking you to explain. Do not stand up in righteous indignation. You are not explaining the matter properly.

513 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Bruton should allow the Minister to finish before he makes his contribution.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: The righteous indignation is because you characterised this as a tax. It is not a tax.

Deputy Richard Bruton: It sounds like righteous indignation.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: It is a reduction in a contractually agreed payment. That is expressly envisaged in sections 9 and 10 of this legislation. The recitals to the legislation set out the justifications for why the State finds it necessary to vary contracts and expectations in this manner.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I am not disputing that at all.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Will the Minister give us an example? Is he referring to the general medical scheme or pharmacists and other people with whom the Minister for Health and Chil- dren has contracted to pay a certain amount? Is he saying that he will have powers under this section to cause a reduction in the services to these categories of professional?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: The reduction is not in the services but in the amounts of payment they receive. That is exactly what is envisaged in this section. I set out examples from the health services and supplemented them with several examples of the kinds of professional engagement comprehended by section 10, such as veterinary officers in the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food or medical assessment officers in the Department of Social and Family Affairs, which would be in an analogous position to those which section 9 was designed to address.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I do not want to delay our discussion but I would have thought that if the Minister is taking onto himself a power to reduce by fiat the income of certain categories, he needs clear authority in regard to the categories to which he will apply that power. His is a broad definition which has not offered certainty as to which categories would be subject to the power. Does he not need, in order to ensure that the legislation is robust and immune from challenge in the courts, to inform the Oireachtas of his precise intentions so that the authority which he derives from this House is fully explained to us when we grant it to him? Perhaps I am being obtuse but he has not explained to my satisfaction which categories of charges, fees and services can be subjected to this reduction by fiat. My interpretation of what the Minister has said is that even the group to which I adverted, home help services, could be embraced by section 10 because he has not stated that the section excludes the Minister for Health and Children.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: It does exclude the Minister for Health and Children.

Deputy Richard Bruton: Perhaps I am wrong. I am not a lawyer and do not pretend to be one but I would have thought the Oireachtas needs to be clear not only in respect of whom we are giving this power to, but also against whom the power can be exercised. I do not think we have that clarity. This provision appears rather poorly defined, although I am not opposing it. I just think that in order to make it robust we need more detail regarding the categories to whom it applies. That is all I seek.

514 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Section 9(1) states, “the Minister for Health and Children may, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, by regulation, reduce, whether by formula or otherwise, the amount or the rate of payment to be made to health professionals, or classes of health professionals, in respect of any services that they render to or on behalf of a health body from the date of the regulation.” That allows for the regulation of health professionals. Section 10 extends a like power to other Ministers in respect of persons or classes of persons, which is a wider definition, and any service rendered to or on behalf of that Minister or under the aegis of the Minister. This includes any Minister other than the Minister for Health and Children because subsection (4) makes it clear that a Minister making regulations shall have all the powers enjoyed by the Minister for Health and Children under section 9. It would not be safe for the Minister for Health and Children to operate under section 10 and he or she must operate under the conditions and terms of section 9.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Does this provision apply to non-medical consultants of the kind that has proliferated across the Civil Service in recent times?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: It could.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: If the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources has hired a consultancy firm to advise him on energy policy, I doubt that a reduction on the contract price can be enforced through application of this measure.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Assuming that a consultant renders a professional consultancy arrangement of a long-term and onerous character, it would be open to the Minister to deal with the arrangement.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Would the Minister consider public relations consultancies as professional services?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Let us explore these questions as we proceed through this emergency.

Amendment put and declared lost.

An Ceann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 27 to 31, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together.

Deputy Joan Burton: I move amendment No. 27:

In page 10, subsection (4), line 10, after “appropriate” to insert the following:

“with a view to promoting the opportunity for agreement where with any body which in the opinion of the Minister for Health and Children is representative of the health professionals concerned, in relation to the terms of the regulation to be made under subsection (1)”.

Some of this ground has been covered in our earlier discussions. At present it costs between \50 and \60 to visit a GP privately. The preamble to the Bill states that professional medical and legal fees will decrease by 8%. In an economy which is experiencing deflation, professional fees are relatively high, particularly for ordinary people. The majority of public servants who will pay this levy do not qualify for medical cards. The Government’s proposal to reduce professional fees is a quid pro quo but I am not convinced about how or when this will happen. If a person visits a solicitor next week to draw up a will, can he or she ask that the fee be

515 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

[Deputy Joan Burton.] reduced by 8%? That is what this means to the person in the street. This provision does not seek to provide for that. A complication arises in section 9 in regard to professional bodies. The various associations of professionals, particularly in the health services, have a long-standing demand to be recognised for the purpose of negotiating collectively on behalf of their members. The approach of the Minister for Health and Children and the HSE has consistently been to deny outright or to limit that negotiating right in a parallel trade union situation. The advice from the Competition Authority has been that as these professionals are in business in their own right, negotiating therefore constitutes a type of collaboration which amounts in effect to a cartel to fix prices. The Competition Authority objects to professional bodies having negotiating rights in respect of general issues affecting their members. Each time the Health Service Executive or other body is required to engage in negotiations, they reach for lawyers and the Competition Authority who tell them they cannot hold discussions as they would be engaging in cartel practises. The biggest cartel and oligarchs in this country are the banks who have made billions. It is pity we do not know where most of this money is or if it is gone down the drain, the hole we are now trying to plug. The Competition Authority never had a go at any of them. In fact, one gets the impression that people such as the Minister for Health and Children were more often wined and dined by people from the banks. I recall asking the Regulator, in regard to various shareholdings on contracts for difference in respect of Anglo Irish Bank in which he was not able to take an interest, if he would be interested in such matters as a Russian oligarch sailing up the Liffey and announcing his intention to take over the Irish banks. He looked across the table at me but did not respond. We are in difficult territory. I am sure the Minister will be delighted to hear that people are utterly confused. The Minister is suggesting there will be a reduction in professional fees and has cited in particular medical and legal fees, namely, doctors, dentists, pharmacists, physiotherapists and, on the legal side, presumably, solicitors and barristers but he has not told us how this will be done. In addition, people in these professions are represented by long-standing professional bodies who negotiate on a quasi trade union basis to set fees and conditions. Also, there are in all of these professions weaker and younger members who do not have the know-how or strength of the more experienced providers at the top who can and do charge high fees. We are being left to the mercy of the Minister for Health and Children who is being given sweeping powers under sections 9 and 10, which I presume is the Minister’s intention. However, a question arises in regard to whether they will simply facilitate a greater bureaucratic whip hand for the Department of Health and Children and the Health Service Executive and, similarly, the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform which, I presume, deals with fees for lawyers and barristers?

Deputy Richard Bruton: The Attorney General.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: The Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Deputy Richard Bruton: They are not listed in the Bill.

Deputy Joan Burton: Is the Attorney General or Director of Public Prosecutions a Minister for the purposes of this provision?

516 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

We are asked to believe that next week, following the passage of this Bill, the lawyers employed by the DPP in respect of prosecutions and the lawyers in the Attorney General’s Office who brief counsel, will be subject to an 8% reduction in fees. This matter needs to be clarified by Deputy Lenihan who is, after all, the Minister for Finance. The Minister for Health and Children and the Attorney General attend Cabinet. Has the Minister spoken to them and told them the slogan is “minus 8%?”. This provision will result in a lot more regulation and an enormous amount of additional power for various bodies. However, this power will not necessarily manifest itself in lower fees and costs for the public or firms and businesses using these professional services. The irony is that this Government and the Minister for Health and Children have been driving the situation whereby hospital consultants and private hospitals are charging astro- nomical fees for most procedures carried out in the new private hospitals. However, this is not necessarily a problem as the National Treatment Purchase Fund is obliged to spend 90% of our scarce money commissioning procedures in private hospitals. The poor old taxpayer is on a hiding to nothing as regards the Minister for Health and Children. Connolly Hospital, which is located in the constituency which the Minister and I represent, does not have a strong tradition in respect of private medicine, as is the case in respect of most rural hospitals. For example, a person who is unable to have a procedure carried out by a consultant, can, under the National Treatment Purchase Fund, have that procedure carried out at another location and the NTPF will pay for it. This is part of a circle of crazy logic. The object of the amendments put forward by the Labour Party is to provide for negotiating rights by the various professionals on behalf of their trade union members, to require the Minister to make available the statutory instruments in this regard and to require an extension of the consultation period beyond the 30 days provided. These are eminently reasonable amendments which seek to provide for a more negotiated position in respect of the extraordinary powers conferred on the Minister in sections 9 and 10. I do not know exactly when PricewaterhouseCoopers was commissioned by the Minister to work on matters relating to Anglo Irish Bank. We were told in various discussions that seven or eight drafts of the report had been compiled. It would appear PricewaterhouseCoopers was commissioned during the summer or in September. Does the Minister have an estimate of costs in respect of the seven reports drafted by PricewaterhouseCoopers? It is a firm with which I am familiar having worked and undertaken my accountancy training there. I am interested to know if the Minister has a ballpark figure in respect of the cost of the drafting of these reports. Also, as and from tomorrow, will all of those people, who may still be working on reports for the Minister’s Department, receive a note stating their fees will be subject to a reduction of 8%? This is the net point. The Minister confidently stated earlier that computer systems in the various public bodies were ready to go in respect of the deduction of pension levies for public sector workers. Is there in the Department of Finance a programme which will subject staff from Price- waterhouseCoopers and Merrill Lynch, another consultancy group employed by the Minister, to an 8% reduction in fees following enactment of this Bill? That is what this is about.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Deputy Burton is correct that this is about providing clarity. Taxpayers would welcome this measure if they believed it could be enforced and if the Minister could provide us with some examples in this regard. The Attorney General’s office has reasonably frequent resort to senior counsel advice from the Law Library. I am presuming, Minister, that

517 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

[Deputy Pat Rabbitte.] this provision is contemporaneous with the application of the levy. If from 1 March the Attorney General’s office is to have resort to professional advice from the Law Library, will the envisaged reduction apply? Does the reduction envisaged occur in that case? If the Minister for the Environment, Heri- tage and Local Government receives a request from Dublin Castle in respect of the tribunals still extant, will this reduction be enforced in respect of professional fees at Dublin Castle? We need some of these examples, because there has been excessive profit taking in this economy in recent years and professional fees have borne no relationship to developments otherwise in the economy in the past ten or 15 years. In that sense this may not be insignificant. Deputy Burton pointed fairly to the record of the Competition Authority as distinct from its rhetoric. Let us imagine that the banking situation was staring one in the face since the establishment of the Competition Authority, yet the case it decided to take to court was that of the Irish League of Credit Unions. The authority produced the fantastic conclusion that we require two such leagues. It is like saying we ought to have two football associations or FAIs. The other notorious case taken by the authority relates to pet food for Chihuahuas. It did not take on concrete blocks, soft drinks or anything else. If this is to be simultaneously applied and enforced for all forms of professional fees, I welcome it. Section 9 relates to the Minister for Health and Children and section 10 relates to other State services. However, we deserve answers to the questions raised about process and clarity in terms of its application. I welcome it if it makes one small step in addressing the sheltered private sector. Up to now, the debate about competitiveness has been about the public service versus the private sector. Depending on one’s view of the world one exaggerates one or the other. However, there is a sheltered private sector and if we do not address it we will not seriously address the competitiveness issue in the economy. Will the Minister indicate if this small measure helps us towards that end?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: It helps us towards that end in terms of services rendered for the taxpayer. Sections 9 and 10 relate to professional services rendered for the State, not professional services rendered for private parties. In the context of professional services rendered for the State, these sections empower the Minister to take the actions envisaged which will result in ensuring a contribution or a reduction of professional fees by 8% as part of the measures to achieve the annualised \2 billion target. Deputy Burton raised a question in respect of consultation involving a large group of professionals. The relevant sections, namely, sections 9 to 11, inclusive, provide that notwithstanding competition law and other constraints, there would be a process of consultation of 30 days duration which would allow the relevant Minister to determine payments for services with due regard on the one hand to the views of the professionals involved, their contracts, expenses and obligations, and on the other hand, the ability of the State to continue to provide existing health services or other services without a reduction of payments to the professionals concerned. These emergency provisions are independent of any separate decision which the Government may choose to make on the issue of a substantive amendment to the Compe- tition Act. I refer to various circumstances postulated by Deputies about where this section might apply. The Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions are covered by the legislation and it is possible for them to invoke these powers. The Attorney General will exercise these

518 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009 powers. The general provision would also apply in the context of tribunals to the relevant Minister responsible for the tribunal in question.

Deputy Joan Burton: I asked the Minister for a figure and if he were to provide it off the top of his head, that would be fine. I asked what PricewaterhouseCoopers and Merrill Lynch were earning for the services they have provided. Is the Minister proposing to reduce the price for those services by 8% as of next week?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Neither of those bodies work for me. PricewaterhouseCoopers has carried out an assessment of the exposures in the banking sector and is working for the Finan- cial Regulator and is, therefore, remunerated by it. As the Deputy is aware, the regulator is funded through bank levies. Merrill Lynch is retained by the National Treasury Management Agency and it advises that agency. I will establish the position in respect of professional fees, but I do not have the information to hand. I am aware they are substantial.

Deputy Joan Burton: The Minister is the boss of the Financial Regulator and the National Treasury Management Agency. I realise it is indecorous in professional operations to discuss money, but were the cost of these various services ever discussed over cups of tea?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: As the Deputy is well aware, I am not the boss of the regulator.

Deputy Joan Burton: The Minister for Finance is the relevant Minister. The National Treas- ury Management Agency does have a direct reporting relationship to me, but the regulator does not. The matter of PricewaterhouseCoopers is a matter for the regulator. I will check with my Department and the NTMA regarding the position of Merrill Lynch.

Deputy Richard Bruton: Will the Minister indicate what issues a Minister or Attorney General might consider in making his or her determination? I note that according to sections 9(5)(d) and 9(5)(e) the Minister must examine the expenses and commitments of the people providing services and the impact on the State’s ability to continue to provide whatever services the Department is providing. It would seem, therefore, there could be different rates of reduction of fees applied, depending on what the Minister finds when the criteria are reviewed. Is that what is envisaged? I refer to Deputy Rabbitte’s point. Should we not then include some reasonable value in terms of comparable services in other countries? It would seem that the legal fees paid to some barristers are dramatically out of line with anything credible or reasonable. If we were to consider cuts in the level of fees, by applying various criteria of this nature one could produce the idea that some would be reduced by a good deal more than others. I would be very support- ive of this measure if we could get away with it and if we could apply rules based on it. For example, would the expenses and commitments of professionals referred to in the legislation require an examination of the expenses of a barrister? Would the Minister consider the general expenses of a barrister in providing a service and then take that into account in deciding the per diem or the retainer fee? It would be very interesting territory if a Minister could do so. Will we see some categories taking a larger hit because, under these criteria, they have a broader back?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: That inevitably will be the case. We have set ourselves the target of 8% and we will pursue that through the relevant professional bodies. However, we have the reserve power in the legislation to deal with matters in the absence of agreement.

519 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

Deputy Richard Bruton: Should the Minister not have some test of reasonable value?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: The more tests included in such legislation the more one exposes oneself to judicial review. The Minister has been given a very clear power to strike a balance between the rights and obligations of professional service providers and the purposes of the Act to provide a basis for taking emergency measures to tackle the exceptional problems of the public finances. Under that broad rubric the Minister could take into account factors such as those Deputy Bruton has outlined.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: What figure are the Minister’s advisers factoring in for sections 9 and 10? What contribution is that making to the national effort?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: We believe the figure is \80 million on a full year basis but if we can secure more than that, well and good.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Did the Minister say \80 million for both?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Yes, \80 million on a full year basis for both.

Deputy Joan Burton: I am intrigued by the medical list on page 12, subsection (f). What sort of person is that?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Which person does the Deputy mean? I am on page 12.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: The kind of person from whom one would stay away.

Deputy Joan Burton: It is at the top of page 12.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: A registered pharmacist?

Deputy Joan Burton: No I think I understand that. It is in subsection (f).

Deputy Brian Lenihan: A podiatrist.

Deputy Joan Burton: What is that?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Someone who deals with feet.

Deputy Joan Burton: I thought that but what is a chiropodist?

Deputy Richard Bruton: A chiropodist looks after toes.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Ingrown toenails.

Deputy Joan Burton: One deals with the whole of the foot and the other is just——

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Yes the podiatrist deals with the shape of one’s foot and ensures that is correct. Many people have flat feet in our population and in the House.

Deputy Joan Burton: Where is Deputy Gogarty now that we need him?

Acting Chairman (Deputy Charlie O’Connor): I am bound to ask whether the Chair should leave. Is Deputy Burton pressing the amendment?

520 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

Deputy Joan Burton: Yes.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Amendments Nos. 28 to 32, inclusive, not moved.

Acting Chairman: Amendments Nos. 32a and 36 are related and will be taken together by agreement.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 32a:

In page 12, between lines 10 and 11, to insert the following subsection:

“(19) In this section, payment in respect of a service rendered by a health professional includes payment in respect of goods provided by that health professional as part of the service.”.

The purpose of this amendment is to make clear that the payment to a health professional for services rendered may include an element in respect of goods provided and not just a fee for the time and expertise of the professional concerned. Fees to health professionals can include a variety of elements, capitation fees, fee for item dispensed, fee for repairs to appliances and so forth. The subsection puts that issue beyond any doubt.

Amendment agreed to.

Question proposed: “That section 9, as amended, stand part of the Bill.”

Deputy Richard Bruton: What is the nature of the review? Will it encompass some sort of evaluation against criteria or will we simply hear what happened as a financial report?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: It will cover the whole Bill.

Deputy Richard Bruton: I mean subsection (13).

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Subsection (13) is similar to the provision on the pension contribution. It will be of a similarly comprehensive character.

Question put and agreed to.

SECTION 10.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 33:

In page 12, subsection (1), line 12, to delete “circular,” and substitute “circular or”.

Amendment agreed to.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 34:

In page 12, subsection (1), line 17, after “Minister” where it firstly occurs to insert “of the Government”.

521 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

[Deputy Brian Lenihan.]

The purpose of this amendment is to clarify that the reference to “that Minister” does not refer to the Minister for Finance but to the Minister of the Government referred to earlier in the subsection. It is a technical amendment.

Deputy Richard Bruton: Not being the Minister for Health.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Not being the Minister for Health. We are not going to amend that now. It is all right.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment No. 35 not moved.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 36:

In page 12, subsection (5), line 33, to delete “(12)“ and substitute “(16)”.

Amendment agreed to.

Question proposed: “That section 10, as amended, stand part of the Bill.”

Deputy Richard Bruton: Has the Attorney General been asked to comment on the robustness of these sections? Can the Minister assure us that they are robust?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: Yes, the Attorney General took considerable pains in the drafting of this legislation and was especially anxious to ensure the robustness of these two sections.

Deputy Richard Bruton: Does their robustness depend on the sort of citations at the beginning to establish public interest?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: One of the reasons for inserting the recitals after the Long Title was to confirm the importance and gravity of the position that justified the Government’s taking the step of dispensing with legal rights. If the Deputy reads the Long Title he will see that the pension levy is not as directly related to the emergency as the other powers.

Question put and agreed to.

SECTION 11.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 37:

In page 12, lines 37 and 38, to delete “any person from whose remuneration” and substitute “the remuneration of a person in respect of which”.

The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that a person is not subject to a deduction under section 2 and under section 9 or 10 in respect of the same payment.

Deputy Joan Burton: What type of person does the Minister have in mind? Is it a consultant doctor on a salary?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: An example would be a coroner who is also a general practitioner.

522 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

Deputy Joan Burton: What does that mean?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: A person who pays the pension deduction but might also be captured as a fee for professional services.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 11, as amended, agreed to.

SECTION 12.

Acting Chairman: Amendments Nos. 38 and 39 have been ruled out of order.

Amendments Nos. 38 and 39 not moved.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I move amendment No. 40:

In page 12, subsection (1)(b), line 45, after “Minister” to insert “for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food”.

The purpose of this amendment is to clarify that the reference is to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and not the Minister for Finance.

Amendment agreed to.

Acting Chairman: Amendment No. 42 is a technical alternative to amendment No. 41.

Deputy Michael Creed: I move amendment No. 41:

In page 13, subsection (3), lines 5 to 9, to delete all words from and including: “subsection (1)— “ in line 5 down to and including “concerned.” in line 9 and substitute the following:

“subsection (1) a tax credit equivalent to the interest charged shall accumulate.”.

I am not sure whether there are many farmers in the Minister’s constituency who are victims of the Government’s decision to unilaterally tear up the contract it had made with farmers under the farm waste management scheme. I can advise the Minister that many farmers are angry. I do not propose to give him chapter and verse of the debacle of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food’s handling of the farm waste management scheme. We propose the amendment in light of the provision in the Bill to defer payment of moneys legally due under a contract to farmers who had undertaken work under the farm waste management scheme enabling them to comply with the nitrates directive. The proposal is to defer those payments but no cognisance is taken of the accumulated interest payments that farmers must meet while the payment is deferred. The simple purpose of this amendment is to enable individual farmers to claim a tax credit to the value of the interest they will pay on the loans they have secured with their banks. Through no fault of their own, they are no longer in a position to repay those loans as promptly as they would have if the Government grant had been paid in full. Obviously, that provision would only assist farmers who have a taxable income. It would be preferable if we were not in this situation at all — if the Government was paying the moneys up front. I appreciate that we are facing a difficult financial situation. I accept the principle that if one makes one’s tax returns late, one is penalised by the State. In such circumstances, one has to pay penalties and interest.

523 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

[Deputy Michael Creed.] If the State is proposing to defer payment, it is fair that the same principle should apply. The State should meet the cost of the interest farmers have to pay in the interim. That would be the preferred remedy, obviously. The Ministers for Finance and Agriculture, Fisheries and Food should agree to solve the problem in this manner. In the absence of such an agreement, a minimum arrangement is needed. I welcome the fact that the Minister, Deputy Smith, is now present to deal with this issue. Perhaps he can update us on his negotiations on this issue with the farming organisations. I understand that discussions on interest rate provision in respect of these loans have continued until the last few minutes. I exhort him to do the honourable thing by accepting this amendment, thereby meeting the fair and reasonable requests of the farming community. The 17,400 farmers affected by this measure undertook works in good faith to enable them to continue farming. The works in question were concluded in difficult circumstances in advance of the mandatory conclusion date, which was 31 December last. The rug has been pulled from under the farmers. I implore the Minister to take action. It would be preferable if the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food could tell us that he has successfully concluded his negotiations with the farming organisations and now plans to meet the cost of the interest payments. In the absence of such an agreement, the interest element of farmers’ loans needs to be covered, at a minimum.

Deputy Tom Sheahan: I concur with what Deputy Creed has said. I have been contacted by many farmers who are suffering as a result of this decision. The Minister is in breach of contract, in effect. On 27 June 2007, the farmers of this country signed a contract to carry out works on behalf of the Government. However, the Government is not fulfilling its part of that deal. I wish the farming bodies would take a High Court case. By the time it comes to court, I suppose the farmers will be broke anyway. The Minister’s approach has enjoyed some success on several fronts. He has pitted workers against each other. He has pitted the public sector against the private sector. He has pitted family members from both sectors against each other. He has even pitted father against son. A Member of this House will vote with the Minister tonight, even though the Deputy in question’s son, as the deputy general secretary of the Garda Rep- resentative Association, was protesting outside Leinster House earlier today. If the Minister thinks this is a success, I wish him the best with it.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: The Minister is trying to burst up the family.

Deputy Seymour Crawford: I support the efforts of my colleagues to try to get justice for farmers who are affected by this totally unfair and unjust system. I refer to farmers who conducted certain works before 31 December last, in line with a Government commitment and under an agreed contract. They now find that the payments they are owed will be delayed. I do not think any sector of the public agrees with this proposal. I do not think the Minister, Deputy Brian Lenihan, would like to have to wait two years for his salary to be adjusted on an annualised basis. The Minister, Deputy Smith, is well aware that approximately 2,000 farmers in our shared constituency of Cavan-Monaghan are affected by this extremely serious situation. I fully appreciate that it is difficult to raise the finance that is needed, but it is hard to explain to farmers that \7 billion could be found to recapitalise the banks but \300 million cannot be found for them. While 40% has already been paid, the remaining 60% — over \300 million — is not being provided. People are being asked to do without it. If the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has not reached agreement with the farmers tonight, I urge him to accept the amendment before the House and thereby meet the cost of interest payments, at a mini-

524 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009 mum. It is certainly not a full solution, but it is a genuine attempt to alleviate the plight of farmers who are in an extraordinarily difficult situation.

Deputy Joan Burton: I would like the Minister for Finance to outline the economic rationale or strategy that underpins this proposal. The chief executive of Allied Irish Banks has empha- sised in the bank’s various public advertisements that it is important to enable cash and credit to flow through the economy. He has appealed to people and organisations, including Govern- ment Departments, to try to pay their bills on time. He has suggested that payment periods could be reduced to ten or 20 days. He has said that people could bring forward payments on account. If we could get more money circulating in the economy, we could improve confidence and develop a sense that business is resuming. I find the Minister’s proposal difficult to understand. Payments like this tend to circulate in a rural economy, thereby improving the circulation of money, unless people use them to go on foreign holidays, which I do not think the farmers in this instance will do. I do not understand why this payment was singled out in the totality of things. If the Minister for Finance decided that payments to consultants who provide services to Government Departments were to be put on the long finger for two or three years, he might get quite a sympathetic hearing in this Chamber. I refer, for example, to the officials who were involved in projects like the electronic voting machines and the PPARS system. I wonder why payments to farmers were singled out as being worthy of delay. The Minister is aware that during the boom years, many farmers, and their children who stood to inherit their farms, took up off-farm employment in the construction industry. That source of primary or secondary income for many farmers and farm families has dried up. I am sure the Minister understands that the supply of one-off housing projects in certain countries is drying up. It seems strange, from an economic strategy perspec- tive, that the Minister introduced restrictions on the scheme prior to last year’s budget and, more recently, introduced restrictions on payments under the scheme. The impact of those restrictions on the flow of credit is exactly what we do not want at this time. Can the Minister explain the economic rationale for this measure? I certainly do not understand it.

Deputy David Stanton: Over recent days, I have met a number of groups of farmers throughout the country who are under severe pressure as a result of the decision we are trying to amend. They want 40% of the payment to be paid now or, at the very least, the interest to be covered. Their cash flow is drying up. They are worried about their credit rating. 10 o’clock They are under ferocious pressure from banks to pay back the money. They borrowed in good faith, on the understanding that the grants would be made available in a timely manner, as it always was in the past. There was some talk about letters of comfort. Has the Minister asked the banks to ease off? Some farmers told me that they have taken out loans of \120,000, while some have bridging loans with high interest, and they are facing ruin. They are extremely worried. Is this particular part of the Bill constitutional? Legislation in the past on nursing homes tried to change something retrospectively. The President referred it to the Supreme Court and it was found to be unconstitutional. The Government made a promise to citizens who entered into an agreement on good faith, yet the Minister has tried to make something legal that is obviously unjust and is causing great hardship. The idea should be scrapped and the grants should be paid in full straight away. Failing that, the 40% should be paid immediately. There was also an issue with the computer system in the Department, and the whole thing was delayed due to the change in the payment method. This is extremely serious for many farming families around the country, and I implore the Government to look at this again.

525 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

Deputy Denis Naughten: I would like to speak on the amendment put forward by Deputy Bruton, even though Deputy Creed has already spoken on it. It is extremely interesting to read what has been written in this section. At the moment, the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food is legally liable to pay the moneys owed to the farmers. He signed a binding contract with them on the farm waste management grant. As he could not do the maths, we have now ended up with this situation. In section 12, the Minister abdicates his responsibility to make any legally binding payment to farmers. It is dependent on the resources being available to the Minister from time to time to make payments under the scheme. While the Minister has stated that he will pay 40% this year, 40% next year and 20% the year after, there is absolutely nothing in this Bill to commit him to do that. Deputy Creed highlighted today that the \140 million required to make up the 40% this year is not available. No funding will be made available for it, and these resources must be obtained within the Department itself. The concern is that the headage will be cut in order to pay it, so we are robbing Peter to pay Paul. The Government has now got a loan from Irish farmers of \500 million that is interest free for two and a half to three years, but it is not prepared to assist farmers, many of whom have desperate financial problems at this stage. Under subsection (3), the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food defers any liability, accrual or payment relating to the farm waste management grant. The Bill also states that there is no obligation to make any payment arising in respect of the amount deferred. The Minister for Finance is removing any obligation, legal or otherwise, to make a repayment to the farmers. He is stealing money directly from their pockets. The Minister should at least write into the Bill his commitment for 40%, 40% and 20% payments. He should also write into the Bill that the interest currently borne on the backs of small farmers would be carried by the Exchequer in light of the mess that the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has made of this. Severe cases of financial hardship should be addressed immediately and should be paid in full.

Deputy Tom Hayes: I understand that the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has been in negotiation with farming organisations. I will give him my speaking time to give us an update on the situation. Is that possible? I would prefer this to the repetition of the situation by every speaker.

Acting Chairman: There are only two speakers left.

Deputy Tom Hayes: I just want to allow him speak instead of me.

Acting Chairman: If other colleagues are happy with that, I will allow it.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte: Could somebody restrain the Minister?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I am in possession of the Bill.

Acting Chairman: The ball is in your court.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: The Deputy wants the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to speak.

Deputy Michael Creed: The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food entered negotiations this evening with the farm organisations on this particular issue. It would be a courtesy to the House to give us an update on these negotiations.

526 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

Acting Chairman: I understand that I can allow that to happen, if the Minister so wishes.

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): I had discussions with the farm organisations on a number of issues this evening, including payment under the farm waste management scheme. I explained to them that I hoped to conclude negotiations with the banks within the next few days on seeking to ease the difficulties that individual farmers are meeting.

Deputy Tom Hayes: What does that mean?

Deputy Sea´n Sherlock: On a point of order, what in the name of goodness does that mean? Are we given to believe that the Minister is negotiating with the banks for favourable terms for farmers who have undertaken to complete a scheme under obligation of EU legislation?

Deputy Michael Creed: I was in the Minister’s constituency last night in Cootehill at a public meeting with a couple of hundred farmers. One farmer came up to me after the meeting with a letter from his bank manager. The letter stated that the bank manager wanted to see him as a matter of urgency, in light of the fact that he was no longer in a position to pay his farm waste management loan, and on that basis, the manager wanted to review his working capital provision for 2009. That letter is replicated the length and breadth of the country, from Cork to Cavan and from Wexford to Donegal. The Minister has stated in the House that he is hoping to conclude a deal with the banks on this issue. The estimated cost to farmers is approximately \9 million over three years. If the State were to take on board that liability, it would possibly be on even more favourable terms. Farmers entered into a contractual agreement in good faith with the Minister and the Depart- ment, which he has now unilaterally torn up in their face and told them he will not pay them their money as expected, even though he enticed them to complete the works before 31 December. We discovered in hindsight that this was an artificial deadline imposed by the Minister in order to deliberately exclude farmers from the scheme.

Deputy Brendan Smith: It was not an artificial deadline.

Deputy Michael Creed: Farmers stepped up to the plate in their thousands; in fact, 17,400 of them did so. The Minister failed to provide adequate funding in the budget for that. A total of \125 million in 2009 leaves us short of \105 million to pay even the 40% to which the Minister refers. We need clarity from this debate. We do not want a situation where farmers are being asked to live horse and get grass. They did that for the farm waste management scheme by completing their works before 31 December, yet the Minister has hung them out to dry. He failed them with farm waste management, he is failing them in REPS 4, he failed them with the suspension of the farm investment scheme before that, installation aid, the early retirement scheme and disadvantaged area payments. Farmers deserve a fair break, and Deputy Burton raised an interesting issue here. Why is it that farmers have been singled for the deferral of liabilities? If colleagues of the Minister for Finance in Dublin Castle were asked to take a deferred payment on their legal fees for three years, we would be in here hot to trot and would have it resolved before the morning. These farmers have invested hundreds of millions of euro in their farms to enable them legally to continue in business. There is no additional income stream for farmers arising out of this commitment to investment. It only legally enables them to continue with their business. By

527 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

[Deputy Michael Creed.] virtue of the Minister’s failure to provide adequate funding for this grant, he has reneged on his legal responsibility. The Minister is seeking, through this Bill, to weasel his way out of that legal commitment. He gives us meaningless words, saying he hopes to conclude a deal with the banks. This is the last chance saloon for a legal resolution of this issue and I ask the Minister to improve on his last offer.

Deputy Tom Hayes: When I gave the Minister a chance, I expected him to have something positive to say about this because this is a matter of trust, and trust is very important in the times in which we are living. These people entered into agreements with their banks and I cannot understand how we miscalculated this, but we did. People are not getting back the money to pay their banks. They cannot get stocking loans, buy fertiliser or take on people they may want to employ. They are short of credit simply because of the Government’s actions. It is very unfair. We sit here at this hour of the night trying to work something out and bring this nation forward. To do this to a section of the community is deplorable and we should be made answer for it. I hope we will go through the lobbies and that Deputies who represent rural constituencies will think twice before they give a slap in the face to the many people in our constituencies.

Deputy Michael Creed: There is not a single Fianna Fa´il backbencher in the House to debate this matter. It is deplorable.

