Vol. 652 Wednesday, No. 3 23 April 2008
DI´OSPO´ IREACHTAI´ PARLAIMINTE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES
DA´ IL E´ IREANN
TUAIRISC OIFIGIU´ IL—Neamhcheartaithe (OFFICIAL REPORT—Unrevised)
Wednesday, 23 April 2008.
Leaders’ Questions ……………………………… 729 Tributes to An Taoiseach …………………………… 734 Requests to move Adjournment of Da´il under Standing Order 32 ……………… 749 Order of Business ……………………………… 750 An Bille um an Ochtu´ Leasu´ is Fiche ar an mBunreacht 2008: An Dara Ce´im (ato´ga´il) ……… 750 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill 2008: Second Stage (resumed) ……… 750 Estimates for Public Services 2008: Message from Select Committee …………… 768 Ceisteanna—Questions Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources Priority Questions …………………………… 768 Other Questions …………………………… 780 Adjournment Debate Matters …………………………… 789 An Bille um an Ochtu´ Leasu´ is Fiche ar an mBunreacht 2008: An Dara Ce´im (ato´ga´il) ……… 790 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill 2008: Second Stage (resumed) ……… 790 Message from Select Committee ………………………… 828 Private Members’ Business Health Services: Motion (resumed) ……………………… 828 An Bille um an Ochtu´ Leasu´ is Fiche ar an mBunreacht 2008: An Dara Ce´im (ato´ga´il) ……… 852 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill 2008: Second Stage (resumed) ……… 852 Adjournment Debate Pharmacy Services……………………………… 860 Health Services ……………………………… 864 Summer Works Scheme …………………………… 866 Dublin Bay Development Plan ………………………… 867 Questions: Written Answers …………………………… 871 DA´ IL E´ IREANN
————
De´ Ce´adaoin, 23 Aibrea´n 2008. Wednesday, 23 April 2008.
————
Chuaigh an Ceann Comhairle i gceannas ar 10.30 a.m.
————
Paidir. Prayer.
————
Leaders’ Questions. Deputy Enda Kenny: This is the Taoiseach’s last day in this House in that role and I will have to pay tribute to him in a few minutes. I am sure he did not expect that on his last day as Taoiseach, the front page of a national newspaper would carry the story of a primary school that is forced to hold classes in a converted toilet. This is not the kind of situation our children should face in 2008 as education is fundamental to the kind of society and country we wish to become. Two years ago the Minister for happiness wrote to the school in question and said work would start with immediate effect. Deputies Allen and Stanton received four derisory four word replies from the Department of Education and Science. The school raised \50,000 and made the site available, yet is on the front page of today’s Irish Examiner holding classes in a converted toilet. That this should happen in 2008 is a disgrace. The Minister for happiness, happy children, happy parents and happy teachers, wrote two years ago saying building would begin with immediate effect, just before the general election.
Deputy Johnny Brady: Deputy Kenny is not happy.
Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: Deputy Brady was not happy before this either.
Deputy Enda Kenny: Ten years ago action was promised and two years ago it was promised with immediate effect. This is a commentary on our public services. The Minister of State may smile all he likes but the fact remains that 300 people per day lie on hospital trolleys, wards are being closed in Tallaght and at James Connolly Hospital and services are being stripped away in Monaghan and Navan and not being replaced. I raised a question on Leopardstown Park Hospital only two or three weeks ago but the Taoiseach did not get back to me yet. Yesterday Deputy Shatter pointed out that respite care beds will be withdrawn from the hospital from May, June and July and this is another disgraceful situation. I was handed a letter from a school in Wicklow today.
An Ceann Comhairle: Can Deputy Kenny ask his question?
Deputy Enda Kenny: I will ask it now. That school in Wicklow has postponed referrals of children between 16 and 18 years of age with special needs because there are 500 on the waiting list. 729 Leaders’ 23 April 2008. Questions
[Deputy Enda Kenny.]
The Taoiseach recently said that his greatest regret from his time in office was the failure to build the national sports campus. I ask the Taoiseach, on this special morning, to revise that assessment and admit that his greatest regret from times of economic boom is his failure to use his authority to develop a health system that provides proper care and attention for young, old and middle-aged patients and an education system that provides a platform, suitable for 2008, that would allow our children to grow in confidence and compete in the big challenges they face in the years ahead. They should not, in 2008, have to attend classes in a converted toilet, as in Glenville national school.
The Taoiseach: When I took over as Taoiseach ten projects per year were dealt with under the schools building programme, on average, and that was the contribution to capital projects. We now spend \4.5 billion under the national development plan investing in school buildings, refurbishing existing schools and providing new ones in developing areas. We have done this every year for the past seven or eight years and, between roofs, windows and so on, 1,500 projects are being undertaken. I do not know why the school mentioned did not partake in any of the summer works projects or get a position on the capital programme because I do not know every one of the 4,500 school projects. I do know the investment we are putting in and I know the range of projects, which includes the refurbishment of buildings and the construction of new buildings. Thousands of minor works have been completed in schools in recent years, as have many large projects. Construction work this year, when completed, is expected to provide permanent accommodation for 20,000 pupils. When I took over as Taoiseach that figure stood at a few hundred pupils per year. Improved forward planning has been put in place and there is greater co-operation between the Department of Education and Science and local authorities, which can be seen in the publication of area development plans. In the primary sector we have increased funding to disadvantaged areas significantly and have invested \800 million and thousands of teaching posts in tackling disadvantage at all levels. This includes pre-school education, school meals, books, smaller classes, home-school links, special literacy and numeracy programmes, home- work clubs and third level access programmes, practically none of which existed a decade ago. My colleagues and I are proud of this.
Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: And everything is grand.
The Taoiseach: Regarding Leopardstown Park Hospital, there is capital funding in this area and I have raised the issue that the Deputy brought up. This is not the only matter on the list admittedly — there are a number hospitals in the programme — but a few hundred million euro per year is being put into the development of such hospitals. The Deputy mentioned waiting lists and other areas. The other day I reviewed the enormous increase in throughput of outpatients and inpatients in the accident and emergency departments in our hospitals. There are hundreds of thousands more visits than there were three years ago and this is linked to an increase in population.
Deputy Bernard Allen: Not too many people are going into the accident and emergency department in Cork because it is closed.
The Taoiseach: There is a new hospital in Cork with a new accident and emergency depart- ment. The Deputy should try to assist in dealing with staffing levels there because the matter would be simplified if excessively high staff levels were not sought. 730 Leaders’ 23 April 2008. Questions
Deputy Enda Kenny: Plus c¸a change, plus c’est la meˆme chose. The Minister for happiness has abandoned the summer works scheme.
An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Kenny, her title is the Minister for Education and Science.
Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: It is the same person.
Deputy Enda Kenny: In thousands of cases arrangements have been made for building works to go ahead but they have not proceeded. Deputy Hayes exposed the complete abdication of responsibility for special needs and autism by the Minister for Education and Science. The other day Deputy Quinn, in a devastating contribution, showed how the Minister for Education and Science could not answer how many prefabricated school buildings there are in 2008. Children having to go to school in converted toilets is not good enough. The Minister for Health and Children, sitting beside the Taoiseach, is presiding over an absolute crisis in the health service which gets worse day by day. Maybe the Taoiseach is getting out in time. I do not know the full details of what will happen in the next three months. In this final bout of Leaders’ Questions with the Taoiseach, maybe he has regrets and things he wants to say. When he looks back at the unprecedented economic boom we have had, does he regret setting up the Health Service Executive in the way it was? As a person with empathy and compassion for people, I know the Taoiseach did not want to see how the executive has turned out. The way the executive was set up by the Taoiseach, the Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance — who has turned a \4 billion Exchequer surplus into a \6 billion deficit — and the Minister for Health and Children, it was supposed to be the be-all and end-all of health reform and service delivery. Does the Taoiseach regret the manner in which it was set up? I know he has commented on other matters that, from his point of view, were not appropriate. Does he believe appointing a chief executive, a team and then amalgamating all the health boards was the way to go about this? Had he an opportunity, would he change that direction and base it on a different structure in the interest of patient care and safety and service delivery?
The Taoiseach: Deputy Kenny will recall that some of his predecessors — admittedly not him at the time — and Members from my side pressed for the establishment of a unified health system. When the health strategy went through the House in 2001, there was unanimous agreement that the old health board system set up in the early 1970s under the Health Act was not adequate to deal with the diverse demands of primary care and community health services or to control 53 acute hospitals with 13,000 beds. The health board system had wide ranges of grades for personnel and different working practices.
Deputy Denis Naughten: Nothing has changed.
The Taoiseach: It was believed a unified system was the right way to proceed. Incidentally, several other countries in Europe are introducing unified systems of health care. Deputy Kenny asked if there are difficulties with modernising, integrating and introducing standard practices to an old system that has been there in one form or another since the foundation of the State. It is a mammoth task. Deputy Kenny and all Members must acknowl- edge the hospital throughput, the capital programme for hospitals and the integration of hospital services. When I started as Taoiseach, the big issue on Question Time was cardiovascular services with large waiting lists for treatment of up to four years. 731 Leaders’ 23 April 2008. Questions
Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: The Taoiseach should face reality.
The Taoiseach: The reality is that people in the past ten years are living four years longer because we have a good health service.
Deputy Seymour Crawford: I suppose the Taoiseach is responsible for that.
The Taoiseach: The fact that we have eliminated the cardiovascular surgery waiting lists——
Deputy Paul Kehoe: Tell that to the cancer patients.
The Taoiseach: We have eliminated the cardiothoracic surgery lists.
Deputy Paul Kehoe: Go tell that to their families.
The Taoiseach: Our survival rates in all cancer treatments are far better than even five years ago. We have built the health services up with 130,000 people working in them. While there are administrative areas we have to deal with, the health services for the Irish people are better than ever.
Deputy Paul Kehoe: Go talk to the families of cancer patients.
Deputy Billy Kelleher: What has Deputy Kenny done in the past 11 years?
Deputy Enda Kenny: What about Glenville national school?
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I am conscious that it falls to me to ask the last question the Taoiseach will reply to as Taoiseach in this House.
Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: Avoid more like.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I have been thinking of something easy that I could ask him this morning. I have settled on a matter he has been asked on before on 25 April 2007, almost 12 months to the day. He got quite upset then, apologising to the people of Meath because they would not be able to vote electronically in the upcoming general election. Instead, they would have to use the peann luaidhe.
Deputy Johnny Brady: It did not matter in the election, did it?
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: After the events of last Sunday in Parnell Park——
A Deputy: Does the Deputy expect him to apologise for that?
(Interruptions).
An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Gilmore without interruption.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: After last Sunday’s events, I would not expect the Taoiseach to be apologising to Meath people this morning.
(Interruptions).
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I heard him yesterday encouraging his successor to get a new Government jet. As he is tidying up his affairs, will he decide what should be done with the electronic voting machines? 732 Leaders’ 23 April 2008. Questions
Deputy Paul Kehoe: Where is the Minister for Transport, Deputy Noel Dempsey?
Deputy Fergus O’Dowd: He can stand on them as his record.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: A couple of thousand clapped-out voting machines that cannot and will not be used is a terrible legacy for the Taoiseach to leave the people. In the couple of working days he has left in office, will he take out the peann luaidhe and draw a line under the electronic voting machines?
Deputy P. J. Sheehan: Consign them to Hammond Lane.
Deputy Dinny McGinley: We could send them to Zimbabwe.
Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: Send them to the constituency of the Minister for the Envir- onment, Heritage and Local Government.
Deputy Johnny Brady: The Deputies will find this is more complicated.
The Taoiseach: I thought I was going to be asked about Parnell Park for which I have no responsibility. To be honest — and I have to be totally honest——--
(Interruptions).
Deputy Denis Naughten: For the first time ever.
The Taoiseach: Since it is my last question as Taoiseach, it is only fair I should give Deputy Gilmore my best answer and best advice. My best advice is that since he could not beat me with the peann luaidhe, he should go to the old machines because he would have a far better chance with them.
(Interruptions).
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I have to remind the Taoiseach that on the day I was elected leader of my party he also said he saw out many of my predecessors. I think the peann luaidhe could serve me well for a long time to come yet. There is a serious point to this. These machines cost \60 million——
Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: It costs \700,000 just to store them.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: ——which I am sure the Taoiseach will acknowledge could have been better spent. It is two years since the Commission on Electronic Voting reported. It not only confirmed what those of us who had been critical of the particular system had said for a long time but added to it. None of the Taoiseach’s Ministers want to touch this. Every time the line Minister, Deputy Gormley, or his predecessors are asked about it, they run a mile. At some stage it will take a Minister to decide the inevitable on what we all know — these machines will not be used. Continuing to store them is adding more cost to the waste already incurred in the project. Somebody must decide to call it a day and that they will never be used. As the Taoiseach has a window for several weeks, he might unburden his ministerial colleagues with such a decision and write them off.