A Deputy: Or any Green Party Deputy.

Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: It shows their priorities.

Deputy Andrew Doyle: The vast majority of the finance secured for the works that took place is from institutions that are guaranteed or recapitalised by the Government. Given that the total amount due is approximately \500 million or a little more and accounts for only a maximum of 60% of the total investment, it gives us an idea of the level of borrowing that has taken place. What the Minister has put into this Bill makes those loans not nearly as secure or as sound as they were on foot of a guaranteed contract between the Government and the individuals. The Government’s actions have added to the level of less safe debt the banks have. The banks’ loan books have been compromised by their actions. These are the very banks and institutions that seek guarantees, recapitalisations and foreign investment and promote confidence in our financial institutions, yet by their actions they are compromising that effort. It does not matter which sector of society or business the Government did this to; it has undermined the entire system. Deputy Burton talked about trying to restimulate the economy. Last week, AIB put an advertisement in every newspaper saying that it will pay on account. I went into my bank manager to ask what is going on and was told the banks are receiving directions to issue these letters. They are asking all farmers to come in and discuss how they will rearrange their repayment schedules. We have not received a letter of comfort and the Minister says he hopes to have a conclusion with the banks by the end of the week. That is not good enough. First, he will have to tell the banks to tell the people with outstanding loans they will have to wait for their money because their actions have caused the loans to be jeopardised.

Deputy Martin Ferris: The Government’s credibility is in tatters and Deputy Brian Lenihan’s personal credibility as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform will be in tatters if this is not lived up to.

528 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

Deputy Arthur Morgan: The Minister for Finance.

Deputy Michael Creed: He is the Minister for injustice.

Deputy Martin Ferris: Farmers all over the country borrowed an awful lot of money to try to upgrade their farms when they were encouraged to do so by the Government. They were even told to have it done by 31 December. In the meetings other Deputies and I had with the Minister in the past we went around and encouraged farmers to finish their building programmes so they would qualify for the grant. Many of those farmers have already paid back \5,000, \6,000 or \7,000 in interest. These are farmers who are struggling as it is. It is necessary that a letter of security be forthcoming from the Minister and the Department through the banks to alleviate the continuing growth of interest on them. We also need a clear and unequivocal statement by the Government that this money will be paid, all three instalments, as well as the interest they are incurring. We cannot allow another penalty to be imposed on the farming community and the thousands of farmers who await their money. I urge the Minister to give that security to people who are in a desperate situation.

Deputy James Bannon: Up and down the country farmers young and old have been plunged into a cashflow crisis. Last week I had three young farmers in my clinic looking for references to take with them out of the country to Canada to try to earn money to pay for their slatted shed because of the Minister’s behaviour. Farmers took a disproportionate hit in last year’s budget when the Minister abolished the installation aid for young farmers and abandoned the farm retirement scheme. Shame on the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. His position is untenable and he should consider this tonight because the farmers of the country are fed up with his behaviour.

Deputy Joe McHugh: The Minister has heard the declarations from our colleagues. He has five people from the Department of Finance or Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food with him tonight. He is in contact with the banks on a daily basis. The Minister should give a commitment to farmers that they will have some sort of leverage regarding the interest. That is what they seek today and the Minister should give that commitment. It was not given today because people were in the banks today and they know nothing about it. The Minister should use his leverage and influence on the banks because we have a role to play in easing off on the farmers.

Deputy Sea´n Sherlock: I want from the Minister a full and final confirmation on whether he will give a guarantee to the House tonight before we vote on this legislation that those affected by this can wake up tomorrow morning and know there will be some stay of execution and those loans will not be called in.

Deputy Tom Sheahan: Section 12 states: “the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food may, by order, defer to a specified date.” I want a specified date because no reference is given here to a specified date for the 40% payment or anything about the 40:40:20. That has all been stated outside here and not as part of this. Will the Minister specify a date for the first payment of 40%, the second payment of 40% and the 20% final payment?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: The debates are in the public domain. The word “specified” is used in the legislation because the dates are not set out in the legislation but it is intended that 40% will be paid on the enactment of this legislation, 40% in January 2010 and 20% in January 2011. Since 40% will be paid on the enactment of this legislation that might give Members

529 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

[Deputy Brian Lenihan.] opposite, who have turned up in such large numbers showing the Fine Gael interest in this subject, an incentive to support this Bill later and expedite the passage of this legislation. Regarding the earlier question, it is important that the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food’s discussions with the banks are concluded as rapidly as possible in the interests of the farming community. The Minister has put a great effort into these negotiations and they are very close to finalisation. I have been giving him all support on this and will continue to do so to ensure this difficult issue is resolved in the interests of Irish agriculture. The amendment is not accepted because, clearly, writing off interest payments on borrowings against profits is already something farmers, like any other business, can do. Clearly, the righting off of interest payments on borrowings against profits is already something which farmers, like any other business, can do and allowing for a tax credit for such payments, even if the credit was confined to accrued interest payments in respect of borrowing for projects qualifying for farm waste management grants, would be an effective duplication of relief already allowed. As I stated, the Minister, Deputy Smith, has had discussions again this evening with the farm organisations and has been working extensively with the banks to ensure the position of farmers faced with these financial pressures are addressed.

Deputy Michael Creed: Will the Minister give an assurance to the House that in the event of the Government failing to conclude an agreement with the banks, the State will meet the interest liability?

Deputy Brian Lenihan: I am not giving any such assurance this evening because the Minister is engaged in negotiations. I would not dream of giving such an assurance in the House on a sensitive matter like this, but I am sure the Minister will progress matters to the best of his abilities. We must progress these matters. Deputy Bruton speaks regularly about the need for proper control of public expenditure. The reality is that the farm waste management scheme was a demand led scheme, the eventual cost of which bore no relation to the original envisaged cost.

Deputy Sea´n Sherlock: It was a legislative obligation.

Deputy Tom Hayes: Because of the criteria the Department had in place with which to record a market incentive.

Deputy Brian Lenihan: One of the decisions the Government has taken on expenditure control is the cash limiting of demand-led schemes. There are many businesses which face legislative obligations which must discharge the expenditure to perform their legislative obligations out of their own resources. The State rightly, but generously, provided for a contribution towards this and the reality is the sums expended have been way out of proportion to the originally envisaged sum.

Question put: “That the words proposed to be deleted stand.”

530 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

The Committee divided: Ta´, 81; Nı´l, 71.

Ta´

Ahern, Dermot. Kelly, Peter. Ahern, Michael. Kenneally, Brendan. Ahern, Noel. Kennedy, Michael. Andrews, Barry. Kirk, Seamus. Andrews, Chris. Kitt, Michael P. Ardagh, Seań. Kitt, Tom. Aylward, Bobby. Lenihan, Brian. Blaney, Niall. Lenihan, Conor. Brady, A´ ine. Lowry, Michael. Brady, Cyprian. Mansergh, Martin. Brady, Johnny. McEllistrim, Thomas. Browne, John. McGrath, Mattie. Byrne, Thomas. McGrath, Michael. Calleary, Dara. McGuinness, John. Carey, Pat. Martin, Michea´l. Collins, Niall. Moloney, John. Conlon, Margaret. Moynihan, Michael. Connick, Seań. Mulcahy, Michael. Coughlan, Mary. Nolan, M.J. Cregan, John. O´ Cuı´v, E´ amon. Cuffe, Ciarań. O´ Fearghaı´l, Seań. Cullen, Martin. O’Brien, Darragh. Curran, John. O’Connor, Charlie. Dempsey, Noel. O’Flynn, Noel. Devins, Jimmy. O’Hanlon, Rory. Dooley, Timmy. O’Keeffe, Batt. Fahey, Frank. O’Keeffe, Edward. Finneran, Michael. O’Rourke, Mary. Fitzpatrick, Michael. O’Sullivan, Christy. Fleming, Seań. Power, Peter. Flynn, Beverley. Power, Seań. Gallagher, Pat The Cope. Roche, Dick. Gogarty, Paul. Ryan, Eamon. Gormley, John. Sargent, Trevor. Grealish, Noel. Scanlon, Eamon. Hanafin, Mary. Smith, Brendan. Harney, Mary. Treacy, Noel. Haughey, Seań. Wallace, Mary. Healy-Rae, Jackie. White, Mary Alexandra. Hoctor, Maíre. Woods, Michael. Kelleher, Billy.

Nı´l

Allen, Bernard. Doyle, Andrew. Bannon, James. Durkan, Bernard J. Behan, Joe. English, Damien. Breen, Pat. Enright, Olwyn. Broughan, Thomas P. Feighan, Frank. Bruton, Richard. Ferris, Martin. Burke, Ulick. Flanagan, Charles. Burton, Joan. Flanagan, Terence. Byrne, Catherine. Gilmore, Eamon. Carey, Joe. Hayes, Brian. Clune, Deirdre. Hayes, Tom. Connaughton, Paul. Higgins, Michael D. Coonan, Noel J. Howlin, Brendan. Costello, Joe. Kehoe, Paul. Coveney, Simon. Kenny, Enda. Crawford, Seymour. Lynch, Ciara´n. Creed, Michael. Lynch, Kathleen. Deasy, John. McCormack, Pa´draic. Deenihan, Jimmy. McEntee, Shane. 531 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

Nı´l—continued

McGinley, Dinny. Perry, John. McGrath, Finian. Quinn, Ruairı´. McHugh, Joe. Rabbitte, Pat. McManus, Liz. Reilly, James. Mitchell, Olivia. Ring, Michael. Morgan, Arthur. Shatter, Alan. Naughten, Denis. Sheahan, Tom. Neville, Dan. Sheehan, P.J. O´ Caolaín, Caoimhghıń. Sherlock, Seań. O´ Snodaigh, Aengus. Shortall, Ro´ isıń. O’Donnell, Kieran. Stagg, Emmet. O’Dowd, Fergus. Stanton, David. O’Keeffe, Jim. Tuffy, Joanna. O’Mahony, John. Upton, Mary. O’Shea, Brian. Varadkar, Leo. O’Sullivan, Jan. Wall, Jack. Penrose, Willie.

Tellers: Ta´, Deputies Pat Carey and Cregan; Nı´l, Deputies Kehoe and Stagg.

Question declared carried.

Amendment declared lost.

An Ceann Comhairle: I am now required to put the following question in accordance with an order of the Da´il of this day: “That the amendments set down by the Minister for Finance for Committee Stage and not disposed of are hereby made to the Bill in respect of each of the sections undisposed of, that the section or, as appropriate, the section as amended is hereby agreed to in Committee, the Schedule, the Preamble and the Title are hereby agreed to in Committee, the Bill, as amended, is accordingly reported to the House, that Report Stage is hereby completed and the Bill is hereby passed.”

Question put.

The Da´il divided: Ta´, 81; Nı´l, 72.

Ta´

Ahern, Dermot. Cullen, Martin. Ahern, Michael. Curran, John. Ahern, Noel. Dempsey, Noel. Andrews, Barry. Devins, Jimmy. Andrews, Chris. Dooley, Timmy. Ardagh, Seań. Fahey, Frank. Aylward, Bobby. Finneran, Michael. Blaney, Niall. Fitzpatrick, Michael. Brady, A´ ine. Fleming, Seań. Brady, Cyprian. Flynn, Beverley. Brady, Johnny. Gallagher, Pat The Cope. Browne, John. Gogarty, Paul. Byrne, Thomas. Gormley, John. Calleary, Dara. Grealish, Noel. Carey, Pat. Hanafin, Mary. Collins, Niall. Harney, Mary. Conlon, Margaret. Haughey, Seań. Connick, Seań. Healy-Rae, Jackie. Coughlan, Mary. Hoctor, Maíre. Cregan, John. Kelleher, Billy. Cuffe, Ciarań. Kelly, Peter. 532 Financial Emergency Measures in the 25 February 2009. Public Interest Bill 2009

Ta´—continued

Kenneally, Brendan. O’Brien, Darragh. Kennedy, Michael. O’Connor, Charlie. Kirk, Seamus. O’Flynn, Noel. Kitt, Michael P. O’Hanlon, Rory. Kitt, Tom. O’Keeffe, Batt. Lenihan, Brian. O’Keeffe, Edward. Lenihan, Conor. O’Rourke, Mary. Lowry, Michael. O’Sullivan, Christy. Mansergh, Martin. Power, Peter. Martin, Michea´l. Power, Sea´n. McEllistrim, Thomas. Roche, Dick. McGrath, Mattie. Ryan, Eamon. McGrath, Michael. Sargent, Trevor. McGuinness, John. Scanlon, Eamon. Moloney, John. Smith, Brendan. Moynihan, Michael. Treacy, Noel. Mulcahy, Michael. Wallace, Mary. Nolan, M.J. White, Mary Alexandra. O´ Cuı´v, E´ amon. Woods, Michael. O´ Fearghaı´l, Sea´n.

Nı´l

Allen, Bernard. Lynch, Kathleen. Bannon, James. McCormack, Pa´draic. Behan, Joe. McEntee, Shane. Breen, Pat. McGinley, Dinny. Broughan, Thomas P. McGrath, Finian. Bruton, Richard. McHugh, Joe. Burke, Ulick. McManus, Liz. Burton, Joan. Mitchell, Olivia. Byrne, Catherine. Morgan, Arthur. Carey, Joe. Naughten, Denis. Neville, Dan. Clune, Deirdre. ´ Connaughton, Paul. O Caolaín, Caoimhghıń. O´ Snodaigh, Aengus. Coonan, Noel J. O’Donnell, Kieran. Costello, Joe. O’Dowd, Fergus. Coveney, Simon. O’Keeffe, Jim. Crawford, Seymour. O’Mahony, John. Creed, Michael. O’Shea, Brian. Deasy, John. O’Sullivan, Jan. Deenihan, Jimmy. Penrose, Willie. Doyle, Andrew. Perry, John. Durkan, Bernard J. Quinn, Ruairı´. English, Damien. Rabbitte, Pat. Enright, Olwyn. Reilly, James. Feighan, Frank. Ring, Michael. Ferris, Martin. Shatter, Alan. Flanagan, Charles. Sheahan, Tom. Flanagan, Terence. Sheehan, P.J.. Gilmore, Eamon. Sherlock, Seań. Hayes, Brian. Shortall, Ro´ isıń. Hayes, Tom. Stagg, Emmet. Higgins, Michael D. Stanton, David. Hogan, Phil. Tuffy, Joanna. Howlin, Brendan. Upton, Mary. Kehoe, Paul. Varadkar, Leo. Kenny, Enda. Wall, Jack. Lynch, Ciarań.

Tellers: Ta´: Deputies Pat Carey and John Cregan; Nı´l: Deputies Paul Kehoe and Emmet Stagg.

Question declared carried.

533 Tax 25 February 2009. Code

Adjournment Debate.

————

Tax Code. Deputy Joe Carey: I thank you, a Cheann Comhairle, for allowing me to raise this important issue. The hospitality industry is in free-fall, with hotels closing and jobs being lost. The Govern- ment, however, has done nothing to stem the tide. In fact, the Minister for Finance’s travel tax will make this horrendous situation even worse. If the travel tax goes ahead as planned, Ryanair has warned that it will reduce flights to and from Shannon from 30 March. Last year Ryanair accounted for 60% of all traffic through Shannon airport, carrying 1.9 million passengers to and from 30 different destinations. In recent weeks Ryanair has said it will have no choice but to reduce its Shannon-based aircraft from six to four this summer. It will also reduce from 30 to 25 its route network at Shannon. Ryanair’s weekly Shannon service will be reduced from 136 flights to 116. These cuts will mean a reduction of 700,000 passengers using Shannon airport this year. The mid-west region, including County Clare, can ill afford this loss. I spoke with Ryanair’s chief executive, Michael O’Leary, two weeks ago and he informed me that his company would reverse its decision on these cuts if the Government scrapped the flat \10 travel tax. The average price of a Ryanair flight is \10 during the winter months and, in effect, the Minister is imposing a 100% travel tax on Ryanair passengers. There is no fairness or equity in this tax, which must be either scrapped or introduced as a scaled percentage on the price of the flight ticket. It is simply not right or fair to charge a passenger travelling to America the same tax as one travelling to London. Earlier today the Minister for Finance announced that airports in this State which had less than 50,000 departing passengers in the previous calendar year will be exempt from the travel tax. This is positive news for airports in Donegal and Sligo. The Minister’s statement, posted on his Department’s website, states:

Concerns have been raised regarding the impact the air travel tax could have on small peripheral airports and their ability to develop new routes. The importance of such airports to the local area has also been stressed. I indicated that I would take the matter into account and reflect on it.

Shannon airport is the key economic driver of the mid-west region. We too have major concerns about the flat \10 travel tax, as it will have a devastating impact on our economy. The travel tax has placed in jeopardy Ryanair’s \400 million investment in Shannon airport. Some 100 direct jobs and 700 indirect jobs will be lost at the end of March. The lost revenue from 700,000 fewer passengers will place further pressure on retailers in County Clare who are already reeling from the effects of the recession. The tourism industry is being thrown to the wolves by this tax. On a practical basis, it will mean fewer bed nights, fewer coaches, fewer taxi fares and fewer meals in restaurants. I plead with the Minister to reflect on this damaging tax, as he has done for other airports. He should consider the immediate dire consequences the tax will have on the mid-west region, including Shannon airport. Let the Government put balanced regional development first. The Minister should either scrap this tax for Shannon airport or introduce a fair tax based on a

534 Tax 25 February 2009. Code percentage of the cost of flight tickets. The Minister should not lose sight of the fact that we are an island nation.

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy John Moloney): I am pleased to take this opportunity to clarify matters relating to the introduction of an air travel tax that the Minister for Finance announced in budget 2009, which will come into force for passengers departing from Irish airports as and from 30 March 2009. The Finance (No. 2) Act 2008 confirms the introduction of an air travel tax from 30 March 2009. The general rate applying will be \10 per passenger, with a lower rate of \2 for short air journeys. The Minister, however, took account of concerns raised by the regional airports, particularly those on the western seaboard. The lower rate of \2 will apply to departures from any Irish airport where the destination is 300 kms or less from Dublin airport. This means all Irish departures to locations such as Manch- ester, Liverpool and Glasgow will be subject to the \2 rate. The Minister has also decided that a relatively short air journey should reflect a lower charge. It is not unusual for the price of fares for longer journeys to be higher than those for shorter journeys and the tax reflects that position. The Minister was also conscious that the tax would apply to both the outward and return journeys in respect of domestic flights. In addition, the Minister was cognisant of the greater competition that exists from other forms of travel for that sector relative to longer flights. Ireland is not unique in applying a tax on air travel. Many EU member states and other countries worldwide apply similar taxes. For example, our nearest neighbour, the UK, has applied a similar tax for several years. Currently, the UK applies an air passenger duty of £10, approximately \11, for a standard ticket for any destination in the UK or Europe. For all other destinations, the rate is £20, approximately \22. Both these rates double for tickets other than economy class. Moreover, the UK Government announced in its 2008 pre-budget speech that it would be revising the duty with an introduction of four bands of 2,000 miles each together with an increase in rates of air passenger duty with effect from 1 November 2009. The new rates will comprise the following: band A, zero to 2,000 miles, £11; band B, 2,001 to 4,000 miles, £45; band C, 4,001 to 6,000 miles, £50; and band D, over 6,000 miles, £55 in the case of economy class. These rates double in the case of tickets other than economy class. The base band A rate will be further increased to £12 from 1 November 2010, with increases of 30% to over 50% being applied to the other three bands B, C and D. A new Dutch aviation tax entered into force in July last year. The tax is charged at \11.50 for EU destinations and \45 for other destinations. In France, the civil aviation tax is charged at approximately \4 for EU destinations and \7 for other destinations. Australia and New Zealand, both dependent on air travel like Ireland, also apply departure taxes. The proposed air travel tax rates, both for shorter and longer journeys, are not unreasonable when compared with rates in other countries. For example, a person travelling in the UK will be liable to pay the UK air passenger duty of £10, approximately \11, on each leg of the journey. A passenger departing from Manchester to London will be subject to the £10 tax and on the return journey departing from London to Manchester will also be subject to the £10 tax, giving a total tax liability of £20, approximately \22. In Ireland, a person travelling in the State will be liable to pay \2 in tax on each leg of the journey, giving a total tax liability of \4.

535 Health 25 February 2009. Services

[Deputy John Moloney.] Furthermore, both the UK and Dutch rates in respect of longer flights are over two and four times higher, respectively, than the Irish rate. The Government also acknowledges that low cost travel has been good for Ireland. The pioneers in this area deserve to be commended. However, in analysing the new tax, we must not overplay its impact. For example, a fare from Shannon to London Stansted that is initially presented as \15 with a similar \15 return fare will actually cost a passenger over \90 when all charges are included.

Deputy Joe Carey: That is not correct.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy cannot interrupt the Minster of State because this is the Adjournment.

Deputy John Moloney: It is in this briefing, so I must assume it is correct. I do not make it up as I go along. This assumes no luggage is checked in which would cost more. Included in the \90 is a \5 credit card handling fee per flight segment. This latter practice has been the subject of much criticism by consumer bodies. Assuming fares remained the same, the price of this trip would rise to \100 on foot of the new tax. In the case of trips to Manchester, Liverpool and Glasgow the price would rise by just \2.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Minister of State’s time has expired.

Health Services. Deputy Tom Sheahan: I thank the Ceann Comhairle for affording me the opportunity to raise this matter on the Adjournment. I am glad the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Moloney, is in the Chamber to address my concerns. I chose the term “contraction” in my submission for the Adjournment because, after several announcements in the past week, health services in County Kerry are being decimated. At Kerry General Hospital, the Annagh ward, a male surgical ward, will only open five days a week. From now on, one should not even think of getting sick over the weekend in Kerry. How will, for example, an accident that requires male surgery be dealt with on a Saturday? The hospital’s orthopaedic unit, the Rathass ward, will be closed for six months for refur- bishment. Where will male orthopaedic patients be cared for? It must also be remembered that Kerry’s population doubles over the summer due to visitors. How will the health services deal with these extra numbers when these wards are closed? Six beds in the psychiatric unit in the hospital have been closed. Psychiatrists across the country are inundated with cases. The other day I learned from a GP that 80% of his patients looking for anti-depressant prescriptions were under 30 years of age. However, six beds in the psychiatric unit in Kerry General Hospital are closed. In these cost-saving measures the health of the people of County Kerry is irrelevant. Up to 21 community beds in the Rowan ward at St. Columbanus’s Home in Killarney have been closed. The ward was upgraded in 2007 at much expense. I do not have the exact figure for the remedial works as it is quite difficult to get information from the Health Service Execu- tive. Where are the health services going? The Minister of State and his colleagues are jeopard- ising the health of the people in the county. After the closure of the Rowan ward, the female

536 Health 25 February 2009. Services community bed ward will be next to be closed. I met recently with union representatives at the hospital and they are concerned that capacity will be reduced from 150 beds to 97. Some children in County Kerry have been on orthodontic waiting lists for the past seven years. Kerry General Hospital still does not have an accident and emergency consultant. The last one left because he had no supports such as junior doctors or a registrar. He went to Tullamore, the Minister of State’s locality, because in a similar sized hospital there he had two registrars, ten junior doctors and two other consultants. Recently, I met with the HSE representatives in Kerry who believe they will not bother appointing a replacement accident and emergency consultant for the county. Will the Minister of State explain what he will do for the health services in County Kerry?

Deputy John Moloney: The Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, apologises that she cannot be present to reply to this matter. As outlined and agreed in its national service plan, a key objective for the Health Service Executive for 2009 is to manage the delivery of activity targets. The Deputy will appreciate that the executive is facing financial pressures arising, to a large degree, from the broader economic situation, particularly an increase in the number of medical cards and 11 o’clock lower receipts from the health levy. These cost pressures are factors outside the control of the HSE and, therefore, it must take measures to counter their effects in so as far as is possible. It must maintain a strong focus on achieving the maximum efficiency in the delivery of services. This will also require the co-operation and flexibility of all involved, including those working at the front line of care delivery, so that the effect on services for patients will be minimised. Among the key objectives across the health service are the provision of a greater proportion of elective hospital treatment on a day basis, a shift in mental health services from the acute hospital setting to community-based services and the development of multidisciplinary primary care teams. In response to the serious challenges I have described, the executive management board at Kerry General Hospital is reviewing all areas across its services to ensure that all opportunities for increased efficiency are pursued and that the hospital remains within its allocated budget for 2009. Specific areas identified for cost containment and efficiencies include the non-filling of management-administration vacancies, the co-ordinated planning of leave hospital-wide to ensure that locum cover is not required and ensuring that private patients are accommodated in the beds appropriate to such patients. One ward will also be converted from seven-day to five-day use. In other words, it will be closed at weekends. This will generate a significant saving without compromising patient care. Senior staff and heads of department at the hospital, as well as union representatives, have been briefed in respect of the efficiencies and cost savings plan being put in place. Local Oireachtas Members have also been briefed with regard to these measures. The HSE must keep its financial position under constant review, particularly in light of the evolving situation in respect of demand-led schemes such as the GMS. Accordingly, the executive management board of Kerry General Hospital will continue to review its service delivery arrangements as necessary throughout the year. It is clear that the State and the agencies responsible for the delivery of public services face unprecedented economic and financial pressures in the current year. This represents a major challenge on many fronts. In the health sector, we will be obliged to deliver more for a given level of resources and this will require the co- operation of all involved. The key priority for the Government and the HSE in dealing with

537 Public 25 February 2009. Transport

[Deputy John Moloney.] serious budget pressures on the health services is to ensure that the maximum level of service is provided within available financing and that the impact on front-line services will be minimised.

Public Transport. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: I was delighted to learn earlier this afternoon that discussions between the NBRU, SIPTU and Dublin Bus at the Labour Relations Commission, LRC, have resulted in the strike action at Dublin Bus that was set to begin on Saturday next being averted. Commuters and businesses, as well as rugby fans, in the greater Dublin area will breathe a sigh of relief that the planned massive disruptions to services have been avoided. A major interruption of bus services is the last thing the Irish economy needs or can afford at present. An all-out bus strike is an appalling prospect for many workers who rely completely on public transport services. It would also place huge added pressure on businesses that are already under massive strain due to the horrendous economic conditions which currently obtain. However, workers at Dublin Bus and Bus E´ ireann felt they had no option but to withdraw their labour in light of the proposed sacking of approximately 600 of their number. Plans to cut up to 600 jobs and perhaps as many as 300 buses at Dublin Bus and Bus E´ ireann is an unprecedented and appalling attack on bus services, particularly in light of the collusion of the Green Party in this despicable act. Commuters have been stunned and devastated to learn that their local bus services — which are already under severe pressure due to the Government’s neglect of them during the past 12 years — will now be reduced or cancelled completely. I have been inundated with e-mails from young bus drivers and their families who have been devastated to learn that they are to be made redundant. Many of these young drivers left permanent and pensionable jobs in other sectors in the past 12 months in order to join our public bus companies because they believed they had a future with these companies. In the context of the current disastrous economic situation, losing their jobs is a devastating body blow. Each job lost costs the State an additional \20,000 per annum. This means that the State would lose a further \12 million each year as a result of what is proposed at Dublin Bus and Bus E´ ireann. We should not be obliged to cope with such a loss at present. Is the Minister of State in a position to provide any hope tonight to all or some of the young drivers — and their families — who face the possible termination of their contracts in the next week or two? Will he indicate whether there have been any moves to consider a full or partly voluntary redundancy scheme at both bus companies? Will he also comment on the natural wastage that occurs in a large workforce and indicate how this will impact on the proposal? The Minister for Transport, Deputy Dempsey, has direct responsibility for the funding and operation of our national public transport system. However, when a crisis of this magnitude occurs within the bus sector, he runs for cover or tries to use the Green party or the recently published Deloitte & Touche report on Dublin Bus and Bus E´ ireann as a mudguard. A constituent pointed out to me last week that the Minister and his Government colleagues have approved or sanctioned Dublin Bus and Bus E´ ireann business plans in recent years which included fleet expansion plans and the associated recruitment of new drivers. How is it possible that the Minister approved these plans and is now abdicating all responsibility when hundreds of young bus workers are being summarily dismissed? Both bus companies will clearly be obliged to deal with exceptionally difficult financial circumstances this year. However, the Government has done little to strengthen and support

538 School 25 February 2009. Staffing them. Late last year, the Minister abolished the public transport fuel rebate, which CIE warned would add millions to operating costs this year. The funding Bus E´ ireann and Dublin Bus receive under the public service obligation is among the lowest in the European Union. I understand that Dublin Bus receives 29% of its revenue support in this way, while Bus E´ ireann receives only 12%. The recent Deloitte & Touche report, which the House will discuss tomorrow, indicates that they occupy positions at the bottom of the table in the context of public support for bus companies. Even though an all-out bus strike next week has been avoided, it is clear that deep problems remain and that what has occurred may just be a deferral of strike action. One of the appalling features of the current industrial relations crises at both companies has been the complete absence of any political leadership from the Minister for Transport. On numerous occasions in recent weeks and months I asked the Minister, both in this Chamber and at meetings of the Joint Committee on Transport, to adopt a hands-on approach and to do everything possible to avoid an all-out bus strike in light of the profound consequences this would have for workers and businesses throughout the country. It is disappointing that the Minister has continually shirked his responsibility and that matters are as they now stand.

Deputy John Moloney: I apologise for the fact that the Minister for Transport cannot be present to take this matter. As the House will be aware, the resolution of industrial relations matters in the CIE companies and elsewhere is a matter for those companies to deal with in conjunction with their unions and, if necessary, by means of the industrial relations machinery of the State. The background to the current dispute is that CIE is projecting an operating deficit of up to \100 million for 2009. This is despite an increased subvention of \313 million and 10% fares increase. With falling revenue and passengers numbers and a worsening financial position, measures need to be taken immediately in order to secure the future viability of the companies. Dublin Bus and Bus E´ ireann have prepared cost recovery plans to achieve this and their representatives have made themselves fully available for engagement with the unions in respect of these plans. As the House will also be aware, the LRC intervened in the matter and invited the unions and Dublin Bus representatives to attend discussions earlier today in an effort to avert strike action. The outcome of this initiative has resulted in all proposed strike actions being postponed for one week to allow intensive negotiations on cost reduction measures to get under way from Monday next under the auspices of the LRC. The intervention of the LRC is welcome and the Minister for Transport encourages all involved to work constructively to avoid strike action. Such action will not serve the interests of the workers, the public or the companies and nor will it support public transport as an alternative to the use of private cars.

School Staffing. Deputy John O’Mahony: I wish to share time with Deputy Perry.

An Ceann Comhairle: Is that agreed? Agreed.

Deputy John O’Mahony: I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this important issue which relates to the removal of a rural co-ordinator for a number of DEIS schools on the Mayo-Sligo border. This matter first came to light when the rural co-ordinator was withdrawn from non-DEIS schools in the area as a result of recent cutbacks. As a result, St. John’s national school, Carramore, Kinaffe national school, Swinford, Castlerock national

539 School 25 February 2009. Staffing

[Deputy John O’Mahony.] school, Aclare, and St. Attracta’s national school Kilmactigue, have been left without either a home-school community liaison officer or a rural co-ordinator. I am disappointed that the Minister for Education and Science is not present to take this matter. However, I am aware that the Minister of State, Deputy Moloney, is a fair-minded person and I urge him to obtain a successful resolution in respect of this matter. The schools to which I refer have been informed that they will receive some form of grant in lieu. However, this can in no way replace the service on offer at present. Principals, teachers and parents have informed me about the wonderful service that the rural co-ordinator provides at present. She runs parenting, preschool and many other courses for each of the schools and undertakes home visits which create a healthy understanding among families and the schools their children attend and ensure that a holistic and caring education is delivered to those children. Rural co-ordinators have been one of the success stories of the primary education system in recent times. They give children in rural schools an even playing field and help to overcome disadvantage and isolation. Any grant given in lieu of the loss of a rural co-ordinator, while a help, will not in any way replace what it is proposed to remove. A recent letter from the Department states that it is reclustering review considered the size and geographical proximity of other schools and indicated the service was withdrawn for this reason. Surely the overriding decision should have been based on the level of disadvantage. To be constructive, the schools in question produced a new cluster involving Lahinch national school, which would be an acceptable solution if it were taken on board. In rural parishes the rural co-ordinator becomes the spokesperson for parents who will not or cannot speak for themselves. I appeal to the Minister of State to use his good offices to ensure those with responsibility for this decision change their minds. The savings obtained from removing the rural co-ordinator in the primary school cluster in question would be minuscule, whereas the loss of service would be substantial. I appeal to the Minister to reconsider the decision and allow the post to be retained in the schools in question.