Deputy Bernard Allen: The Taoiseach might go into the scrap business. 733 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach
The Taoiseach: The technology report showed it requires the development of new software for these machines to have the confidence of the House and the public. It is technically not difficult to do this. It means an enhancement of the machines and development of the software they use. All of the advice and reports state that this is possible to do. My view is that we are best doing this in the context of the electoral commission that will take over all of the responsibilities. Any attempt to do it another way will not find favour in this House. If it does not find favour in this House, we will be back in controversy. It is a fact that — I would urge the House in this respect — practically every place in the world, with very few exceptions from the great democracies to the states of India to the poor of the world, is using technology systems.
Deputy Bernard J. Durkan: That is not true. They failed in Pennsylvania all day yesterday.
Deputy Tom Sheahan: The Government should send them to Mugabe. He might get the result he wants.
The Taoiseach: Zimbabwe does not have it.
(Interruptions).
An Ceann Comhairle: The Taoiseach without interruption.
A Deputy: Deputy Durkan is not the Labour Party’s leader.
The Taoiseach: Within the electoral commission and with the enhancement that has been identified in the software development, we should get on with it. It is not satisfactory as we go into the next decade that we are not using technology for electoral systems. We are using an old system that might be enjoyable, but it is a way of the past. As a country, we should be very proud of what we have achieved. We are a service country — 4% of the entire world’s global services originate in this country. This is a huge achievement for the Irish economy. In our best areas — pharmaceutical, medical and information and communication technology — we should be seen to lead.
Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: The Government has squandered money.
The Taoiseach: It is an affront to ourselves that, at a time when, for about ten years in a row, we have been either first or second in the export of software development globally, we are still using paper and pens.
Deputy Pa´draic McCormack: The Government is wasting money.
Deputy Bernard Allen: They are Dutch machines.
The Taoiseach: It is far from the image of what we have built in this country. We should keep moving forward. I know the House will do that in the immediate future.
Deputies: Hear, hear.
Tributes to the Taoiseach. An Ceann Comhairle: Anois, ra´itis in o´ mo´ s don Taoiseach. Now, statements of tribute to the Taoiseach. Iarraim ar cheannaire Fhine Gael, an Teachta E´ anna O´ Cionnaith, a ra´iteas a dhe´anamh. 734 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach
Deputy Enda Kenny: When it comes to paying tribute to a man, too often we articulate a list of his achievements. I grant that it is one way to measure a man — it piles up the objectives reached, goals attained and targets hit — but it is also a way to lose sight of the essence of a man by focusing on the little round of deeds and days that make up his curriculum vitae. The essence of a man is to be found not in his notched-up achievements, but in the mosaic of traits that make him what he is, traits that, in their totality, are as unique to that man as his finger- prints and traits that, in a politician, evoke a response from the people which is as unique as the man himself. A key piece of the mosaic making up the man that is Bertie Ahern is his unequalled zest for people. For him, people were never an interruption to his main task — they were the main task. They were the focus, the purpose and the point of his political life. There was never a pretence about it. He enjoyed every human contact, whether it was a hand fleetingly grasped on a canvass, an assistant murmuring something before a meeting or an elderly constituent confiding a problem. To each he gave his concentrated, infinitely respectful attention. From each, he drew the meaning of his political life. For them, to be listened to by the man was to feel valued and important. He heard, absorbed, responded, remembered and attended to those individuals. Nor was he a man who later peddled stories about the people who confided in him for help. He has never been that kind of politician. In fact, that is one of the traits of Bertie Ahern that is little noticed. Nobody ever says that he tells a great story about this, that or the other, that his party piece is this or that or that he is the life and soul of every party. He is popular not because he draws attention to himself by being entertaining, anecdotal or great craic, but because he draws attention away from himself. He is always and everywhere focused on others. He is an absorber of other people’s hopes, dreams and problems. He is a silent supportive listener, rather than the life and soul of the party. He is a mirror of other people’s needs. I have described you, Taoiseach, as the ultimate paradox — a sociable loner. I can accurately suggest that you are at home in a crowd, but at one with your garden. I have watched you in the House since we both entered it many years ago and I have known few who could come near you in terms of diligence to your job. The problems entrusted to you by your constituents and others in recent times would be different from the problems whispered to you and written down by you on scraps of paper in 1977 when you first entered the House. However, the discipline of detail and the follow-up devoted to them have not changed in the decades since your career began. The novelist Thomas Mann observed: “A man lives not only in his personal life, as an individual, but also, consciously or unconsciously, the life of his epoch and his contemporaries.” This is undoubtedly true of the Taoiseach. In a time of constant change and serious challenge, one thing about you that cannot be taken from you is the love for your family and your daughters in particular. I recall from the first time they appeared in Leinster House as school- girls when the Taoiseach was the Minister for Finance how he displayed this admirable quality. Your love and feeling for your family was palpable. I have no doubt that Rocco and Jay will not become the subject of much more attention. They will not mind who “Grandda” was or is. I give the Taoiseach full credit for his involvement in chairing the European Council in Dublin during our Presidency. It was a wonderful outcome and in keeping with your qualities as a negotiator. I want to give him full credit for the part he played as Taoiseach and his persistence, diligence and commitment in bringing to conclusion the Good Friday Agreement, which is of such importance as a follow-through to all leaders in the parts they played, and in providing an opportunity for the people of this island to live in peace and to grow in confidence and prosperity as we face the challenges ahead. 735 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach
[Deputy Enda Kenny.]
It is tough to relinquish power, and particularly tragic in some cases, for people who love either protocol or vanity and who suffer from pride. The Taoiseach has none of these problems. I do not believe you have any personal vanity. Fame, good or bad coverage or opinion polls have all mattered to you only in terms of what you wanted to do. You have done the State some exemplary service. I do not want to stand here and be seen to be discordant or hypocritical, but the Taoiseach knows my stated opinions on other subjects that are not a matter for discussion today. I have made my point in this regard clearly. At a conference on victims’ rights I attended with Deputy Shatter recently, a speaker stated that people may forget what one says or does, but they will never forget how one makes them feel. The Taoiseach should be proud of this because a charity group remarked to me on his willingness to preside over any involvement it had in its forum. The woman in question stated that Bertie will probably be more helpful to her group when he is no longer in office because he would never abandon it. In its own way, this little sentence demonstrates how people were positively affected by his presence as Taoiseach. In many ways, it probably is one of his more important and admirable traits. I have two stories, the first of which is of connection and understanding. A number of years ago, I saw the Taoiseach on a social occasion with a man who clearly was very much under the weather and who had a face as bright as the jacket being worn by the minister 11 o’clock for happiness. He was explaining his case vociferously into the Taoiseach’s ear, while spitting words and saliva at the same time. You caught my eye and raised your eyes up to heaven as if to say: “We are in this together.” I am unsure whether the Taoiseach sorted out the man’s problem. When people ask me whether I ever was jealous of Bertie Ahern, I reply that I never was. However, I suffered from envy on the odd occasion, one of which took place at Croke Park when Mayo played Dublin. The Taoiseach went onto the pitch and the band played the Taoiseach’s salute. One cannot attend an occasion like that without the hairs tingling at the back of one’s neck. I believe I have told you this previously. I have known you since 1977 and we participated on many sporting occasions on behalf of the Oireachtas and so on. Thomas Jefferson said: “I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend” and I say this to you. In conclusion, ta´ su´ il agam go n-e´ireoidh go maith leat agus go mbeidh saol sona agat as seo amach. Go gcumhdaı´ Dia thu´ agus na´r laga Dia do la´mh riamh.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: It is a little unusual to be paying official tributes of this kind to a retiring Taoiseach two weeks before the date of his official retirement. Two weeks is an awfully long time in politics, particularly in the case of this man. Give him two weeks and one would never know what he might pull out of the hat. Your final day in this House as Taoiseach truly marks the end of a remarkable era in Irish politics. When you were elected to the office of Taoiseach on June 26 1997, very few of our friends in the Press Gallery or on this side of the House believed you would hold that office for almost 11 years. However, you are an extraordinary politician whose work rate is 24-7. Few, if any, have so seamlessly combined the duties of statesman with service and availability to constituents. The Taoiseach has been difficult to oppose because of his consensual ability to embrace and to absorb and criticism and to make it appear his own. It is not in any way to underestimate your subsequent achievements to state you were in many respects a lucky Taoiseach who came to office at a time of remarkable opportunity. As the outgoing Taoiseach said following your election on that day in 1997: 736 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach
The economic conditions in which this new Government will enter office in a few hours are exceptional in historic terms. Never before have we seen such rapid growth in employ- ment. Never before have mortgage and interest rates been at such a low level. The Govern- ment also comes into office at a time when the foundations have been laid for major moves towards a settlement in Northern Ireland.
The Taoiseach enjoyed office during a time of rapid and sustained economic growth, conditions that would have been the envy of any of his ten predecessors who had the honour to lead an independent Irish Government. You did many positive things in your time in office that will remain as a monument to you. There was a great growth in personal wealth, for some at least. There was a huge increase in the number of people in employment. You showed a great commitment to the social partnership process and delivered a period of almost unprecedented industrial peace. While there were other things we believe you could and should have done, that analysis can be left for another day. Perhaps the achievement the Taoiseach can be most proud of is his work in regard to Northern Ireland. As the outgoing Taoiseach noted in 1997, the foundations had been laid for major moves towards a settlement in Northern Ireland. However, everyone knows of the enor- mous effort and commitment that the Taoiseach and Prime Minister Blair put into the efforts to secure a permanent peace and political stability on this island. Your patience and ability as a negotiator and conciliator were never more needed than in that process. I am sure that when the Good Friday Agreement was signed ten years ago this month, you had hoped that you were approaching the end of the road and could little have appreciated the time and effort that would still be required to bring the process to finality. The Irish people, North and South of the Border, and indeed the British people, owe you an enormous debt of gratitude for your work in helping to create the political institutions that at last appear to be taking firm root and finally freeing the people of this island from the scourge of politically motivated violence. The Taoiseach’s role in this process alone would guarantee his place in Irish history. I also wish to pay tribute to his work on the European stage as I am familiar with his commitment to the European project. I know, from my own contacts though the Party of European Socialists, how well you are regarded for your work in Europe by politicians of all political hues. It is the duty of Opposition parties to hold the Taoiseach and the Government of the day to account. It was our duty and obligation to criticise and challenge actions of his Government and to question at times his actions, including the political implications of issues that emerged at the Mahon tribunal. You have proven to be a difficult opponent for Members on this side of the House. Your knowledge and understanding of the range of issues that are thrown at you on a daily basis from this side of the House have been remarkable. You have rarely lost your cool, despite the confrontational and adversarial nature of many exchanges in this House. I also want to put on record that, like my predecessors, I have always found you to be exception- ally courteous in any of our private dealings. You have had a remarkable record. You are the second longest serving Taoiseach in the history of the State, with a string of three successive election victories under your belt. You are a Taoiseach who presided over Government though unprecedented economic growth, who played a central role in bringing peace to Northern Ireland and who is a highly regarded player on the European stage. The Taoiseach, his family and his party can be justifiably proud of his achievements. You are retiring from the position of Taoiseach at a relatively young age. I hope you will enjoy the honour bestowed on you in being invited to address a joint session of the United States Con- gress. I wish him well in his retirement and fulfilment in whatever role he may now decide to fill. 737 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): On my behalf and that of my party, I wish to pay personal tribute to the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, as he prepares to step down from his office. It is personal because I wish to recount some simple recollections. While the Taoiseach may not remember some of them, I first saw him in the Phoenix Park at a road bowling event some time in the early 1980s. A tribe from Armagh had come down, together with a tribe from Cork and they went around the Phoenix Park, which was rather unexpected and worth seeing. The Taoiseach was there, bowling, and adding to the occasion. Your hair had not seen a comb for a month and your anorak — to use the correct technical term — was askew. However, there was a glint in your eye. A man was standing 100 yards in front of you who, in proper west Cork west of the road fashion, was saying “Knock me down between my two stockinged feet”. The Taoiseach was there with a glint in his eye that was pure west Cork, where his people came from. This is an image I remember. I encountered the Ahern brothers, Noel and Maurice, on Dublin City Council and it was interesting to hear you talking about your days on that city council recently. You spoke of the excitement that often would attend to that chamber in the presence of the media and the public, who were fascinated by the latest developments and decisions. Some of the disagreements we had in respect of views on planning or transport may have been maddening. However, it must be recognised that in any chamber, it is the commitment to one’s constituents that must be recognised, regardless of one’s political persuasion. The Taoiseach has shown such commitment over those 30 years, beginning with, and presumably learned, during that time on Dublin City Council. That is something he has consistently retained. I attended an event in the National Gallery at which he gave a speech on the political book being launched. He started his speech by citing every single councillor in the room, a trick with which I was very impressed. He had someone check who was present and he mentioned each of them. He has acted similarly in most of the events he attended as Taoiseach over the past 11 years and the Irish people have noticed and liked that willingness to engage. This practice gives rise to difficulties for Opposition Deputies. I once attended an event with the Taoiseach to launch a sponsorship drive at the Kilmacud Crokes and he approached me afterwards in the way that journalists have recorded, put his hand on my elbow and asked: “How is the hardwork- ing man?” I was thrown by that. I thought to myself, the Taoiseach thinks I am a hardworking man. That is a hell of a trick. When I sat on the bench on which Deputy Durkan currently sits, I tried to catch the Taoiseach out in questions or on the Order of Business. It was not easy to do so under the former Ceann Comhairle but we did our best. Afterwards, I would review the detail of every word that was uttered and think, God damn it, he had the details. That characterised his work as Taoiseach and, I am sure, as Minister. He is a hardworking politician and he uses that hard work to get to grips with the details. I wish to characterise the Taoiseach’s clearest and main legacy. I speak as a member of a party which prides itself on having consensus politics as our foundation and roots. He was good at consensus politics and skilful in applying them to the historic issue we faced on this island in terms of sovereignty. He applied consensus politics to Europe like no other European poli- tician has managed to do. Nobody else has had the same success in pulling people together. I have seen him in action during the 11 months I have been in government and it is interesting to see how he works. Sometimes an issue comes to a head and we do not agree on it or think it will work. He would approach it, let it back out and give it some time before returning to it so that people have the chance to work through words and see if a consensus decision can be found. That significant legacy will be left behind him. 738 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach
He was also fortunate to be Taoiseach for 11 remarkable years of prosperity and success unlike anything we experienced in the past. There is a collective sense in this country that we want to hold on to that good fortune and a fear that if the Taoiseach leaves us, some of the fortune will also depart. I hope he will leave it behind. He should touch his wooden desk as he departs and leave that good fortune for the Irish people. In whatever new role he takes on, everyone here wishes him good fortune in deploying his hardworking, consensual and people skills.
Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: Ba mhaith liom mo dea-ghuı´ pearsanta a chur chun an Taoiseach agus e´ ag e´irı´ as oifig. Is le´ir go bhfuil moladh tuillte aige as ucht a ndearna se´ chun pro´ ise´as na sı´ocha´na a chur chun cinn agus chun Comhaontu´ Aoine an Che´asta a chur le che´ile. Bhı´ se´ i measc siu´ d a bhı´ chun tosaigh ag cruthu´ re´ nua sı´ocha´na sa tı´r seo. Nı´l an obair sin thart go fo´ ill. I join in the personal good wishes to the Taoiseach as he prepares to participate in his last session of Taoiseach’s questions in the Da´il. I have been participating in Taoiseach’s questions since my election in 1997 and I commend the Taoiseach on his courtesy which was consistent over the years. His clarity was a different matter, but if we crossed swords on many occasions it was never personalised and so it shall be today. The outgoing Taoiseach’s contribution to the development of the Irish peace process was very significant and deserves full acknowledgement. He built on the work of his predecessor, Albert Reynolds, and played a key role in the negotiation of the Good Friday Agreement. We have a consolidated peace process and a developing all-Ireland political process. That will require continued commitment from all of us and renewed energy from the Taoiseach’s suc- cessor, the Ta´naiste, Deputy Brian Cowen. I say a sincere “well done” on the Taoiseach’s role in that historic process, which alone guarantees his place in the history of our country. I do not want to spoil the bonhomie this morning, but I cannot participate in a back-clapping exercise in isolation of the consideration of the record of Governments led by the Taoiseach over the past 11 years. I repeatedly called on him to resign primarily because of the disastrous state of our health services over which he has presided. Despite all the successes that are rightfully being attributed to the Taoiseach this morning, that failure has overshadowed his role as Head of Government for over a decade. He and the Government have failed completely to deliver an equitable, efficient and truly reformed public health service. I listened to the Taoiseach’s reply yesterday to the question put by Deputy Kenny on Leaders Questions and I wondered how he had become so disconnected from the reality faced by so many of our citizens today, how he had turned his back on the people of Monaghan and elsewhere and had never visited our beleaguered hospital or shown an iota of care for the plight of those who have depended on its services. These are serious matters. This week, sadly, the two coincide, as the clear indication of the closure of our hospital as an acute facility has been signalled to take place before the end of this year. We see the results all around us and as the Taoiseach leaves office, patients in the public health service are again suffering from HSE cutbacks that hurt the old, the sick and the dis- abled. Our local hospital, like so many in the network, is being devastated. Pharmacists are pulling out of state medicine schemes and the public health system is being allowed to crumble while the Government promotes the private for profit health business. Tomorrow morning the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, will officially open a public health con- ference with participants paying over \500 per head to attend. On 24 April 1916, an important date of which I know the Taoiseach is well aware, the Proclamation of Independence was declared. On 24 April 2008 the privatisation agenda is being furthered. 739 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach
[Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in.]
The stepping down of Deputy Bertie Ahern as Taoiseach will mean little if it does not prompt a new direction in Government policy. That would require a beginning to the delivery of a truly equitable health service, prioritising education and other public services and aban- doning the privatisation agenda. The departure of the Minister for Health and Children with the Taoiseach would help, but of itself it not would be enough. What we need is a change in policy. The departure of the outgoing Taoiseach is undoubtedly the end of an era in terms of politi- cal personalities. In his own terms and those of his party, he was extremely successful — I acknowledge he was so on several fronts — but only a fundamental realignment in Irish politics, ending the domination of conservative influences and parties, can bring about real change. Having said that — this is not the first time I have put these views on the record here — I again make the point that personally I hold the Taoiseach in high esteem and I take the opportunity to wish him peace and contentment for all the years before him.
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): It is a great pleasure for me to join other party leaders in paying tribute to the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, as he stands down. I am very conscious of the comment made by Deputy Gilmore that two weeks in the life of this Taoiseach is a long time. I know he goes to America next week and there is a presidential election there.
Deputy Denis Naughten: They are looking for a compromise candidate.
Deputy Mary Harney: You never know what he might pull out of the hat, to use your own phrase. I am the only leader in this House who in the past 11 years has not been in a position to put questions to the Taoiseach from the Opposition benches, as did the former Deputy John Bruton, Deputy Noonan, former Deputy Spring, Deputy Rabbitte, Deputy O´ Caola´in, the Minister, Deputy Gormley, the Minister of State, Deputy Sargent, and even former Deputy Joe Higgins. It is an unusual position to be in. Over those years, many people have tried to capture Bertie Ahern. Joe Higgins said that asking him questions was like playing handball against a haystack. The Minister, Deputy Gormley, spoke about Planet Bertie, and used terms like that to try to capture him. I have even heard of industrial coating being used — the Teflon Taoiseach — and the sports writer in The Irish Times spoke of him in terms of religion — the Zen of Bertie. People have spoken of your extraordinary political skills but I think the key to your successes are your personal qualities. There are many here who would say nobody really knows Bertie Ahern but one thing I know from my experience over the past 11 years is that nothing is too unimportant for you. You use your strengths to concentrate on the issues that matter and to make the impossible a reality. You have embraced some impossible tasks and made them happen, not least the Northern Ireland peace process. When many others would have lost patience because endless patience was required, you never gave up. Although there were many involved in the success that is now the peace in Northern Ireland, you were the prime architect. I know of no political leader on this island or elsewhere who contributed so much to the peace of their own people than you did. It has to be a matter of particular pride for you, as you stand down from office, to know that in your own time and your own land, you were the prime architect of peace after what we endured for so long.
Deputies: Hear, hear. 740 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach
Deputy Mary Harney: In 1997 when we went into Government, most people did not give us a chance. The previous experience of Fianna Fa´il in coalitions was that they ended prematurely. Not only was it a coalition Government, it was a minority coalition. It survived because of your skills. Although you are the leader of the largest party on this island, you understood the importance of accommodating small parties and understanding their requirements. You often seemed to have that impossible 360° vision whereby you could see the whole picture and knew what mattered. That is why you were elected Taoiseach on three successive occasions and are the only Taoiseach to have been re-elected while heading a coalition Government. Others have said you were difficult to oppose. I can say you were impossible to have a row with. Democratic politics is about competing ideas and from time to time difficulties arise. One thing you engendered in the Government was the importance of stability. We set out in 1997 to provide this country with stable government — not perfect government but, certainly, good government. As you leave office, this country is much better placed than it was 11 years ago — of that there can be no doubt. It is not perfect but it is an awful lot better — we can use any yardstick we wish, whether it is unemployment, living standards, peace, educational attain- ment or, indeed, health. When Ireland joined the EU, our life expectancy was two years less than the EU average. Today, a child born in Ireland will live longer than a child born in the Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, Belgium or the UK because of better health treatment — that is a fact. It is not perfect. The task is to focus on the imperfections, put them right and not give up. It has been said by others how calm you always seem to be — I can confirm this to be my experience. Deputy Kenny referred to parties, some of which I attended. The Taoiseach was usually the first person to leave the parties to go back to work. When he told us of his intention to stand down, I told him I hope he gets more time to spend with his family and friends, and gets a life for himself. I know of nobody who has put in the commitment you have over the past 11 years. I would frequently get calls from the Taoiseach at 5 a.m. or 6 a.m. on a Sunday, or very late on a Saturday night. He never seemed to take the normal time to sleep that most of us do. I know the Taoiseach’s family matter a lot to him. A sign of how long he has been in office is that when we first met his daughters, they were just tiny little girls. When he became Taoiseach they were students and now they both have extraordinarily successful careers. I am delighted for him. I know how proud he is of them. He has very few photographs in his office, but he has one of them. I have learned over the past 11 years that what may appear small things matter to the Taoiseach. Each year as Taoiseach, he made sure he contacted every member of the Govern- ment on Christmas Eve. I have been called out of butcher’s shops and other places to be told the Taoiseach was on the telephone and wanted to talk to me. If he got to a family member first, he had a long conversation with them. When everybody else was involved in the rush of Christmas, the Taoiseach found time to contact his colleagues. I know how much personal relationships mean to people. If there were illnesses in families, the Taoiseach always seemed to find time to inquire and be genuinely interested. That is a unique quality. He has been criticised for shaking too many hands but the people of Ireland genuinely found in the Taoiseach somebody who was one of their own, who did not get too big for his boots and did not lose the run of himself with high office. That is a terrific strength. Sometimes the trappings of office can remove some of us from the reality of everyday life. That certainly never happened to the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern. I want to pay him a genuine tribute, personally and politically. It has been a pleasure to work with him as a member of his Government, as Ta´naiste in particular and as leader of a 741 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach
[Deputy Mary Harney.] small party. I know for a fact my party would not have been in Government for such a long period if it was not for the skills that he in particular displayed, whether with the Independents supporting the Government or, in the current case, with a three-party Government. Who here would have thought in 1997 that there would be a coalition Government involving the parties currently in Government? You are the only socialist I could say so many nice things about. The former Minister for Finance said there was only one other socialist in the Da´il but he has not told me yet who is that other person — perhaps he has told the Taoiseach. I genuinely wish you well. You are being honoured in the United States next week. You are the fifth person to be honoured in the United States and the British Parliament and the only person to have been so honoured in a single calendar year. You are being honoured not necessarily because of your personal qualit- ies, although they are the key to your political success, but because of your extraordinary political achievements for the people of this country and this island. I thank you very much and wish you everything you wish for yourself.
The Ta´naiste: Ar no´ s na cainteoirı´ eile, ba mhaith liom fı´or-buı´ochas a ghabha´il leis an Taoiseach as ucht an sa´r-obair ata´ de´anta aige mar Taoiseach e´ifeachtach den che´ad scoth. Ta´ cu´ rsaı´ eacnamaı´ochta, so´ isialta agus polaitı´ochta na tı´re seo an-threa´n de bharr an cheannaire- acht a thaispea´in se´ le linn na 11 bliain ina raibh se´ i gcumhacht mar cheannaire an Rialtais. I join with previous speakers in acknowledging the tremendous achievements of Deputy Bertie Ahern as our Taoiseach and as a member and leader of our party. I want to thank him on behalf of all of the thousands of activists and hundreds of thousands of supporters of our party, who have reposed in him their constant confidence in the management of our national affairs, and who are deeply appreciative, as has been said by other speakers, of the very genuine attributes he brought to the office, which were very much in synch with the mood of the times. He is without question the consummate politician of his era in this country. Many talented politicians who have faced him and confronted him have come to know that and have been gracious enough to acknowledge it, while I also acknowledge their contribution in the role they played. It is important on occasions such as this to recognise that for all the adversarial and some- times phoney confrontation that takes place in this House, there are times when we can rise to the occasion and leave partisan politics outside it, but the great genius of the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern’s politics and methodology has been his ability to extend his appeal beyond party. We know from our electoral success that he has been a tremendous strategist. Colleagues like myself and others who have worked closely with him on those campaigns would be the first to acknowledge that that sense of strategy, not regularly articulated and often denigrated to the point of its non-existence by some who commentate on our public affairs simply because he does not articulate it, is a facet of his personality that is grounded in his belief that we are here to solve problems and represent the people. At times we do not reach those standards, despite the best of our ability — all of us have suffered from that — but that is the motivation behind what we do here. That is the reason there are politicians in this House today who represent the people, because they have that democratic mandate. While from time to time what goes on here, which is the public conduct of our public affairs, may be amenable to be characterised as a circus, it is important work and as Taoiseach and leader of this country, both domestically and abroad, Deputy Bertie Ahern has always, in my knowledge of him — it has been a fairly intimate knowledge of how he has conducted his business — devoted himself, with a great seriousness of purpose, to that task because of its importance in the democratic life of the country. He has displayed, in a way that 742 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach others strive to do, although perhaps not as successfully, that it is possible to be a man of the people in discharging the duties of this high office of Taoiseach.That ability to identify and empathise with the people is a connection and a requirement in our democratic life that stands to its strength and robustness even when it is often ridiculed or denigrated, sometimes with justification but sometimes with an exaggerated sense of importance. The Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, is someone with whom I have worked very closely throughout my political career. I stated here in one of the heated debates recently about his fitness and suitability for office, about which I never had a question, that loyalty is a political virtue. It is not the sole political virtue but it is one. I am convinced that unless that trait is displayed in times of difficulty as well as in good times, the ability for us as a Government or as a party to collectively work together is put at risk because there will be good and bad times in politics. There will be ups and downs. I am sure there will be, from the mass media outlets we contend with as part of our mass mediated world, opinion polls on a weekly basis. There will be shifts and trends and much significance attached to many issues, but as politicians we have a duty to maintain our focus on what is important, which is having colleagues that will work with and stand by one. What is important is that one can come into this House and be accountable, and rightly so, in the interests of the checks and balances that make for the democratic life of this country of which we should all be proud. It is also important that one pursues one’s vision and clarity of purpose regardless of the winds and, on occasion, the gales that blow into one’s face. When the career of the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, is trawled over and detailed, there are achievements which can never and will never be taken away from him because of the type of man he is and because he regarded it as a genuine privilege to be Taoiseach of this country and leader of this party. That love and affection for party and country has been reciprocated in full measure by people and membership. When we talked, as the largest party, I never suggested that the nation and the party are one and the same thing. That would be an absurd and foolish comment to make but I believe, if I may introduce a partisan point, that representing the nation at its best is something that has given Fianna Fa´il the continuous support of the people to put us in government. While I will always respect Deputy O´ Caola´in’s views in terms of asking that we resign or move aside, I often have to remind some people that it is the democratic mandate of the people that has us on this side of the House——
Deputies: Hear, hear.
Deputy Brian Cowen: ——and we accord to those who support us the same respect and weight of vote as I would accord to those who oppose us, although it is not often reciprocated, particularly in one exceptional case this morning.
Deputies: Hear, hear.
Deputy Brian Cowen: Today is not a day for me to engage in self-celebration or self-con- gratulation for this party because we have among us an exceptional political figure of this generation, as has been graciously acknowledged not only domestically but abroad. There have been a few occasions — Deputy Kenny referred to them — when the hair stood on the back of the head because of the sense of achievement and pride one felt in working with someone who achieves great things. I recall the Taoiseach coming home from the Good Friday negotiations, doing that deal, showing that generosity and making the political calls which are the responsibility of politicians, despite the welcome and important advices we receive. Having the real courage to make those 743 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach
[Deputy Brian Cowen.] calls is something I was particularly proud of as I met him when he returned to Dublin Airport from Belfast after those marathon negotiations, which finally resulted in the Good Friday Agreement. I could see that this was a person who was not constrained by the ideas of an outdated ideology but who had a present and future idea of idealism in Ireland in the 21st century and our capacity to rise above the constraints of our history to make our own history. This generation is making its own history rather than being victims of a previous history when mistakes were made. That is the magnitude of the Taoiseach’s achievement today. When we encapsulate and look back on the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern’s role in the establishment of social partnership and what that means, this was a person who did not articu- late in a philosophical way what he believed in or what he was about but who escaped, and helped us escape, from the confrontational 1960s style industrial relations which we imported from a neighbouring island that itself was not competitive with Europe, on the basis that we did not intend to allow the same to happen here again. We understood and advised that the Republic we were trying to build is not simply about dealing with workers and the narrow confines of labour and capital, but that workers are entitled to be involved as stakeholders in the way we devise our social policy, increase participation in education, improve our health services and ensure the generational disadvantage of the past is not replicated because of our ability to sit around the table and provide a real stakeholding for all the constituent partners that make up the social partnership today, and to do it in the most difficult of consequences. Perhaps people now wish to make a virtue out of necessity in hindsight. It was one of the most difficult collective decisions ever taken. Every stakeholder, including the trade union move- ment, employers, Government and farmers, can and should take a bow for their ability to go beyond their constituent interest and recognise that the national interest determined that we had to take certain very difficult decisions. They were shared by Alan Dukes in his leadership of Fine Gael at the time and we were able to proceed along that basis. We will continue to have democratic contests but that occasion should be recognised by everyone in this House. The person beside me was one of the architects, not the sole architect, but we all know the particular chemistry he could create, the leadership he could provide and the bona fides he could establish, uniquely, because of the political skills he has were a key determining factor not only in making the process a success for then, but a real continuous possibility of success for this country as the 2016 ten-year framework agreement provides for us. We are facing those talks now. This has been a lesson for all of us to learn and perhaps he is not the sole teacher. However, he has provided for us in the way he has discharged his responsibilities in that context and in the context of Northern Ireland. I return to the point of the pride I have had in sitting beside him when he acted for this country. I have never spoken about my next memory publicly. I will never forget the final negotiations for the draft constitutional treaty, when 26 other Heads of Government and State, as well as their delegations, stood in applause of the Irish Presidency. They knew in their heart of hearts there was not another politician in the room with the capacity to ensure the deal was done in the coherent way it was.
Deputies: Hear, hear.
Deputy Brian Cowen: That is a matter of pride for all Irish people. I was there on that evening and I recall the pride I had in him, what he had achieved and the privilege it was to work and learn from him. There was much I had to learn. I say this to Bertie Ahern today as he heads to the United States, where a fitting tribute will be paid in another cradle of democracy, the Houses of Congress. The Irish diaspora has had a 744 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach very real historical presence there through the years, from the time we faced catastrophe and cataclysm in our own history 150 years ago. He will go to that place, the cradle of the American democracy, and be feted for what he has done, and not only for the Irish diaspora and those millions of Americans who feel themselves part of Ireland today, as they and their forefathers were in the past. He has given an example — with others, as he will always claim — that even in many forsaken parts of the world, where conflict is a constant, it is possible through politics and constitutionalism to ensure people’s difference and diversity can be accommodated in a co-operative way. This is a way that will provide for Ireland the prospect of being acclaimed throughout many parts of the world in future as a result of our ability to live beyond our history and create our own. Be it in the United States, the European Union, Northern Ireland, this House or any parish, town or village in Ireland, we have seen consistently a standard of statesmanship and political skill which it has been our privilege and pleasure to observe. He has grown and developed too. His potential has been realised and there is more to come, le cu´ namh De´, in whatever task he puts his mind to in future. On behalf of my party, he is a resource we will not easily let go of.
Deputies: Hear, hear.
An Ceann Comhairle: The Taoiseach will be aware there is a long-standing convention that the Ceann Comhairle does not participate in tributes such as this. Let it be said that the fact something is left unsaid does not mean it is also unfelt. I join with all of the party leaders in wishing you, sir, long life, happiness and success. In the immortal words of a Prime Minister from a different jurisdiction in a different context, now is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end, but it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.
The Taoiseach: I thank Deputies for their kind words and their courtesy not just today, but in the past few weeks. I would be grateful if the House might indulge me in a few words and the short acknowledgements I wish to make. I will not make a long speech on policy or any of the events I have been involved with. I will just say a few words of thanks. I am proud to have been elected Taoiseach by this House three times. It has been a great privilege to serve my community and our nation, and I will always be grateful for the oppor- tunity that the House and my constituents have given me. I am always conscious I would not be here if my constituents did not give me the opportunity, like everybody else in the House. I was first elected Taoiseach on 26 June 1997. The cliche´ says a week is a long time in politics, and a few colleagues noted that this morning. I am told that when I leave office on 7 May I will have served 565 weeks as head of Government. It has been both a long journey and a real pleasure to have played my part in bringing this country forward and working with everyone in the House to do this over almost 11 years. As my time comes to an end, I thank all my ministerial colleagues. I am very grateful to all my Cabinet colleagues and my Ministers of State who served with me since 1997. They have soldiered with me, they have sustained me and they have served with loyalty and great skill. I include the Ceann Comhairle in that. I acknowledge the wise and skilful advice I received from the Attorneys General with whom I served, David Byrne, Michael McDowell, Rory Brady and the current Attorney General, Paul Gallagher. They are very important people these days. Through my Ministers, I thank their respective Secretary Generals and departmental staff, who have always provided the Governments I have led with every proper assistance as we endeavoured to do our duty for the people. 745 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach
[The Taoiseach.]
I have the height of respect for this country’s Civil Service and believe they are one of the great cornerstones of our democracy. Over many years, I have found them to be the most impartial, dedicated and talented public service on this Continent. One cannot do this job for a year, never mind 11, without working closely with those people. I have huge admiration for them. In that regard, I also mention the many people who work in our State agencies and semi- State agencies. They have always been most helpful to me in my role as Taoiseach and they too can take great pride in their work for the people. It is often forgotten but they work hard. I thank the secretary to the Government and the Secretary General of my Department, Dermot McCarthy, who encompasses all of the best traditions of the Irish public service. Through him, I thank all of the officials at every level in the Department of Taoiseach. Their professionalism and commitment has been a source of inspiration to me in performing my duties. The Ceann Comhairle will appreciate that when one is in a Department for 11 years, one probably gets to know more about the Department than one should, even more than civil servants would like you to know. I have worked very closely with many of the civil servants and ended up being friends with them, as well as being head of Department. I acknowledge my advisers, past and present, and especially my long-serving and loyal prog- ramme manager, Gerry Hickey, who has been with me since I went to the Department of Finance in 1991. I also thank all those people who worked with me over the years in the Department of Labour and the Department of Finance. I was appointed Minister for Labour on two occasions and Minister for Finance on three occasions. I worked briefly in other Depart- ments also and I thank all the people I worked with. I thank the Oireachtas Press Gallery, who report on proceedings here, for being courteous down through the years. I understand they have a job to do and deadlines to meet. I appreciate their work. A Cheann Comhairle, I wish to express my gratitude to you for many years of friendship. In your elevated position, I commend you on the wise use of your parliamentary skills, honed over years of experience, your impeccable judgment and most of all your decency and fairness. I wish you and the Leas-Cheann Comhairle every success. I will always hold a deep and lasting affection for this House. My respect is rooted in the fact that generations of our people had to fight and struggle to establish a truly representative native Parliament. That sense of respect is further enhanced by the people who serve this House. I have the highest regard for Members on all sides. They work extraordinarily hard to get here and then to remain. They do so because of their concern for others. My long experi- ence of Members is that they give everything and sacrifice a great deal to try to do the best they can for people. The demands placed on them, in every way, are horrendous. Those demands seem to become more onerous each year. Politics is a tough career for officeholders and for those on the front and back benches. There are far easier and more lucrative careers. I think almost every other career is more lucrative. I appreciate and admire Members for all they do. The staff of Leinster House have always treated me with great courtesy and have always been ready to provide assistance. I particularly wish to acknowledge all of the ushers with whom we deal every day and who are fountains of knowledge on the history of the Oireachtas. These men and women are unfailingly polite in carrying out their duties. I often wonder if all the stories they tell are true but, in any event, they sound good. I wish to turn now to another place which has my deepest affection, Northern Ireland, and I thank previous speakers for mentioning it. Peace has been the overriding priority of my political life. All of us in the House have lived through the difficulties that arose in the past. I 746 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach have given that cause my all. I salute today the leaders of the political parties in Northern Ireland who have travelled the extra mile for peace. They are all friends of mine now. Our journey is not done but our path has been set. We have seen in our times how much we can accomplish when men and women of goodwill dare to take the risks required in the quest for peace. Many people from all walks of Irish life and beyond our shores have played an honourable role in fostering reconciliation. It is difficult to single out individuals. Sometimes when one tries to do so, the list becomes too long. I will just one mention one individual but I thank them all collectively. So many people played consequential roles but today I wish to make special reference to the First Minster of that other fine democratic Assembly on this island. Like me, Dr. Paisley will soon leave office and bring to a close a long and distinguished career. He has played a significant role in the history of this island. I acknowledge his courage and kindness to me. I wish him and his wife, Eileen, well in retirement. It was my task to work with Dr. Paisley to try to turn matters around. At our early meetings, he stated he would never shake hands with me and there were rows and scowls between us on many occasions. However, we have ended up good friends and I acknowledge his contribution. This island has come a long way and I thank God for that. I wish to say a word of thanks to all my colleagues at the European Council. I thank previous speakers for their remarks about Ireland’s Presidency of the European Union, which occurred in a special and most enjoyable period of my career. Across Europe, it is recognised that all of Ireland’s presidencies have been good. Our staff in our embassies and our diplomats in Europe and the wider world represent this country with flair and distinction. People will appreciate that having been an officeholder for 19 and a half years, I have travelled to all parts of the world with these people. I thank them for all the work they do. In recent years we expanded our diplomatic corps across the globe and its members do a good job keeping the Taoiseach of the day abreast of all the issues that arise in the world’s trouble spots. They also help our business interests and Irish people involved in activities in the Third World. I admire the huge efforts these people make. There were many tragedies during my period as Taoiseach and the staff of our embassies have been obliged to work exceptionally hard as a result. I thank them for the dedication they displayed in that regard. Their work made matters much easier for those of us at home. I wish now to refer to my colleagues in the House. I shall continue to be a Member of the Da´il and thank God for that. I look forward to working with colleagues in the House in a different capacity. I will be earning my living looking after the needs of the people of Dublin Central again. I look forward to doing that. I look forward to working with Deputy Cyprian Brady, my great friend, in the future for the betterment of our local organisation and the communities we serve. I also look forward to my ongoing work for the people of Dublin Central alongside Deputies Costello and Gregory. I particularly want to wish Deputy Gregory good health into the future. I have spent 30 years working with the Deputy and I wish him well. My lifelong friend, Senator Kett, is suffering from cancer. I wish him well and I hope he can overcome the disease. All those on the Fianna Fa´il benches know innately how honoured I am to have led them for so long and I thank them for putting up with me. Members of Fianna Fa´il bring to this House a proud republican tradition which draws on history but which is also focused on build- ing a better future. It is a generous republicanism — outward looking and modern — which embraces our national identity and also our wider European identity. This is the republicanism which inspired me, as a very young person, to join Fianna Fa´il. It is the same republicanism that motivates our party today. I look forward to Fianna Fa´il going from strength to strength 747 Tributes to 23 April 2008. An Taoiseach
[The Taoiseach.] in the years ahead. I have no doubt my successor will do our country and this party proud. Deputy Cowen has been a good friend and he will make a great Taoiseach when, hopefully, the House elects him. I thank him for the years of loyalty he has given to me. No one in politics could have asked for a better friend or colleague. He has worked for our party up and down the country. The Progressive Democrats have been an integral part of the three Governments I have led. Deputy Harney has served with me in the Oireachtas for 31 years. She has my enduring respect and my gratitude for sharing my commitment to a fairer, stronger Ireland. I also want to extend my good wishes today to former Deputy Michael McDowell, who worked closely with me as Attorney General and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Ta´naiste. In years to come, I will look back with pride on my decision to invite the Green Party into government. The Ministers for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputies Gormley and Ryan, the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Sargent, and their colleagues have proven to be politicians of conviction and talent. It is my hope that the current Administration will run its full term and deliver on an innovative and meaningful programme for Government. I thank the members of the Green Party for their excellent work. I also wish to acknowledge the Independent Deputies who have given me steadfast support in government. I thank them for they loyalty they have displayed in respect of the policies I have been pursuing. I have known Deputy Kenny since I entered Da´il E´ ireann. He is the only politician in the House who has been here longer than me. I wish him well in his continued service to his constituency and to the country. I have worked with the Deputy and we have enjoyed many social occasions together. We worked hard in our political capacities. I have great regard for you, Enda. I thank you for the job you do as Leader of the Opposition in the House and in various other roles. It is not an easy job and I understand that. Each day, you must come here and represent the parliamentary democratic process. The nature our parliamentary democracy means that from time to time we have crossed swords. I would like to think this was not personal and it has never felt that way to me. While we have not always agreed politically, I have never doubted your sincerity or your patriotism. I wish you well. I also wish Deputy Kenny’s predecessors, former Deputy John Bruton and Deputy Noonan well. They are people I respect. I have long admired Deputy Gilmore. I have known him for many years in various capacities. He is an incisive parliamentarian with a strong grasp of public policy. I am pleased to say I have many friends in the Labour Party.