Deputy John Perry: I thank Deputy O’Mahony for sharing time on this important issue. The Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Batt O’Keeffe, gave an undertaking that DEIS schools would not be subject to cutbacks. This offered some comfort to schools, staff and parents in disadvantaged areas. We are now witnessing the rolling back of this undertaking by the Minister with the axing of the vital service of rural co-ordinators in many DEIS cluster schools. Kilmactigue national school and Castlerock national school in County Sligo are classified as DEIS schools, with the latter being the base school for a cluster of five DEIS schools. As a result of two schools within the cluster losing DEIS status, the cluster was broken up. Kilmac- tigue national school proposed a new cluster in order that the vital rural co-ordinator service could continue. However, it received a reply from the inclusion unit of the Department stating that having considered the size and level of disadvantage of the schools in question, their geographical location and proximity to other schools, it was not possible in the reclustering review to include all the schools in the cluster. For this reason, it was decided that some geographically isolated schools and-or have small enrolments were not entitled to a rural co- ordinator. If the schools in question were deemed disadvantaged and warranted the appointment of a rural co-ordinator five years ago, what has changed in the meantime? The schools, which were

540 School 25 February 2009. Staffing classified as disadvantaged five years ago, are still disadvantaged and still have a low enrolment. The rural co-ordinator role was a vital link between the home and school for those families who needed it. It provided home school liaison programmes, as well as parenting and family support for those in disadvantaged areas. This cutback is another example of the most vulnerable in society suffering as a result of a lack of prioritisation in the management of the rollout of funding. The very families who need these supports are now losing out through the withdrawal of the vital rural co-ordinator service, a decision which will place further strain on the resources of schools in disadvantaged areas. I call on the Minister to include the DEIS schools in question, Kilmactigue national school, Kinaffe national school, Lahinch national school, Castlerock national school and Carramore national school, in the cluster programme to ensure their rural co-ordinator service is retained. As Deputy O’Mahony stated, this is a vital service and maintaining it will not lead to additional costs. The Minister should take a common sense approach to the benefits of maintaining a rural co-ordinator for the schools in question. It would be easy to facilitate the retention of the co-ordinator.

Deputy John Moloney: I thank the Deputies for their contributions. I am taking this Adjournment matter on behalf of my colleague, the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science, Deputy Sea´n Haughey. DEIS, the action plan for educational inclusion, provides for a standardised system for identifying levels of disadvantage and a new integrated school support programme, SSP. DEIS brings together and builds upon a number of existing interventions in schools with concentrated levels of disadvantage. The process of identifying schools for participation in DEIS was managed by the Educational Research Centre on behalf of the Department and supported by quality assurance work co-ordinated through the Department’s regional offices and the inspectorate. There are 876 schools in DEIS, comprising 673 primary schools — 199 urban band 1, 141 urban band 2 and 333 rural — and 203 second level schools. Rural schools participating in the DEIS scheme have access to a rural co-ordinator serving a cluster of schools whose general functions include the development of home school community liaison, supporting the implementation of literacy and numeracy measures and planning supports. Some rural DEIS schools receive financial support as an alternative to rural co- ordinator services where the schools cannot be clustered. The schools to which the Deputies refer were selected for inclusion under the rural element of DEIS. In the past, these schools were part of rural clusters which also comprised schools that were not included in DEIS but retained resources, including a rural co-ordinator service, under pre-existing schemes and programmes for addressing educational disadvantage. When DEIS was introduced a commitment was given, as a concessionary measure to these non-DEIS schools, that they would retain a level of support for the duration of the current DEIS initiative which is scheduled to end in 2010. Owing to the current challenging economic climate, such supports are being withdrawn from non-DEIS schools from the beginning of the next school year. As a result, it has been necessary to recluster some DEIS schools which have to date been clustered with non-DEIS schools. As part of this process, all possibilities were explored to cluster schools, taking into account the size and level of disadvantage of schools, geographical location, the proximity of schools to each other and the overall resources available for this purpose.

541 The 25 February 2009. Adjournment

[Deputy John Moloney.]

It was not possible to include the schools referred to by the Deputy in a rural cluster. As a consequence, these schools will receive additional financial support from the Department in lieu of the rural co-ordinator service from the 2009-10 school year and will continue to receive the full range of supports provided to rural primary schools under DEIS.

An Ceann Comhairle: Before concluding, I must advise Members that No. 23, the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Bill 2009, will now be sent to the Seanad.

The Da´il adjourned at 11.20 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 26 February 2009.

542 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Written Answers.

————————

The following are questions tabled by Members for written response and the ministerial replies as received on the day from the Departments [unrevised].

————————

Questions No. 1 to 8, inclusive, answered orally.

Questions Nos. 9 to 37, inclusive, resubmitted.

Questions Nos. 38 to 47, inclusive, answered orally.

Appointments to State Boards. 48. Deputy Pa´draic McCormack asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the criteria being used to select a new chief executive officer of the Equality Authority; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7727/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The appointment of Chief Executive Officer is made on such terms as the Minister, after consultation with the Authority and with the consent of the Minister for Finance, may determine, and subject to the Civil Service Commissioners Act 1956 and the Civil Service Regulation Acts 1956 to 1996. The Authority have written to me requesting me to set terms in consultation with them for the appointment of a Chief Executive Officer and my Department is in consultation with the Department of Finance on this matter. The criteria to be used in the selection process are primarily a matter for the Authority and the Public Appointments Service. On 17 December 2008 the Equality Authority Board, as empowered by the Employment Equality Act 1998, appointed a member of its staff as Acting Chief Executive Officer.

Departmental Agencies. 49. Deputy Dan Neville asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if officials of his Department have identified the impact of funding cuts on the core functions of the Irish Human Rights Commission and the Equality Authority; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7737/09]

58. Deputy Olivia Mitchell asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he is confident that Ireland is not in breach of the European race equality directive in view of the fact that Article 13 of that directive specifically outlines that equality authorities must be able 543 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Olivia Mitchell.] to provide independent assistance to victims of discrimination, conduct independent surveys regarding discrimination and publish independent reports, functions which many former board members of the Equality Authority feel will not be possible in view of recent budget cuts; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7734/09]

85. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the way Ireland is not in breach of the European race equality directive in view of the fact that Article 13 of that directive specifically outlines that equality authorities must be able provide independent assistance to victims of discrimination, conduct independent surveys concerning discrimination and publish independent reports, functions which former respected board members and the former chief executive officer have said are not possible because of the 43% cut in funding. [7578/09]

86. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the way the integration of corporate services between the Equality Authority and the Irish Human Rights Commission is progressing in view of the fact that he regards it as vital to cost savings; the way he will save money by integrating the corporate services of the Equality Auth- ority and the Irish Human Rights Commission if one body is to be decentralised to Roscrea, County Tipperary and the other is to remain in Dublin; and the way, using accounting projections, decentralisation of the Equality Authority to Roscrea will save money in view of the fact that many experienced staff will have to be redeployed or replaced. [7577/09]

87. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the way he will save money by integrating the corporate services of the Equality Authority and the Irish Human Rights Commission if one body is to be decentralised to Roscrea, County Tipperary and the other is to remain in Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7664/09]

89. Deputy Shane McEntee asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the progress made to date on integrating the corporate services of the Equality Authority and the Irish Human Rights Commission; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7731/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 49, 58, 85, 86, 87 and 89 together. Discussions are continuing in relation to the sharing of services between the two organisations. All payroll transactions are already carried out on behalf of the Equality Authority by my Department’s Financial Shared Services Unit based in Killarney. My Department is currently looking to extend this service to the Irish Human Rights Commission. As a next step, the Equality Authority is now in the process of linking up with my Department’s central IT operating system and this will result in substantial savings in respect of the provision of IT services in the years ahead. This system operates throughout the country, in all my Depart- ment’s offices, from the central location in Dublin and will soon be functional in Roscrea as well. In the context of the overall reduction of staff within the Authority, it will now be possible for their building in Dublin to be shared within the Justice and Equality group and accordingly, the rent payable by the Authority can now be halved. Finally, it should be noted that fifteen staff have been working in Roscrea for almost two years, they have been fully trained and are operating very effectively there. Discussions are ongoing with the agencies to identify further

544 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers areas where economies of scale can be achieved such as library and information services, host- ing of websites, licensing of software and shared procurement. The Equality Authority is a designated equality body in Ireland for the promotion of equal treatment of all persons without discrimination on the grounds of gender and of racial or ethnic origin, for the purposes of the EU gender non-discrimination directives and the racial equality directive. The authority has informed me that it fully intends to carry out its core functions, including those exercised in its role as a designated equality body.

Proposed Legislation. 50. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when he expects to publish legislation based on his justice for victims initiative; if his attention has been drawn to the concerns about some of his proposals expressed by a group (details supplied); his views on the concerns raised; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7598/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): In June 2008, at the launch of the Justice for Victims Initiative, I announced that it would include an important legislative package of reforms. Last December the Government approved my proposals for this legislative package in the form of the Criminal Procedure Bill. This Bill draws on several of the major recommendations of the Balance in the Criminal Law Review Group. The General Scheme of the Bill is available from my Department’s website. The legislative proposals are groundbreaking and include:

• Reform of the victim impact statement mechanism, in particular, to give a statutory right to make a statement to family members in homicide cases or in cases where the victim is incapacitated as a result of the crime or where the victim is a child or suffers from a mental disorder.

• A new procedure where the DPP can apply for a court order to have cases re-tried following an acquittal (i) where compelling new evidence later emerges or (ii) where the acquittal occurred due to an error in law by a trial judge or (iii) where sufficient evidence exists of tampering with the trial process, including witness intimidation or perjury.

• Reform of the law on character evidence to enable the prosecution to respond where, during the trial, unwarranted and vexatious imputations are made by or at the instigation of the accused against the character of deceased or incapacitated victims.

• Provide for the advance disclosure to the prosecution of expert evidence which the defence proposes to introduce.

• Establish a written procedure that will allow for the early return of property to victims, where that property may constitute evidence in criminal trials.

The Bill is currently being drafted by the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel. The work is progressing very satisfactorily. The document to which the Deputy refers, A Better Deal: the Human Rights of Victims in the Criminal Justice System, was prepared by the Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL). It contains a very comprehensive and helpful analysis of the position of victims of crime. However, I would point out that most of the comments and recommendations made by the ICCL relate to practical and administrative measures which do not require legislative action. Nonetheless, the comments and recommendations are very pertinent and are being given due consideration. I would also add that one of the areas mentioned by the ICCL that requires

545 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] legislation, namely the revision of the arrangements relating to victim impact statements, is being addressed in the Bill I am preparing. I am aware that in a separate publication entitled “Taking Liberties: the human rights implications of the Balance in the Criminal Law Review Group Report the ICCL took issue with some of the recommendations of the Criminal Law Review Group including those relating to appeals against acquittals. The House will have an opportunity to fully debate these issues, including the level of safeguards being provided, when the Criminal Procedure Bill is published.

Departmental Agencies. 51. Deputy Tom Hayes asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when the value for money audit on the Equality Authority commissioned by his Department in 2008 will be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7720/09]

88. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when the value for money audit on the Equality Authority carried out by consultants (details supplied), at the behest of his Department, will be published in view of the fact that its terms of reference were to analyse the achievements of public funding to the Equality Authority; if the Equality Authority is meeting his Department’s and Government current and future requirements in an economic and effective manner; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7663/09]

113. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when the value for money audit on the Equality Authority (details supplied) carried out at the behest of his Department in 2008, will be published in view of the fact that the consultants state that the review is to analyse the achievements of public funding to the Equality Authority; and if the Equality Authority is meeting his current and future requirements in an economic and effective manner. [7576/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 51, 88 and 113 together. As indicated in my reply to Question No. 249 of 5 November 2008 the Value for Money review of the Equality Authority is an analysis of past performance in achieving the tasks set out in its strategic plan to date. The review has not yet concluded. A decision on publication of the report will be taken in due course.

Organised Crime. 52. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his proposals to combat the ongoing threat of drug related criminality; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7768/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Government attaches the highest priority to tackling organised crime including drug trafficking and bringing those involved in such activities to justice. One of the main priorities I have set for the Garda Sıóchańa in 2009 is to target gun crime, organised crime and drug related crime through a range of measures, including the use of the Garda specialist units and targeted operations such as Operation Anvil. I am assured by the Garda authorities that An Garda Sıóchańa, in co-operation with the Revenue Commissioners, will ensure that all available resources will be deployed in targeting

546 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers the major gangs involved in organised criminal activity, including drug trafficking and the following are some of the specific strategies put in place by An Garda Sı´ocha´na, to date, to address the sale, supply, importation and distribution of illegal drugs:

• the allocation of appropriate resources at the Garda National Drugs Unit and at district and divisional level;

• the establishment, on a permanent basis, of the Organised Crime Unit with the specific objective of targeting those suspected of involvement in organised crime, including drug trafficking, importation, sale and supply.

• the establishment of dedicated Divisional and District Drug Units and the allocation of additional personnel to those already established;

• internationally, An Garda Sıóchańa works closely with relevant law enforcement agencies including all EU agencies, the Drugs Enforcement Agency (US), Interpol and Europol. An Garda Sıóchańa also has Liaison Officers based in the Hague, London, Paris, Madrid Europol and Interpol.

• participation at the Maritime Analysis Operations Centre for Narcotics based in Lisbon

• ongoing training programmes for personnel as Divisional Asset Profilers, who have the specific remit of targeting assets of persons who are suspected of being involved in the importation, sale and supply of drugs at local, divisional / district, level.

A number of other specific measures have been put in place to deal with serious crime. These include Operation Anvil and other intelligence-led operations which have been used to target specific individuals. The Criminal Assets Bureau is also being actively utilised to identify and target funds accumulated by criminals, in order to seize such assets and to deprive them of the profits of their criminal activity. A dedicated unit within the Garda National Drugs Unit has been established to liaise with the Criminal Assets Bureau to particularly target those criminals and criminal groupings believed to be deriving profits and assets from drug-related criminal activity. In addition and as the Deputy will know, I have secured a ringfenced allocation of \21million this year in the Garda budget to ensure ongoing operations of Anvil, which are augmented by other operations and initiatives, both locally and nationally, and continue to be undertaken by all units and sections of An Garda Sı´ocha´na. Furthermore, the criminal law has also been considerably strengthened, for example, by making it more difficult to get bail in drug trafficking and firearms cases. The periods the Gardaı´ can question people suspected of involvement in serious crime have been extended, and the law on the right to silence has been updated. The Government has also approved my proposals to introduce new legislation underpinning the use of covert surveillance methods principally by the Gardaı´. Under the legislation, the State will be able to use collateral material obtained by means of covert surveillance as evidence to support or strengthen the case for the prosecution at a criminal trial. I am also moving ahead with my proposals for a DNA database. Finally I can assure the House that the Government will continue to give absolute priority to the frontline fight against crime. The Garda budget for 2009 of \1.589 billion, the ringfencing of \21m for the continued implementation of Oper- ation Anvil this year and the ongoing increase in Garda numbers provides clear evidence of this commitment.

547 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Proposed Legislation. 53. Deputy Paul Connaughton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on introducing legislation to regulate debt collection here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7695/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The question of legislation to regulate debt collection as a financial activity is not one that comes within the area of responsibility of my Department. However, I am aware of recent media reports which alleged intimidation of persons owing money in various circumstances by “criminal” debt collectors. The alleged intimidation and threatening behaviour of debt collectors, no more than such behaviour by any person, would appear to come within the scope of the provisions of the Non-Fatal Offences against the Person Act 1997. Any person who is threatened or intimidated by debt collectors should report the incident to the Gardaı´ who will take appropriate action.

Departmental Reports. 54. Deputy Sea´n Sherlock asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the progress made to date with regard to the implementation of the recommendations of the Report of the Commission of Investigation into the Dean Lyons case; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7605/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Report of the Commission of Investigation into the Dean Lyons case offered a thorough independent analysis of the facts surrounding the false confession made by Dean Lyons based on the evidence of all relevant witnesses. It concluded that there was no deliberate attempt to undermine the rights of Dean Lyons. At page 12 of his Report Mr Birmingham (now Judge Birmingham) makes it clear that the Commission had no role in making recommendations on future safeguards and procedures. Instead an Expert Group was established by the then Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform for that purpose. The Group will be reporting on the adequacy of Garda training, protocols, regulations and procedures in assessing the fitness of persons to be interviewed and on the recording of any bona fide reservations of an individual member of a Garda investigation team as to the truthful- ness or accuracy of self — incriminating statements. As has been indicated in this House previously the Group took time to allow it to comprehend the work associated with the Sixth report of the Morris Tribunal which, as Deputies will be aware, dealt extensively with the question of detention of vulnerable suspects. The Group is now considering that Report with a view to finalising its work.

Appointments to State Boards. 55. Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on whether all public appointments for which he has ministerial responsibility should involve a transparent, open and merit based recruitment process and be subject to prior scrutiny by a panel that is independent of his Department. [7574/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I assume the Deputy is referring to appointments to Boards and other such like bodies which I am required to make from time to time. The Deputy will be aware that in making appointments of this nature, that in some instances the procedures to be followed are set down in statute. In other cases, the law often requires that an appointee be qualified in a certain profession or perhaps be a nominee of a representative body. For example, some appointments to the Legal Aid

548 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Board, the Equality Authority and the Property Registration Authority to mention a few, are required to be made in accordance with criteria of this nature. Another category of appointment is that made by me to boards and/or bodies which may not be subject to any specific statutory provision. I, along with all my predecessors, have made appointments of this nature. I have no proposals to change this system and I would strongly reject an imputation that any such appointment made by me did not have regard to merit and the appointee’s capacity to undertake the task required of him or her.

Departmental Expenditure. 56. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the way in respect of the announcement of 3 February 2009, it is intended to effect the 8% reduction in professional fees in relation to services provided to or funded by his Department; the amount expected to be saved in his Department’s budget as a result of this process; if this decision will apply to all legal fees paid by the State; if it is intended to seek agreement on this process with professional bodies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7581/09]

110. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the way, in respect of the announcement of 3 February 2009, it is intended to achieve the general administrative reductions in regard to his Department; the amount expected to be saved in his Department’s budget as a result of this process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7582/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 56 and 110 together. I can confirm that in common with all other Departments, my Department is required to give effect to an 8% reduction in the rates for professional fees for services rendered to it from 1 March. Services provided by legal practitioners, including those provided by solicitors and barristers, will be subject to the reduced rates. By definition, the reduced rates of fees payable will yield a financial saving in my Department’s Vote Group; while I cannot be precise about the amount at this stage, I anticipate it will be in the order of \3 million. On the question of general administrative reductions, I can inform the Deputy that, in accordance with the Government’s decisions on these matters, related budgetary savings will be achieved in my Department in 2009. Details of these reductions are still being finalised and will be published in the normal way in the Revised Estimates Volume next month. I cannot be precise about the amount to be saved in respect of these administrative reductions but I anticipate that it will be in the order of \10m.

Garda Deployment. 57. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his plans to increase the number of community gardaı´ here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7739/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I have been informed by the Garda Commissioner that the number of Community Gardaı´ on 31 January 2009, the latest date for which figures are readily available was 706. All Gardaı´ have a role to play in addressing community policing issues as and when the need arises. In that sense, community policing involves far more than a single member or unit within the Garda Sı´ocha´na, and I agree with the view expressed by the Garda Inspectorate in their third report entitled

549 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] “Policing in Ireland—Looking Forward”, that community policing is a fundamental policing philosophy and that there is a strong foundation for it in Ireland. I was present at the recent opening of the new Ballymun Garda Station where the Com- missioner launched a new National Model of Community Policing for An Garda Sı´ocha´na. This new model will build on the success of existing good community policing practice and I look forward to the implementation of this plan. A national community policing office will be established within Garda Community Relations Section and every district officer throughout the country will take ownership of community policing within their area of responsibility. It is the responsibility of the Garda Commissioner to allocate personnel throughout the Force taking everything into account. The issue of Community Gardaı´ will be kept under review within the overall context of policing requirements nationwide.

Question No. 58 answered with Question No. 49.

Proposed Legislation. 59. Deputy Terence Flanagan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on the Privacy Bill 2006; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7716/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Privacy Bill 2006, that is before the Seanad, having been restored to the Seanad Order Paper in late 2007 by the Leader of the Seanad, represents Government policy in the area of privacy. My Department continues to review the provisions in the Bill taking into account developments in the operation of the law of privacy in our courts and elsewhere, with a view to possible amendments of the Bill.

Tribunals of Inquiry. 60. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the action he will take arising from the seven reports of the Morris tribunal; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7600/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): As I indicated in my reply to question number 68 of 18 December 2008 the Morris Tribunal has completed its work and has produced a total of eight reports. The Government has already taken strong action on foot of its recommendations. This action includes:

• the passage of the Garda Sıóchańa Act 2005, the most significant piece of legislation relating to An Garda Sıóchańa in the history of the State,

• the establishment of the Garda Sı´ocha´na Ombudsman Commission with almost 100 staff — including its own investigative staff,

• the establishment of the Garda Inspectorate with its international policing expertise, as a source of independent and expert advice for the Minister,

• new more streamlined discipline regulations,

• the imposition on members of a legal duty to account for their official actions,

• the empowerment of the Garda Commissioner, with the consent of the Government, to dismiss a member of garda, sergeant or inspector rank where he has lost confidence in

550 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

the capacity of the member to discharge his or her duty and where dismissal is necessary to maintain public confidence in the Force,

• new promotion regulations and a competency based promotion system,

• a whistleblowers’ charter and the appointment of an eminent former senior civil servant as a Confidential Recipient.

Other areas of organisational development and modernisation arising from the Commissioner’s consideration of the first five reports have been progressed within the terms of reference of the Garda Sı´ocha´na’s published Corporate Strategy 2007 to 2009. These include a number of specific change projects under the chairmanship of the Deputy Commissioner, Strategy and Change Management. In relation to the sixth report, which dealt with the detention and questionings of suspects, I understand that a working group established by the Commissioner has developed a model for investigative interviewing which incorporates all the elements of the PEACE model proposed by Judge Morris. A comprehensive training programme to support this model has been developed and is being rolled out to student Gardaı´. The findings and recommendations of the seventh and eight reports of the Tribunal are currently being considered. All of these changes are indicative of unprecedented reform and a new era in policing and will go a long way to ensuring, as far as possible, that the events in Donegal will not be repeated. Finally, it is my understanding that the Dail Committee on Procedures and Privileges has established a sub-Committee to consider Mr Justice Morris’s recommendations as to how public representatives should deal with anonymous allegations.

Proposed Legislation. 61. Deputy Michael D. Higgins asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if arising from his interview (details supplied) he will state when he will introduce legislation to provide for a major crackdown on the gambling sector to ensure that casinos are not involved in money laundering; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7589/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I refer the Deputy to my reply to PQ Number 45 of today’s date. Work on the drafting of the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering) Bill, which forms part of the Government’s legislative programme, is underway and publication is scheduled for later this year. The Bill, which seeks to transpose the Third Money Laundering Directive into Irish law, will contain provisions to ensure that places such as private members’ clubs that offer casino type gaming will be subject to anti- money laundering safeguards.

Crime Levels. 62. Deputy Noel J. Coonan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on offences committed by persons on bail; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7698/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): A decision to grant bail in a particular case is a matter for the court, which is, subject only to the Constitution and the law, independent in the exercise of its judicial functions. There is a constitutional presumption in favour of bail, since, in the eyes of the law, a person is innocent until proven guilty. The bail referendum in 1996 allows for bail to be refused where a person is charged with a serious

551 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] offence and where refusal is reasonably considered necessary to prevent the commission of a serious offence by the person. The independent DPP represents the State for the purpose of dealing with bail applications. The Gardaı´ can object to bail being granted. In addition, a Superintendent may give his opinion that he or she believes that refusal is necessary to prevent the commission by the person of a serious offence. The Criminal Justice Act 2007 amended the 1997 Act and other statutes governing the law on bail with the aim of facilitating a stronger challenge by the prosecution to applications for bail by persons charged with serious offences and of further improving decision-making by the courts. The stringent provisions include a requirement that applicants for bail may have to provide a statement of their means, their previous criminal record and details of any offences committed while previously on bail. The Act also provides that a Garda Superintendent may give an opinion that bail should be refused on the grounds that the applicant is likely to commit a serious offence if granted bail. The prosecution authorities are also given the right to appeal against decisions to grant bail or, where it is granted, the conditions attaching to it. The law already takes a serious view of offences committed by persons on bail. The commission of any offence while on bail carries the prospect of a harsher sentence than might otherwise be imposed had the offence not been committed while the offender was on bail. Section 11 of the Criminal Justice Act 1984 provides that any sentence of imprisonment passed on a person for an offence committed while he or she was on bail shall be consecutive on any sentence passed on him for a previous offence. It further provides, following the Bail Act 1997, that where the consecutive provisions apply and the court is determining the appropriate sentence to impose for an offence committed while on bail, the fact that the offence was committed while on bail must be treated as an aggravating factor. Accordingly, the court must impose a sentence that is greater than that which it would have imposed in the absence of such an aggravating factor. The only exceptions are where the sentence for the previous offence is life imprisonment or where the court considers that there are exceptional circumstances to justify not doing so. The people, in the bail referendum, and the Oireachtas have made clear their determination to tackle abuses of bail. My Department is keeping under review what is actually happening and whether anything more needs to be done. We will be looking in particular at whether the changes in the Criminal Justice Act 2007 Act are bringing about an improvement in the situation. The Government is determined to take any measures that are necessary and practical to deal with this situation. That would not ultimately exclude putting the matter before the people again, though there would have been a view that the 1996 amendment to the Consti- tution would be sufficient to address this problem; and we would have to be satisfied that no other options remained before we went down that road. The Criminal Justice Act 2007 contains provisions in regard to electronic tagging, and there are complex issues surrounding bringing them into force, including cost effectiveness and developments in technology. I have established a Project Board, led by the Probation Service, to look at the implementation of electronic monitoring in this jurisdiction. However, there is a possibility that if tagging was available it could actually lead to an increase in the number of persons being granted bail by the courts, who might be persuaded that it would be safe to release certain persons on bail if they were tagged, and who they would otherwise detain in custody.

552 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

63. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on the opinion expressed by the Garda Commissioner (details supplied) that Ireland is becoming a more violent place; the steps he plans to take to counter this trend; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7583/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The most recent crime statistics released by the CSO, in respect of 2008, show a number of encouraging trends. There was a decrease of 42.9% in the number of homicide offences, which includes a decrease of 36.4% in murder and of 57.1% in manslaughter. Aggravated sexual assault decreased by 33.3% and assault causing harm by 2.2%. Nevertheless the number of violent crimes committed remains a matter of concern. The Garda Policing Plan for 2009, which reflects the priorities set for the Force by me as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, contains a series of measures aimed at reducing the impact of crime and criminal behaviour. These goals are backed up by strategic actions which include a commitment to continue and intensify intelligence-led operations against groups and individuals engaged in criminality. An Garda Sı´ocha´na, in accordance with the priorities I have set out, is committed to targeting violent crime and those who engage or facilitate persons involved in such activity. Operation Anvil commenced in the Dublin Metropolitan Region in 2005 to deal with serious crime, including murder and other violent crime, and was extended nationwide in 2006. The primary focus of the Operation is the targeting of active criminals and their associates involved in serious crime by preventing and disrupting their criminal activity through extensive additional overt patrolling and static checkpoints by uniform, mobile and foot patrols, supported by armed plain clothes patrols. Under Operation Anvil, up to 8 February, 2009, 1,239 firearms have been recovered in Dublin and 1,092 in the rest of the country. There have also been over 7,000 arrests for serious crimes such as murder, serious assault, robbery and burglary and 70,000 searches for weapons, drugs and stolen goods. In this way, the Gardaı´ will continue to address the issue of illegal guns relentlessly. Though legislation on the use of knives and similar weapons is already very strong and heavy penalties are already in place, I am moving to strengthen the law in this area. In that context, I sought and received proposals from the Garda Commissioner on strengthening the law on knife crime. These include:

• increasing the penalties for possessing a knife in a public place;

• creating an extended power of search without warrant in certain circumstances; and

• the introduction of a prohibition in relation to swords.

I have accepted these proposals, and they will be included in the forthcoming Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. Drafting of the Bill is now almost completed, and the Govern- ment have agreed to treat it as a priority measure for this Daíl session. On 5 February, the Garda Commissioner and I launched a Knife Awareness Campaign by An Garda Sıóchańa with the objective of informing and educating young people on the dangers of carrying knives and with the aim of reducing the number of incidents of knife crime. In addition to these measures, I have directed the drafting of a new Firearms and Offensive Weapons Order which will deal with the issue of swords. In particular I will be banning the sale of samurai swords. Since my appointment as Minister, I have expressed concern at the number of handguns which have been licensed here in recent years. Some time ago, I directed my Department and

553 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] An Garda Sıóchańa to carry out an urgent and intensive review of the firearms law. Following that review, I have brought forward proposals which include no new licenses being issued for handguns, subject to limited exceptions in relation to Olympic sports. Existing licenses will not be renewed unless applicants fully meet the requirements of a radically tightened licensing procedure where the safety of the community will be paramount. While a de facto ban on new handgun licences is already in place, my proposals will also be given legislative form in the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. That Bill will also tackle comprehensively the issue of airsoft guns, including making their possession in public a serious offence. On 26 January, the Garda Commissioner and I launched a new National Model of Com- munity Policing. The Model builds on the success of existing good community policing practice within Ireland and aims to foster collaborative partnerships between An Garda Sıóchańa and community members. Alongside the specialist operations such as Operation Anvil, a comprehensive model of community policing ensures that enforcement will not only be employed to reduce crime but also to reduce the fear of crime and ensure a better quality of community life for all. At a time when the public finances are under pressure, I am determined that top priority will continue to be given to frontline policing. Funding for Operation Anvil will increase in 2009 from \20 million to \21 million to enable it to continue with targeted disruption of serious and organised criminal activity. Other key operations will be maintained through 2009, and any savings that have to be made will not be allowed to diminish frontline policing.

Tribunals of Inquiry. 64. Deputy Damien English asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he is satisfied that the Smithwick tribunal is progressing satisfactorily; the amount the tribunal has cost to date; when its proceedings are due to conclude; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7711/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Smithwick Tribunal was established in May 2005. The cost of the Tribunal (to end-January 2009) is \4,869,390. The Tribunal is in an investigative phase at present. I met with the Chairman of the Tribunal last July and during that meeting I conveyed the Government’s view that the legal costs of tribunals should be strictly managed. I also informed him that the Minister for Finance had requested that, in light of public expenditure constraints, tribunals and inquiries would conclude their business as early as possible. I have no doubt that the Tribunal’s Chairman is fully cognisant of the position and that its mandate should be fulfilled as expeditiously as possible.

Crime Levels. 65. Deputy Dinny McGinley asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to the increasing number of robberies, including kidnapping, that have occurred in County Donegal in February 2009; the steps being planned to prevent a continuation of these incidents; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7489/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am informed by the Garda authorities that local Garda management, through ongoing monitoring and analysis of crime trends in Donegal Garda Division, is aware of an increase in the incidents referred to by the Deputy. These incidents are under active Garda investigation. Additional patrols by uniform and plain clothes personnel have been put in place in the areas concerned and

554 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers resources have been redeployed to assist in the identification of suspected offenders in respect of these offences. Senior Garda management will be meeting representatives of local communities to apprise them of ongoing efforts and initiatives to target this type of criminality, including appealing to the community to report any suspicious activity occurring in the area to An Garda Sı´ocha´na. Crime prevention advice will also be given through local media. There are significant levels of ongoing cross border cooperation with the Police Service of Northern Ireland to identify crime trends and suspected offenders. Border Superintendents, including from County Donegal, attend bi-monthly crime meetings, and, at local level, cross- border crime meetings are held monthly, with regular contact taking place regarding individual incidents and criminal activity generally. I am further informed that a Divisional Crime Man- ager has been appointed to assist in the monitoring and analysis of crime trends in order to prepare specific initiatives and operations to target these specific crime types. The personnel strength of the Donegal Garda Division on 31 January, 2009, the latest date for which figures are available, was 485. This follows the allocation of significant numbers of additional personnel to the Donegal Garda Division recently, including the establishment of a rural community policing initiative for Inishowen. The situation will be kept under review and the needs of the county will be fully considered by the Commissioner within the overall context of the needs of Garda stations throughout the country.

Garda Reserve. 66. Deputy Emmet Stagg asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of members of the Garda Reserve recruited to date; the stations to which they have been allocated; the number of applicants for the Reserve in training; if he is satisfied with the rate of recruitment; when he expects that the full complement of 1,500 will be in place; if restrictions have been placed on recruitment to the Reserve arising from budgetary restrictions; his views on the suggestion made by the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors that the Reserve should be scrapped; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7609/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The strength of the Garda Reserve as of 31 of January 2009 was 327, allocated to the following stations:

Number Number

Anglesea Street 11 Kilkenny 6 Arklow 1 Kilmainham 4 Ashbourne 1 Letterkenny 5 Athlone 1 Longford 1 Balbriggan 3 Lucan 7 Ballina 3 Macroom 1 Ballyfermot 3 Malahide 1 Baltinglass 1 Mayfield 3 Ballymun 6 Middleton 3 Bandon 1 Monaghan Town 4 Blackrock 5 Mullingar 6 Blanchardstown 11 Naas 3 Bray 3 Navan 2 Bridewell 6 Nenagh 1 Cahir 1 New Ross 1 Carlow 5 Newbridge 2

555 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] Number Number

Carrick On Shannon 1 Pearse St 17 Carrick-On-Suir 1 Portlaoise 1 Castlebar 8 Raheny 4 Cavan Town 3 Rathfarnham 3 Celbridge 1 Rathmines 2 Clonakilty 1 Ronanstown 1 Clondalkin 3 Roscommon 3 Clonmel 2 Santry 4 Clontarf 4 Sligo 6 Coolock 6 Store St 6 Crumlin 3 Sundrive Rd 2 Donnybrook 4 Swords 4 Drogheda 7 Tallaght 2 Dun Laoghaire 4 Terenure 3 Dundalk 5 Thurles 1 Ennis 9 Tipperary Town 1 Enniscorthy 1 Togher 4 Fermoy 2 Tralee 2 Finglas 4 Tramore 2 Fitzgibbon Street 5 Trim 1 Galway 18 Tuam 2 Gorey 1 Tullamore 4 Gurranabraher 6 Watercourse Rd. 3 Henry Street 10 Waterford 9 Howth 3 Westport 3 Kells 1 Wexford 1 Kevin Street 5 Whitehall 2 Kildare 3 Wicklow 1

Currently, there are 111 persons in training to become members of the Garda Reserve. A total of 23 attested Reserve Gardaı´ have become full time members of An Garda Sıóchańa. In addition, eight Garda Reserve trainees left the Garda Reserve prior to attestation to become full time members of An Garda Sıóchańa. I am satisfied that significant progress has been made in terms of the recruitment and appointment of members of the Garda Reserve. In particular, it must be borne in mind that recruits for the Reserve are required to undergo an extensive programme of training which includes assignment to Garda stations. The Government is strongly committed to the development of the Reserve. Recruitment to the Reserve is continuing and regular promotional campaigns to attract Reserve members are being undertaken. For my part, I am fully satisfied that the Reserve provides a valuable contribution to the Garda Sıóchańa and to the many communities where it is operating. In particular, I would like to express my appreciation to the members of the Reserve who serve on a voluntary basis and give of their time very generously.