Deputy Brian Cowen: Here we go again.
Deputy Tom Hayes: More socialists.
The Taoiseach: I served in a very good Government with two of Deputy Gilmore’s prede- cessors, former Deputy Dick Spring and Deputy Quinn. Deputy Quinn and I have been battling against and following each other across various Departments for almost 34 years. 12 o’clock It has been a long road but I wish you well, Ruairı´. I hold another predecessor, Deputy Rabbitte, in very high regard. I thank Pat, who shadowed me during my times as Ministers for Labour and Finance and later in his capacity as leader of the Labour Party. I thank him for the respect he has always shown me and for his great commitment. I 748 Requests to move Adjournment of 23 April 2008. Da´il under Standing Order 32 thank the Labour Party for its good wishes and collegiality over the years. I enjoyed working with its members in every way. I also acknowledge the work undertaken by Deputy O´ Caola´in and the other Sinn Fe´in Members of this House who have always engaged constructively with me. I thank them for their work. All Deputies, irrespective of their party loyalties, have my undiminished admiration. I will always be grateful for the strong values and enduring friendships Members of this House have afforded me. I have many friends in this House for whom I have great respect, as I do also for those I may not know as well. They have shaped the fabric of my politics and, indeed, my life. When I meet them around the country I see what they are doing. I have been in the chicken and chips brigade for 27 or 28 years, so I have watched everybody in their own constituencies and I know the commitment they have made. I entered politics because I believed it to be a noble profession. Over three decades on, I hold firmly to that view which, if anything, is stronger now. I have seen at first hand the long hours and dedication, as well as the pressure on family commitments and the traumas involved. I would particularly like to mention all the colleagues I worked with here who have gone to their eternal reward. I also wish to mention those who lost out. It is never nice to see people who work so hard losing out because of the whims of the democratic process. I remember all of those. I am proud that in a hard-working profession I have earned a reputation for being a hard worker. At least you said so, a Cheann Comhairle, and I thank you for that. I openly and honestly admit that during my time as Taoiseach I did not get everything right. I always did my best, however, and worked to the best of my ability for the people. I stood successfully in 12 local and national elections. Public service is a calling and it has been my life’s work. I have enjoyed every day of it, or at least most days. As I finish my time in the House as Taoiseach, I want to thank every one of you sincerely. Ba mhaith liom mo bhuı´ochas a ghabha´il libh ar fad as ucht bhu´ r gcairdeas agus bhu´ r gcomho- ibriu´ thar na blianta. Obviously, I want to thank my family and friends and while I will not go through all their names, I do wish to thank those close to me who supported and advised me. They include my big brothers Noel and Maurice, and my sisters Eileen and Kathleen who are here. I also thank my daughters who are both out of the country today working hard, which is a good family trait. I will close by quoting the words of a Jesuit writer, the great Fr. John Sullivan. On good and bad days I read Fr. John’s work, and the following few lines selected from his many writings appear suitable today: “Take life in instalments. This day now, at least let this be a good day. Be always beginning, let the past go. Now let me do whatever I have the power to do.”
Members rose.
Requests to move Adjournment of Da´il under Standing Order 32. An Ceann Comhairle: Anois, iarratais chun tairiscint a dhe´anamh an Da´il a chur ar athlo´ faoi Bhuan-Ordu´ 32 — now we come to requests to move the Adjournment of the Da´il under Standing Order 32.
Deputy Arthur Morgan: I seek the adjournment of the Da´il under Standing Order 32 to discuss the following matter of urgent national importance, namely, to force the Government to explain to this House why it thinks it is safe to remove essential hospital services, such as accident and emergency and the intensive care unit from Louth County Hospital, Dundalk, 749 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Arthur Morgan.] when there is no prospect of a regional hospital being constructed for at least 20 years; to explain why the people of Dundalk and its catchment communities are being denied these essential health services; the attendant risks they carry as a consequence of these savage cut- backs; and the need to deal urgently with the crisis in our health service.
Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: I seek the adjournment of the Da´il under Standing Order 32 to discuss the following matter of national importance requiring urgent consideration, namely, the threatened collapse of the general medical services scheme and related State schemes for the supply of medicines from 1 May if pharmacists implement their decision to withdraw from these schemes; the threatened legal action against pharmacists arising from this withdrawal; the role of the Minister for Health and Children and the HSE in escalating the dispute; and, above all, the threat to the health and safety of patients posed by this imminent collapse of schemes on which hundreds of thousands of people, many of them elderly, rely.
An Ceann Comhairle: Tar e´is breithniu´ a dhe´anamh ar na nithe ardaithe, nı´l siad in ord faoi Bhuan-Ordu´ 32.
Order of Business. The Taoiseach: It is proposed to take No. 22, Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill 2008 — Second Stage (resumed). It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the Da´il shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. tonight and business shall be interrupted not later than 10 p.m. Private Members’ business shall be No. 38, motion re neurology and clinical neurophysiology services (resumed) to conclude at 8.30 p.m. tonight.
An Ceann Comhairle: There is one proposal to be put to the House. Is the proposal that the Da´il shall sit later than 8.30 p.m tonight agreed to? Agreed. I call Deputy Kenny on the Order of Business.
Deputy Enda Kenny: Does the Taoiseach have any update on the problem that is becoming more apparent concerning pharmacy patients? I know I must raise this matter in the context of the pharmacy (No. 2) Bill, but I assume that some contingency plan is being put in place because the matter is becoming more serious. Perhaps the Taoiseach could provide an answer to that.
An Ceann Comhairle: We can only deal with the legislation now — the pharmacy (No. 2) Bill.
The Taoiseach: The pharmacy Bill is being drafted. The work of the Dorgan group’s commit- tee is continuing and that is where the important emphasis must be. I hope everyone can co- operate with that.
An Bille um an Ochtu´ Leasu´ is Fiche ar an mBunreacht 2008: An Dara Ce´im (Ato´ ga´il).
Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed).
Atairgeadh an cheist: “Go le´ifear an Bille an Dara hUair anois.”
Question again proposed: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time.” Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: In February 2008, Commissioner Kuneva’s office said that the Commission and Council were getting negative feedback on a health directive and President Barroso instructed the Commission not to take unpopular initiatives during the Lisbon treaty discussions. On 1 April, Androulla Vassiliou, the Health Commissioner, told MEPs that the 750 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
Commission will publish its long-delayed proposal for a cross-border health care directive in June. We find — surprise, surprise — that the publication date will be 25 June, after the Irish referendum on the Lisbon treaty. On Monday, 14 April, the Daily Mail outlined a briefing by Dan Mulhall, a senior official in the Department of Foreign Affairs, stating that the referendum is being held in June rather than October due to likely “unhelpful developments” during the forthcoming French Presidency, particularly with regard to defence. Mr. Mulhall also acknowledged Margot Wallstrom’s reassurances that the Commission was willing to “tone down or delay messages that might be unhelpful” to the Irish referendum. Also revealed last week was a letter from the powerful EU constitutional committee chair- person, Jo Leinen, stating that he was writing to chairpersons of EU committees advising them that “any documents concerning implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon which addresses politically sensitive matters be examined only when it becomes sufficiently clear that the Treaty will enter into force” — i.e. after the Irish referendum. On Thursday last, 17 April, the EU Observer reported that a public debate on EU budgetary reform launched last September has been given two additional months, with diplomats suggest- ing that the additional time comes as a result of the “EU tip-toeing around Ireland” as the controversial debate includes possible cuts in farm subsidies. It was reported on Sunday last that President Barroso has confirmed that the Commission will not now be pursuing a case against Ireland for alleged breach of EU rules on equal oppor- tunity due to religious schools refusing to employ teachers who do not adhere to the religious ethos of the school. It is believed that this climb-down reflects the intense pressure on the European Union to avoid antagonising the Irish in advance of the referendum. Deception is the name of the game for the “yes” camp, but the old saying should be remembered: “what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.” Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn said we must support the treaty, that it is not perfect but “it is the only Europe around”. That is patently false. We have a choice. We can say no to the drive towards the type of Europe envisaged by Jose Barroso, President of the European Commission who said last July:
Sometimes I like to compare the EU as a creation to the organisation of empire. We have the dimensions of empire.
Sinn Fe´in Deputies set out the arguments against the Lisbon treaty. We set out the direct implications for Ireland if the Lisbon treaty is passed in terms of the loss of power, neutrality, public services, workers’ rights, rural Ireland and the economy. We also set out in clear terms what the Irish Government should do in negotiations for a new treaty. I would like to add to my contribution a call on the electorate to participate in the debate, to come out and vote “no” and send the Government back to secure a better deal for Ireland. It is my firm view that the Irish Government absolutely failed to protect Irish national interests during the negotiations both on the EU constitution and the Lisbon treaty. People should consider carefully what they are being asked to support. The Lisbon treaty includes more than 100 additional powers for EU institutions, including the loss of vetoes in key areas like the economy; the ending of our automatic right to a Commissioner — this means no Irish voice at the table for five out of every 15 years; a 50% reduction in our voting strength in the Council of Ministers; and Article 48, which gives the EU powers to amend its own treaties without recourse to an intergovernmental conference or a new treaty — this would give the Commission and the Council significant scope to acquire more powers in the future. 751 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in.]