Garda Deployment. 67. Deputy Arthur Morgan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he has had discussions with officials of the Department of Finance or with the Garda Com- 556 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers missioner with a view to making additional resources available to the fraud squad in view of the many banking scandals that have recently come to light. [7573/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am informed by the Garda Commissioner that resource levels at the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation are constantly monitored by Garda Management, taking into account crime trends and competing demands. These are kept under review to ensure that optimum use is made of Garda resources and the best possible service is provided to the public. In addition, there are currently one Detective Inspector, two Detective Sergeants, and five Detective Garda seconded from the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation to the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement under the provisions of the Company Law Enforcement Act 2001 to assist in investigations being conducted by the Director who has a statutory remit in the enforcement of the Compan- ies Acts. There are regular discussions between my Department and officials of the Department of Finance in relation to Garda resources generally and specifically in relation to the overall strength of the Force, and it is a matter for the Garda Commissioner to allocate these resources in the most optimum manner. While Garda management at the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investi- gation is satisfied with the service being provided by the Bureau, I am advised by the Garda Commissioner that a competition for the allocation of additional personnel to the Bureau is currently under way with personnel expected to be allocated in the near future.

Departmental Expenditure. 68. Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the extent to which the announcement of 3 February 2009 of expenditure savings of \2.1 billion will have an impact on Garda recruitment and Garda overtime in 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7602/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): In accordance with the Government Decisions on these matters, the related budgetary savings will fall to be achieved across the Justice Group of Votes, including on the Garda Vote in 2009. While the detail in relation to these and other budgetary matters is at an advanced stage, it would not be appropriate for me to comment further on their composition at this point, pending the finalisation of the Revised Estimate Volume which will be published next month. However, I can say that priority will continue to be given to resources, including overtime, for front-line policing duties. Taking into account the number of recruits due to be attested this year and the expected number of departures, the attested strength of the Force will increase from 14,411 at the end of 2008 to approximately 14,900 at the end of this year. This will represent a historic high, in terms of Garda numbers. To stress this achievement it should be pointed out that the Deputy’s Party promised to reach the 15,000 Garda target in 2012. A total of 200 new recruits have been inducted into the Garda College in the past two quarterly intakes and calculations on the scale of future intakes will be made closer to the relevant time taking into account wider Government policy on the public service.

Garda Investigations. 69. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he has received communication from the Garda Sı´ocha´na Ombudsman Commission regarding a possible public interest inquiry into the circumstances in which serious drug charges against a person (details supplied) were dropped; if the internal Garda inquiry into the same affair has

557 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Willie Penrose.] been concluded; if he has received a report from the gardaı´ on their inquiry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7603/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I have previously informed the House that I received an interim report from the Garda Commissioner on this particular case. I am informed by the Garda authorities that an internal Garda inquiry into the matter is ongoing. The Garda Sı´ocha´na Ombudsman Commission has indicated that it has opened a public interest investigation in relation to the withdrawing of charges against an individual. In the circumstances, I believe that it would not be appropriate for me to make any further comment about the case at present. If action is required on my part then, of course, I will take it.

Proposed Legislation. 70. Deputy Jim O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position in relation to the establishment of a DNA database and the forensic science laboratory; and the legislation which has been promised in this regard. [7445/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Criminal Justice (Forensic Sampling and Evidence) Bill is on the A list of the Government’s Legislation Programme for this session. The main aim of the Bill is to provide for the establishment of a DNA database for the purposes of criminal investigations and the identification of missing and unknown persons. While the drafting of the Bill is at an advanced stage, its finalisation has been affected somewhat by the very necessary examination of the implications of the recent judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of S and Marper v the United Kingdom. In that case the Court held that the arrangements in the United Kingdom for the indefinite retention of DNA material and fingerprints taken from suspects who were not subsequently convicted were a disproportionate and unjustified interference with their right to privacy. The examination of this judgment may impact on the timetable for publication of the Bill but, in the event of a delay, I will ensure that it is kept to an absolute minimum. As regards the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL), it will have statutory responsibility for the establishment and operation of the DNA database. Professor Ingvar Kopp (former head of the Swedish Forensic Science Laboratory) was engaged by my Department to review the resource needs of the FSL. Professor Kopp’s report was published in January 2008. On foot of its recommendations a rigorous staffing campaign for the FSL was undertaken in 2008 and resulted in 12 new Forensic Scientists Grade III and 14 new Laboratory Analysts being recruited. These recruits were used to fill professional posts in the 20 posts announced by my predecessor in January 2008 and to fill existing professional vacancies. In addition an Assistant Principal IT Manager was assigned to the FSL in December 2008. The report also included a preliminary appraisal of the resources which would be required in order to bring the DNA database on line as well as the need for advance implementation planning for the database. An implementation team, led at Deputy Director level, has been established in the FSL to plan for the introduction of the database as recommended by the report. One of the team’s tasks is to examine further the resource implications which will arise as the database is established and built up to its optimal capacity. In relation to the accommodation needs of the FSL, my Department is actively pursuing this matter in consultation with the Office of Public Works.

558 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Social Welfare Payments. 71. Deputy Deirdre Clune asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he co- operates with the Department of Social and Family Affairs when the latter is processing social welfare applications for State benefits by persons who are known to be engaged in criminal activity; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7689/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am informed by the Garda Authorities that pursuant to the statutory remit of the Criminal Assets Bureau, personnel from the Department of Social and Family Affairs, who are Bureau Officers attached to the Criminal Assets Bureau, investigate and determine social welfare entitlements of persons who are suspected of acquiring assets which are believed to be the proceeds of crime.

Crime Prevention. 72. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the main provisions of the policing priorities for the Garda published by him on 2 December 2008; the way it is intended that the gardaı´ will target serious crime and in particular, organised crime; if he is satisfied that cuts in Garda overtime will not impede effective policing; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7586/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I determined the following matters as priorities for the Garda Sıóchańa for 2009, in accordance with Section 20 of the Garda Sıóchańa Act 2005.

• National and International Security — To protect the security of the State and the people against domestic and international terrorism.

• Crime — To target serious crime, in particular organised, gun and drug related crime.

• Traffic — To improve road safety by taking appropriate measures to reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries on the roads.

• Public Order — To preserve peace and public order in co-operation with local communities, in particular by targeting disorder arising from binge drinking.

• Customer Service — To complete and implement a Garda Charter which will improve the Garda response to calls for service and which will contain commitments on the level of community policing service which the public can expect from gardaı´.

• Illegal immigration and human trafficking — To protect national sovereignty, the fron- tiers of the State and the integrity of the State’s immigration systems and to prevent and target human trafficking and people smuggling through the effective enforcement of national and international immigration law.

In relation to serious and organised crime, the Garda Commissioner, in the Policing Plan for 2009, has set the increased targeting of organised and serious crime networks as a key action for the force. This will involve confronting organised crime, drug trafficking, gangland crime and related killings by the greater use of intelligence, legislation and the co-ordination of targeted operations. Special operations, such as Oak and Anvil are targeting organised drug and gun crime. Under Operation Anvil approximately 1,240 firearms have been recovered in Dublin and 1,090 in the rest of the country. There have also been over 7,300 arrests for serious crimes such as murder, robbery and burglary and over 70,000 searches for weapons, drugs and stolen goods.

559 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.]

At a time when public finances are under pressure I have ensured that within the Justice, Equality and Law Reform area top priority is given to frontline policing. Funding for Operation Anvil and other key operations will be maintained through 2009 and any savings that have to be made will not be allowed to diminish frontline policing. Over the past few years the expansion in the size of An Garda Sı´ocha´na has been unprecedented. From the start of 2008 to the end of 2009, the attested strength of the Force will have grown by over 1,100 to almost 14,900. This will represent an 8% increase. The additional rostered hours available this year arising from the increase in the strength of the Force will amount to over one million hours. This will more than offset any reduction in overtime hours.

Fingerprints Records. 73. Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to the reports that the decision to outsource to the United States the transposition of all existing fingerprints on the automated fingerprint identification system may jeopardise the integrity of the chain of evidence in future cases; if he has discussed the matter with the Garda Commissioner; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7571/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am advised by the Garda authorities that the transposition of fingerprints records onto the upgraded Garda Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS) was achieved by back record conversion, an internationally accepted method for such a task. The process was carried out at a location in the United States of America as part of the contract for the delivery of the new system and personnel from the Garda Technical Bureau, working with strategic partners, secured the highest security transport method and travelled with fingerprint records to and from the US. The Garda authorities also advise that all processes were fully documented to ensure the integrity of the conversion and that there are no issues concerning the integrity or robustness of the AFIS system. All electronic identification of fingerprints in criminal cases are compared with the original hard copy and I am assured that the processes and procedures of fingerprint identification operated by Fingerprint Section of the Garda Technical Bureau are to the highest professional standards.

EU Directives. 74. Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the reason for the failure to implement the 2005 EU directive on money laundering by the deadline of December 2007; when the required legislation will be published; if he will confirm that there are enforcement proceedings imminent against Ireland for its failure to implement the directive; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7596/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The legislation which will give effect to the third EU Money Laundering Directive (and the related Imple- menting Directive) is being drafted at present. This legislation will also take into account relevant recommendations arising from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) third mutual evaluation report (2006) on Ireland’s measures to combat money laundering and the financing of terrorism. As the Deputy correctly states the transposition timescale for these directives was December, 2007. This is a complex and important piece of legislation and it is essential that it meets all the requirements involved. I can assure the Deputy that the highest priority is being given to

560 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers the drafting and publication of this Bill. I am also taking the opportunity through this Bill to repeal and consolidate the existing anti-money laundering provisions. This is an approach, which I believe will facilitate all sectors and groups involved in using and applying the money laundering provisions. For this reason, when Government approval was given to the drafting of this Bill, approval was also received for the publication of the proposals on my Department’s website. Following this, my Department and the Department of Finance conducted an extensive consultation process involving interested parties, which included both the provision of written submissions and meetings with those involved. I understand from my officials that this was an extremely useful and important exercise for all concerned. The Commission has brought proceedings against Ireland in relation to the transposition of these directives. I understand that it has also taken similar action against some other Member States. As the matter is currently with the European Court of Justice, I think it would be inappropriate to comment any further on the matter. However, what is relevant in this regard is that I expect to be in a position to publish the legislation in the first half of this year and my intention is that it will be considered by both Houses of the Oireachtas as soon as possible after that date.

Detention Centres. 75. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position with regard to the development of the new national child detention facility for young offenders at Lusk, County Dublin; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7680/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Barry Andrews): In March 2008, the Government approved the development of new national children detention facilities on the Oberstown campus near Lusk, Co. Dublin. The Government decision was informed by the report of the Expert Group on Children Detention Schools, which is available on www.iyjs.ie. The project will be delivered by the Irish Youth Justice Service (IYJS), an executive office in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, which has responsibility for a wide range of youth justice matters including the children detention schools. In preparing for the development, in line with Department of Finance guidelines for capital projects and with good practice, the IYJS has established a Project Board to ensure robust governance and accountability are in place. Advice and supports for this project are being provided to the Irish Youth Justice Service from a number of sources, including the Chief State’s Solicitors Office and the National Development Finance Agency. The Office of Public Works has been charged with designing the new facilities and that office is currently liaising with the IYJS and with management and staff of the children detention schools with regard to concept drawings which will be further developed in order to tender for the construction element of the project. Construction will take place over two phases in order to ensure that the existing detention schools can continue to operate and provide places to the Courts until such time as the new facilities are available. Phase 1 of the project is expected to be completed in 2012 and Phase 2 in 2014. The cost involved for the project will be met from National Development Plan/Exchequer sources. I am happy to say that the Government has made adequate capital provision in the 2009 Estimates to progress this project.

Crime Levels. 76. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the

561 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Fergus O’Dowd.] action he will take to address the increase in knife crime; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7742/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): While the number of murders committed involving knives showed a welcome decrease last year from 32 in 2007 to 11, the overall number of crimes committed using knives is a matter of concern. Though legislation on the use of knives and similar weapons is already very strong and heavy penalties are already in place, I am moving to strengthen the law in this area. In that context, I sought and received proposals from the Garda Commissioner on strengthening the law on knife crime. These include: increasing the penalties for possessing a knife in a public place; creating an extended power of search without warrant in certain circumstances; and the introduction of a prohibition in relation to swords. I have accepted these proposals and they will be included in the forthcoming Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. Drafting of the Bill is now almost completed, and the Govern- ment have agreed to treat it as a priority measure for this Daíl session. In addition to these measures, I have directed the drafting of a new Firearms and Offensive Weapons Order which will deal with the issue of swords. In particular I will be banning the sale of samurai swords. On 5 February, the Garda Commissioner and I launched a Knife Awareness Campaign by An Garda Sıóchańa with the objective of informing and educating young people on the dangers of carrying knives and with the aim of reducing the number of incidents of knife crime.

Ministerial Appointments. 77. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the criteria he is using when considering appointments to the Equality Authority; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7725/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The criteria for appointments to the Board of the Equality Authority are set out in Section 44(1) of the Employment Equality Act 1998, which state:

“Of the ordinary members of the Authority—

(a) two, one male and one female, shall be persons appointed on the nomination by such organisations representative of employees as the Minister considers appropriate,

(b) two, one male and one female, shall be persons appointed on the nomination by such organisations representative of employers as the Minister considers appropriate, and

(c) the remaining number shall be such persons as appear to the Minister to be persons who have knowledge of, or experience in—

(i) consumer, social affairs or equality issues, including issues related to the experience and circumstances of groups who are disadvantaged by reference to gender, marital status, family status, sexual orientation, religion, age, disability, race, colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin or membership of the Traveller community,

(ii) issues related to the provision of goods or services, or

(iii) such other subject-matter (including law, finance, management or administration) as appears to the Minister to be relevant to the issues to which the functions of the Authority relate.”

562 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Section 41(1) of the Act of 1998, as amended requires that, of the number of persons appointed to the Board at any one time, the difference between the number of males appointed and the number of females appointed shall be not more than two.

Crime Levels. 78. Deputy Ciara´n Lynch asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number in respect of each year from 1998 to date in 2009, of cases of murder in which firearms were used; the number of such cases in which prosecutions for murder were initiated; the number of such cases in which convictions were secured; if he is satisfied with the level of detection and conviction in such cases; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7592/09]

112. Deputy Pat Rabbitte asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of gun murders that have taken place since the beginning of 2009; his views on the spate of gun murders in the Dublin area and the extent to which this reflects the continued operation of criminal gangs; the steps being taken to deal with such murders; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7579/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 78 and 112 together. The following table contains the number of cases of murder recorded in which firearms were used, the number of prosecutions initiated and the number of convictions secured in each year from 1998 to 2008 and to date in 2009. Figures provided for 2009 are provisional, operational and liable to change. The detection rate for murders by its nature increases over time as Garda investigations progress. It is expected that in respect of each year the number of convictions obtained will increase as Garda investigations are concluded and the number of proceedings commenced are finalised by the courts. This applies particularly to murders committed in the most recent years. In addition, directions may be received from the Law Officers to charge persons arrested in connection with such incidents with offences other than murder. Furthermore such persons charged and brought before the courts may be convicted of offences other than murder. One of the main priorities I have set for An Garda Sıóchańa in 2009 is to target gun crime, organised crime and drug related crime through a range of measures, including the use of the Garda specialist units and targeted operations such as Operation Anvil. An Garda Sıóchańa meet this task by strategic actions, including in particular continuous and intensive intelligence led operations against groups and individuals engaged in such illegal activity. Available intelligence is fully analysed and used in the strategic deployment of both local and specialised operational Garda units in targeting persons and groups. It is used in carrying out searches and arrests aimed at both preventing attacks and apprehending persons suspected of being involved in such attacks. Profiles regarding the personnel of organised criminal gangs are continually updated. The Garda Commissioner has established, on a permanent basis, the Organised Crime Unit, with the specific objective of targeting those suspected of involvement in organised crime, including drug trafficking, importation, sale and supply. Similar operations are undertaken by Garda specialist units, including the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation, the Garda National Drugs Unit and the Criminal Assets Bureau. Operation Anvil commenced in the Dublin Metropolitan Region in 2005 to deal with this type of serious crime and was extended nationwide in 2006. The primary focus of the Operation is the targeting of active criminals and their associates involved in serious crime by preventing

563 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] and disrupting their criminal activity through extensive additional overt patrolling and static checkpoints by uniform, mobile and foot patrols, supported by armed plain clothes patrols. Under Operation Anvil up to 8 February, 2009, 1,239 firearms have been recovered in Dublin and 1,092 in the rest of the country. At a time when the public finances are under pressure, I will ensure that top priority will continue to be given to frontline policing. Funding for Operation Anvil will increase in 2009 from \20 million to \21 million to enable it to continue with targeted disruption of serious and organised criminal activity. Other key operations will be maintained through 2009, and any savings that have to be made will not be allowed to diminish frontline policing. There will also be a 20% (\1.5 million) increase next year in funding for the Criminal Assets Bureau. Overall, the Garda budget next year will be \1.589 million. There can be considerable difficulties for the Garda in obtaining evidence in shootings which are the result of gangland activities. This arises not least because many such victims (where they survive the attack) and their associates will not co-operate with the Garda investigation. Witnesses may also be subject to high levels of intimidation not to come forward, and it is to assist such witnesses that the Witness Protection Programme is in place. Nevertheless, the Garda are determined to pursue rigorously all killings, whatever their background.

The number of murders recorded in which a firearm was used, proceedings commenced and convictions

Year Recorded Proceedings Commenced Convictions

2009* 6 0 0 2008 21 6 0 2007 18 2 0 2006 26 6 2 2005 22 3 2 2004 8 4 3 2003 19 3 1 2002 10 4 3 2001 9 2 1 2000 12 4 1 1999 12 7 5 1998 4 2 1 *Figures provided for 2009 are to 20 February.

All figures are operation and liable to change.

Juvenile Offenders. 79. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, further to Parliamentary Question Nos. 326, 327 and 328 of 16 December 2008, if he has reached a decision on which of the 38 applications received in 2008 are to be included in the Garda youth diversion projects; the number of young people referred to the programme in 2008; if a review had been carried out on the effectiveness of the programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7666/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Barry Andrews): Garda Youth Diversion Projects (GYDPs) are funded by the Irish Youth Justice Service, through An Garda Sıóchańa. These projects are community-based, multi-agency crime prevention initiatives which seek to divert young people from becoming involved (or further 564 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers involved) in anti-social and/or criminal behaviour by providing suitable activities to facilitate personal development, and promote civic responsibility and improve long-term employability prospects. By doing so, the projects also contribute to improving the quality of life within communities and enhancing Garda/community relations. At present, there are 100 GYDPs in operation throughout the country and these projects serve up to 3,800 young people at any one time. The planned expansion in the number of projects beyond the existing 100 is currently being assessed in the light of the changed economic climate and, in this context, the primary focus will be on ensuring the quality and effectiveness of the services provided. The Irish Youth Justice Service and the Garda Sıóchańa are reviewing the effectiveness of the diversionary measures as set out under the National Youth Justice Strategy 2008-2010. In view of these changed circumstances, I do not, at this stage, expect to announce any new projects in 2009. The first stage in reviewing the effectiveness of the existing diversion projects has been completed. An initial baseline analysis of the projects was completed in 2008 and the report on this analysis is nearing completion and will be published shortly. The work of IYJS and An Garda Sıóchańa in improving the effectiveness of the diversion projects will be monitored by the National Youth Justice Strategy Oversight Group throughout the life of the strategy.

Criminal Legal Aid. 80. Deputy Charles Flanagan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on whether it is satisfactory that suspects, whose assets have been designated proceeds of crime by the courts are granted criminal legal aid; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7691/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The matters which are of importance to note in relation to the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme and the Criminal Assets Bureau Ad-Hoc Legal Aid Scheme are the following:- (a) that the grant of legal aid, including the level of legal representation, is a matter for the court; (b) the court considering the application must be satisfied that the means of the applicant are insufficient to enable the person to obtain legal representation on his or her own behalf; (c) by reason of the exceptional circumstances it is essential, in the interests of justice, that the applicant should have legal aid in the preparation or conduct of his or her case; (d) steps may be taken to dispute the applicant’s assertion as to his or her inability to discharge the legal costs. I can assure the Deputy that operation of the Schemes is being kept under review in my Department.

Proposed Legislation. 81. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when he will bring the promised legislative reforms before Da´il E´ ireann to deal with the increase in knife crime; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7587/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): Though legislation on the use of knives and similar weapons is already very strong and heavy penalties are already in place, I am moving to strengthen the law in this area. In that context, I sought and received proposals from the Garda Commissioner to assist his force in tackling knife-crime. These include: increasing the penalties for possessing a knife in a public place; creating an extended power of search without warrant in certain circumstances, and the introduction of a prohibition in relation to swords. I have accepted these proposals and at the launch of the knife crime awareness campaign on 5 February 2009 I announced that the proposals will be included in the forthcoming Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill.

565 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.]

Amongst the provisions are: increasing the maximum prison sentence for possessing a knife in a public place from one year to five years and an extended power of search without warrant in circumstances where a member of An Garda Sıóchańa has reasonable grounds to suspect a person is carrying any article for unlawful purposes. Drafting of the Bill is now almost complete, and the Government have agreed to treat it as a priority measure for this Daíl session. In addition to these measures, I have directed the drafting of a new Firearms and Offensive Weapons Order which will deal with the issue of swords.

International Agreements. 82. Deputy Michael D. Higgins asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the reason for the delay in the ratification of the UN Convention of the Rights of People with Disabilities; if, further to a previous question on the matter, it has been indicated to him when such ratification will be possible; and when this will take place. [5210/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy John Moloney): The position remains that it is the Government’s intention to ratify the UN Conven- tion on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities as quickly as possible, taking into account the need to ensure that all necessary requirements under the Convention are being met. The Inter-Departmental Committee established in the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, to advise on and monitor the legislative and administrative actions required to enable the State to ratify the Convention, has developed a work programme that is being actively addressed by Government Departments. The Mental Capacity Bill — the responsibility of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform — is at present being drafted by Parliamentary Counsel and forms an important part of what is required to ratify the Conven- tion. Ireland was in the first group of countries to sign, subject to ratification, the Convention. There will be no undue delay in the State’s ratification of the Convention.

Garda Recruitment. 83. Deputy Pat Rabbitte asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if An Garda Sıóchańa recruits are serving members of the police force in the UK; the way an interested applicant and serving policeman in the UK can make an application to join An Garda Sıóchańa; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7446/09]

Organised Crime. 84. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the action he proposes to combat organised crime in the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7767/09]

566 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I wish to inform the Deputy that tackling organised crime remains one of my highest priorities. The Commissioner’s Policing Plan 2009 sets out strategic goals inter alia a commitment to reduce the impact of crime and criminal behaviour. An Garda Sıóchańa, in accordance with the priorities determined by me pursuant to Section 20 of the Garda Sıóchańa Act 2005/2007 is committed to targeting violent crime and those who engage in or facilitate such activity. I am informed by the Garda Authorities that there are two categories of organised crime groups operating in this jurisdiction. The first category consists of groups that are well established and tightly structured and are involved in drug trafficking, armed robbery and firearms offences. The second category involves groups whose activities are characterised by less cohes- ive group structures and whose criminal activities are mainly confined to Ireland. The membership of organised crime gangs tends to be fluid and the nature of criminal activity is such that offences committed by members of gangs may or may not be connected with the individual’s membership of such gangs. An Garda Sıóchańa undertakes a number of multi-agency activities designed to target and disrupt the operations of criminal organisations. Intelligence-led operations are used by Gardai to target organised crime groups on an ongoing basis. A significant element of the fight against organised crime by An Garda Sıóchańa employs the use of specialist units. Units with expertise in specific areas operate under the direction of the Assistant Commissioner in charge of the National Support Services and this senior Garda officer has overall responsibility for the coordination of measures designed to address organised crime throughout the State. Specialist units include:

• The Criminal Assets Bureau which identifies and targets funds accumulated by criminals in order to seize such assets and deprive them of the profits of their criminal activity.

• The Organised Crime Unit which has a specific remit of targeting those suspected of involvement in organised crime, including the trafficking, importation, sale and supply of drugs.

• The Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation which is responsible for the investigation of individuals and organisations involved in Money Laundering.

• The National Bureau of Criminal Investigation which is responsible for investigating the activities of organised criminal networks.

These units are also supported by the Security and Intelligence Section which assists with the provision of intelligence briefings and timely information. Other measures put in place to tackle serious crime include Operation Anvil which commenced in May 2005 in the Dublin Metropolitan Region, and was extended nationwide in 2006. The primary focus of this operation is the disruption of serious and organised criminal activity. This has resulted in approximately 1,240 firearms being recovered in Dublin and 1,090 in the rest of the country (to 11 February 2009). In addition, the value of property recovered under this Operation to date is approximately \31 million. Funding for Operation Anvil will increase in 2009 from \20 million to \21 million to enable it to continue with the targeted disruption of serious and organised criminal activity. In addition to the above, An Garda Sıóchańa maintains close liaison with other law enforcement agencies throughout Europe, and elsewhere, exchanging information and intelligence. An Garda Sıóchańa currently has a number of liaison officers on secondment to other jurisdictions and to international bodies such as Interpol and Europol. These officers act as a conduit for

567 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] information to pass between law enforcement agencies to ensure that national borders are not, and cannot, be used by criminals as a means of frustrating the efforts of law enforcement agencies. Senior management in An Garda Sı´ocha´na are keeping the situation under review to ensure an effective law enforcement response remains in place to tackle organised crime.

Questions Nos. 85 to 87, inclusive, answered with Question No. 49.

Question No. 88 answered with Question No. 51.

Question No. 89 answered with Question No. 49.

Departmental Reports. 90. Deputy Sea´n Sherlock asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the action he has taken or plans to take arising from the report of the Hartnett inquiry into the death of Brian Rossiter, who died in Garda custody in Clonmel in 2002; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7606/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): As indicated in my response to Parliamentary Question Number 62 of 18 December 2008, the findings of the Hartnett Report have been accepted. The Inquest into the death of the person in question has been concluded and civil proceedings instituted by the person’s family have been settled. A Chief Superintendent was appointed under the Garda Sı´ocha´na (Discipline) Regulations 2007 to deal with disciplinary matters arising from the Report. The question of discipline for members is, in the first instance, a matter for the Commissioner and I understand that one member has been dealt with under that process and the process is ongoing in respect of two others.

Road Safety. 91. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will provide a full update on the roll-out of the national speed camera programme; when the first cameras will be in operation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5829/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): In accordance with EU Directives, national public procurement procedures and relevant legislation, An Garda Sı´ocha´na engaged in a procurement process for the provision and operation of safety cameras. As a result, a preferred supplier has been selected, and the contract discussion phase of the procurement process has commenced, with the aim of entering into a contract with the preferred supplier at the earliest opportunity. Every effort is being made to proceed with this project as speedily as possible. Until the contract discussions are concluded, it is not possible to indicate a specific timescale for the project, but it is expected that roll-out will commence in the course of 2009.

National Disability Strategy. 92. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, further to Parliamentary Question No. 17 of 18 December 2008, if the strategic document outlining the vision, mission and objectives of the national disability strategy as detailed in Towards 2016 has been finalised since the beginning of 2009; if not, when he expects it to be finalised and published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7665/09]

568 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): Follow- ing necessary consultation, work on the Strategic Document outlining the vision, mission and objectives of the National Disability Strategy is in the process of being finalised. The document will, in line with the commitment in T2016, be published as soon as possible.

Garda Complaints Procedures. 93. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the steps that have been taken in respect of the report of the Garda Ombudsman Commission following the death of a person (details supplied) and in particular the recommendations in the report that require action by An Garda Sı´ocha´na or the Garda Commissioner; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7599/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I refer the Deputy to my response to Parliamentary Question No. 64 of 18 December 2008. I have been informed by the Garda Commissioner that the recommendations are being actively pursued.

Garda Recruitment. 94. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he has plans to facilitate the transfer of, or otherwise recruit serving police officers from the London Metropolitan Police to An Garda Sıóchańa; if he has plans to encourage members of the Garda Reserve to join the full-time force; if he will raise the upper age limit for recruitment to An Garda Sıóchańa; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7613/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): Section 122(1)(d) of the Garda Sıóchańa Acts, 2005-2007 provides for the making of regulations on the admission, appointment, and enrolment of members including members who have served with other Police Services and members with different ethnic or national origins or different religious beliefs or backgrounds. The Act also provides for the continuation in law of the Garda Sıóchańa Admis- sions and Appointments Regulations 1988 (as amended) which in turn set out the specific recruitment criteria for appointment as a member of An Garda Sıóchańa. Recruitment is open to citizens of the EEA and there is no prohibition on serving police officers applying, provided they meet the requirements. The case for specific regulations on the recruitment of serving police officers will be kept under review. It is open to members of the Garda Reserve to apply to join An Garda Sıóchańa on a full time basis. To date, a total of 31 attested and/or trainee Reserve Gardaı´ have left the Garda Reserve to become full time members of An Garda Sıóchańa. The Garda Sıóchańa (Admissions and Appointments) (Amendment) Regulations 2006 provide that in a competition for full-time membership of An Garda Sıóchańa, the assessment shall take into account any service by the candidate as a Reserve member of the Garda Sıóchańa, and shall give due recognition to evidence of satisfactory service as such a member. Admission as a trainee Garda is contingent on the prospective applicant being under 35 years of age. This upper age limit was set in 2004 following consultation with the Commissioner and there are no plans to amend it.

Garda Investigations. 95. Deputy Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the progress made to date with regard to the murder of a person (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7593/09]

569 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am informed by the Garda authorities that the murder of the person concerned is under intensive Garda investigation. The Deputy will appreciate that as the investigation is ongoing, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further at this time.

96. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of occasions in 2007, 2008 and to date in 2009 in which grenades, bombs or improvised explosive devices have been used; the number of occasions in each year when the Garda called on the assistance of the Army ordinance unit to deal with such devices; the number of prosecutions initiated as a result of the discovery of such devices; his views on the increased use of such devices by criminal elements; the steps being taken to curb the use of such devices, particularly having regard to the danger they pose to the public; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7604/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am informed by the Garda authorities that to date in 2009 there have been 11 incidents involving grenade, pipe bomb or other improvised devices in the Dublin Metropolitan Region. A Defence Forces Explosives Ordnance Device (EOD) team attended nine of these. In 2008 there were 106 incidents and an EOD team attended 93. In 2007 there were 24 such incidents and an EOD team attended at 17. Proceedings have been commenced against nine persons for offences in 2008 and investigations by An Garda Sı´ocha´na into other such incidents are continuing. I am further informed by the Garda authorities that Garda strategies in responding to incidents involving pipe bomb attacks are firmly focused on disrupting these activities. Where sufficient evidence is available to warrant the bringing of criminal prosecutions this will be done.

Data Protection. 97. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if, arising from the recent judgment of the European Court of Justice, he will introduce the legislation required to bring Irish law regarding the retention of data on telephone calls into line with European law; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7590/09]

99. Deputy Martin Ferris asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will make a statement on the implications of the European Court of Justice’s recent ruling against Ireland, in which it held that the internal market decision mechanism employed in the making of the data retention directive which involves no Irish veto was the correct one as opposed to the justice and home affairs mechanism which he contended was the correct one and which does involve a veto, for future decision making in areas deemed by Irish elected representatives to be matter of justice rather than services. [7575/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 97 and 99 together. Irish law on data retention is mainly at Part 7 of the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act 2005. It obliges service providers to retain telephony data for three years and to disclose it to the gardaı´ on request for the purpose of the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of crime or for safeguarding the security of the State. The providers are also obliged to disclose telephony data on request to the Permanent Defence Force for the purpose of safeguarding the security of the State. The 2005 Act provisions largely comply with the telephony requirements of Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and Council on the retention of data. I will shortly be seeking Government approval to publish a Bill that will

570 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers consolidate the existing legislation in the 2005 Act and the requirements of the directive in relation to the retention of internet data. Ireland sought the annulment of Directive 2006/24/EC before the European Court of Justice (ECJ) based on the argument that the legal basis used for the Directive, which is contained in the internal market provisions of the EU Treaties, does not apply to measures that are designed to combat crime. The ECJ has ruled that as the Directive relates predominantly to the functioning of the internal market, it is founded on an appropriate legal basis. The implications of the judgment are being examined in my Department.