The effect of all of this is to substantially weaken Ireland’s position within the European Union institutions. This loss of power will have serious implications for our farming community; fisheries, as already demonstrated;r small businesses; and the economy in general. We are told that all countries are being treated equally, but of course this is not the case. While our voting strength is being cut in half, the voting strength of larger countries such as Britain and Germany nearly doubles. We are told that it is not practical to have 27 Commissioners, that it would be too cumbersome, but in the Da´il there are 15 Ministers and 20 Ministers of State for a popu- lation of fewer than 5 million people. It seems more than credible and necessary to have 27 Commissioners to represent more than 500 million people. There has been a lot of scaremongering during this debate about the economy, with some suggesting that foreign direct investment will dry up if the Lisbon treaty is rejected. This is nonsense and serves only to distract attention from the content of the treaty. In France, follow- ing the rejection of the EU constitution, inflows of foreign direct investment reached historic highs for two consecutive years. Ireland will remain an attractive location for investment and our position in the European Union will be secure long into the future. However, there are issues in the Lisbon treaty that will negatively impact on key economic issues, such as competitiveness, growth and social inclusion. The loss of a permanent Com- missioner could have a serious impact on agriculture and rural communities. Not only is the Commission given greater scope in the negotiation of international trade agreements, but Ireland loses its veto in all but a small number of cases. The Lisbon treaty provides for qualified majority voting on laws governing foreign direct investment and international agreements on foreign investment. There are also growing concerns about the EU desire to create a common tax base. Ministers claim that Ireland’s veto will block measures from the EU, but as it stands Article 48 of the Lisbon treaty allows the EU to move from unanimity to majority voting on key areas, including company tax. This is not a shock to the Irish Government. It has known about this issue for many years but has failed to take action to protect the national interest and instead tried to bury the issue until after the Lisbon treaty. Charlie McCreevy has talked about the long-term hidden agenda for a common corporation tax base and said it was a sinister idea that refuses to die. French finance Minister Christine Lagarde let the cat out of the bag during this past week when she said that the French were determined to push through a common corporate tax base during the upcoming French Presidency of the European Union. In the view of this Deputy and that of my colleagues and many more people with a variety of political opinion and none, the Government seriously mishandled the Lisbon treaty nego- tiations. Decisions regarding taxation are a matter for this State to decide. The Government ought to have ensured that issues such as taxation were exempt from the application of Article 48, but it failed to do this. This could be properly addressed in a new treaty. If we look at the position of the other parties, the situation is even more worrying. MEPs from both Fine Gael and the Labour Party supported the Bersani report in the European Parliament, which called for common corporation taxes. I believe that a better deal is possible. The Lisbon treaty should be rejected and Irish negotiators should be sent back to the table to secure a better deal, including Ireland keeping a permanent European Commissioner and our voting strength on the Council of Ministers being maintained; a specific article recognising and protecting neutrality; opt outs ending support for nuclear power, the European Defence Agency and other contributions to EU military expenditure; working with other EU countries to strengthen democracy and create new provisions promoting public services; specific proto- cols serving this State’s right to continue making its own decisions on taxation; specific 752 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) measures exempting health and education from privatisation; and specific measures promoting fair trade over free trade. On behalf of the Sinn Fe´in Oireachtas team in the Da´il and the Seanad, I again encourage people to take their courage in their hands on 12 June——
Deputy Michael Ahern: Vote “yes”.
Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: ——not to be bullied or frightened but to consider all the points before us. We have the right and the responsibility to point out the deficiencies in what is proposed. I encourage people to consider these carefully but, above all, to exercise their vote. I want to see a high turn-out and I hope that all people, irrespective of what views we represent on this issue from the “yes” and “no” camp will encourage the electorate to employ their franchise. I want to see a resounding rejection and I encourage people to take the courage to do so.
Deputy Michael McGrath: I wish to share time with Deputy Sea´n Connick. I am pleased to contribute to the debate on the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Consti- tution Bill 2008, which sets out the legal basis of the Lisbon treaty referendum, which will be put to the Irish people on 12 June. I acknowledge the importance of Ireland’s participation in the EU since 1973 and the enormous contribution that membership and participation has made to Ireland’s social and economic parameters since 1973. Listening to Deputy O´ Caola´in state that the “yes” campaign has been characterised by deception is rich coming from him and Sinn Fe´in. That party has opposed every European treaty referendum to date. For the argument on the Lisbon treaty to have any credibility, Sinn Fe´in should have the courage to say that it got it wrong in the past, that it underestimated the importance of Ireland’s involvement and participation in the European Union and understated the benefits that Ireland has derived from membership and participation in the Union. Its arguments would have greater credibility if it acknowledged it got it wrong many times in the past in terms of Ireland’s involvement in the European Union. If there has been any deception to date in this campaign, it has been on the “no” side, which has been characterised by con- spiracies, falsehoods and ignorance of what the treaty states. It has completely disregarded the assurances given by the European Commission, the President, individual Commissioners and our Government. It is a source of great pride to me that it was the Irish Government, which held the Presidency of the European Union in 2004, that successfully concluded the negotiation of the draft constitutional treaty, which forms the basis of the Lisbon treaty as it has emerged. It has been put on the record by the Taoiseach and others that 90% or more of the contents of the Lisbon treaty derive from the constitutional treaty which the Irish Presidency secured agreement on in June 2004. That is not something we should hide but rather we should be proud of it. There have been changes since and those have been clearly articulated in the campaign thus far. It is important to have this debate in the context of our overwhelmingly positive contribution since 1973. I take issue with some of the criticisms that have been made of the Lisbon treaty. The number of Commissioners will be two thirds the number of member states, totalling 18 Com- missioners. It is an enormous sacrifice for countries the size of France, the UK and Germany to relinquish the automatic right they have to a Commissioner. It is not very long ago since those countries had two Commissioners each while smaller countries such as Ireland had one. As larger countries in the European Union, their sacrifice is much greater in that they are agreeing to relinquish their automatic right to have two Commissioners. The “no” side has consistently ignored the fact that the treaty recognises, for the first time, the role of national parliaments in the conduct of European affairs. It significantly enhances the role of the Euro- 753 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Michael McGrath.] pean Parliament by providing co-decision making with the Council in a number of areas. It is important that a President of the European Council will be appointed for a two and a half yearly term, with the possibility of his or her time in office being extended for a total of five years. This would provide continuity in terms of the European Commission being represented in all its international affairs. The charter of fundamental rights, which is being given legal recognition under the treaty, is also a significant improvement and must be commended. Many of those on the “no” side have talked about the common foreign and security policy and the common security and defence policy, completely ignoring the fact that participation in any mission will be voluntary for every member state. They ignore the fact that Ireland’s neutrality is copperfastened in this treaty, which provides recognition of our constitutional provisions in this regard. They also refer to the solidarity arrangements, whereby in the event of a member state being attacked other EU countries have the right, if they choose, to come to its assistance. I see nothing wrong with that. If Ireland came under attack at some future date, for instance, we would all like to believe that our neighbours and friends in the European Union would come to our assistance. The view has long been proffered by opponents of European engagement and the European project that Ireland’s neutrality would end. I am very proud that our military personnel are participat- ing in humanitarian missions in Chad and are saving lives. It should be reaffirmed too that unanimity and the right of veto is retained in all sensitive areas. Deputy O´ Caola´in was disingenuous in what he said on taxation. Ireland will retain a right of veto on any proposed changes to corporation tax rates, and to suggest otherwise is wrong. At odds with the facts also is the assertion that in some way the adoption of this treaty may lead to the introduction of abortion in Ireland. Members will know that Ireland has secured a number of protocols in previous treaties, which apply to the Lisbon treaty, partic- ularly as regards Article 43.3 of the Constitution. These stipulate clearly that nothing in the treaties or any Acts modifying or supplementing them will affect the application in Ireland of Article 43.3 of the Constitution as regards respect for the right to life of the unborn. On modernising and changing decision-making structures that will be brought about by the adoption of the Lisbon treaty, the double-majority voting system, which will be introduced in 2014, provides an important safeguard for smaller member states. It effectively means that the large European states cannot gang up on the smaller countries and impose decisions that we would not support. The requirement for 55% of countries to support measures under qualified majority voting, QMV, representing 65% of the population, effectively means that 15 of the current 27 member states must agree on a particular initiative under QMV before it can be adopted, and those countries must represent 65% of the population. That is a very important safeguard for small countries. It enshrines the equality of member states in the decision-making process in the European Union and I very much welcome this. The essential point of the treaty is that it copperfastens the view that 27 member states, working together and collectively, on issues such as climate change, the WTO negotiations and the security of future energy supplies, are much more effective. Our bargaining strength is enhanced significantly when we act as a bloc of 27 member states. The European Union is now a bloc of 500 million people. The Single Market has allowed us to break free from the shackles of economic dependence on the UK and has provided us with tremendous opportunities which many Irish businesses and entrepreneurs have seized on enthusiastically and with great success since Ireland joined the EEC. The European Union is the most affluent bloc of consumers in the world, with its 500 million people. It is important that all parties play a constructive and positive role in this campaign. The Joint Committee on European Affairs will be held in Cork on Thursday night next and I 754 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) encourage as many people as possible to attend and participate in the debate. I call on the Irish people to vote, as they have done in the past, in favour of the treaty in this referendum, to enhance and copperfasten Ireland’s role as an important member of the European Union.
Deputy Sea´n Connick: The challenges facing Irish jobs, the environment and Ireland’s com- petitiveness today are global. Against climate change, rising energy costs, transnational crime and global economic downturns, our capacity to defend our interests on our own is minimal. Ireland’s sovereignty, power and strength lie in the capacity to act for its people, to defend its prosperity, safeguard its environment and protect the jobs and livelihoods that families have worked so hard to build. That capacity to act, though minimal on our own, is enhanced extra- ordinarily through the unique partnership that is the European Union. This ensures access to the Single Market, practical co-operation and greater clout on the world stage. The reform treaty will increase Ireland’s capacity to act even further in its own interests. It will cut bureaucracy, tackle inefficiency, speed up decision making and deliver a Union that is more responsive to its citizens and more answerable to the Oireachtas. The EU empowers us and this treaty will empower us further. We have done well from the EU and the Lisbon treaty will enable us to deliver even better outcomes for Irish people. In the words of Pope Benedict, it gives a boost to the process of building a European home. In the 40 years before the European Steel and Coal Community was formed in 1952, Europe suffered two devastating world wars, which left tens of millions dead and destroyed large areas of the Continent. Wars involving many of the European powers had broken out every 50 years on average for several centuries before this. Europe was an area in turmoil with constantly changing national borders and international alliances created with the sole intention of waging war. The European Coal and Steel Community and its subsequent incarnations leading up to the European Union were created in part to normalise relationships between the countries of Europe and to try to end the devastating cycle of war that was ripping the Continent apart. The success of the European Union is demonstrated by the fact that Western Europe has not seen war fought on its lands in over 60 years and is unlikely to see it again in any of our lifetimes. Since Ireland joined the European Economic Community in 1973, the Irish people have been among the most enthusiastic supporters of the European concept. On several occasions over the past 35 years, the Irish public has been asked to adopt treaties that would change the nature of Europe and Ireland’s role therein. However, every one of these treaties has brought changes that have been good for Ireland. The Single European Act lead to the establishment of the Single Market and the investment of Structural Funds in Ireland at a time when our economy needed it most. The Single Market and Structural Funds were among the most important contributors to the start of the Celtic tiger. The Maastricht treaty gave us the euro. The treaties of Amsterdam and Nice helped to end permanently the divisions between east and west in Europe and the Lisbon treaty will equip both Ireland and Europe to meet the challenges of today’s changing world. The Lisbon treaty completes a process of internal reform that began in 1990. When it became clear that the European Union would grow rapidly from 12 countries to upwards of 30, it became obvious that the existing structures would not be sufficient to administer a union of that size. A lot of time and negotiation has been devoted to this matter and the Lisbon treaty was the best compromise that could be obtained. It will bring an end to debates on the structure and future of the European Union, and its unique reliance on inter-governmental agreements will ensure that the Union will never become a superstate. The principle of subsidiarity, enshrined in this treaty, which is based on the principle that decisions should, if possible, be taken at a local, regional or national level, guarantees national sovereignty. 755 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Sea´n Connick.]
Article 1.4 of the treaty is one of the most important and it will be quoted frequently as the debate continues over the coming months. The article contains the essence of what the Union is about. It states: “The Union’s aim is to promote peace, its values and the well-being of its peoples”. Article 1.4 is very important and I will be highlighting it as I travel around the country to promote the passage of the treaty. In 1973 Ireland joined the EEC and I therefore have been a proud citizen of the Union for 36 years, which is most of my life. Every aspect of our experience as a member to date has been positive. All sectors have benefited greatly from membership, including the agriculture and business sectors, as has the peace process and infrastructure in terms of roads, bridges, and sewerage and water schemes. We hear arguments that the treaty is complicated. Of course it is; we are brining together 27 different countries. We must not forget that the European Union is a work in progress. I am proud to say Ireland is playing its part in the development of the process. We are part of a great tapestry of different countries, peoples and cultures, all working towards a common goal, namely, unity of purpose and movement towards peace, prosperity and progress. I really cannot understand people who are opposed to this treaty. Let us counter some of the myths they are generating. There is no doubt that our neutrality is protected. This has been ensured by virtue of the triple lock. Our taxation law is protected. Unanimity will continue to apply to all taxation matters and approval of all member states will be required to make any changes in this regard. Ireland will not give up its tax advantage. We have fought for this and it has afforded us an advantage that we will not relinquish. Increased co-operation in the European Union, particularly in areas related to criminal law and policing, is to be welcomed. Increased economic security and stability and the upholding and strengthening of the principle of subsidiarity are also to be welcomed. The world is now a global village. I travelled to Vienna some weeks ago and it was amazing to sit alongside the main street there listening to the different languages of citizens of different nationalities and to watch people wander through the streets peacefully. One can do the same is Spain, France, London or Dublin. Europe has become multicultural throughout. Most of the groups and people speaking out against the treaty are from the extreme left or extreme right and they are very strange bedfellows. Most, if not all, of them have benefited from our membership of the Union, yet they are against the further development of this great project. It is inconceivable that people will vote against this treaty and Europe. It is essentially voting against a movement for peace, prosperity and progress. We must not let these people hinder or prevent the ongoing development of the Union. A “yes” vote is a vote for jobs, peace and progress. Our opponents state that this treaty enshrines in law increased militarisation, ends our military neutrality and cedes a whole range of competencies to the European Union. One party that is opposing this treaty has made the same arguments about militarisation in respect of every referendum on our involvement in Europe. When we were voting to join the EEC in 1972, it stated:
Irish people will be compelled to fight wars the European powers decide to wage. Neu- trality will go and compulsory military service will be introduced.