Programme for Government. 98. Deputy Ciara´n Lynch asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the progress made to date with regard to the implementation of those sections of the programme for Government under the headings community payback, parental responsibility and anti-social behaviour; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7591/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The information on the progress made to date with regard to the implementation of those sections of the Prog- ramme for Government referred to by the Deputy is published on the website of the Depart- ment of the Taoiseach. It can be accessed at www.taoiseach.gov.ie under Publications (archive 2008). The information will be updated later this year.

Question No. 99 answered with Question No. 97.

Garda Strength. 100. Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the strength of An Garda Sı´ocha´na at the latest date for which figures are available broken down by full members, those who have attested but not yet concluded their training, those in training, the expected number that will be recruited in 2009, the anticipated numbers at each above category at the end of 2009 and the number of members of the force who are expected to retire during 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7601/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I have been informed by the Garda Commissioner that the personnel strength of attested members of An Garda Sıóchańa on 31 January 2009, the latest date for which figures are readily available, was 14,391. The number of recruits in training (Phases 1 to 3) at that date was 1,045. The number of probationer gardaı´ who have been attested but have not yet graduated (ie not yet completed Phases 4 and 5) at that date was 825 and it is anticipated the majority of these probationers will complete their training in 2009. This figure is included in the overall strength of the force as at 31 January 2009. It is further anticipated that approximately 944 Student gardaı´ will be attested during 2009. In relation to retirements, it is anticipated that approximately 400 members of An Garda Sıóchańa (all ranks) will retire in 2009 which, coupled with the existing strength and future attestations, will result in an estimated attested strength in An Garda Sıóchańa of over 14,900 on 31 December 2009. Future recruitment to An Garda Sıóchańa will take place in line with overall Government policy.

Crime Prevention. 101. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to the statement made by the head of the Garda Inspectorate, Kathleen

571 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Jack Wall.] O’Toole, that the Garda could identify newly emerging crime trends earlier and respond faster if better technology was made available to it; if he has discussed with Ms O’Toole the needs of the Garda in this area; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7584/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Garda Inspec- torate is currently examining resource deployment in the Garda Sı´ocha´na. In this general context I have received a proposal from the Inspectorate to undertake a study in this regard. I envisage that the terms of reference for the study will be finalised shortly.

102. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the measures he has taken to monitor known serious criminals living in communities; the checks and protections in place to protect residents and public safety in estates in which criminals are known to reside; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7686/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): As the Deputy is aware the monitoring of serious criminals is an operational matter for An Garda Sıóchańa, independent of political interference or direction. Persons involved in organised criminal activities, including persons suspected of involvement in drug-trafficking, importation, sale and supply, including the illegal importation of firearms, are being targeted by An Garda Sıóchańa on a number of fronts, involving uniform and plain-clothes personnel overtly and covertly disrupting known criminals in the course of criminal activities. Such criminals, their operating methods, criminal interests and financial assets are likewise proactively targeted and intelligence-led operations, particularly under Operation Anvil, which commenced in May 2005 in the Dublin Metropolitan Region and was extended countrywide in 2006. The primary focus of Operation Anvil is the disruption of serious and organised criminal activity through such operations, in conjunction with an increased overt visible Garda presence. Multi-agency approaches have been and continue to be used where all of the national units from National Support Services — the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation, Criminal Assets Bureau, Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation and Garda Technical Bureau — are used to combat serious crime. These Units are also supported by the Garda Security and Intelligence Section who assist with intelligence briefings and timely information. The Criminal Assets Bureau is being actively utilised to identify and target funds accumulated by criminals, in order to seize such assets and to deprive them of the profits of their criminal activity. A dedicated unit within the Garda National Drugs Unit has been established to liaise with the Criminal Assets Bureau to target in particular those criminals and criminal groupings believed to be deriving profits and assets from drug-related criminal activity. This integrated approach adopts best practice in implementing a co-ordinated use of Garda resources and using available criminal legislation to its fullest extent. Operations are reviewed on an ongoing basis to ensure their effectiveness. In addition to these specific initiatives, all members of An Garda Sıóchańa have the responsibility to enforce the criminal law, including relevant drug trafficking legislation. The situation is being closely monitored and kept under constant review by senior Garda management in conjunction with Regional Assistant Commis- sioners and Heads of Units. The Criminal Justice Act 2007 provides that the courts may impose orders on persons convicted of serious offences, following their release from prison. These orders are intended to monitor the offender in question or to provide protection for the victim of the offence concerned. A monitoring order may require the offender to notify the Garda Sıóchańa of their address and to further notify the Gardaı´ of any change of address. The court may also provide

572 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers for a protection of persons order which prohibits the offender from engaging in behaviour which would cause fear or distress to the victim or any other person named in the order. On 26 January, the Garda Commissioner and I launched a new Garda National Model of Community Policing. The Model builds on the success of existing good community policing practice within Ireland and aims to foster collaborative partnerships between An Garda Sı´och- a´na and members of the community. Alongside the specialist operations already referred to, a comprehensive model of community policing ensures that enforcement will be employed not only to reduce crime but also to reduce the fear of crime and ensure a better quality of community life for all.

EU Directives. 103. Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, in respect of EU directives for which his Department has responsibility, the number of directives remaining to be implemented; the directives that are overdue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7595/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): My Department has responsibility for eight EU Directives which have to be implemented. Four of these Directives are overdue. They are:

Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status. Irish law and practice in this area is already substantially in compliance with the terms of this Directive. The Immi- gration, Residence and Protection Bill 2008 contain provisions to restate the law on refugee and other protection procedures with some amendments. These restatements are in compliance with Ireland’s obligations under the Directive.

Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive 2002/58/EC. Part of the Directive is covered by Part 7 of the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act 2005. The remainder is to be transposed by means of primary legislation. The necessary legislation is being prepared as a matter of urgency.

Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing; and

Commission Directive 2006/70/EC of 1 August 2006 laying down implementing measures for Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the definition of politically exposed person and the technical criteria for simplified customer due diligence procedures and for exemption on grounds of a financial activity conducted on an occasional or very limited basis. The necessary legislation to implement these two Directives is currently being drafted. I expect to be in a position to publish the legislation in the first half of this year.

Four recent Directives remain to be implemented. They are not overdue. They are: Commission Directive 2008/43/EC of 4 April 2008 setting up, pursuant to Council Directive 93/15/EEC, a system for the identification and traceability of explosives for civil uses; Directive 2008/51/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 amending Council Directive 91/477/EEC on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons; Directive 2007/23/EC of

573 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 May 2007 on the placing on the market of pyrotechnic articles; Directive 2008/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on certain aspects of mediation in civil and commercial matters.

Proposed Legislation. 104. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if arising from his interview (details supplied) he will state when he will introduce legislation to end prison terms for non-payment of fines; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7588/09]

105. Deputy Jim O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on the concept of developing alternatives other than imprisonment for the non-payment of fines and civil debt bearing in mind that upwards of 2,000 people are imprisoned annually for such non-payment; the details of such proposals; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7444/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 104 and 105 together. My predecessor published a Fines Bill in 2007. The primary purpose of the Bill was to provide for the indexation of fines. It also introduced the concept of equality of impact and the payment of fines by instalments. Those provisions are currently being redrafted in a new Bill I am preparing, and I am also examining the possibility for inclusion in the Bill of giving the courts power to impose alternative penalties to that of imprisonment in cases of default on payment of a fine. I can advise the Deputy that the number of persons imprisoned for the non-payment of a fine by the due date for payment comprises a tiny fraction of the overall prison population. Nonetheless, I believe that my proposals will make a significant contribution towards reducing that number while at the same time preserving the integrity of the fines system. I intend to seek Government approval for the publication of the Bill in the near future. Imprisonment for non-payment of debt was abolished by the Debtors (Ireland) Act 1872. However, refusal to pay a contractual debt may amount to civil contempt of court, for which imprisonment may be imposed. This is a civil law matter and the primary remedies available to a complainant, through the courts, would be enforced performance of the contract or damages. Where a person refuses to obey a court order relating to providing a remedy for contractual default to another person or organisation, imprisonment may be one of a number of remedies ultimately for non-compliance. The imprisonment of such defaulters is very much a last resort. The person will generally have been given every opportunity to fulfil the contract or to discharge the debt. There are no proposals in the current Government Legislative Prog- ramme to reform the law in regard to civil contempt and how it might be applied to default of contractual obligations or failure to pay a civil debt.

Gun Control. 106. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number in respect of each year from 2002 to date in 2009 of licensed handguns; the number of licensed handguns that were reported as stolen; the number of such stolen guns that were subsequently used in crimes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7597/09]

574 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Deputy will be aware that prior to 2004 there was a de factor ban on handguns in this jurisdiction. However, I understand from the Garda Authorities that records indicate approximately 1,800 handguns have been licensed since the beginning of 2004. The most recent figures on stolen firearms were received on 16 December 2008 and indicate that 31 handguns were recorded as stolen since 2004. I am further advised that stolen firearms are used in the course of the commission of other criminal offences but, because not all stolen firearms or firearms used in the commission of offences are recovered, it is not possible to say precisely how many formerly legally held handguns have been used in criminal offences. As I have stated on a number of occasions I am concerned with the situation we now find ourselves in following the growth in the licensing of hand guns over the past few years. We now have these 1,800 handguns licensed, and not as a result of a considered or deliberate public policy decision. As Mr. Justice Charleton said in a recent judgement the public is entitled to feel alarmed at the proliferation of handguns. I am not going to permit the growth of a ‘handgun’ culture. It was against this background that I announced my proposals for reform in this area, which include a ban on issuing new licenses for handguns and a strict regime for renewal of existing licenses, with limited exceptions made in relation to Olympic sports. The House may note the endorsement of these proposals by the Chief Inspector of the Garda Inspectorate who draws on her own considerable experience of policing in the United States. She has recently been quoted as saying that a lot of guns used in the commission of crime in the States are guns that have been stolen from their rightful owners. We must have controls in place to prevent the same thing happening here. My proposals will be reflected in the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill which I will be publishing very shortly. It is important to say that my proposals in relation to handguns will not impinge directly on the activities of the vast majority of licensed firearms holders. I recognise that those firearms holders pursue their legitimate interests in a law abiding way and am anxious to have a well regulated sector in which those interests can be successfully pursued, in co-operation with the relevant authorities. But the reality is specific issues arise from the inherent nature of firearms.

Proposed Legislation. 107. Deputy Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when he will publish the Covert Surveillance Bill; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7594/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Government announced on 26 January, 2009 that the Covert Surveillance Bill would be among a number of Bills which would be published during the present session of the Da´il.

Crime Levels. 108. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on the Central Statistics Office crime figures for 2008; his views on the continued increase in the number of drug offences; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7585/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The 2008 crime statistics published by the Central Statistics office show a number of encouraging trends. The number of homicide offences decreased by almost half (42.9%) during the year, with murder down 36.4% and manslaughter down 57.1%. The number of sexual offences was stable (up 1.1%), with rape down 2.8% and aggravated sexual assault down 33.3%. The number of cases

575 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] of discharging a firearm decreased by 31.3%. While the number of cases of possession of a firearm increased by 8.2%, this is due primarily to increased Garda activity in combating this. Controlled drug offences show an overall increase of 25.4%, with increases of 24.1% in the category of importation of drugs and 36% in cases of cultivation and manufacture of drugs. It is important to emphasise that, of their nature, in the vast majority of cases drug offences are recorded as a result of enforcement activity. The statistics in question, therefore, are the result of increased levels of enforcement and should lead to commendation of the efforts of those involved. Through ongoing specific initiatives and intelligence-led operations, An Garda Sı´ocha´na continues to seize substantial quantities of illegal drugs and identify those involved in the importation, distribution, sale and supply of illegal drugs. At present there are 379 members of the Force attached to the Divisional Drug Units and 60 to the National Drugs Unit. They, in turn, are supported by the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation, the Organised Crime Unit and the Criminal Assets Bureau. The Gardaı´ work closely with Customs and the Naval Service under the umbrella of the Joint Task Force on Drugs as well as with their international colleagues. Among recent and ongoing initiatives are the establishment of the Organised Crime Unit on a permanent footing, our involvement in the establishment and operation of the Maritime Analysis and Operations Centre in Lisbon, strengthened provisions in the Criminal Justice Acts 2006 and 2007 and the ring-fencing of \21million this year for Operation Anvil. I am confident that the legislation that I will be introducing shortly dealing with surveillance will be of particular value in tackling drugs gangs. While the crime figures for 2008 are encouraging, there are no grounds for complacency.Λ I recently stated my belief that the time has come for a strategic review of how we fight crime in the longer term and announced the development of the State’s first White Paper on Crime.Λ However, as that process develops, there will be no let up in the pace of reform already underway, which includes a ban on handguns, controls on knives, new surveillance powers to deal with organised crime and terrorism and the establishment of a DNA database.

Garda Sı´ocha´na Ombudsman Commission. 109. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the procedures used in selecting a new chairperson of the Garda Ombudsman Commission; the reason the post was not advertised and applications sought; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7580/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The appointment of members of the Garda Sıóchańa Ombudsman Commission is dealt with in section 65 of the Garda Sıóchańa Act 2005, which provides they are to be appointed by the President on the nomination of the Government and the passage of resolutions by both Houses of the Oireachtas. In making the nomination of a person to be a member of the Ombudsman Com- mission, the Government is required by the 2005 Act to satisfy themselves that the person has the appropriate experience, qualifications, training or expertise for appointment to a body having the functions of the Ombudsman Commission. On the 3rd February 2009, the Government nominated Mr Dermot Gallagher for appointment by the President to be the Chairperson of the Ombudsman Commission. In making the nomination, the Government was fully satisfied that Mr. Gallagher meets the statutory requirements for appointment as Chairperson of the Ombudsman Commission. The same pro-

576 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers cess was undertaken by the Government in 2005 in relation to the appointment of the original members of the Garda Sı´ocha´na Ombudsman Commission. Having satisfied itself that the nominees had the appropriate experience, qualifications, training and expertise for appointment to the Commission, Judge Kevin Haugh, Ms Carmel Foley and Mr. Conor Brady were appointed by the President on the nomination of the Government and the passage of resolutions by both Houses of the Oireachtas.

Question No. 110 answered with Question No. 56.

Garda Stations. 111. Deputy Mary Upton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if plans for an appropriate Garda headquarters to serve the Garda divisional area of Tallaght have been shelved; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7612/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I refer the Deputy to the response to Parliamentary Question number 132 of 23 October, 2008 which outlines both the immediate and longer term plans for the station. I am advised that communications are ongoing between the Garda authorities and the Office of Public Works on the feasibility report prepared by the Board for the longer term development of the station. The immediate measures to provide additional office accommodation for fifty personnel adjacent to the existing station are at an advanced stage.

Question No. 112 answered with Question No. 78.

Question No. 113 answered with Question No. 51.

Prison Building Programme. 114. Deputy Mary Upton asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if is satisfied in relation to the capacity of the preferred bidder to deliver the Thornton Hall prison project; the progress that has been made on the project since the enactment of the Prison Development (Confirmation of Regulations) Act 2008; the estimated date for the commencement and the completion of the project; the estimated cost of the project, including the cost of acquiring the site; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7611/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): It is the responsibility of the commercial consortium, under the PPP process, to arrange the funding and other resources to deliver the project. Part of the PPP process includes various checks to ensure that the bidder has the capacity to deliver the project before any contract is signed. It is not appropriate, for commercial and procurement reasons, for me to comment on the specific financial funding aspects of the PPP contract negotiations which are currently in progress. Since the enactment of the Prison Development (Confirmation of Resolutions) Act, 2008 the Irish Prison Service, along with its technical advisors and the National Development Fin- ance Agency has focused on progressing the Negotiation Phase of the Public Private Partner- ship (PPP) process with Leargas, the preferred tenderer, across financial, technical and legal aspects of the project. This involved the continuation of the design development of the project and contract negotiations to enable the Irish Prison Service to contract with the PPP Co and commence construction of the new prison development. While negotiations on the contract are at an advanced stage they have not yet been completed to the point that the Project Agreement can be signed. I am advised by the Irish Prison Service that it is anticipated that it will not be possible to have a contract signed until later this

577 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] year. Construction will commence immediately after contract award and should take no more than 3 years. This timeframe is subject, of course, to the successful completion of the contract negotiations. I can say, however, that if the current contract negotiations are not successfully concluded there are other tenderers and other options which can still be considered. The Thornton Hall project is a complex Public Private Partnership Project which involves the construction of more than 30 buildings, including 8 prison facilities on the site, a major internal road network, extensive perimeter security and a vast array of security systems both physical and electronic. Additional matters have had to be addressed following the extensive public consultation involving the publication of the Environmental Impact Assessment and consideration of the development by the Oireachtas. Pressures on the international financial markets have the potential to impact on all major capital projects. The Irish Prison Service is being advised by the National Development Finance Agency in relation to trends and developments in this area. The cost of the acquisition of the site for the prison development was \29.9 million. An additional 8.7 acres has also been acquired to provide a dedicated access road to the main site. This was done following representations from the local community which reflected concern in relation to the effect of increased traffic generated by the prison project. The cost of this additional land was \1.3 million. A total of \10.4 million has been expended to date on preliminary site works including surveys, landscaping, security and maintenance of the property, studies such as archaeological, topo- graphical, etc., and professional fees including legal and specialist technical advice. It is not appropriate, for commercial and procurement reasons, to provide details as to the likely costs of the construction. In particular it would not be in the public interest to give an indication of expected costs before a bid is accepted and a contract finalised. The disclosure of such information is, in any event, not allowed under Department of Finance guidelines applicable to Public Private Partnership.

Redundancy Payments. 115. Deputy M. J. Nolan asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employ- ment when a person (details supplied) will have their application for a redundancy payment processed and granted. [7814/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Billy Kelleher): The Redundancy Payments Section of my Department has received an application for a statutory lump sum payment in respect of the above person. The claim is at an advanced stage of processing and, subject to the criteria being fully met, payment of the claim can be expected to issue shortly.

Health and Safety Inspections. 116. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the number of meat plants inspected by the legal metrology service in the years 2006 to 2008; the date each plant was inspected; the breaches that were found; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7824/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy John McGuinness): The number of meat plants inspected over the three-year period is as follows:

2006: 8;

2007: 22; and

2008: 11.

578 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

The following table details the meat plants inspected and the dates of inspection. No breaches of the legislation requiring prosecution were found. Following the resolution of an industrial relations issue relating to the hiring of private haulage for the conveyance and lifting of test equipment, about which the Deputy will be aware from previous replies, the Legal Metrology Service NSAI is currently inviting tenders for supply of haulage services. Provision of this support will enable the Service resume a full inspection regime in meat processing plants.

Meat Processing Plants Inspection Visits

Year Number of Plant (s) Date of Visit(s) Plants visited

2006 1 AIBP , Clones 11-March, 22-May 1 Liffey Meats, Ballyjamesduff, Cavan 09-Mar 1 Kepak Ltd, Clonee 06-Jul 1 Newgrange Meats, Navan 10-Jul 1 Tullamore Meats, Tullamore 15-May Kepak, Athleague 16-Feb 1 Kepak, Ballymahon 17-Jan, 14-Feb, 22-Mar, 20-April, 15-Jun, 18-Aug, 18-Oct, 1-Nov, 19-Dec 1 Dawn Meats, Ballyhaunis 15-Jan 1 Donegal Meat Processors 07-Dec

2006 Total 8

2007 1 AIBP, Clones 30-April, 17-Aug 1 Liffey Meats, Ballyjamesuff, Cavan 13-Dec 1 Dawn Meats, Midleton 26-Jun 1 AIBP Rathkeale 07-Nov 1 Kerry Foods Shilleagh Wicklow 30-Jan 1 Slaney Foods Bunclody 31- Jan, 16 & 17-Jul 1 Kepak Hacketstown 26-Jul, 1-Aug 1 QK coldstores Grannagh 04-Sep 1 QK coldstores Kilmacthomas 05-Sep 1 AIBP Meats Cahir 11-Sep 1 Callan Bacon Callan 11-Oct 1 Slaney Foods Bunclody 11-Dec 1 Rosderran Meats Roscrea 15-Aug 1 Ashbourne Meats Roscrea 15-Mar 1 AIBP Bandon 09-Aug 1 AIBP Athleague 25-Jan 1 Oliver Carty Athlone 24-Jan, 11-Jul 1 Duffy Meats Gort 26-Feb 1 Donegal Meat Processors 04-Oct 1 Kepak, Ballymahon 3-April, 31-May, 31-Jul, 27-Aug, 31-Oct 1 Galtee Meats Charleville 09-Mar, 17-May 1 AIBP Rathkeale 07-Nov

2007 Total 22

579 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy John McGuinness.] Year Number of Plant (s) Date of Visit(s) Plants visited

2008 1 AIBP, Clones 28-Apr 1 Irish Country Meats, Camolin 25-Jun 1 Dawn Meats Midleton 16-May 1 Dawn Pork and Bacon, Grannagh 17-Jan 1 Kepak Hacketstown 12-Mar, 20-Aug 1 Slaney Foods Bunclody 21-Jul 1 Galtee Meats 10-Apr 1 Kepak Ballymahon 11-Feb, 19-Mar, 20-Mar, 4-April, 8-April, 26-Jun, 27-Jun, 30 & 31-Jul, 18-Sept, 2 & 13-Oct, 23-Dec 1 Donegal Meat Processors 12-Dec 1 Kepak, Athleague 20-Feb, 20-Jul 1 Oliver Carty, Athlone 29-Apr

2008 Total 11

Job Losses. 117. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employ- ment the details of her discussions with the unions that she met from a company (details supplied) on 19 February 2009, in connection with the potential loss of jobs in the company; the alternatives she is looking at in connection with this issue; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7833/09]

Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): I very much regret the announced closure of the SR Technics operation at Dublin Airport. My most recent meeting on the matter was on Thursday last, 19 February, with a delegation representing the Trade Union interests in the Dublin operation, who outlined their concerns. Similar concerns have been relayed to me in the many approaches I have had from public representatives. The Government is anxious that as many jobs as possible are secured at Dublin Airport. We would like to see the SR Technics Group do what it can to facilitate this, such as helping to promote the capabilities and skills available at the Dublin facility, agreeing to an orderly wind down of the facility to give IDA Ireland an opportunity to promote the location to interested parties, and maintaining assets and equipment at the site for at least 6 months. There are a number of expressions of interest from different parties in possibly all or part of the business and time is needed to assess these proposals. The Government is anxious that the facility and the workers will maintain their IAA approval status while the alternative proposals are being progressed. I am conveying these points, and the widespread concern in Ireland that every effort be made to maintain the maximum number of jobs at the facility at Dublin Airport, to SR Technics at Group level, as a follow-on to my meeting with the company on 11th February, when I was accompanied by my Secretary General and the Chief Executive of IDA. I should add that a number of meetings had taken place between the State, its Agencies and the company in the past year. The company had explained that it had been exploring all options for its Dublin operations, including sale to another party, but had not found it possible to 580 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers proceed with any of these options. The company outlined the deterioration that had taken place in its global business since mid 2008, with contracts moving to Eastern Europe, Jordan, Turkey and Malta. It confirmed that it was putting in place a 5 year restructuring plan and that it had already reduced its worldwide workforce by 500 in the last year. The company stated that the recent loss of major contracts, its current business and economic forecasts, as well as its high cost-base and over capacity at Dublin airport, had made it impossible to continue a sustainable business in Dublin. SR Technics provides line maintenance for the Aer Lingus fleet at their Dublin base. This is a long-term contract awarded by Aer Lingus in 2008 following a competitive procurement process. The Company had indicated that it hoped to assign this and other smaller operations to another operator, offering the potential of saving up to 200 jobs. IDA Ireland has had an ongoing relationship with the company over many years and approved a significant Training Grant package for the company in 2006 to assist the company in maximising efficiencies and improving competitiveness. IDA also had discussions with the company in relation to its business plan and further opportunities to assist the company with additional financial incentives such as RD&I support with the emphasis on Innovation and Process Development. In the light of the announced closure of the Dublin plant, FA´ S has been at the forefront in providing intervention and support to employees facing redundancy. It is currently in contact with SR Technics Management to discuss the services available from FA´ S and the potential needs of the employees. Each response will be tailored on a case-by-case basis. FA´ S Services to Business Unit will also be involved in these consultations. It is important to establish how best FA´ S can assist the workers. Following this initial contact, a judgement will be made in relation to the level of FA´ S intervention required. As regards efforts to save some or all of the jobs involved, actual involvement by IDA Ireland or Enterprise Ireland in providing financial or other supports will be dependent on a company or companies submitting proposals for consideration and seeking approval for State support for an undertaking in the normal way. In the meantime IDA Ireland are actively exploring options with interest parties.

Departmental Reports. 118. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, further to Parliamentary Question No. 147 of 2 December 2008, the Departments which have responded to the Secretary General and the Departments which remain to furnish a full response; the result of the examination of the enterprise agenda recommendations in the report; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7887/09]

Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): The report of the Services Strategy Group, “Catching the Wave: A Services Strategy for Ireland”, published in September 2008, contains a range of recommendations across a wide area that concerns the policies and activities of a number of Government Departments and Agencies. All the relevant bodies have been contacted for their views on the pertinent recommendations in the report. Officials of my Department are currently engaged in the process of analysing responses, both from divisions within my own Department and from other relevant Departments and Agencies. Some of the issues raised by these recommendations are complex and have policy implications for the Departments involved. For this reason it is important that we comprehensively analyse the issues raised and identify the most appropriate measures to address the difficulties involved. These issues are obviously compounded by the straitened economic circumstances and the

581 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Mary Coughlan.] severe constraints on public expenditure. Upon completion of this process I will be in a position to formulate a comprehensive approach to the implementation of the report. Moreover a number of actions are already taking place. In November 2008 I launched Enterprise Ireland’s “Strategy for Internationally Traded Services”, which could, if fully realised, lead to a doubling of export sales by 2015. The Agency also initiated a new “Going Global Fund” which is aimed at locally traded companies that have successfully established businesses in Ireland and wish to explore opportunities to sell abroad. These plans and supports will give ambitious services firms, particularly those that have not looked beyond the Irish market yet, the confidence to offer their quality services in global markets, generating wealth and prosperity for the economy back home. The Government has recently given a commitment to publishing a whole-of-Government response to recommendations contained within the reports of the Competition Authority. This, in conjunction with the merging of the Competition Authority and the National Consumer Agency, should yield dividends for the economy as a whole, where both the individual and enterprises as consumers will benefit from increasing competition and a reduction in sheltered sectors of the economy. In January of this year, my colleague Minister Eamonn Ryan in the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources announced details of a new scheme to deliver universal broadband across Ireland by September 2010. That department is also actively engaging with key stakeholders in the implementation and means of delivery of Next Generation Broadband. I am confident that following due consideration, we can put the right structures in place to ensure the successful implementation of the recommendations of the Services Strategy Group. This will enable Irish service companies to exploit new and exciting opportunities, such as eLearning, business and financial services, professional and consultancy services and others. Given a relatively solid foundation to begin with, Ireland can be an ideal location for services to develop and prosper.

Industrial Development. 119. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employ- ment the number of offices the Industrial Development Authority has leased or operates from in the Kildare area; if there are none, the base from which Kildare is served; her plans to locate further or new offices in the Kildare area in view of the fact that the unemployment figures for Kildare are so high and are above the national average; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7942/09]

Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): IDA Ireland is the agency with statutory responsibility for the attraction of foreign direct investment (FDI) to Ireland and its regions. The marketing of individual areas for new or expansion FDI investments and jobs is a day-to-day operational matter for the Agency. While I may give general policy directives to the Agency, I am precluded under the Industrial Development Acts from giving directives regarding individual undertakings or from giving preference to one area over others. IDA Ireland has informed me that it markets Kildare, as part of an integrated East Region, which comprises Dublin, Kildare, Meath and Wicklow, from its East Regional Office based in the Agency’s Head Office in Wilton Park House Dublin as well as through its network of overseas offices. The opening of a separate IDA office in Kildare is not envisaged at this stage.

582 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Redundancy Payments. 120. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the position in relation to staff at a company (details supplied) who have requested that she meet with them over their situation; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7952/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Billy Kelleher): Further to my reply in response to a question put down on 5 February regarding the situation of staff at the company to which the Deputy refers, the Tańaiste has received a number of representations from staff at the company to which she has just very recently responded. In the context of Redundancy entitlements, my Department is not in a position to pay out the statutory redundancy entitlements to staff until a determination of the Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) is available which should provide clarity as to whether a genuine redundancy situation at the company exists. The Tańaiste encouraged staff to pursue this issue through a determination before the Employment Appeals Tribunal and we both welcome the news that a number of staff have taken up this suggestion and would encourage all remaining eligible staff to do likewise. Upon receipt of the EAT decision, and on the assumption that this is positive, my Department will, subject to the eligibility criteria being met, be in a position to pay the employees their statutory redundancy entitlements. In that event, the Department will pursue the employer directly to recoup the monies paid. As regards the pursuit of complaints to the Rights Commissioner Service under the Payment of Wages Act, 1991, to which I drew attention in my response of 5 February, I am pleased also to note that a number of employees have decided to request hearings before the Rights Commissioners and I understand that a number of cases have now progressed to the hearing stage. Naturally, the Tańaiste and I are very concerned about the issues that have been raised in relation to this company. The National Employment Rights Authority, (NERA) were recently requested to undertake an inspection at the company’s premises and although this did not yield a result in that there was no company presence in evidence, NERA is considering its further options in this regard. In line with the type of joint inspection activity and information sharing which NERA undertakes with both the Revenue Commissioners and the Department of Social and Family Affairs, NERA has taken the opportunity to share information on the company with these bodies. The Deputy may also wish to be aware that separately, and in light of the powers vested on the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement (ODCE) under company law, the Tańaiste has also forwarded the matter to the ODCE for further consideration. I am satisfied that all relevant advice has been provided to staff in terms of the pursuit of all relevant avenues of redress to secure their employment rights entitlements. Equally, the Tańaiste has undertaken follow-up action in relation to the company as outlined.

Job Creation. 121. Deputy Tom Sheahan asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the number of people currently working in animation studios here; the steps being taken to create job opportunities for graduates here with animation qualifications; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7960/09]

583 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Ta´naiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Mary Coughlan): My Department has no function in this matter and accordingly does not have the statistics requested on employment numbers. However, Enterprise Ireland can provide support to companies that engage in one of the 21 eligible activities as set out in the Services Order 2003, and currently generate or intend to generate exports from the eligible activity in the near future. The twenty-one services include: Media, multimedia and recording services; and Entertainment and leisure services. Therefore, Enterprise Ireland can provide funding to any business proposal from a company in the animation sector that meets the agency criteria.

Financial Institutions Support Scheme. 122. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Finance if a category of saving product (details supplied) is covered by the State guarantee. [7765/09]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The product in question is not covered by the Bank Guarantee Scheme. It is not a deposit product; returns are based on movements in the equity market and investors are not entitled to compensation for any losses incurred.

Tax Code. 123. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Finance if a person selling their home (details supplied) is liable for capital gains tax; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7778/09]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that in the circumstances outlined, a person’s share of a gain arising on the sale of a jointly- owned house, including gardens and grounds up to one acre which he has occupied as his only or main residence throughout his period of ownership, is generally exempt from capital gains tax (this exemption is commonly referred to as “principal private residence relief”). Principal private residence relief may be restricted where the house is not so occupied throughout the period of ownership (excluding the final 12 months), is partially used for business purposes or is a sale of development land. The portion of the gain attributable to the siblings who do not live in the house is chargeable to capital gains tax on each in the normal manner unless the sibling who lives there is a “dependent relative”. If the person who lives in the house is a “dependent relative” of the other siblings, then principal private residence relief may also be available to those other siblings.

Tax Collection. 124. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Finance if he will support a matter (details supplied). [7781/09]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The day-to-day responsibility for collection of taxes and duties payable to the State rests with the Revenue Commissioners. I am advised by the Revenue that they are determined to maintain the high levels of compliance achieved over the last several years notwithstanding the more difficult economic circumstances in which businesses are now operating. Revenue expects that businesses organise their financial affairs to be timely compliant in paying their taxes. I fully support Revenue’s stance in this regard. An approach that involves holding back or parking the payment of VAT payments due to the State is not an acceptable approach from business. Such an approach, involving the use of such monies for cash flow within a business calls into question the basic viability of such businesses and is not a sustainable approach even in the current economic climate.

584 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Some businesses who have always had a disposition to meet their obligations on time and in more favourable economic circumstances did precisely that are, however, experiencing particular difficulties in meeting their tax payment obligations in a timely fashion in the current environment. Revenue is prepared to work with such businesses, provided they are fundamentally viable, in finding a solution acceptable to Revenue to enable the survival of the business and the speedy resolution of those payment difficulties. I am aware that Revenue has always encouraged and continues to encourage businesses in such difficulties to talk to them at the earliest opportunity.

125. Deputy Edward O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Finance when a refund of DIRT will be issued to a person (details supplied) in County Cork. [7798/09]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that Deposit Interest Retention Tax (DIRT) at the rate of 23% for 2009 (20% for 2008) is deducted from interest earned on most deposits held in financial institutions such as banks, building societies, post office savings bank and credit unions. A person or his/her spouse can claim a repayment of DIRT if the following conditions are satisfied:

• he/she is aged 65 or over, or

• he/she is permanently incapacitated, and

• his, her or their total income (including the gross DIRT income) is less than the relevant exemption limit. A repayment of DIRT can be sought by submitting a written claim and certificates of interest subject to DIRT to their Revenue Office. Alternatively, an individual may claim a refund from Revenue by submitting a completed form 54D. Finance Act 2007 introduced new arrangements that allows an individual to have any interest accrued on money on deposit credited to his/her account by the financial institution without deduction of DIRT, where he/she satisfies the above conditions. In order to claim such exemption, the individual should submit a completed declaration form, DE1 to the financial institution, stating that he/she or his/her spouse (if married) meet the required conditions. Full details are available on http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/dirt/leaflets/de1.html Revenue’s records indicate that no claim for refund of DIRT has been received from the person in question. If the person in question would like to discuss his possible refund or seek assistance with completion of the forms, he should contact the Revenue Office in Cork, at telephone number 021 6027058.

Banking Sector Regulation. 126. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Finance if he will amend the regulations on fixed interest rates whereby people are being penalised for breaking out of them in order to change to lowering variable rates; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7803/09]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The Minister has no function in setting interest rates. His function is to provide an appropriate and robust legislative framework for regulation of the financial services sector, with a particular focus on the consumer. The choice of mortgage product ultimately rests with the consumer in light of the terms and conditions that their lending institution offers. The decision of borrowers is influenced by factors such as their personal preferences and their own assessment of the relative merits of fixed and variable rate mortgages.

585 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Brian Lenihan.]

Generally mortgages are for long periods. To some consumers a fixed interest rate on a mortgage offers peace of mind in that the borrower benefits from certainty regarding the cost of their mortgage, does not need to be concerned with changes in mortgage interest rates and accordingly he or she can budget more confidently. As the Deputy will be aware, interest rates charged by banks generally vary in line with the base rate fixed by the European Central Bank (ECB) from time to time. Where a bank offers a fixed rate over a certain period it incurs additional costs in obtaining fixed or other funding in respect of the loan over the period. The additional costs will reflect both the market view in relation to future trends in interest rates for the period and the fact that longer term deposits generally attract higher interest rates than short term. In addition, where a consumer changes from a fixed interest rate contract to a variable rate contract before the end of the term for which the interest rate was fixed, there is an associated cost to the lender. In circumstances that lenders were prohibited from passing on this cost to borrowers switching to variable rates, this cost could increase the price and reduce the availability of fixed rate mortgages.

Tax Code. 127. Deputy Ciara´n Lynch asked the Minister for Finance the number of office holders availing of the terms of section 836 of the Taxes Consolidated Act 1997 which allows tax deductions in regard to the cost of maintaining a second residence in respect of each year since 2002; the amount of tax foregone in each of these years as a result of the allowance; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7813/09]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): Section 836 of the Taxes Consolidation Act provides for a tax deduction under section 114 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 in respect of the cost of maintaining a second residence where, arising out of the performance of his or her duties, a Minister or a Minister of State holder is obliged to maintain that second residence in addition to his or her main residence. I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that the estimated costs of such tax deductions in terms of tax foregone for the tax years 2002 to 2007, the most recent year for which statistics are available, are set out as follows.

Year Number of claimants Cost

2002 18 95,051 2003 19 109,540 2004 13 63,448 2005 18 105,112 2006 15 91,750 2007 16 88,335

128. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Finance his views on whether the issu- ance of loans by banks receiving recapitalisation should be made conditional on evidence that building contractors used on the building works are tax compliant; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7831/09]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): There are already measures in place in the tax code in respect of contractors. The Tax Clearance Certificate scheme ensures that persons 586 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

(residents and non-residents) who derive an economic benefit from a licence/permit to conduct certain activities in the State, and/or receive contracts or payments from the State are in compliance with their tax obligations. Relevant Contract Tax applies to both resident and non- resident contractors and is a tax deduction system whereby a principal contractor deducts tax at 35% from payments to subcontractors for whom the principal contractor does not hold a relevant payments card. Prior to the introduction of Relevant Contracts Tax (RCT), there were significant difficulties with tax compliance in the construction sector. RCT was introduced in 1970 as a measure to tackle that non-compliance problem, and has been significantly enhanced since then. The construction industry continues to be a focus for Revenue attention, and 25% of its audit and compliance resources were assigned to this sector in 2006 and 2007. Resources are currently assigned based on the identified risks in individual Districts and Regions. It is clear that tax compliance in the construction sector is actively pursued by the Revenue Commissioners and I do not propose at this time to impose additional tax conditions on lending as suggested.

Financial Services Regulation. 129. Deputy Paul Connaughton asked the Minister for Finance if he will amend section 35 of the Credit Union Act 1997 as it relates to existing lending restrictions on credit unions; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that many credit union customers are experiencing difficulty in meeting loan repayments due to redundancies and reduced hours of work, that many of those members are requesting a reduction in their loan repayments and that should the credit union accede to these requests the consequences would be that the percentage of loans in excess of five years would increase; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7844/09]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): Section 35 of the Credit Union Act, 1997, as amended, sets out the limits that credit unions must comply with in respect of the total amount of loans advanced for periods exceeding 5 years and 10 years. These limits were increased by Statutory Instrument in 2007, following consultation with credit union stakeholders. Section 35 was also amended in 2007 by way of Section 17 of the Markets in Financial Instruments and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2007. This amendment changed the basis of calculation of the total amount of loans outstanding for the purposes of applying the limits. These relatively recent amendments of the Credit Union Act were in line with the recommendations contained in the Report of the Review Group on Longer-term Lending Limits. This Group, chaired by the Department of Finance, included representatives from the Irish League of Credit Unions, the Credit Union Development Association and the Registrar of Credit Unions. It recommended that Section 35 lending limits should be increased for loans over five years from 20% to 40% and over ten years from 10% to 15%, for those credit unions approved by the Registrar as having the necessary controls and safeguards in place and satisfying financial criteria in relation to arrears and reserves. The Group agreed that the core objective of the legislative and regulatory framework is to ensure the safety and soundness of credit unions, which requires both prudent lending and protection of members’ savings. This amendment struck an appropriate balance between the development needs of credit unions and the protection of members’ savings from undue risk. I fully appreciate that some credit union customers are experiencing difficulty in meeting loan repayments due to unfavourable changes in their financial circumstances on account of the deterioration in the overall economic climate and consequently are requesting a reduction in their loan repayments. I understand that the Registrar of Credit Unions has recommended to Credit Unions that where rescheduling needs to happen revised repayment instalments

587 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Brian Lenihan.] should be agreed with the borrower as is necessary but that the term of the loan should not be changed from the original agreement. This approach would satisfy the borrower’s need to reduce repayments but would also ensure a transparent arrears position. The calculation of the provision for bad and doubtful debts would also be calculated in a realistic fashion. The Regis- trar has highlighted the need to ensure that rescheduling of loan repayments should be carried out in a fashion which is fully consistent with accurate reporting of the arrears and provisioning situation of credit unions. In addition, my Department has been in contact with the Consumer Directorate in the Finan- cial Regulator to request consideration of a guidance note for credit unions providing advice on dealing with members experiencing difficulties with loan repayments and building on general guidance on this issue already published on the Financial Regulator’s website.

Tax Collection. 130. Deputy Sea´n Sherlock asked the Minister for Finance if home carer’s tax credit will be applied to the income of a person (details supplied) in County Cork; if so, the way this can be secured; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7845/09]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I have been informed by the Revenue Com- missioners that a spouse is not a dependent person for the purpose of claiming the Home Carer’s Tax Credit. Accordingly the person in question does not qualify for the relief.

Public Works Projects. 131. Deputy Sea´n Fleming asked the Minister for Finance when the public walkway (details supplied) which had been closed for safety reasons by the Office of Public Works while they completed works in the area will be reopened; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7868/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Martin Mansergh): The walkway has now been re-opened to the public.

Tax Code. 132. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for Finance, further to Parliamentary Ques- tion No. 139 of 18 February 2009, the reason a tenant’s tax credits are automatically restricted even in circumstances in which they are unaware of the withholding provision or the tax residency status of their landlord; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7900/09]

133. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for Finance, further to Parliamentary Ques- tion No. 139 of 18 February 2009, the amount of money which was restricted from tenants as a result of the non-resident tax status of their landlords; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7901/09]

134. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for Finance, further to Parliamentary Ques- tion No. 139 of 18 February 2009, if he will provide details of the year a PPSN was issued in each of the 373 cases in which tenants were penalised for the tax owing on the rental income of their overseas landlord; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7902/09]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I propose to take Questions Nos. 132 to 134, inclusive, together.

588 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that the restriction of the rent credit of a taxpayer arising from the tax residency status of their landlord is applied only where the taxpayer indicates that the landlord is non-resident. I am further advised by the Revenue Commis- sioners that in 2008, tax credits were restricted in a total value of \438,930.93, for those taxpayers who had advised Revenue that their landlord resided outside the State. Finally, I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that their records do not contain the year a PPSN was issued. PPSNs are issued by the Dept. of Social and Family Affairs.

135. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Finance if overseas allowance paid to gardaı´ and members of the Defence Forces is liable to the pension levy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7939/09]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): Section 196A of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 (inserted by section 12 of the Finance Act 2005), provides that where any allowance to, or emoluments of, an officer of the State are certified by the Minister for Finance, having consulted with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, or with such Minister of the Government as the Minister for Finance considers appropriate in the circumstances, to represent compensation for the extra cost of having to live outside the State in order to perform his or her duties, that allowance, or those emoluments, shall be disregarded as income for the purposes of the Income Tax Acts. Since the allowances paid to members of the Garda Sı´ocha´na and of the Permanent Defence Force for overseas duty have been so certified by the Minister for Finance, they would therefore not be subject to the pension related deduction.

Departmental Expenditure. 136. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Finance the printed material from his Department which has been printed abroad (details supplied). [7951/09]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): In the period in question my Department has not sent material abroad for printing. I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that their policy on handling printing work is as follows. Where feasible, printing is carried on in-house by the Revenue Printing Centre. If the Revenue Printing Centre cannot carry out a particular job an order will be placed through the Government Supplies Agency arrangements. With regard to information requested by the Deputy, this is the detailed in the following table. I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that the contracts were all awarded following competitive processes run on their behalf by the Government Supplies Agency of the Office of Public Works.

Years Material Printed Amount Spent

2004-2007 Various Tax and VAT Forms 71,100.00 2004-2007 Cheque stationery 66,083.53 2007 Security Overlay for C2 Cards 39,639.07 2004-2007 C2 Cards 496,697.53 2007-2008 File Covers 33,011.09 2008 PAYE Booklet 96,618.40

I have been informed by the Office of Public Works that they are currently examining records in relation to their own printing work and will forward directly to the Deputy any relevant information accruing from this process. 589 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Departmental Staff. 137. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Finance if principal officers in the Civil Service are to receive the 1.1% pay increase recommended under the second report of the Public Service Benchmarking Body; the effect this will have on other Civil Service pay grades; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7953/09]

Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Lenihan): As the Deputy is aware a very limited number of increases were recommended by the last Benchmarking Body. The Principal Officer grade in the civil service was to receive a 1.1% increase. There are no plans to pay this increase.

Health Services. 138. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Health and Children her plans to provide telephone translation services for community welfare officers to assist in dealing with clients with poor or non-existent English language skills; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7783/09]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter, it has been referred to the HSE for attention and direct reply to the Deputy.

Services for People with Disabilities. 139. Deputy Damien English asked the Minister for Health and Children the reason a person (details supplied) in County Meath is awaiting allocation of funding requested by the physical and sensory team in Meath for full-time care in a nursing home; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7760/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): As the Deputy’s question relates to service matters I have arranged for the question to be referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply.

140. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Health and Children when a decision will be made on an application by a person (details supplied) in County Roscommon; the reason for the delay in same; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7761/09]

Cancer Screening Programme. 141. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Health and Children the age group of women who are screened for breast cancer here; the cost of operating this programme; if she will reduce the screening age in view of the high prevalence of breast cancer among women in their 20s, 30s and 40s; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7771/09]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): BreastCheck — the National Bre- ast Screening Programme provides free breast mammograms to women aged 50-64 on a two- yearly cycle. It is estimated that the BreastCheck programme will cost approximately \24m in 2009. The expert advice from BreastCheck and from the National Cancer Forum, as contained in its National Strategy for Cancer Control, is that following the completion of national roll out of the programme for women aged 50 — 64, the upper age limit should be extended to women

590 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers aged 69 years. The priority of BreastCheck is to screen women who have not yet been screened and accordingly it is fully focussed at present on the completion of the first round of screening in the West and South. BreastCheck will have reached all counties by the end of this year. There are no plans at present to screen women under the age of 50. Any woman, irrespective of her age, who has immediate concerns or symptoms, should contact her GP who, where appropriate, will refer her to the symptomatic services in her area.

Health Services. 142. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will support a person (details supplied) in Dublin 5. [7780/09]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply. The National Treatment Purchase Fund arranges treatment for patients who have been on a surgical waiting list for more than three months. It is open to the person in question or anyone acting on their behalf to contact the Fund directly in relation to their case.

Services for People with Disabilities. 143. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Health and Children when a decision will be made on an application in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Roscommon; the reason for the delay in same; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7782/09]

Health Services. 144. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Health and Children her plans to provide interpretation services to enable persons with poor or non-existent English language skills to communicate with medical professionals; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7784/09]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter, it has been referred to the HSE for attention and direct reply to the Deputy.

Hospital Services. 145. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will seek an explanation from St. James’s Hospital, Dublin as to its inability to plan its appointments to take consideration of staff holidays and its inability to adequately communicate with its patients as to rescheduled appointments; and when it is proposed to schedule an appointment for a person (details supplied). [7789/09]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

146. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Health and Children when specialist beds (details supplied) in County Galway will be opened; the reason they have not been opened to date; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7791/09]

591 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter, it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

Medical Aids and Appliances. 147. Deputy Edward O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will assist in having a hearing aid provided for a person (details supplied) in County Cork. [7796/09]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

Services for People with Disabilities. 148. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Health and Children if her attention has been drawn to the fact that a person (details supplied) in County Roscommon is on a waiting list; and if she will intervene to ensure they are admitted to the National Rehabilitation Centre, Du´ n Laoghaire as quickly as possible due to the urgency of the case. [7810/09]

Mental Health Services. 149. Deputy Darragh O’Brien asked the Minister for Health and Children the reason the heating system in St. Ita’s adult psychiatric assessment unit, Portrane, County Dublin is not working; and if she will ensure that this situation is rectified for the good of the mainly elderly patients and the staff of St. Ita’s. [7817/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney): As this is a service matter the question has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

Health Services. 150. Deputy Sea´n Sherlock asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will expedite an orthodontic appointment in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Cork who has been waiting for some time; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7897/09]

Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the HSE for direct reply.

Care of the Elderly. 151. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will support the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 5. [7945/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Ma´ire Hoctor): As this is a service matter it has been referred to the Health Service Executive for direct reply.

Public Transport. 152. Deputy Ciara´n Cuffe asked the Minister for Transport the current and capital spending on public transport in each of the past five years; the proposed current and capital spending in 2009; if he will provide a breakdown for Dublin Bus, Bus E´ ireann and other bodies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7777/09]

592 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): The information sought by the Deputy in relation to the agencies is set out as follows.

Funding Received by the CIE´ Group of Companies (2004- 2008)

IE´ BA´ CBE´ CIE TOTAL

\ millions \ millions \ millions \ millions

Year Current Capital Current Capital Current Capital Current Capital

2004 171.42 145.60 61.81 7.30 24.00 3.20 257.23 156.20 2005 179.99 279.60 64.90 9.60 25.20 1.80 270.09 291.00 2006 188.72 257.40 69.85 27.30 26.46 1.90 285.02 286.60 2007 189.91 408.00 80.08 28.30 36.60 32.80 306.58 469.00 2008 191.15 532.60 80.63 18.44 36.85 39.90 308.63 590.94

Totals 921.19 1,623.20 357.26 90.94 149.10 79.60 1,427.55 1,793.74

Proposed 2009 494.00 6.00 0.00 *313.279 500.00

*Allocation of current funding as between the CIE companies is being currently finalised by CIE.

Funding Received By the RPA (2004-2008)

\ millions

Year Current Capital

2004 28.84 130.00 2005 7.44 82.00 2006 9.70 28.80 2007 10.28 121.60 2008 8.29 112.00

Totals 64.55 474.00

Proposed 2009 10.73 194.3

Funding Received By the RSC (2004- 2008)

millions

Year Current Capital

2004 0 — 2005 0 — 2006 2.27 — 2007 1.57 — 2008 2.07 —

Totals 5.91 0.00

Proposed 2009 2.03 0.00

593 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Taxi Regulations. 153. Deputy Mary Upton asked the Minister for Transport if he will meet with a group (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7788/09]

Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): Officials from my Department met with taxi representatives on 17 December 2008 to discuss their concerns in relation to the taxi industry. Furthermore, I have been in correspondence with the person referred to by the Deputy, on 10 February 2009 and 20 February 2009, in response to issues raised by him and in that context I have indicated that the Commission of Taxi Regulation is due to publish the economic review into the small public service vehicles sector which it has commissioned. When the Commission’s review is published I will consider any recommendations relevant to my statutory obligations and the need for further meetings with representatives of the taxi sector.

154. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for Transport if he will clarify the body which has the responsibility for giving out taxi licences and the body which has responsibility for ensuring that no cap is placed on their number. [7852/09]

Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): The Commission for Taxi Regulation is the independent body responsible for the development and maintenance of the regulatory framework for the control and operation, including licensing, of taxis, hackneys, limousines and their drivers in accordance with the provisions of the Taxi Regulation Act, 2003, which does not provide for quantitative restrictions on the issue of licences.

Registration of Title. 155. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding an application lodged with the Land Registry relating to title of property in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Roscommon. [7809/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I can inform the Deputy that under the Registration of Deeds and Title Act 2006, the Property Registration Authority (PRA) was established as and from 4 November, 2006. The PRA replaces the Regis- trar of Deeds and Titles as the registering authority in relation to property registration in Ireland and, subject to the above Act, is independent in the performance of its functions. The Deputy will be aware of the service to Deputies and Senators which provides information on the current status of applications and which was introduced in May 2006. The service provides a speedier, more efficient and more cost effective alternative to submitting Parliamen- tary Questions. It is operated by the PRA and is available all year round. I understand that the PRA has now provided the Deputy with the information requested.

Departmental Expenditure. 156. Deputy Ciara´n Cuffe asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if, further to a previous parliamentary question, he will identify the companies or bodies awarded each contract; the value of each contract; and the nature of the work in each contract. [7776/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The companies in question were Bridgestock Ltd, Mosney Holidays PLC, East Coast Catering, IBM Ireland and Accenture. The first three companies provide accommodation and related facilities for asylum seekers and the value of these contracts ranged from \10.3 million to \14.1 million. In the case of the latter two companies who provided IT and risk management services respectively, the value of these contracts was in the range of \5.8 million to \9.2 million. I should also add that

594 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers due to a typographical error, the previous reply to the Deputy’s Question referred to four companies providing services to asylum seekers when in fact that should have been stated as three. In line with normal commercial sensitivities, I do not propose to indicate the precise amount of each individual contract.

Crime Prevention. 157. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of community alert schemes in County Kildare; if the number has increased over the past number of years; the amount of support that is available from his Department to establish a scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2594/09]

158. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of community alert schemes here; if the number has increased in recent years; the amount of support that is available from his Department to establish a scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2593/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 157 and 158 together. The Community Alert Programme is a community-based initiative in rural communities, set up in 1985 by Muintir na Tı´re in association with the Garda authorities. The Programme is dedicated in particular to improving the quality of life of vulnerable people in rural communities, especially the elderly, by: crime prevention; neighbourliness and self-reliance; general community safety and well-being; accident prevention; promotion of personal safety; and awareness of social inclusion. I am informed by the Garda authorities that there are 1,341 Community Alert schemes in operation throughout the country, of which 67 were formed in the past five years. I am also informed that there are currently 54 schemes in operation in County Kildare, of which ten were established in the past five years. I regard the work of Community Alert as very important. In recent years my Department has provided funding to Muintir na Tı´re for the Community Alert Programme of \150,000 in 2004, \120,000 in 2005, \175,000 in 2006, \200,000 in 2007 and \200,000 in 2008. Funding is also provided by the Health Service Executive. The funding covered the costs associated with running the Programme, including salaries, travel and subsistence, staff training and administration. Funding is not provided directly by my Department to schemes, but resource material, including booklets, stickers and survey and related material, is provided by An Garda Sı´ocha´na.

Grant Payments. 159. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if an application for funding was received from Meath County Council under the community graffiti reduction programme 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2584/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Community Graffiti Reduction Programme is managed for the Department by Pobal in such a way that it is divided into two distinct phases. In 2008 grants were made under Phase 1 of the scheme. It offered each RAPID area the opportunity to receive a ring-fenced budget allocation (of up to \30,000) for graffiti removal work, using a list of approved contractors. Under this phase of the programme, 44 applications (from a total of 46 RAPID areas) were received. Each of these qualified for a maximum allocation of \30,000 and funds of 1.2 M were allocated to this Phase. Meath County Council and Navan Town Council submitted a joint application under Phase 1 of the scheme. The Navan RAPID area was allocated \30,000. Under

595 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] Phase 1 the core responsibilities of beneficiaries were to identify graffiti; decide which items of graffiti they wanted to spend their budget on; ensure that graffiti removal companies can access the graffiti sites; check the completeness/thoroughness of removal work

160. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the amounts and recipients of grants under the community graffiti reduction programme 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2582/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Community Graffiti Reduction Programme (CGRP) is sponsored by the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Department of Community Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs. Its aims are to: support an immediate reduction in the extent and impact of graffiti within the communities who participate in the programme; develop local mechanisms within these communities to support the long-term reduction of incidences of graffiti. The scheme is managed and delivered by Pobal. Phase 1 of the programme applied to RAPID (Revitalising Areas through Planning, Investment and Development) areas only. It offered each RAPID area the opportunity to receive a ring-fenced budget allocation of up to \30,000 for graffiti removal work using a list of approved contractors. Under this phase of the programme, 44 applications (from a total of 46 RAPID areas) were received. Phase 1 of the scheme commenced in March 2008 and approx \1 million was spent. The core responsibilities of beneficiaries were to: identify graffiti; decide which items of graffiti they wanted to spend their budget on; ensure that graffiti removal companies were able to access the graffiti sites; check the completeness/thoroughness of removal work Phase 2 of the scheme was launched in April 2008 which extended to all areas of the country. In addition to the graffiti removal element, it proposed to fund a wide range of activities to reduce the long-term impact of graffiti on communities by the provision of training and other preventative measures at local level. The Board of Pobal completed its assessment of the applications and made recommendations for allocation of funds to groups in respect of 28 projects. However, in light of current financial circumstances this phase of the scheme is now under review.

Garda Training. 161. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the training in operation to refresh procedures, law, and regulations to members of An Garda Sı´ocha´na; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7848/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am informed by the Garda Commissioner that staff at the Continuous Professional Development Training Centres in each Garda Division deliver a two (2) day training course each year — Core Prog- ramme — to members of Garda and Sergeant Rank. The Core Programme regularly includes modules on new legislation and policy, and the Core Programme for 2008 covered the following areas:

(1) Legislation & Headquarter Directives (certain sections from the Acts listed below) Crimi- nal Justice Act 2007; Criminal Justice Act 2006; Garda Sı´ocha´na Act 2005; Mental Health Act 2001; Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006; Anti Social Behavioural Orders (H.Q 37/07); Disclosure.

596 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

(2) Casualty Bureau Training; (Mass Casualties)

(3) Road Traffic Check Points.

(4) Family Liaison Officers.

(5) Professional Responsibilities.

(6) Policing Plan 2008 / Strategic Goals.

(7) First Responder Guidelines and Policy.

There are now twenty seven (27) Continuous Professional Development Training Centres nationally, one (1) in each Garda Division. There are sixty four (64) appointed Continuous Professional Development Trainers who are responsible for delivering training to both Garda and Sergeant ranks. In 2008 a total of 5,855 members attended Core Programme Training.

Garda Disciplinary Proceedings. 162. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the steps taken internally in An Garda Sıóchańa when a member of An Garda Sıóchańa is in clear breach of procedure to address same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7849/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): Where an alleged breach of procedure by a member of An Garda Sı´ocha´na occurs, the matter is one for the Garda Commissioner to investigate.

Garda Complaints Procedures. 163. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his views on the case of a person (details supplied) relating to the person’s unlawful detention as an Irish citizen; his further views on the error which took place; if his attention has been drawn to the fact an Irish citizen who wishes to make a complaint should not be directed to the Garda National Immigration Bureau; the reason for this direction; his views on whether he was mistaken in this direction; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7850/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am aware of the circumstances which the Deputy is referring to in his Question and I dealt with them in my reply to a Question tabled by the Deputy on the 2nd December 2008 (No. 301). As I indicated in that reply, a response to the letter referred to by the Deputy would be issued and this has been done.

Organised Crime. 164. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he has plans to put organised criminal groups off the street; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7874/09]

172. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his plans to combat the growth in armed organised criminal gangs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7882/09]

176. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of known to the Gardaı´ criminals or alleged criminals who are known to be members of

597 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Bernard J. Durkan.] criminal gangs and who are free or recently released from prison; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7886/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 164, 172 and 176 together. I have been informed by the Garda Authorities that organised criminal groups are being targeted on a number of fronts, including through the use of focused intelligence led operations by specialist units in An Garda Sıóchańa. Specialist units within the Gardaı´ targeting organised crime operate under the remit of the Assistant Commissioner in charge of the National Support Services. These units include the Garda National Drugs Unit, the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation and the Criminal Assets Bureau. The National Bureau of Criminal Investigation is the Garda specialist unit tasked with tackling organised crime. This unit carries out its role by conducting intelligence led operations and utilises the activities of a dedicated Organised Crime Unit. The Organised Crime Unit was established on a permanent basis in January 2008, with its primary function to identify organised crime groups that operate within the State through the use of increased profiling, intelligence gathering, overt and covert surveillance and threat assessments. Measures put in place to combat the growth in armed organised criminal gangs include Operation Anvil which commenced in May 2005 in the Dublin Metropolitan Region and was extended nationwide in 2006. The primary focus of this operation is the disruption of serious and organised criminal activity and has resulted in approximately 1,240 firearms being recovered in Dublin and 1,090 in the rest of the country (to 11th February 2009). In addition, the value of property recovered under this Operation to date is approximately \31 million. The funding for Operation Anvil will increase in 2009 from \20 million to \21 million to enable it to continue with targeted disruption of serious and organised criminal activity In addition, a wide range of measures were introduced under the Criminal Justice Act 2006 to enhance the powers of An Garda Sıóchańa in tackling organised criminal gangs. The provisions of this Act provide for sentencing of up to seven years for the unlawful possession of a firearm and mandatory minimum sentencing of five to ten years for more serious firearm offences. I have been informed that there are two categories of organised crime groups operating within this jurisdiction. The first category consists of individuals / groups that are well established and tightly structured and are involved in drug trafficking, armed robbery and firearms offences. The second category involves groups whose activities are characterised by less cohes- ive group structures, and criminal activities which are mainly confined to Ireland. Membership of organised crime gangs tends to be fluid and the nature of criminal activity is such that offences committed by members of gangs may or may not be connected with the individual’s membership of such gangs. The identification of offenders as members of a criminal gang is not an essential criterion in the prosecution of offences. It is not therefore possible to ascertain the precise number of criminals who are also members of criminal gangs operating in this country. Senior management within An Garda Sıóchańa continue to monitor developments as they occur to ensure that the resources at their disposal are deployed in the most effective manner so as to combat criminality.

Crime Prevention. 165. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform

598 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers his proposals to halt the rise in drug related crime; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7875/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I refer the Deputy to my answer to Question No. 52 of today’s date.

166. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform his plans to combat gun crime including murder; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7876/09]

171. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the action he will take to put armed gangs off the streets; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7881/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I propose to take Questions Nos. 166 and 171 together. The Garda Policing Plan for 2009, which reflects the priorities set for the Force by me as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, contains a series of measures aimed at reducing the impact of crime and criminal behaviour. These goals are backed up by strategic actions which include a commitment to continue and intensify intelligence-led operations against groups and individuals engaged in criminality. An Garda Sıóchańa, in accordance with the priorities I have set out, is committed to targeting violent crime and those who engage or facilitate persons involved in such activity. Operation Anvil commenced in the Dublin Metropolitan Region in 2005 to deal with serious crime, including murder and other violent crime, and was extended nationwide in 2006. The primary focus of the Operation is the targeting of active criminals and their associates involved in serious crime by preventing and disrupting their criminal activity through extensive additional overt patrolling and static checkpoints by uniform, mobile and foot patrols, supported by armed plain clothes patrols. Under Operation Anvil, up to 8 February, 2009, 1,239 firearms have been recovered in Dublin and 1,092 in the rest of the country. There have also been over 7,000 arrests for serious crimes such as murder, serious assault, robbery and burglary and 70,000 searches for weapons, drugs and stolen goods. In this way, the Gardaı´ will continue to address the issue of illegal guns relentlessly. Since my appointment as Minister, I have expressed concern at the number of handguns which have been licensed here in recent years. Some time ago, I directed my Department and An Garda Sıóchańa to carry out an urgent and intensive review of the firearms law. Following that review, I have brought forward proposals which include no new licenses being issued for handguns, subject to limited exceptions in relation to Olympic sports. Existing licenses will not be renewed unless applicants fully meet the requirements of a radically tightened licensing procedure where the safety of the community will be paramount. While a de facto ban on new handgun licences is already in place, my proposals will also be given legislative form in the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. That Bill will also tackle comprehensively the issue of airsoft guns, including making their possession in public a serious offence. A significant element of the fight against organised crime by An Garda Sıóchańa is the use of specialist units. Units with expertise in specific areas operate under the direction of the Assistant Commissioner in charge of the National Support Services, and this senior Garda officer has overall responsibility for the coordination of measures designed to address organised crime throughout the State. Specialist units include: the Criminal Assets Bureau which iden-

599 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] tifies and targets funds accumulated by criminals in order to seize such assets and deprive them of the profits of their criminal activity; the Organised Crime Unit which has a specific remit of targeting those suspected of involvement in organised crime, including the trafficking, importation, sale and supply of drugs; the Garda Bureau of Fraud Investigation which is responsible for the investigation of individuals and organisations involved in Money Laundering; and the National Bureau of Criminal Investigation which is responsible for investigating the activities of organised criminal networks. These units are also supported by the Garda Security and Intelligence Section which assists with the provision of intelligence briefings and timely information. An Garda Sıóchańa also maintains close liaison with other law enforcement agencies throughout Europe, and elsewhere, exchanging information and intelligence. An Garda Sıóch- ańa currently has a number of liaison officers on secondment to other jurisdictions and to other international bodies such as Interpol and Europol. These officers act as a conduit for passing information between law enforcement agencies to ensure that national borders are not, and cannot, be used by criminals as a means of frustrating law enforcement agencies. On 26 January, the Garda Commissioner and I launched a new Garda National Model of Community Policing. The Model builds on the success of existing good community policing practice within Ireland and aims to foster collaborative partnerships between An Garda Sıóch- ańa and community members. Alongside the specialist operations already referred to, a comprehensive model of community policing ensures that enforcement will not only be employed to reduce crime but also to reduce the fear of crime and ensure a better quality of community life for all. At a time when the public finances are under pressure, I am determined that top priority will continue to be given to frontline policing. Funding for Operation Anvil will increase in 2009 from \20 million to \21 million to enable it to continue with targeted disruption of serious and organised criminal activity. Other key operations will be maintained through 2009, and any savings that have to be made will not be allowed to diminish frontline policing.