When opposing the Single European Act in 1987, the party said the treaty would surrender power completely to the NATO-dominated EEC. We were told by the same party that the Maastricht treaty will be a death knell for Irish neutrality while the Amsterdam treaty would ensure the nuclear-armed Western European Union would be integrated into the European 756 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
Union structures. During our last referendum, on the Nice treaty, the party told us that Nice would “bring us closer into a European Army”. Thirty-six years and six treaties later, our neutrality is still secure. In respect of the Lisbon treaty, we are still being peddled the same arguments on neutrality that have been proven to be wrong time and again. One of the biggest changes in approach that the European Union will take as a result of the Lisbon treaty is having a more co-ordinated response to foreign policy. The treaty represents a very good outcome for Ireland on issues of major sensitivity, such as unanimity in the taxation area. One of the strangest claims being made by opponents of this treaty is that it will somehow be self-amending, that is, that once it is passed, nations will no longer have the power to decide whether to accept or reject any further changes to the structure or powers of the European Union. Article 48.4 of the Lisbon treaty states quiet clearly that any decision “shall not enter into force until it is approved by the Member States in accordance with their respective consti- tutional requirements”. I do not understand how any opponent of this treaty can credibly claim it will become self-amending when Article 48.4 is so clear. No Irish interest would be served by creating a political crisis in Europe, by turning our backs on a treaty that was to a considerable extent made in Ireland and responds to our needs and aspirations. As we face current and future challenges on our domestic front, such as the need to safeguard the livelihoods and quality of life of our citizens, Ireland’s membership of the Union is as vital as ever. Imagine if we had to face the current uncertainty in the global economy on our own, outside of the European monetary system. The treaty contains concrete measures that will enhance democracy within the Union. It strengthens the role of national parliaments by giving them direct input into European legis- lation. The provision whereby a sufficient number of national parliaments can object to a particular proposal is a genuine step forward. It will enable national parliaments to ensure that the Union does not exceed its authority. As Vice Chairman of the newly established Oireachtas Committee on EU Scrutiny, I have seen at first hand the power that has been given to national parliaments to amend, influence and even object to European legislation. This treaty actually strengthens the role of national parliaments in this regard. A central feature of European democracy is the protection of individual rights and freedoms. The reform treaty raises the protection of the rights of Europe’s citizens to a new level. It will do so by making the Charter of Fundamental Rights legally binding on the Union’s institutions and on the Member States when they are implementing EU law. It will also allow the Union to accede to the European Convention on Human Rights, which, together with the European Court of Human Rights, is the foundation stone of human rights protection in Europe. So many of the issues on our national agenda today have major European and global dimen- sions. Issues such as climate change and spiralling energy costs transcend national borders. On its own, a small country such as Ireland cannot solve these problems. However, working together with our European partners, as part of the richest domestic market in the world, will help us to address them. It is therefore in our interest to support the European Union in this endeavour. It would not make sense for us to turn our backs on Europe by blocking sensible changes to the functioning of the Union. We have the opportunity to guarantee Ireland’s posi- tion at the heart of Europe. Let us not throw that chance away.
Deputy Enda Kenny: I understand Deputy Connick has made his maiden speech. If so, it is on an auspicious day in the House, on which a serving Taoiseach attends for his last day. I am sure the Minister of State, Deputy Michael Ahern, has seen a few Taoisigh move on in his time and I have seen all the outgoing Taoisigh since 1975.
757 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Enda Kenny.]
I am honoured, as leader of the Fine Gael Party, to say that we strongly support the EU reform treaty. We are urging our supporters all over the country to come out and vote “yes” for it. As things may not be going so well in the country economically, or from a health, education or other perspective, it would be very easy in a party political sense to use the opportunity to encourage people to use their vote on Europe against the Government here. Long before this debate started I said publicly, just as my predecessors in this party always did, that we would put Ireland first in the context of Europe and leave aside any partisan party political differences that I might have with Fianna Fa´il, the Progressive Democrats or the Green Party in Government. This is about ourselves, our children, our country and our Continent. From that point of view it is fundamental that the politicians understand that their remit, role and responsibility in this matter are to explain to people as clearly and as understandably as possible what this treaty is about, what it contains, what its implications are and why it is necessary. It is important that the people be properly informed when they go to make their decision. There are people who may have a different point of view and have an articulation as to why they want to vote against the treaty, which I respect. However, between now and 12 June, this debate should take place on the facts in the treaty and not on the misinformation that is being peddled about in various locations. That is not the way to conduct our business. While it is always easy to be negative — it is always easy to generate coverage or publicity by claiming to be a “no” person on the treaty — it is not in the interests of our people. While I serve as leader of my party, in a European context I also serve as the elected vice president of the European People’s Party, which as Members will know forms the largest voting bloc in the European Parliament with more than 272 Members. That bloc provided the Pres- ident of the European Parliament, Hans-Gert Po¨ ttering, MEP, who recently spoke in the Seanad. The President of the European Commission, Jose´ Manuel Barroso, is also from that party as are Chancellor Angela Merkel and a number of other Prime Ministers, some of whom were here last Monday to discuss the challenges facing Europe economically. They did not come here to tell us what we had to do. They came here to demonstrate solidarity with this country as we move forward to face these challenges, which are not confined to Ireland alone. From that perspective when I attend those meetings approximately every two months, I get a very clear picture of the problems, challenges and opportunities that face Ireland, Europe and the world in a global sense in the coming period. Over the next 20 years we will see major changes economically and around the world. Often in a place like Ireland we can become very focused on our own immediate problems without looking at what is staring us in the face in the next 20 to 50 years. A recent advertisement in some of the financial newspapers asked who is responsible for the weather in 2050, the answer to which is “You are, so do something about it now”. The challenges we face include climate change, energy security, energy cost, food security, food production cost, water supply and the geopolitics of oil. In the next 20 years there will be five presidential elections in the United States. Regardless of whomever the people might want to elect and whatever might be the political message or the consequences of that, there will be serious difficulties in many countries between now and then, including the great humanitarian crises we are facing and the implications of political decisions made around the world. We are witnessing the phenomenal advance of China with its 1.4 billion people, the advance of India economically with its 1.2 billion people, the coming again of Russia because of its energy reserves, the emergence of Brazil and South Africa, and the powering ahead of the United States. It would be a mistake for us to assume that 4.3 million people can afford to stand by and watch all these events from the sidelines. That is why the referendum on this treaty on 12 June is unique. 758 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
The Irish people are the only ones having a referendum, which is required following the Supreme Court decision in the Crotty case many years ago. It gives every elector the privilege and responsibility of deciding the fate and future of the main institutions of Europe to cater for a population not of 250 million, as it was when we had 15 countries, but of 500 million. As the eyes of Europe are on Ireland, it is important that this debate be healthy, robust, true and based on the facts in the treaty. I have attended some of the 30 or 35 meetings the Fine Gael Party has arranged around the country. These are well attended. I recall the campaign for the first referendum on the Nice treaty. People did not support the treaty in that referendum because they were confused and did not understand it. On the second occasion my party arranged a series of public meetings around the country. Some 500,000 more people voted on the second occasion and the Nice treaty referendum was passed. As I see the same trend now, it is vital that people be encouraged to come to these public meetings so that they can stand up and ask the questions that are in their heads about this treaty if they have any interest in it. If they have no interest, it is our duty to try to stimulate an interest so that they can ask these questions because it is about themselves, their children and our future. I recall, as in the campaign for the referendum on the Nice treaty, people saying they went to a meeting and witnessed a really good row about neutrality, abortion or whatever it was. Those people found they left the meeting much clearer in their minds about their position, either for or against. At least they had participated in a healthy, democratic and robust debate and were therefore in a much stronger position to make up their minds. The usual stuff has been peddled about on this occasion suggesting that a vote for the Euro- pean reform treaty is a vote for the backdoor introduction of abortion, euthanasia, single-child families etc., which is complete nonsense in the context of this treaty. As everybody should know we have protection in Bunreacht na hE´ ireann and a specific protection written into the protocol of the Maastricht treaty which is legally binding. In any event health is a competence of each individual country and no European dimension can influence that without the Irish people making the decision themselves. The same applies in the case of neutrality. I have heard people of prominence and others claiming the treaty would introduce a European army with enormous costs for militarisation and that therefore we are likely to face the ravages of being invaded or whatever. We have a very clear position on the matter. We have differed with the Government in some aspects of neutrality and how we would approach it. However, we have always said the triple-lock mech- anism that applies here requiring a UN mandate, Government clearance and Da´il approval in each case is very important. A few years ago I went to Kosovo with Deputy Timmins, who is a former member of the Defence Forces and who saw service abroad. South of Pristina we met troops, and saw them on parade and doing their duty. We travelled out with them to the villages and townlands in the area. They were operating under Finnish command carrying out a peace-enforcement, peacekeeping exercise in which they wanted to participate and in which they excelled. People from different walks of life there in what was a political tinderbox said the Irish troops were manifestly able to command respect on both sides of the political divide. While the mission in Chad is difficult as were the ones in Liberia and Lebanon, these matters are all cleared by the Government and must accord with a UN mandate. There is no question of Ireland being forced into a military alliance. That is protected and requires unanimity. In our case there is respect and understanding for our constitutional position and the legal protocol inserted into the Maas- tricht treaty. That is not to say that we might not require help in the area of terrorism, which is a transborder phenomenon. 759 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Enda Kenny.]