Recidivism Rate. 167. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the action he proposes to take to combat recidivism; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7877/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Deputy will be aware of the findings of the major study on prisoner re-offending, undertaken by the Institute of Criminology at UCD, which was facilitated by the Irish Prison Service. Briefly the study found that 27.4% of released prisoners were serving a new prison sentence within one year; this rose to 39.2% after two years, 45.1% after three years and 49.2% after four years. The Irish Prison Service provides a range of rehabilitative programmes which have the dual purpose of providing prisoners with purposeful activity while serving their sentences and encouraging and equipping them to lead productive lives on release. Prisoner rehabilitation involves significant multidimensional input by a diverse range of general and specialist services provided both by the Irish Prison Service and in-reach statutory and non-statutory services. Briefly these include: healthcare, psychiatric, psychological, educational, work and training, vocational, counselling, welfare and spiritual services. These services are important in addressing offending behaviour, drug and alcohol addiction, missed educational and vocational opportunities, anger management, and self management in the interest of encouraging positive per-

600 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers sonal development in prisoners, and preparing them for re-integration and resettlement on release from custody. The Irish Prison Service places a strong emphasis on access to educational services and on the provision of work and training activities for prisoners. Educational services are available at all institutions and are provided in partnership with a range of educational agencies in the community including the VECs, Public Library Services, Colleges and the Arts Council. Liter- acy, numeracy and general basic education provision is the priority of the Prison Education Service and broad programmes of education are made available which generally follow an adult education approach. A significant expansion and development of vocational training programmes has taken place in recent years and there are now over 90 workshops in place in our prisons capable of catering for in excess of 800 prisoners each day. The Irish Prison Service is also delivering programmes aimed at reducing the demand for drugs within the prison system through enhanced security measures as well as education, treatment and rehabilitation services for drug-addicted prisoners. Significant progress is also being made in the development of programmes based on risk assessment and rehabilitation needs. The Irish Prison Service is developing and rolling-out a fully coordinated system of Integrated Sentence Management. This system is being piloted in two prisons at the present time. The phased roll-out of Integrated Sentence Management will be dependant on the lessons learned from the evaluation of the pilot phase. In addition, the Probation Service has an active role during the course of the prisoner’s sentence in helping maintain links with family and community agencies, encouraging prisoners to address their offending behaviour and engaging prisoners in individual counselling and group counselling programmes such as offending behaviour, addiction, violence and sex offending. I also wish to advise the Deputy about a number of other relevant initiatives. For example: The Adult Cautioning Scheme: which was agreed with the DPP, was introduced in 2006 as an alternative to bringing before the District Court persons against whom there is evidence of the commission of offences of a less serious nature, and where that is not required by the public interest and a caution would be an effective response to the offender. Provisions of the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994 (Sections 4 and 5): these are now fixed charge offences following the enactment of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 and the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2008. Joint Policing Committees ( as provided for in the Garda Sıóchańa Act 2005): Their purpose is to provide a forum where An Garda Sıóchańa and the local authority — the two organisations which make the most significant contribution to preventing and tackling crime in a specific area — can come together, with the participation of members of the Oireachtas and community and voluntary interests, on matters affecting the area. On 24 September, 2008 I launched, with my colleague the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, the roll out of the Committees from the initial pilot phase in 29 local authority areas to all 114 local authority areas. An Garda Sıóchańa and the relevant local authorities have now commenced establishing the Committees in accordance with new Guidelines in local authority areas where there are not yet Committees.

Crime Prevention. 168. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the action he will take to prevent further serious crime including homicide by those on bail; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7878/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The law takes a serious view of offences committed by persons on bail. The commission of any offence while

601 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] on bail carries the prospect of a harsher sentence than might otherwise be imposed had the offence not been committed while the offender was on bail. Section 11 of the Criminal Justice Act 1984 provides that any sentence of imprisonment passed on a person for an offence committed while he or she was on bail shall be consecutive on any sentence passed on him for a previous offence. It further provides, following the Bail Act 1997, that where the consecutive provisions apply and the court is determining the appropriate sentence to impose for an offence committed while on bail, the fact that the offence was committed while on bail must be treated as an aggravating factor. Accordingly, the court must impose a sentence that is greater than that which it would have imposed in the absence of such an aggravating factor. The only exceptions are where the sentence for the previous offence is life imprisonment or where the court considers that there are exceptional circumstances to justify not doing so. My Department keeps the operation of the provisions relating to offences committed by persons while on bail under review and whether any changes are required. An Garda Sı´ocha´na monitors the adherence of bailed persons to their bail conditions and does not hesitate to apply to the courts to revoke bail if the conditions are being breached.

169. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the extent of criminal threat arising from legally held or illegally held hand guns; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7879/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I am informed by the Garda authorities that approximately 1,800 handguns have been licensed since the beginning of 2004 and that 31 have been stolen in that period. I am further informed that stolen firearms are used in the course of the commission of other criminal offences but, because not all stolen firearms or firearms used in the commission of offences are recovered, it is not possible to say precisely how many formerly legally held handguns have been used in criminal offences. Since my appointment as Minister I have expressed concern at the number of handguns which have been licensed here in recent years. One of my concerns is that legally held firearms may be stolen and used in the commission of criminal offences. Following an intensive review of firearms legislation by my Department and An Garda Sıóchańa, I have brought forward proposals which include no new licenses being issued for handguns, subject to limited exceptions in relation to Olympic sports. Existing licenses will not be renewed unless applicants fully meet the requirements of a radically tightened licensing procedure where the safety of the community will be paramount. Together with the Garda Commissioner I will keep under annual review the outcome of the licensing procedure and, if the outcome leaves a situation which still poses an unacceptable risk to the community, I will use new powers to ban particular types of firearm. While a de facto ban on new handgun licences is already in place, my proposals will be given legislative form in the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, which will be published shortly. There are already very severe penalties for firearms offences in place under the Crimi- nal Justice Act 2006. For example, possessing a firearm with intent to endanger life and using a firearm to resist arrest or aid escape carry a mandatory minimum sentence of ten years. Possessing a firearm while hijacking a vehicle, possessing a firearm or ammunition in suspicious circumstances, carrying a firearm with criminal intent and altering a firearm carry a mandatory minimum sentence of five years. One of the main priorities I have set for An Garda Sıóchańa in 2009 is to target gun crime through a range of measures, including the use of the Garda specialist units and targeted

602 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers operations such as Operation Anvil. Operation Anvil commenced in the Dublin Metropolitan Region in 2005 to deal with serious crime and was extended nationwide in 2006. The primary focus of the Operation is the targeting of active criminals and their associates involved in serious crime by preventing and disrupting their criminal activity through extensive additional overt patrolling and static checkpoints by uniform, mobile and foot patrols, supported by armed plain clothes patrols. Under Operation Anvil up to the 8 February, 2009, 1,239 firearms have been recovered in Dublin and 1,092 in the rest of the country.

Crime Levels. 170. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of crimes committed by persons using legally held hand guns and the number committed by those using illegally held hand guns in each of the past five years to date in 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7880/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I understand from the Garda Authorities that records indicate approximately 1,800 handguns have been licensed since the beginning of 2004 and that 31 have been stolen in that period. I am further advised that stolen firearms are used in the course of the commission of other criminal offences but, because not all stolen firearms or firearms used in the commission of offences are recovered, it is not possible to say precisely how many formerly legally held handguns have been used in criminal offences. Question No. 171 answered with Question No. 166. Question No. 172 answered with Question No. 164.

173. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of break-ins reported by householders in north Kildare in each of the past five years to date in 2009; the extent of recovery of the stolen goods; the number of prosecutions taken; the number of convictions or case dismissals; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7883/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Garda Sı´och- a´na Act 2005 makes provision for the compilation and publication of crime statistics by the Central Statistics Office, as the national statistical agency, and the CSO has established a dedicated unit for this purpose. I have requested the CSO to provide the statistics sought by the Deputy directly to him.

174. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of break-in robberies under investigation in the towns of Leixlip, Celbridge, Maynooth , Kilcock, Clane and Naas, County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7884/09]

Public Order Offences. 175. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform

603 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Bernard J. Durkan.] the action he proposes to take to combat anti-social behaviour in each town in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7885/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Garda Policing Plan for 2009, which reflects the priorities set for the Force by me as Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, contains a series of measures aimed at reducing the impact of crime and criminal behaviour. One of the strategic goals identified in the Plan is to reduce significantly the incidence of public disorder and anti-social behaviour in communities. I am informed by the Garda authorities that, following a successful pilot phase in the Naas and Kildare Garda Districts, a new policing model to combat anti-social behaviour has been adopted throughout County Kildare. Under the model, members of An Garda Sıóchańa meet key stakeholders such as local authority members, councillors and business representatives to discuss public order issues and offer advice. The model is then devolved to a local level, whereby members of An Garda Sıóchańa visit individual publicans, managers of fast food outlets and taxi drivers and offer appropriate advice, with the aim of preventing incidents of public disorder and anti-social behaviour taking place. In addition, where large groups of people gather, particularly at weekends, temporary taxi- ranks are set up to divert people away from potential flashpoints. All members of An Garda Sıóchańa on patrol including mobile, foot, mountain bike and Traffic Corps personnel are aware of identified public disorder hotspots, and particular attention is paid at times when there is potential for public disorder and anti-social behaviour. To facilitate this community policing/public disorder policing model, additional personnel has been allocated to all Districts within the Kildare Garda Division. Local Garda Management intend to increase the number of personnel allocated to Community Policing Units within the Division. The issue of Garda resources is kept under constant review, and when additional personnel next become available the needs of County Kildare will be fully considered by the Commissioner within the overall context of the needs of Garda stations throughout the country. Joint Policing Committees provide a forum where An Garda Sıóchańa and the local authority — the two organisations which make the most significant contribution to preventing and tackling crime in a specific area — can come together, with the participation of members of the Oireachtas and community and voluntary interests, on matters affecting the area. A Committee has a range of functions and monitor two broad areas. The first is the levels and patterns of crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour in its area, including patterns and levels of misuse of alcohol and drugs. The second is the broader issue of the factors underlying and contributing to crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour. Following on from this the Committee advises the local authority and An Garda Sıóchańa on how they might best perform their functions, having regard to the need to do everything feasible to improve the safety and quality of life and to prevent crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour within the area. I am of the view that the Committees have enormous potential for tackling the problems of crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour. Following a pilot phase in 29 local authority areas, including Athy, the Committees are currently being rolled out to all other local authority areas in the country.

Question No. 176 answered with Question No. 164.

Departmental Staff. 177. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, further to his commitment to the Oireachtas committee on 4 June 2008, if he will furnish the

604 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers staffing figures for each section of the immigration service and current vacancies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7888/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I would refer the Deputy to my replies to his previous questions in this regard on 8 July 2008 and 18 December 2008.

Court Staff. 178. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding his comments to the Oireachtas committee on 4 June 2008 regarding the feasibility in law of assigning county registrars cases from colleagues with high case loads; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7889/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): On foot of an amendment made by the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2008, section 9 of the Courts and Courts Officers Act 1945 now enables a County Registrar to act as County Registrar in another county and exercise powers concurrently with their being exercised by the other County Registrar. Since this provision was implemented on 1 August 2008, the Courts Service has authorised a number of County Registrars in the counties surrounding Dublin to assist the Dublin County Registrar with the additional workload involved in family law case progression.

Vetting of Personnel. 179. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform when a decision will be made in regard to an investigation of a person (details supplied) in County Kildare in view of the fact that this person needs a decision due to employment position; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7894/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The Garda Central Vetting Unit (GCVU) provides employment vetting for a number of organisations in Ireland, registered with the Unit, which employ personnel to work in a full-time, part time, voluntary or student capacity with children and / or vulnerable adults. The procedure is also conducted for fostering and the Adoption Board. The Health Service Executive is a registered organisation for vetting. I am informed by the Garda authorities that a vetting application has not been received by them in respect of the person referred to.

Citizenship Applications. 180. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will explain the way a minor traffic offence can be considered a criminal offence for the purposes of assessing the good character and suitability of a candidate for naturalisation as in the case of a person (details supplied); the rationale for determining that as a result of same, the person has a criminal record; if a minor litter fine would be similarly considered a criminal offence; if he will provide this Deputy with the guidelines that are issued to deciding officers in relation to the assessment of candidates when a traffic offence is recorded against them; and the way a decision may be appealed or reviewed when it is argued that these guidelines have not been followed. [7899/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): The granting of Irish Citizenship through naturalisation is a privilege and an honour and not an entitlement. The Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act, 1956, as amended, provides that the Minister may, in his absolute discretion, grant an application for a certificate of naturalisation provided certain

605 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Dermot Ahern.] statutory conditions are fulfilled. One such condition is that the applicant must be of good character. The particulars of each case are assessed and presented to the Minister for decision and factors including, but not restricted to, criminal or other offences are taken into account as part of that assessment in order for the Minister to be satisfied that the applicant is of good character. An application for a certificate of naturalisation from the person referred to in the Deputy’s Question was received in the Citizenship Division in June 2005 and the Minister decided to refuse the application. The reason for the refusal was disclosed to the applicant in a letter issued on 27 June, 2008. There is no appeals process under the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956, as amended. It is open to the person concerned to lodge a new application for a certificate of naturalisation if and when she is in a position to meet the statutory requirements. However, in doing so she should bear in mind the reasons for refusal of her previous application.

Drug Treatment Programme. 181. Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the progress made on the reopening of Harristown House alcohol and drug treatment centre, County Roscommon; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7938/09]

Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Dermot Ahern): I refer the Deputy to my reply to Parliamentary Question number 206, of 28th January, 2009. I await the proposal from the Probation Service relating to a new vision for Harristown House. When I receive that proposal I will be in a position to make informed decision(s) on what is the best and most viable option for the reopening of the House having particular regard to the client needs of the Probation Service. As I have already indicated I would hope to be in a position to make an announcement on this matter in the coming months.

Human Rights Issues. 182. Deputy Brendan Howlin asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the efforts made to secure the release of persons (details supplied) and all other political prisoners in Zimbabwe including women activists, trade unionists, human rights workers and opposition supporters, and about whom both Houses of the Oireachtas have passed a resolution undertaking to defend; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7766/09]

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Deputy Michea´l Martin): The situation in Zimbabwe remains very grave, as the humanitarian and economic crises continue, and the number of cholera victims continues to increase. The formation of a power-sharing government involving Zanu- PF and the MDC is a sign of some progress, and I hope that it will be able to address the significant problems now facing Zimbabwe. However, the continued detention of political and human rights activists remains a cause of serious concern. Since December, a number of promi- nent figures have been taken into state custody, and I am troubled by reports that some of them have been mistreated or tortured, or denied access to appropriate medical treatment. It is a bad sign that, even after the installation of the power-sharing government, these prisoners have not been released and even more people have been detained. The arrest on 13 February of Roy Bennett, who had been designated by the MDC as deputy agriculture minister, sends a particularly worrying signal. His continued detention, despite having been granted bail, demonstrates clearly the enormous challenges facing those who aim to ensure that the state and its security forces respect democracy and human rights. The power-sharing government

606 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers needs to deliver real progress, including in securing political freedoms for the people of Zimbabwe. The Government will carefully monitor developments in this area. Ireland has made its views on the detention of political prisoners in Zimbabwe abundantly clear. The Embassy of Ireland in Pretoria, which is accredited to Zimbabwe, has repeatedly communicated to the Zimbabwean Ministry of Foreign Affairs the deep concern of the Govern- ment in relation to the disappearance of Ms. Jestina Mukoko, and urged the Zimbabwean Government to do everything possible to ensure her safety. As recently as 18 February, the Embassy conveyed to the Zimbabwean authorities the Government’s deep concern regarding the continued detention of political prisoners, including Mr. Roy Bennett, and called for their immediate release. Ireland has also worked with our colleagues in the European Union to press for the release of political prisoners in Zimbabwe. EU Ambassadors in Harare have communicated their strong views about the case of Ms. Mukoko to the Zimbabwean authorities. The European Council of 11-12 December issued a declaration demanding the immediate release of people held incommunicado in Zimbabwe. At the January meeting of the General Affairs and External Relations Council, my EU colleagues and I expressly condemned the abduction and detention of those exercising a democratic right to express opposition to the regime, and of those defending human rights in Zimbabwe. In a public statement on the swearing-in of the new Prime Minister, Mr. Morgan Tsvangirai, on 11 February, EU Ambassadors in Harare expressed their deep concern that political prisoners detained on unsubstantiated charges remained in Zimbabwe’s prisons, and called for their immediate release. I sincerely hope that the new power-sharing government will bring economic stability and political freedom to Zimbabwe, including the release of these prisoners. Ireland will continue to make every effort to ensure that the position of political prisoners in Zimbabwe remains a priority for the EU, and to convey to the Zimbabwean authorities our strong views on the matter.

183. Deputy Alan Shatter asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the fact that members of the Baha’i community in Iran, in a co-ordinating group known as the Friends of Iran, have been detained in prison for more that eight months and that the conditions under which they are being maintained constitute cruel and inhumane treatment; the action being taken by Ireland in its bilateral relationship with Iran and as a member of the European Union to address this issue and the recent report of the persons concerned being falsely charged with espionage for Israel and insulting religious sanctities and propaganda against the Islamic Republic; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7816/09]

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Deputy Michea´l Martin): The situation of members of the minority Baha’i faith in Iran has long been a matter of serious concern to the Government and to members of the Oireachtas. There is in Iran no tolerance of the Baha’i faith, which is regarded as a heretical or apostate offshoot of Islam. Over the last four years, as conservative forces have again asserted control in Iran, there has been a serious and progressive increase in harassment of individual Baha’is, and worrying indications that these are part of a concerted effort by the Iranian authorities to destroy the Baha’i faith and community as a whole. I have replied in detail to Parliamentary Questions about these issues on a number of occasions. Particular concern has now arisen in relation to the group of Baha’i the Deputy refers to, five men and seven women, who were detained in March and May 2008, and held in Evin Prison in Tehran, without any charge, for nine months. During this period their only outside contact was a family visit of ten minutes approximately once per month, and the five men are

607 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Michea´l Martin.] understood to be in a single cell with no bed. These seven people constitute an informal leadership group, attempting to maintain links among the Baha’i communities throughout Iran. Their arrest gives rise to particular concern because of the fate of the previous Baha’i leadership, who in 1980 in the early days of the Islamic Republic were arrested and never seen again. The successor leadership were also arrested in 1981 and executed. These seven Baha’i have now been charged with a number of offences, including running an illegal organisation, anti-regime propaganda, insulting religious values, and espionage on behalf of Israel. These are obviously very serious charges, which could lead to the application of the death penalty, and the basis for which must be seriously questioned. My concerns are height- ened by the fact that the lawyers for the accused have been unable to see them at all, have been denied access to the case files, and have themselves been subject to public criticism and harassment. There seems very little prospect of even a semblance of a fair trial in these circumstances. I have directly raised my concerns regarding the treatment of the Baha’i with members of the Iranian Government, including with Foreign Minister Mottaki at the United Nations General Assembly in September 2008 and with Deputy Foreign Minister Safari in Dublin in June 2008. In December I wrote to Foreign Minister Mottaki on human rights concerns in general, and I raised the issue of the Baha’i and the case of these seven representatives in particular. As I said in that letter : “It is difficult in these circumstances to avoid the conclusion that the Govern- ment and authorities of Iran are actively trying to suppress a religious faith.” The European Union has repeatedly drawn attention to the oppression perpetrated against the Baha’i faith and its members by the Islamic Republic of Iran. This has taken the form of communications to the Iranian authorities, public statements, and action in other forums such as the UN. I will continue to follow this case with great concern, and to bring our views to the notice of the Iranian authorities. I call on Iran unequivocally to drop these charges, release the imprisoned Baha’i, and cease the oppression of the Baha’i faith.

Official Engagements. 184. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the position regarding his visit to Cuba; and if he met the families of the Miami five. [7837/09]

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Deputy Michea´l Martin): I visited Cuba from the 17 -19 February on what was the first working visit by an Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs. Cuba is undergoing a period of change, and its relations with the EU have entered a new phase. I availed of this new context to discuss a wide range of political, economic and social issues, including human rights. I held a meeting with the Foreign Minister of Cuba, Mr. Felipe Pe´rez Roque. Our discussions included an examination of ways and means to develop bilateral relations between Ireland and Cuba, as well as EU-Cuba relations. During my visit to Cuba, I also met with the Cuban Minister of Foreign Investment and Economic Co-operation to discuss possible sectors for economic cooperation. In this connection, I visited the world-renowned Genetic Engineering and Biotech Institute. I reported on the visit to my EU colleagues at Monday’s meeting of the External Affairs Council and urged that the Union continue its policy of engagement. I hope and expect that Irish and EU relations with Cuba will be further developed following my visit. As I indicated to the Deputy on 29 January, the Government has no standing in the matter of the so-called Miami Five, which is a bilateral consular question between the US and the Cuban authorities, and I did not meet with the families of the Miami Five during my visit to

608 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Cuba. However, I did have an exchange on such matters with Minister Pe´rez Roque, during which he stressed to me the importance which the Cuban government attaches to the release of the so-called Miami Five.

Sports Funding. 185. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism if he will support a matter (details supplied). [7779/09]

Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism (Deputy Martin Cullen): The funding of the Gaelic players grant schemes is a matter for the Irish Sports Council (ISC) in the context of the distribution of its budget for 2009. In light of the current economic constraints and the reduction in the ISC’s allocation of funding in the 2009 Estimates, I am having discussions with the Council on optimum funding options, in order to maintain its existing programmes while building on recent progress. The future funding of the Gaelic players schemes is being considered in that context.

Departmental Expenditure. 186. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the printed material from his Department which has been printed abroad (details supplied). [7947/09]

Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism (Deputy Martin Cullen): In the calendar years from 2004 to 2008, inclusive, the Department did not produce printed material which was printed abroad. The award of printing contracts, like any other contract awards, is subject to the Department of Finance’s public procurement guidelines, with which the Department complies.

Rural Transport Scheme. 187. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if a review of the pilot evening rural transport scheme in County Roscommon has taken place; the funding decisions for 2009; and when the evening transport scheme for Loughglynn, County Roscommon, which was suspended in December 2008, will be operating again. [7807/09]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): I would direct the Deputy to Questions 6 and 25 of the 29th January 2009 in relation to this matter. Furthermore, I wish to confirm that there has been no suspension of the Rural transport Night Scheme in the Loughglynn area, and that these services continue to operate. I have provided funding for the first quarter of 2009 for the continuation of the Rural Transport Night scheme, pending the consideration of a review recently carried out by my Department.

National Drugs Strategy. 188. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs his Department funds for the operation of the dial-to-stop drug dealing phone line service; if he will confirm that the phone line will continue to receive calls from the public and pass on reports to the gardaı´ from June 2009 onwards after the funding for advertising runs out as confirmed by his reply to Parliamentary Question No. 303 of 3 February 2009. [7839/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy John Curran): As previously advised to the Deputy, the Dial-to-Stop Drug Dealing Campaign was officially launched on 30 September 2008. The first phase was rolled out across five Local and Regional Drugs Task Forces areas with funding being provided by my Department (\100,000) and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform (\50,000). As highlighted

609 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy John Curran.] during the launch, the confidential number used in the campaign is open for all to use regardless of the area they come from. The next phases of the campaign will be funded from the Dormant Accounts Fund and an indicative allocation of \300,000 has been approved for the campaign in 2009. I expect to have Government approval shortly on the specific Local and Regional Drugs Task Force proposals involved. I understand that there is a fixed cost for every call answered so the campaign will run until the funding is exhausted. Accordingly, the Deputy will appreciate that the level of calls over the coming weeks and months will determine the lifetime of the funding.

Departmental Expenditure. 189. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the printed material from his Department which has been printed abroad (details supplied). [7949/09]

Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): No material was printed abroad by my Department.

Pension Provisions. 190. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the assessment which she carried out of a scheme that would provide mutual insurance among pension funds in order to cover the situation where pension deficits threatened those people without pension cover; the cost and benefit of such a scheme; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7804/09]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The pension rights of scheme members are protected through trust law and by provision in the Pensions Act 1990 as amended. Defined benefit pension schemes are required to comply with the funding standard provision set out in the Pensions Act. This funding standard requires defined benefit pension schemes to maintain sufficient assets to enable them discharge accrued liabilities. Where schemes do not satisfy the Funding Standard, the sponsors/trustees must submit a funding proposal to the Pensions Board to restore full funding within three years. As the deputy is aware, in recognition of the current market difficulties and the challenges facing pension trustees, the Government has recently announced a number of short-term measures aimed at easing the pressures on defined benefit schemes. In relation to the long-term context, Government is working with the Pensions Board, representative organisations and the social partners to find ways to ease the pressure on schemes by striking a balance between the long-term nature of pension savings and the need to ensure short-term security of accrued benefits. Any decision on the introduction of a fund such as that suggested by the Deputy will be considered in consultation with all relevant Departments and proposals thereafter will be reflected in the National Pensions Framework which the Govern- ment will announce shortly.

Social Welfare Fraud. 191. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the number, in view of a newspaper report (details supplied), of schools that have made a complaint to her Department in connection with potential improper conduct and behaviour in terms of the school meals programme; the number of allegations of subsidy fraud that have been made to

610 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers her Department by various schools throughout the country; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7836/09]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The school meals programme gives funding towards the provision of food services for disadvantaged school children through two schemes. The first is the statutory urban school meals scheme, operated by local authorities and part-financed by the Department of Social & Family Affairs. The second is the school meals local projects scheme through which funding is provided directly by the Department to participating schools and local and voluntary community groups who are running their own school meals projects. The Department has received one allegation in relation to the operation of the School Meals programme and this allegation is currently being investigated. The Depart- ment does not comment on individual allegations of fraud or abuse until there has been a successful prosecution in the courts.

Social Welfare Code. 192. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if she will implement a similar arrangement with Bord Ga´is as her Department has with the ESB to allow social welfare recipients to avail of free units in the same manner as they do with the ESB; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [7870/09]

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Under the household benefits package, the electricity allowance covers standing charges and 2,400 units of electricity each year, which equates to \540 per annum. For the majority of customers, the electricity allowance is paid direct to the ESB each month on their behalf and offset against their bills. Payment of the electricity allowance in respect of some 4,000 customers is by cash payment through a nominated post office or financial institution. Similarly, customers transferring their electricity allowance to Bord Gaís Energy will be paid a monthly cash payment of \45 (\540 per annum) through a nominated post office or financial institution as Bord Gaís Energy’s technical system is not capable of processing a unit based electricity allowance at present. Payment of the electricity allowance to Bord Gaís Energy customers by way of cash ensures that these customers will continue to receive their electricity allowance.

Defence Forces Equipment. 193. Deputy Mary Upton asked the Minister for Defence the military equipment Ireland purchases from Israel; the value of these contracts; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7820/09]

Minister for Defence (Deputy Willie O’Dea): In general, tender competitions are conducted by my Department in accordance with the EU procurement guidelines. For procurements of defensive equipment in excess of \1million, the European Defence Agency (EDA) Code of Conduct on Defence Procurement is observed and competitions are advertised on the EDA Electronic Bulletin Board. Tender competitions are held in accordance with the EU Code of Conduct on Export Controls. Accordingly, competitions are open to any individual or country in accordance with the terms of all UN, OSCE and EU arms embargoes or restrictions. To properly follow these guidelines and codes, the Department must deal impartially with all companies that are entitled to enter its procurement competitions and must evaluate tenders on the basis of objective criteria.

611 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Willie O’Dea.]

A number of Israeli companies have won orders for defensive equipment in recent years as a result of tender competitions. Since 2005, the Department has purchased small arms ammunition, X-Ray equipment, helmets, an Artillery Fire Control System and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, commonly referred to as UAVs from Israeli suppliers. The total value of defensive equipment acquired from Israeli companies since 2005 is in the region of \9.2m, inclusive of VAT. In each case, the contract was awarded by competition, conducted impartially in compliance with the codes and guidelines set out above, on the basis that the company concerned had submitted the best tender.

Health and Safety Issues. 194. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government his plans to encourage and promote the introduction of a device (details supplied) into every household. [7763/09]

195. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the steps he has taken to warn people of the dangers of carbon monoxide. [7764/09]

Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): I propose to take Questions Nos. 194 and 195 together. Carbon monoxide gas, which arises when fuel fails to combust properly due to an inadequate supply of air, can cause health risks, illness or death to persons exposed to it for prolonged periods. The threat of carbon monoxide poisoning can arise in a variety of domestic, workplace and public settings and I understand that a number of Departments and agencies have arrangements in place for dealing with their responsibilities in relation to carbon monoxide. For instance, the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and the Commission for Energy Regulation are both required under the Gas (Interim) (Regulation) Act, 2002 to have regard to the need to promote safety and efficiency on the part of natural gas undertakings; the Health and Safety Authority promotes awareness and regulates the risks of carbon monoxide in the workplace; the Department of Health and Children and the Health Service Executive have specific responsibilities in relation to health promotion and environmental health; the Environmental Protection Agency monitors the level of atmospheric pollutants, including carbon monoxide; and the Central Statistics Office publishes statistics relating to incidents of carbon monoxide poisoning. I have recently asked my Department, as part of a review of Part J — Heat Producing Appliances — of the Building Regulations and the associated Technical Guidance Document (TGD J), to consider whether, and in what circumstances, mandatory provision for carbon monoxide alarms might be appropriately included in the building code. Part J of the Building Regulations sets out the minimum legal standards of safety and quality in relation to the installation of heat producing appliances in new buildings and in relation to the replacement of heat producing appliances in existing buildings; TGD J outlines the technical requirements that should be followed to fulfil this statutory obligation. The review of Part J will be the subject of a full public consultation process.

Proposed Legislation. 196. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he will support proposals (details supplied) in the housing Bill. [7794/09]

612 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Michael Finneran): The Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008 contains a range of measures designed to provide local authorities with a framework for a more strategic approach to the delivery and management of housing services. That framework includes new provisions for the making of housing services plans and the implementation of those plans through housing action programmes. It provides for a more effective management and control regime covering rents, tenancy arrangements, the making of anti-social behaviour strategies and a more developed statutory basis for the Rental Accommodation Scheme. The Bill also provides for the introduction of a new incremental purchase scheme and a new, more objective and comprehensive basis for assessing need and allocating housing. While the Bill addresses a wide range of issues, there are some other aspects still under development, which I hope to bring forward for consideration at Committee Stage in the Dail. In conjunction with the Office of the Attorney General, work is continuing to resolve the outstanding complex issues in relation to the introduction of a viable sales scheme for local authority apartments. I am also working towards the introduction of an affordable homes purchase scheme which, in the longer term, will facilitate the purchase, through a single equity based mechanism, of property under the various affordable housing schemes. In addition, during the Bill’s passage through the Seanad there was considerable debate on providing a statutory basis for the preparation and adoption of homelessness action plans and I am also determined to bring proposals on this matter before the Dail. However, the Government has decided, in the context of the new Homeless Strategy, that the statutory definition of homelessness will not be changed. It is proposed to review how the definition is applied operationally, for example, to ensure consistency in practice across local authorities regarding its application. This has been made clear in the Homeless Strategy and also in the course of engagement with representatives of service providers in the MakeRoom alliance. In addition, work is currently being undertaken by the Homeless Agency, in partnership with the Centre for Housing Research, to develop a position paper regarding a common operational definition for the Dublin area. A legal right to housing has not been included in the Constitution on the basis that the funding commitment to the various housing programmes has resulted in increased outputs and that decisions in relation to the allocation of financial resources is a matter for Government, rather than the Courts. This is in line with the 1996 report of the Constitutional Review Group, which concluded that the Constitution should not confer personal rights to freedom from poverty or to other economic or social entitlements. The Group regarded these as being essentially political matters, which should be the responsibility of the elected members to address and determine in a democracy. The legislative code governing social housing in Ireland is contained in the Housing Acts 1966-2004 and while it does not confer any statutory right to housing, the range and extent of measures implemented demonstrate the State’s long standing commitment to ensuring that housing needs, especially social housing needs, are adequately addressed. The Housing (Miscellaneous

Housing Grants. 197. Deputy Edward O’Keeffe asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if his attention has been drawn to the dissatisfaction of an organisation (details supplied) in County Cork; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7795/09]

613 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Michael Finneran): On 10 October, 2008, Cork County Council, who are responsible for the administration of the voluntary housing funding schemes, sought certain clarification from my Department on the procurement arrangements pertaining to this project. Following an examination of the procedures followed by the Approved Housing Body, my Department advised the Council on 10 December, 2008, that the procedures did not appear to comply with the requirements of the new Forms of Contract for publicly funded projects. Authorities had been advised of the change to the procurement procedures for all construction projects including those undertaken by Approved Housing Bodies in circulars issued by the Department on 20 October 2006 (IPPP10/2006), on 4 April 2007 (N7/07), and again on 10 August 2007 (IPPP4/2007). I understand the Council recently advised the approved body to seek all tenders in accordance with public procurement requirements.

198. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government when the mobility and disability grants for the elderly will be notified to the local authorities and particularly councils in Counties Westmeath and Longford; if the precise amount to be allocated is immediately notified in view of the fact that there are numerous applicants for such grants awaiting final approval from their local authority but they cannot be so notified whilst they have not been notified of their final allocations by his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7827/09]

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Michael Finneran): Local authorities will be notified of their capital allocations for 2009 in respect of the Housing Adaptation Grant Schemes for Older People and People with a Disability, following the publication, shortly, of the Revised Estimates for Public Services 2009. The Housing Adaptation Grants for Older People and People with a Disability are funded by 80% recoupment available from my Department together with 20% contribution from the resources of the local authority. As in previous years, it will be a matter for each local authority to decide on the specific level of funding to be directed towards each of the schemes, from within the combined allocation notified to them by my Department, and to manage the operation of the schemes in their areas from within this allocation.

Fisheries Protection. 199. Deputy Edward O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources when payment will be made to a person (details supplied) in County Cork under the hardship fund. [7799/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Sea´n Power): I have been informed by Bord Iascaigh Mhara, who administered the Salmon Hardship Scheme on behalf of the Department, that an application was received from the person referred to by the Deputy. The application was approved and payment was made in November 2007.

Telecommunications Services. 200. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources when the roll out of MANs broadband in Boyle and Castlerea, County Roscommon will be implemented and funding for same put in place as had been agreed. [7812/09]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Any future broadband investment decisions, including investment in further phases of the Metro-

614 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers politan Area Networks (MANs) Programme, will be guided by (i) the final policy paper on Next Generation Broadband, which will be published shortly (ii) the Value for Money and Policy Review of Phase I of the MANs Programme, which was published last year, (iii) any other analysis as appropriate and (iv) the availability of resources.

Energy Conservation. 201. Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the reason window replacement is not a part of the home energy saving scheme; if this had been part of the pilot scheme; if so, the reason it is no longer part of the scheme; if a building energy rating is mandatory for inclusion in this scheme; the position regarding the scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7819/09]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Together with the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, I recently launched the National Insulation Programme for Economic Recovery. The Home Energy Sav- ing scheme is the largest element of the Programme with a budget of \50 million in 2009, and has the potential to support the upgrade of in excess of 27,500 homes this year. Sustainable Energy Ireland (SEI) estimates that demand for this scheme could ultimately exceed 100,000 homes. The scheme provides grant assistance to homeowners for attic and wall insulation, efficient boilers and heating controls. These measures were selected for inclusion in the scheme, with the assistance of SEI, which has built up a considerable expertise on residential energy efficiency matters as part of their statutory remit and in the course of their oversight of the pilot phase of the scheme in 2008. Following the pilot programme in 2008, in which windows were included, SEI recommended the current measures as the most likely to deliver significant energy savings to homeowners at the least cost. There are other measures not included in the scheme that also deliver energy savings. My Department and SEI will be keeping the scheme under review and if there is a strong case for adding other measures to the scheme, I will give this full consideration. The scheme is open to anybody owning a house that was built prior to 2006. Homeowners and landlords will be able to apply under the scheme from next month. In the meantime, homeowners can register their interest with SEI on 1850 927000 or at [email protected]. Homeowners may arrange to have a building energy rating carried out immediately, if they wish, but this is not a requirement for participation in the scheme. However, homeowners should not undertake any remedial work until they have received grant approval from SEI, as work underway or recently completed will not be considered for grant assistance.

Telecommunications Services. 202. Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if Kilmovee, County Mayo is part of the national broadband scheme; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that there is no broadband provider apart from satellite broadband; his plans for Kilmovee and its ability to receive broadband, if it is not included in the national broadband scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7823/09]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Broad- band services are available from competing service providers over multiple platforms, including DSL (telephone lines), cable, fixed wireless, and mobile. I understand that broadband is available in the Kilmovee area from mobile, wireless and satellite service providers. The following

615 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] list, from my Department’s website www.broadband.gov.ie, details the availability of broadband services in the Kilmovee area.

Platform Service Provider Website Phone

Mobile O2 Ireland http://www.o2.ie/broadband 1800 886 086

Wireless Brisknet Ltd http://www.brisknet.ie 09066 34319 Last Mile Broadband http://www.lastmile.ie 090 6477701 WestNet http://westnet.ie 1850 930 305

Satellite Applied Solutions http://www.ADSLnow.ie 1890 924 854 Avonline http://www.avonlinebroadband.co.uk 0044 800 073 1102 Broadband Wherever http://www.broadbandwherever.net 0044 800 068 3358 Cross Country Broadband Ltd http://www.crosscountrybroadband.com 053 925 5428 Digiweb Satellite http://broadband.digiweb.ie 042 939 3300 e3 Broadband http://www.e3broadband.ie 1850 303 333 ehotspot http://www.ehotspot.ie 0044 1262 409 109 Eircom Satellite http://www.eircom.ie 1800 242 633 Fastnet Broadband Satellite http://www.fastnetbroadband.com 01 2303 746 Media Satellite Ireland Ltd http://www.mediasat.ie 1850 202 144 National Broadband Ltd http://nbb.ie 045 982 130 Orblink http://www.orblink.ie 01 860 1995 Pure Telecom Satellite http://www.puretelecom.ie 01 289 5555 Satellite Broadband Ireland. http://www.satellitebroadbandireland .ie 044 937 2514 Ltd

Alternative Energy Projects. 203. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the details of the ocean energy prototype fund as referred to in Parliamentary Ques- tion No. 362 of 3 February 2009; the extent envisaged by him of the prototype fund; the purposes for which it will be set up; the proposed distribution method of funds involved; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7828/09]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The ocean energy prototype development fund is one element in the Ocean Energy strategy. It is designed to stimulate the development and deployment of ocean energy devices and systems. The fund provides grant support for industry-led projects developing and testing wave and tidal energy capture devices and systems, independent monitoring of projects/technologies, R&D aimed at the integration of ocean energy into the electricity market and the national electricity grid (and network), data monitoring, forecasting, communications and control of ocean energy systems and specific industry-led research projects carried out by research centres. The prototype fund is being administered by the Ocean Energy Unit of Sustainable Energy Ireland (SEI). The budget for this measure is \2.7 million. The detailed qualifying conditions and applicable terms and conditions have already been published by the Ocean Energy Development Unit of SEI. In response to the call for proposals in December, a number of applications from industry are currently being processed with a view to first awards being announced shortly. 616 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

204. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the details in respect of the state of the art national ocean energy facility in Univer- sity College, Cork; the physical expenditure of money due in 2009; when he expects the project to be completed; the number who will work therein; the intended qualification level; the remit of the national ocean energy facility; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7829/09]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Sus- tainable Energy Ireland is engaged with UCC in the further development and enhancement of the existing wave-basin located at the Hydraulics and Maritime Research Centre (HMRC) at UCC and the development of a new National Ocean Test Facility (NOTF). The facility provides research and testing facilities for a variety of offshore purposes. The upgrade of the existing facility currently underway includes new wave generating equipment, new experimental test rigs, additions to the wave flume facilities and improved mechanical and electrical workshop facilities and advanced computer solutions for numerical analysis and modelling. Capital expenditure in 2009 is estimated at \1.2 million. The enhancement of the HMRC will be completed in 2009. The HMRC facility requires further and more substantial enhancement and extension, to be able to service a more extensive range of modelling and testing requirements by device developers. It is currently envisaged that this capability will be provided in a new facility, the NOTF, which in turn will be part of a proposed Maritime and Energy Research Centre (MERC), to be located adjacent to the National Maritime College at Ringaskiddy. It is hoped that funding for MERC will be sourced within the current call for proposals for PRTLI 5. In this scenario, the NOTF would be commissioned in 2012. The facility, which performs a variety of additional functions and services beyond the ocean energy programme, is staffed by a Director, a Research Manager, 2 Principal Investigators and an additional 20 staff including Research Engineers, Post Doctorates, PhD students, MSc students and also includes 2 technicians.

205. Deputy Enda Kenny asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the details of the group connected wave energy test site off the west coast; the location and status of same; the extent of expenditure envisaged for 2009; when he expects the project to be completed; the projected test period for the facility; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7830/09]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The Marine Institute, in partnership with ESBI, conducted the extensive process of locating a suitable wave energy test site. The development partnership is between Sustainable Energy Ireland, the Marine Institute and ESBI to develop a grid connected site off Annagh Co. Mayo for testing fully operational pre-commercial wave energy converters supplying power directly to the electricity network. Interim Project Management is in place undertaking a detailed process of technical consultation with prospective industrial users of the facility, completing engineering specifications, processing the requirements for onshore and offshore lease applications, network connection and shore works requirements. Expenditure on the project is expected to exceed \ 2 million in 2009, and project completion is expected by 2010 or 2011 depending on variable factors including offshore sea conditions in the development phase. The project is expected to remain viable for at least ten years.

Electricity Generation. 206. Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural

617 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Liz McManus.] Resources if the Commission for Energy Regulation refused permission to the ESB to reduce prices; his views on whether the ESB is being refused permission to lower prices in order to allow competitors to be profitable; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7832/09]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The regulation of ESB customer supply electricity tariffs is the statutory responsibility of the Com- mission for Energy Regulation (CER) under the Electricity Regulation Act 1999. The CER is required to ensure that regulated tariffs are cost reflective. The CER will shortly complete its review of options for a reduction in electricity and gas prices, taking account of all relevant factors and having consulted with all players including ESB. I have also engaged with IBEC and with the major suppliers of the Large Energy Users. The timing and nature of decisions in relation to energy prices will be informed by the outcome of the Energy Regulator’s review and my own discussions with the enterprise and energy sectors.

Departmental Expenditure. 207. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the printed material from his Department which has been printed abroad (details supplied). [7948/09]

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The identification of records prior to January 2007 cannot be facilitated without undue commitment of staff resources and administrative cost. However, if the Deputy has a question in relation to a specific item I will make appropriate enquiries. The following table contains details of material, which my Department had printed abroad from January 2007 to date.

Material Cost

All-Island Grid Study 17,021.00 Printing of colour illustrations in Geo Marine Letters 1,330.75 MakeITsecure 72,054.61

Grant Payments. 208. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when a REPS 4 grant will be awarded to persons (details supplied) in County Mayo; and the reason for difficulties with the applications. [7758/09]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): REPS 4 is a measure under the current Rural Development Programme 2007-13 and is subject to EU Regulations which require detailed administrative checks on all applications to be completed before the first payments issue. The first payments for 2008 REPS 4 applications issued in the last week of January to those whose applications required no correction following the administrative checks. Further payments continue to be made as applications are cleared. Queries have arisen during the administrative checks on the plans of both persons named and they are currently under further examination.

618 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

209. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the status of all outstanding grant applications for a person (details supplied) in County Mayo; and when the due amounts will be awarded. [7759/09]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): The person named submitted applications for REPS 4 and for the Young Farmers’ Installation Scheme. The latter application was received in my Department on 20 October 2008. Only fully completed applications made under the Young Farmers’ Installation Scheme and received by my Department up to and including 14 October 2008 are being processed. I have no proposals to re-open the Scheme. REPS 4 is a measure under the current Rural Development Programme 2007–13 and is subject to EU Regulations which require detailed administrative checks on all applications to be completed before the first payments issue. The first payments for 2008 REPS 4 applications issued in the last week of January to those whose applications required no correction following the administrative checks. Further payments continue to be made as applications are cleared. Queries have arisen during the administrative checks on the plan of the person named and it is currently under further examination.

210. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when a person (details supplied) in County Mayo will be awarded the farm waste management grant. [7793/09]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): The arrangements for payment of grants under the Farm Waste Management Scheme on a phased basis have been confirmed with 40 per cent being paid this year as claims are approved. A further 40 per cent will be paid in early January 2010 and the remaining 20 per cent in January 2011. Payment of the initial 40 per cent to farmers will be made as expeditiously as possible.

211. Deputy Seymour Crawford asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when a person (details supplied) in County Monaghan will be awarded their REPS 4 payment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7806/09]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): REPS 4 is a measure under the current Rural Development Programme 2007-13 and is subject to EU Regulations which require detailed administrative checks on all applications to be completed before the first payments issue. The first payments for 2008 REPS 4 applications issued in the last week of January to those whose applications required no correction following the administrative checks. Further payments continue to be made as applications are cleared. Queries have arisen during the administrative checks on the plan of the person named and it is currently under further examination.

212. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when is it envisaged a REPS application in respect of a person (details supplied) will be processed for payment. [7808/09]

619 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Brendan Smith.] of January to those whose applications required no correction following the administrative checks. Further payments continue to be made as applications are cleared. Queries have arisen during the administrative checks on the plan of the person named and it is currently under further examination.

Farm Waste Management. 213. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if, in the context of the significant number of farmers who have the farm waste management grants which are duly payable to them, it is proposed to be granted over three years on a 40:40:20 basis, if they will be paid on a 50:50 basis; if the interest accruing on the outstanding loans which farmers negotiated with the banks, which were \100,000 and over in many instances, will be defrayed by his Department, as farmers are paying up to \750 or \800 monthly interest on the outstanding amounts which would not have arisen if the grants were paid out as they were due, and which outstanding bank balances for the capital loan, are making it more difficult for farmers to negotiate their usual seasonal loans; if steps along the forgoing proposals will be taken to help alleviate the situation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7825/09]

Grant Payments. 214. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the status of the application under the farm waste management scheme for a person (details supplied); when payment will be made; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7841/09]

215. Deputy Sea´n Sherlock asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when payment will be issued to a person (details supplied) in County Cork under the farm improvement scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7843/09]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): The person named is an applicant under the Farm Improvement Scheme. Applications under this Scheme are being processed by my Department up to the level of funding provided for the Scheme in the 2006 Partnership agreement, Towards 2016.

216. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will approve funding for a farm waste grant in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Roscommon; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7846/09]

620 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

Fertiliser Prices. 217. Deputy Paul Connaughton asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the reason fertiliser prices are so expensive in 2009 in view of the fact that the price of crude oil is much lower than the same time in 2008; the other factors that influence the present cost of fertiliser; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7851/09]

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Brendan Smith): Changes in fertiliser costs, in common with all elements of intermediate consumption for farmers, are principally a function of market forces, primarily operating at international level in this instance. CSO preliminary estimate for 2008 shows that the price of fertiliser increased by 61.4% compared to 2007, which was an unprecedented increase. This extraordinary price increase in 2008 resulted from:

• The high cost of oil in 2008 to manufacture fertiliser, upon which it is is heavily dependent

• High shipping cost in 2008 resulting from increased global economic activity

• Increased global demand for fertiliser for the production of biofuel crops, to replace high priced fossil fuels.

• Increased demand for fertiliser by emerging economies, such as India and China, to increase food output and

• Increased demand for fertiliser to increase animal feedstocks, which were low globally.

The recent down turn in global economic activity and especially much reduced oil price have reduced transport and manufacturing costs of fertiliser. Nevertheless, fertiliser prices have not fallen as quickly as expected, due mainly to the carryover of expensive stocks from 2008. Furthermore, since the closure of IFI in 2002, Ireland has no indigenous inorganic fertiliser production and as such is a “price taker”, being as we are, totally dependent on imports. Furthermore, Ireland’s location on the fringe of Europe implies increased shipping costs and a lack of economies of scale as regards shipping. It should be remembered that it is still early in the season for fertiliser application onto crops and grassland, and farmers are holding back making purchases in anticipation of price falls, which is why it is difficult to predict prices for 2009 at this early stage of the cropping year, as very little fertiliser has traded.

School Curriculum. 218. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Education and Science his plans to provide an updated mathematics syllabus for the second level senior cycle; the timetable for its implementation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7785/09]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): On foot of advice received from the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA), work is now underway for

621 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Batt O’Keeffe.] reform of Junior and Senior Cycle mathematics which is designed to provide for the phased implementation of syllabus change in maths. The Project Maths initiative is designed to encourage better understanding of maths, to reinforce the practical relevance of maths to everyday life, and to ensure better continuity between primary and second level, and junior and senior cycle. The initiative started in 2008 and is being piloted in 24 schools. The curriculum changes will be phased in over three years and mainstreaming will begin in 2010, prefaced by a national programme of professional development for teachers beginning in 2009. Starting in the Project schools allows the opportunmity to trial the changes and to develop lesson plans and exemplars for teachers at the same time. It will help to ensure that the optimum level of resources are available in advance, when the changes are introduced in the mainstream system, beginning in September 2010. It will enable the student experience, which is central to effective learning, to feed into the final syllabus development so that we can ensure the best possible approach to ensuring relevance and quality in the new reforms. The NCCA website www.ncca.ie. sets out the draft syllabus for Strands 1 and 2 at junior and senior cycle, a draft common Mathematics course for the first year in junior cycle, and a Geometry course. The website www.ProjectMaths.ie sets out additional supports in the form of teaching and learning plans, a forum for teachers, and additional resources. These resources will expand over time. Project Maths is being implemented on a phased basis covering the following five strands of mathematics:

Phase 1 — Strand 1 statistics and probability; Strand 2 geometry and trigonometry

Phase 2 — Strand 3 number; Strand 4 algebra

Phase 3 — functions Phase 3 will have begun in all schools in 2012, and will be fully implemented in all class groups by 2015.

Special Educational Needs. 219. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will investigate the cut back in special needs support in respect of a person (details supplied) from 27 hours to 12.5; if he will report on the circumstances; and if the service will be reinstated. [7811/09]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): As the Deputy will be aware, the National Council for Special Education (NCSE) is responsible, through its network of local Special Educational Needs Organisers (SENOs), for allocating resource teachers and special needs assistants (SNAs) to schools to support children with special needs. SNAs are recruited specifically to assist in the care of pupils with disabilities in an educational context. Applications for an SNA may be considered where a pupil has a significant medical need for such assistance, a significant impairment of physical or sensory function or where their behaviour is such that they are a danger to themselves or to other pupils. A pupil’s level of care may diminish over time as the child matures. Pupils may move to a different school or on to post-primary school. In such situations, the NCSE will review and adjust the SNA support required in the school. The NCSE operates within my Department’s criteria in allocating such support. I have arranged for the details supplied by the Deputy to be forwarded to the NCSE for their attention and direct reply. All schools have the names and contact details of their local SENO. Parents

622 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers may also contact their local SENO directly to discuss their child’s special educational needs, using the contact details available on www.ncse.ie.

Schools Building Projects. 220. Deputy John Deasy asked the Minister for Education and Science the status of plans for a permanent building for a school (details supplied) in County Waterford; when it is planned to have a technical examination of the site; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7821/09]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): It is my Department’s intention to provide the school to which the Deputy refers with a new building. The progression of all large scale building projects, including this project, from initial design stage through to construction phase will be considered in the context of my Department’s multi-annual School Building and Modernisation Programme. However, in light of current competing demands on the capital budget of the Department, it is not possible to give an indicative timeframe for the progression of the project at this time.

221. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Education and Science the position in relation to the provision of a new school (details supplied) in County Westmeath, which is much needed and has been approved at all stages, and which is required to accommodate up to 1,000 pupils; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7826/09]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The new building for the school to which the Deputy refers is one of seven projects which I have approved for inclusion in the 3rd Bundle of schools to be procured under the public private partnership process. This Bundle is in the pre-procurement stage which involves the preparation of a detailed output specification and Public Sector Benchmark and the submission of an outline planning permission for each site. On successful completion of this process, the Bundle will be handed over to the National Development Finance Agency (NDFA) for procurement. The indicative timeframe for the delivery of a PPP school currently stands at approximately 4 years from the date the Bundle is formally announced.

School Accommodation. 222. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science the amount spent within his Department for 2006, 2007 and 2008 in respect of the rental costs of temporary accommodation for schools; if he will estimate the expected amount for 2009; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7834/09]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The amount spent on renting temporary accommodation for schools, including — but not limited to — prefabricated accommodation for each of the years 2006 to 2008 is as follows:

2006: \24.5m

2007: \35.5m

2008: \52.86m.

The Deputy will be aware that demand for additional accommodation in schools has risen significantly over the last number of years, with the appointment of 6,000 extra teachers in the

623 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Batt O’Keeffe.] primary sector alone since 2002. In considering the need to provide extra resource and other teachers to schools in recent years, the Government could have decided to make children wait until permanent accommodation could be provided. However, we prioritised putting the extra teachers into schools as soon as possible. It will continue to be necessary for prefabricated accommodation to be provided because competing priorities mean that it will not always be possible to have a permanent accommodation solution in place in a short timeframe. Following the delivery of just on 500 additional classrooms at primary level alone in 2008, I anticipate that the overall spend on temporary accommodation for 2009 will be reduced to around \48m.

Departmental Staff. 223. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will confirm that the teacher education section of his Department has recently decided to amalgamate all science subject national co-ordinators, currently eight, into one national co-ordinator to assist teachers in schools in the development of science related subjects; the way this amalgamation from eight to one post will help secondary schools to develop and encourage science related subjects in view of his objectives under a strategy for science, technology and innovation 2006 to 2013; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7835/09]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): Individual support services were established between 1999 and 2001 to support teachers following the implementation of changes to the syllabus in Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Home Economics. In 2003 an additional support service was put in place to support teachers of Junior Cycle Science. The Physics and Chemistry support services were then integrated into Second Level Support Service. It is the natural life cycle for a post primary syllabus based support service that, following an intensive phase of support, it would move to a maintenance phase within the existing structure in the Second Level Support Service. This has happened previously for other similar services in the period 2006-2008. In a maintenance phase support remains within the system for teachers where necessary. My Department is currently reviewing the various supports offered to teachers in the context of the resources that are available to me. As part of this exercise, the SLSS is being restructured and other services are folding into its remit. In relation to the sciences specifically, I am mindful of the need to ensure that we continue to make support available. To this end, my Department is examining the ways in which this might be done by leveraging the capacity which currently exists within the sector, thus ensuring that a wide range of support for Science teachers will remain from September 2009.

Schools Funding. 224. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will support a school (details supplied) in Dublin 5 in 2009. [7838/09]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): The school referred to by the Deputy is a recognised primary school and attracts funding in the same way as all recognised primary schools. The Deputy will be aware that schools’ running costs are met by my Depart- ment’s scheme of capitation grants. These grants have been increased substantially in recent years. The primary school capitation grant has increased from \81.26 per pupil in 2000 to its

624 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers current rate of \200, which was an increase of \21 on last year. This represents an increase of 146% in the standard rate of capitation grant since 2000.

Special Educational Needs. 225. Deputy Mary Upton asked the Minister for Education and Science if he has proposals to restore classes for those mild general learning disability students who would be affected by his recent announcement to remove some of those classes; if he has plans to meet with teachers from those schools affected by his recent decision to consider options to restore such classes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7840/09]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I wish to advise the Deputy that all primary schools have been allocated additional teaching resources to enable them support pupils with high incidence special educational needs including mild general learning disability (MGLD). All primary schools were given these additional teaching resources under the General Allocation Model of learning support/resource teaching introduced in 2005. Schools can decide how best to use this allocation based on the needs of the pupils. Most pupils with a MGLD are included in ordinary classes with their peers and are supported by their class teacher. The curriculum is flexible so that teachers can cater for the needs of children of different abilities. The Deputy will be aware that allocations to schools typically increase or decrease depending on pupil enrolment. In the case of classes for MGLD the normal pupil teacher ratio that applies is 11:1. My Department however allows for a small reduction in this number and permits schools to retain a teaching post where it has a minimum of 9 pupils in the class. In the schools in question, the number of pupils dropped below this minimum. These schools therefore are no longer entitled to the teaching posts in these classes. In 2005 when the General Allocation Model was introduced, schools with additional teachers in classes for MGLD were allowed to retain the teachers for these classes. Effectively, these schools received a double allocation. The number of these special classes has decreased over the years and schools have integrated the children into age-appropriate mainstream classes. All of the other primary schools in the country who do not have classes for children with MGLD cater for these pupils from within the General Allocation Model.

Schools Building Projects. 226. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Education and Science the consideration given to the condition of a school (details supplied) in County Galway; his plans for a new building for this school; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7842/09]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): An application for capital funding towards the provision of a new school building was received in April of last year from the school referred to by the Deputy. This was the first such application from the school. The school, which has a current enrolment of 49 pupils, is situated in a rural area. On foot of this application and information supplied by the school regarding its condition, officials from the Planning and Building Unit of my Department visited the school in June of last year. As a result of the visit, an amount of \26,862 was sanctioned to carry out remedial works to the school. A member of the Inspectorate and officials from my Department’s Building Unit visited the school on 11 December last. Since then my Department has been in ongoing contact with the

625 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Batt O’Keeffe.] school regarding its needs with a view to carrying out some urgently required works as soon as possible. In light of the many competing demands on the capital budget of my Department, it is not possible to give any commitment relating to the provision of a new building for this school at this time.

Post-Leaving Certificate Courses. 227. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Education and Science the reason for the cap on post-leaving certificate places in colleges of further education; his plans in view of the need for retraining of the workforce to expand the quota each college can enrol; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7861/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science (Deputy Sea´n Haughey): The number of approved PLC places is set at its current level of 30,188 because there is a continuing requirement to plan and control numbers and to manage expenditure within the context of overall educational policy and provision. Due to the difficult budgetary position it is not possible to increase the number of places. Any possible future increase would have to take account of the present and prospective economic and budgetary context and related financial constraints.

228. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Education and Science the colleges of further education and the numbers of post-leaving certificate places allocated to each one. [7862/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science (Deputy Sea´n Haughey): The number of places available under the Post Leaving Certificate programme currently stands at 30,188. For the current academic year 2008/2009, 28,066 of these places were allocated to Vocational Education Committees (VECs). Further distribution of those places internally is a matter for each individual VEC. The balance of places were allocated to a number of secondary and community and comprehensive schools. A breakdown of the places allocated to VECs is available in the attached table.

VEC 2008/09 Places Approved

Co. Cavan 1,150 Co. Carlow 800 Co. Clare 100 City of Cork 3,870 Co. Cork 1,244 City of Dublin 7,538 Co. Dublin 896 Boro of Dun Laoghaire 2,048 Co. Donegal 213 City of Galway 1,080 Co. Galway 160 Co. Kerry 460 Co. Kildare 317 Co. Kilkenny 460 Co. Laois 350 Co. Leitrim 82

626 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

VEC 2008/09 Places Approved

City of Limerick 750 Co. Limerick 310 Co. Longford 330 Co. Louth 1,000 Co. Mayo 387 Co. Meath 270 Co. Monaghan 248 Co. Offaly 50 Co. Roscommon 63 Co. Sligo 350 Co. Tipperary N.R. 570 Co. Tipperary S.R. 270 City of Waterford 700 Co. Waterford 205 Co. Wexford 730 Co. Westmeath 115 Co. Wicklow 950

Total VEC 28,066

229. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Education and Science if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the Ballyfermot College of Further Education, Dublin, is located in a RAPID and local drugs task force area and that the number seeking to enrol from Ballyfermot, which has a low educational attainment level, has increased in recent years and as a result of the cap on places the college may not be able to accommodate the increase; and his plans to increase the number allowed for this college, which has a large intake from neigh- bouring disadvantaged areas such as Tallaght and Clondalkin. [7863/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science (Deputy Sea´n Haughey): The Post Leaving Certificate (PLC) programme provides an integrated general education, vocational training and work experience programme for young people who have completed their Leaving Certificate and adults returning to education. Its purpose is to enhance their prospects of gaining employment or progressing to Further Education. The number of places available nationwide under the PLC programme currently stands at 30,188. Places are allocated to VECs an on annual basis following an application process. Further distribution of those places internally is a matter for each individual VEC. The application process for the 2009/2010 academic year has not yet been completed and each application is dealt with on its own merits having regard to all the relevant circumstances. Ballyfermot College of Further Education is part of City Of Dublin VEC. For the academic year 2008/09, the City of Dublin VEC was allocated 7,538 PLC places. Tallaght and Clondalkin are part of County Dublin VEC. For the academic year 2008/09, County Dublin VEC was allocated 896 PLC places.

Vocational Training Opportunities Scheme. 230. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Education and Science if, in view of the large number of people being made unemployed, consideration will be given to increasing 627 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh.] the number of places on vocational training opportunities schemes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7864/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science (Deputy Sea´n Haughey): The Vocational Training Opportunities Scheme (VTOS) provides full-time second-chance education and training opportunities for unemployed adults who are over the age of 21 and in receipt of specified social welfare payments for at least six months. VTOS is funded by my Department and operated through the 33 Vocational Education Committees (VECs). Its primary target groups are the longer-term unemployed, the low-skilled and disadvantaged. There are currently 5,000 approved places on VTOS nationwide. Due to the difficult budgetary position it was not possible to allocate further funding to increase the number of places this year. Any possible future expansion of VTOS would have to take account of the present and prospective economic and budgetary context and related financial constraints.

Post-Leaving Certificate Courses. 231. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Education and Science the reason courses in animation at Ballyfermot College of Further Education, Dublin have not been validated, despite being done under the Dundee University programme for many years, and therefore the almost 90 students involved cannot obtain grants to pursue these courses. [7865/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science (Deputy Sea´n Haughey): There are currently approximately 30 students pursuing the two-year Level 8 BA in Animation degree programme validated by Dundee University in Ballyfermot College of Further Edu- cation. Ballyfermot College is an approved PLC centre. My Department funds four maintenance grant schemes. Three are at third level: the Higher Education Grants (HEG) Scheme, the Vocational Education Committees’ (VEC) Scholarships Scheme and the Third Level Mainten- ance Grants Scheme for Trainees (TLT). The fourth, the Maintenance Grants Scheme for Students attending Post Leaving Certificate (PLC) Courses, is for students attending approved courses in approved PLC centres. Students who are entering approved courses in approved PLC centres for the first time may be eligible for grants under the scheme, where they satisfy the relevant conditions as to age, residence, means, nationality and previous academic attainment. However, under the terms and conditions of the scheme, students pursuing degree programmes or who already hold a Level 5 or 6 qualification are ineligible. I understand from the VEC concerned that prospective students are informed of the absence of grant support for the degree courses before they apply for places.

School Transport. 232. Deputy Sea´n Sherlock asked the Minister for Education and Science if he will investigate a situation whereby a person (details supplied) in County Cork has been denied access to school transport mid-term despite having availed of the service for the past six weeks and paid for the service as far back as September 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7869/09]

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science (Deputy Sea´n Haughey): Under the terms of the Primary School Transport Scheme, pupils are eligible for free school transport if they reside 3.2 kilometres or more from and are attending their nearest national

628 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers school. Pupils who reside less than 3.2 kilometres from their nearest national school may avail of fare-paying concessionary transport to that school, provided there are spare seats available on the bus. Spare seating is allocated on a ‘first come first served basis’. In that regard, Bus E´ ireann has informed my Department that it was not possible to accommodate the pupil referred to by the Deputy in the details supplied.

Sceímeanna To´ ga´la Scoile. 233. D’fhiafraigh Deputy Dinny McGinley den Aire Oideachais agus Eolaıóchta cad e´ an dul chun cinn ata´ deánta maidir le bunscoil u´ r a chur ar faíl i nGort an Choirce; agus an ndeánfaidh se´ raíteas ina thaobh. [7205/09]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): Iarradh ar Oifig na nOibreacha Poiblı´, a fheidhmıónn thar ceann mo Roinnse i dtaca le sealbhu´ suıómh i gcoitinne, suıómh a lorg don scoil ata´ i gceist. Ta´ suıómh oiriu´ nach sainaitheanta agus ta´ faíl an tsuı´mh sin dulta ar aghaidh go dtı´ ardcheím. De bharr na n-ıógaireachtaı´ traćhta´la ata´ ag baint leis nı´lfu´ m tuilleadh ara´ maidir leis an suıómh feín. Machno´ far cur i gcrıćh phro´ iseas fa´la an tsuı´mh agus seachadadh an tionscadal to´ ga´la don scoil i gcomhtheács an bhuiseíd chaipitil ata´ ar faíl do mo Roinnse i gcomhair foirgneamh scoile i gcoitinne. I bhfianaise lıón na n-eíleamh iomaıócha ata´ a´ ndeán- amh ar bhuiseád caipitil mo Roinne faoi la´thair nı´ feídir fra´ma ama ta´scach a lua d’fhaíl shuı´- omh na scoile na´ do sheachadadh an tionscadal to´ ga´la don scoil ag an am seo.

Comhairle Mu´ inteoireachta. 234. D’fhiafraigh Deputy Dinny McGinley den Aire Oideachais agus Eolaıóchta ceń socru´ ata´ ann maidir le ball amhaín ar a laghad a bhfuil saineolas aige/aici ar riachtanais na Gaelscola- ıóchta a cheapadh ar an gComhairle Mu´ inteoireachta; agus an ndeánfaidh se´ raíteas ina thaobh. [7893/09]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): Mar is eol don Teachta, deánaim an 37 ball den Chomhairle Mu´ inteoireachta a cheapadh i la´thair na gcriteár a leagadh sıós in Alt 8 d’Acht na Comhairle Mu´ inteoireachta. I la´thair Ailt 8 den Acht sin, nı´ mo´ ra bheith sa Chomhairle

• 11 oide cla´raithe ata´ fostaithe i mbunscoileanna aitheanta no´ a bhfuil ca´ilithe chun teagasc iontu

• 11 oide cla´raithe ata´ fostaithe in iarbhunscoileanna aitheanta no´ a bhfuil ca´ilithe chun teagasc iontu

• 2 dhuine ainmnithe ag na Cola´istı´ Oideachais um Bhunteagasc

• 2 dhuine ainmnithe ag na hinstitiu´ idı´ 3u´ leibhe´al ata´ liostaithe faoi Alt 8(2)(c) den Acht

• 4 duine ainmnithe ag eagraıóchtaı´ bainistıóchta aitheanta scoile. Dha´ eagraıócht aitheanta san aicme sin is ea Foras Pa´tru´ nachta na Scoileanna Lań-Ghaeilge Teo and Gaelscoile- anna Teo.

• 2 dhuine ainmnithe ag cumainn na´isiu´ nta tuismitheoiri.

Ta´ cu´ igear ball eile sa bhreis a bhfuil taithı´ acu sa ghno´ , sa tionscal no´ sna gairmeacha a dhe´anaim a cheapadh go dı´reach. Mar ata´ leagtha amach in Alt 8 den Acht, caithfidh ceann

629 Questions— 25 February 2009. Written Answers

[Deputy Batt O’Keeffe.] amha´in de na ceapaithe dı´reacha sin a bheith ainmnithe ag ICTU agus ceann eile a bheith ainmnithe ag IBEC.

Departmental Procurement. 235. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Education and Science the printed material from his Department which has been printed abroad (details supplied). [7950/09]

Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): My Department is checking relevant records and I will be in further contact with you in this regard.

630