Leaders from the European People’s Party, EPP, group discuss the problems they foresee and immigration, for example, presents both a challenge and an opportunity. It can be a divisive issue and just now I was outside with the Taoiseach for the Show Racism the Red Card cam- paign. Many countries, including Greece, Malta and others, have sent back many people who entered illegally. The point has been made that if the population of Africa doubles in the next 25 years, which it will, and if even 10% of young males decide to emigrate from Africa to Europe, no single country could withstand the pressure. There must be a fair, equitable and reasonable European response to this. When one examines the scale of the problems that exist one realises that Ireland is in a position to influence this matter greatly. Two points in the treaty are fundamental to strengthening democratic links, namely, increas- ing accountability and improving transparency in the interest of citizens. Members who serve in this Chamber are directly elected by the people and are given a mandate through the secrecy of the ballot box. When people, hopefully, endorse the treaty we will enhance accountability and transparency. The Joint Committee on European Scrutiny, which has been elevated to the status of a full Oireachtas committee and is chaired by Deputy John Perry from my party, will be responsible for ensuring that initiatives that come from the Commission and are sent to parliaments eight weeks before anything happens are scrutinised. The members of the commit- tee, who were directly elected by the people, can call in officials and ask what the implications of initiatives are, what they will mean in Brussels and what they will mean when they come back. If an initiative taken in the Commission is not in accordance with the wishes of this Parliament or the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny there will be a facility, shared with other countries, to have it changed or withdrawn. This is an important element for the citizens of Ireland to understand. The European Commission is entitled to introduce initiatives, directives and regulations but the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny is an important element in scrutinising them. The committee can see that people are informed of what is going on and that things we do not want are not imposed on us. It should be clearly understood that nothing can happen in Europe unless that competency and authority is given to it by member states. The co-decision making process between the European Parliament and the Council of Mini- sters is an enhanced responsibility that is very important. Members know that at the moment MEPs have little or no influence in terms of decisions that are made by the Commission. They have always had responsibility in dealing with the Parliament’s budgetary position and there is a measure of co-decision there but this will be enhanced and increased. This means that when the treaty is, hopefully, passed, MEPs, elected by the public and, therefore, transparent and accountable to the public, may be lobbied by groups, agencies, organisations and individuals about issues that matter to them. It is important that every Irish citizen knows that MEPs elected to the Parliament will have this responsibility placed on them. In terms of increasing democratic accountability, transparency and responsibility these are fundamental areas. The position of President of the Council is important. Over a number of years we held very successful EU Presidencies and the six months it is in our possession tends to be a very busy time for departmental officials and Ministers and Ministers of State. In 1996 we held the Presi- dency from July until the end of the year and it was an incredibly busy period that culminated, in my case, as Minister for Tourism and Trade, in dealing with the World Trade Organisation talks. I believe that what will emerge from this treaty is a better system that will see responsi- bility rolling on and the President of the Council appointed for two and a half years. The President will only be mandated to do what he or she must do through agreement by member states. This is a more effective and efficient way of dealing with business. 760 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
I mentioned World Trade Organisation talks and this is a matter of concern in Ireland. I have the privilege of chairing an ad hoc working group on agricultural reform in the European People’s Party grouping and this is an important element. Europe’s contribution to the Doha Round of talks, driven through by the former commissioner, Mr. Franz Fischler, was the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy until 2013. The agriculture sector is now of increasing importance in the context of rising food prices, rising production costs and food shortages. There were riots relating to this in Egypt recently and the price of rice has increased by 100% in India, Thailand and other countries. This is due to changing demographics, the growing of crops for energy, the production of bio-fuels and deforestation. China has seen the greatest migration of people in history as people move to cities; they want rice to eat and food and production costs all affect this issue. The agriculture sector here is important in this regard. Last Tuesday morning, at the ad hoc working group that I chair, I called the Irish Farmers Association, IFA, the Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association, ICMSA, and the Irish Cattle and Sheep Farmers Association, ICSA, to give their points of view on how they see agriculture issues unfolding in the context of World Trade Organisation talks. They made clear statements and have legitimate concerns. However, the Government has confirmed, as did the European Commission President, Jose´ Manuel Barroso, when I put a question to him at the forum on Thursday, that when the WTO talks conclude they must be accepted unanimously. This means that every one of the 27 member states will have the power to veto any deal they do not see as fair and balanced. The Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Coughlan, did not speak clearly enough on this matter and Deputy Creed articulated the point of view of our party. This issue is of consequential concern for the country’s agrisector and while people have the right to express their opinions strongly, their wrath should not be focused on the Lisbon reform treaty because every country has the right to veto the WTO talks if they not deem them fair and balanced. I communicated the points raised by the agriculture and farming organisations to Chancellor Angela Merkel and President Barroso after the forum presentation in Dublin Castle. The agriculture sector has always voted, and farming organisations have taken the view that they are better equipped to deal with coming challenges as part of a strong Europe. 1 o’clock From this perspective we support the treaty on the basis that CAP has been reformed until 2013. I believe that it is better to be part of a strong Europe and deal with WTO subsequently. There will be a presidential election in the United States and I will not dwell on the fact that the US decides what it will and will not deal with in the WTO. I saw evidence of this approach when I dealt with the United States. When I attended those meetings, observer status was granted to other countries which want to join the European Union for a number of reasons. It is not just because they see Ireland as a development role model as a result of co-operation with and finances from Europe. They also want enlargement for other reasons — for the benefit of their peoples. The EU Commission President Jose´ Manuel Dura˜o Barroso explained when he was a young lad in Portugal he could not listen to the music or read the books he wanted to because it was a dictatorship at the time. The Ukrainian President, Victor Yushchenko, explained at another meeting how the Ukraine would love to do business with the West as it has lived under Russia for so many years. He made the point that when Stalin was in charge of his country, he issued an edict which resulted in 2,000 people starving to death every day for over two years. These countries want to join with Europe. They see the EU as a force for good in the world, given the challenges we face in the future. 761 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Enda Kenny.]
I was struck by the question from the Polish Prime Minister, Donald Tusk, of what do we have to offer our young people. He replied: “Freedom.” The EU and Lisbon treaty is funda- mental to this. Every Irish elector must remember that for the first and most important time, 500 million people look to our small country of 4.3 million to decide the future flexibility, efficiency and professionalism of the large EU institutions in which we are all part. We all have a part to play in these institutions, which will not be able to do anything against our consent. I urge everyone to understand the fundamentals of the Lisbon treaty. My party supporters, Deputies, Senators and councillors should not be concerned by this treaty because I believe in its integrity, quality and consequence. That consequence will be for a better Europe and a better Ireland for all our people.
Deputy Margaret Conlon: I wish to share time with Deputy Calleary.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Kathleen Lynch): Is that agreed? Agreed.
Deputy Margaret Conlon: A host of challenges and opportunities face the European Union and its member states. Meeting these collectively is in all our interests. The Lisbon reform treaty will improve the way the EU works, making it more effective at national and European level and on the world stage. The EU has helped build an unbroken peace in Europe for 50 years. It has helped guide Greece, Portugal and Spain on the road from authoritarian to democratic rule. It has contrib- uted to the peaceful transition of ten central and eastern European countries from the tyranny of communism to democracy. Little is heard about how the Union ensured we adhere to better environmental standards or secured equal pay for equal work for women across Europe. What is heard is plenty of rhetoric about bloated and faceless bureaucracies. In the face of such charges, it is worth reminding ourselves of the truly profound, historic and progressive dynamic created by Euro- pean integration. It has transformed our Continent and country, setting standards that people both near and far wish to emulate. I accept the Union is not perfect. As an organisation made up of 27 member states, each with its own national interests and traditions, compromises must be made. However, the Union has shown time and again that national interests can be accommodated and that our shared interests are strong. Since joining the then EEC in 1973, Ireland has been transformed. Our economic, political, social and cultural horizons have broadened. The economic contribution the Union has made to Irish life is perhaps the best documented aspect of this story. The EU has also opened other doors to us, both here at home and in the wider world. It has given us an opportunity to bring our own distinctive views to the table of the most important political and economic bloc in the world. It has also provided us with an important new context in which to address the Northern Ireland conflict and to build better relations between all the people of this island. As a small nation, it has given us confidence to sit as equals among the biggest players on the world stage. I will encourage people to vote “Yes” in the upcoming referendum because the treaty will reform the EU’s structures to take account of a membership of 27 states, reform and improve the democratic deficit in the EU and further copperfasten our neutrality. The reform treaty is an important achievement for the Union. It responds to the needs of today’s Union with its increased membership numbering 27 member states. It will equip it to 762 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) meet the emerging challenges of the 21st century. The treaty contains several institutional provisions which will make its structures more effective and give it a stronger voice on the world stage. One major change is the proposed full-time president of the European Council who will co- ordinate the Council’s work, a function currently carried out by the EU Presidency which rotates between member state governments every six months. The treaty provides for a dedi- cated chair at the highest level, in a position to direct the Council’s discussions and provide valuable continuity. At present, different countries holding the EU Presidency every six months often bring their own priorities and to-do lists which can lead to a disconnect and a lack of medium to long-term planning and discussion. The proposed post of high representative for foreign affairs and security policy will act to increase the visibility and influence of the EU in international affairs. This is an essential development as many of the challenges we will face in the coming years will be external ones. A concerted European response to such issues as energy, security, climate change, development aid and immigration will be vital. Contrary to claims, the high representative will not set foreign policy. All 27 member states will continue to set policy acting unanimously. A further reform in the treaty is the plan to reduce the number of Commissioners by one third from 2014. Much has been made of this by the treaty’s opponents. These new rules will affect all member states equally. Ireland, nor any other smaller member states, is not being singled out. When we joined the then EEC, the larger member states nominated two Commis- sioners while the smaller countries nominated just one. The Nice treaty has already made provision for this change and it is to be welcomed. Climate change, drug-trafficking and pollution are just some issues that do not recognise borders. They need trans-European and cross-border co-operation. Passing the treaty will allow the EU be more effective at tackling such issues. The “No” campaigners claim the proposed voting system will halve Ireland’s voting strength. The truth is that under the new system, double-majority voting will give proportionate weight to population while protecting the interests of small and medium-sized member states. This is particularly good news for Ireland. This will be achieved by specifying that a qualified majority would require 55% of member states and 65% of the Union’s population. Sinn Fe´in’s claims against this proposal are based on counting only one part of the voting in its calculations. Recently at the National Forum on Europe event in Monaghan, I stated this is like failing to count the goals when deciding who has won the match. The treaty will see an enhanced role for national parliaments. Despite misleading claims by those opposed to it, the treaty actually gives a greater role to national parliaments. This will give the EU the legitimacy that some feel it lacked in the past. For the first time, national parliaments will have a direct input into the evolution of European legislation. It will do much to address the so-called democratic deficit. Under the treaty, national parliaments will be able to bring their influence to bear by offering reasoned opinions on the appropriateness, or other- wise, of proposals coming from the EU Commission. There has been much scaremongering in the media that ratification of the treaty would result in the introduction of tax harmonisation and threaten our favourable corporation tax rates. There are scare stories that a “yes” vote will give the EU permission to make decisions that will threaten Irish interests. This is simply not true. All Ireland’s key issues will be protected. As taxation, defence and foreign policies require unanimous voting, Ireland will have a veto. We will also retain our protocol on abortion. 763 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Margaret Conlon.]
Irish neutrality has been the subject of countless scare stories and has been hijacked by the “no” camp to encourage the electorate to reject the treaty. The treaty will have no effect on our military neutrality. Under the Constitution, Ireland cannot participate in an EU common defence. This position will remain unchanged under the reform treaty and will be reaffirmed in the 28th amendment of the Constitution. The triple lock arrangements that have governed the commitment of the Army to any overseas operation will remain in place in that any oper- ation would require Government and Da´il approval and a United Nations mandate. There is nothing in the treaty to change that. We have heard this red herring argument at every treaty referendum, but it is yet to be the case. The reform treaty will put in place structures for EU- led military missions, but each member state is free to participate as it chooses. None can be forced into participation in any mission. Claims of a new European army are bogus. The EU has been good for Ireland and our active role within Europe has played a vital part in improving our standards of living and our quality of life. Membership of the Union has been crucial to our social development. For example, an entire generation has grown up expecting to be treated fairly and equally regardless of gender, race or religion. The quality of life for hundreds of thousands of our people has changed for the better because Ireland is part of Europe. Better conditions of employment, safety regulations, maximum working hours, protec- tion of young workers, equal treatment for men and women and the introduction of maternity leave, parental leave and child care have all come about because of our collaboration with Europe. Sinn Fe´in opposes the treaty as it has opposed every referendum on Europe. Its Members say that they are pro-Europe. Following their logic, however, it would be better for us either not to be in Europe or to be in Europe but only to such a peripheral extent that we might as well not be in it. Opposed to this is the Fianna Fa´il stance, which is to be involved at all stages, to punch above our weight and to earn respect for being prepared to compromise while stand- ing strong on fundamental issues instead of huffing and puffing on the sidelines. I encourage people to vote “yes”. I welcome the opportunity to debate and discuss the issues, but there is an onus on us all to do so in a truthful manner instead of dealing with innuendo or anecdotal evidence. We must present the facts as they are to the public, which deserves it. I thank the Acting Chairman for the opportunity to contribute.
Deputy Dara Calleary: Gabhaim an seans seo chun caint ar an reifreann. Reifreann stairiu´ il ata´ ann, mar is e´ an che´ad reifreann a bhe´as againn i ndiaidh sta´das oifigiu´ il a bhaint amach don Ghaeilge san Aontas Eorpach. I welcome the opportunity to speak on Second Stage of the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill. We are in the run-up to referendum day on 12 June when the issues that have been under discussion in the House and around the country in recent months can finally be put to rest. I pay tribute to the National Forum on Europe on its work since its foundation in 2001 under the chairmanship of former Senator, Dr. Maurice Hayes, and his directorate and on the work it continues to do in the run-up to the referendum on the Lisbon treaty. I pay tribute to the work of the Joint Committee on European Affairs, which is travelling around the country to present arguments in a fair and balanced manner so as to engage with and involve people and to encourage them to vote on 12 June. All political parties in the House are mobilising their activists and voters, such is the importance of a “yes” vote on 12 June, not just to Irish interests, but to European interests generally. Those who oppose the EU reform treaty do so from a number of points of view. We must respect that some are genuine, a fact we cannot dismiss, but other points of view have been held unchanged for the 35 years of our membership despite all the benefits and evidence to 764 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) the contrary. Ireland has punched far above its traditional weight in that time. From the late Dr. Patrick Hillery, to whom the country paid rightful tribute last week, to Mr. Charlie McCreevy, our Commissioners have generally occupied top level posts and have been instru- mental in changing the face of Europe and the lives of Europeans. Our Commissioners will continue to do this in future. Despite our relatively small European Parliament delegation, an Irish man, Mr. Pat Cox, served as President and Irish parliamentarians serve as group leaders regularly. For example, Mr. Brian Crowley, MEP, serves as the leader of his group in Europe. Irish people such as Mr. David O’Sullivan and Ms Catherine Day have served in the top levels of the Commission’s civil service. Irish people throughout the directorates are putting their cases forward and fighting a European cause from an Irish viewpoint. We paid tribute to the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, on this historic day, but Irish Presi- dencies of the European Council from all sides of the House have delivered significantly. The Ta´naiste referred to his pride when the Taoiseach was able to put together a deal of 27 coun- tries, something that only an Irish person could have done. That deal will continue post Lisbon via the treaty’s significant and important reforms. They will strengthen the EU bloc, its powers and its global presence at a time when it needs to be strengthened. Equally, the democratic foundations that serve the bloc and on which it is built — an EU of nation states — will be strengthened. The directly elected European Parliament will be given more power, thereby enhancing its role in the making of EU legislation. The treaty will enhance the role of voters. The Oireachtas will be given more power in anticipating and commenting on legislation before it is tabled at the Commission and European Parliament. Through the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny and various other committees, we will have a chance to influence EU legis- lation that we do not currently have. Instead of the “one for everybody in the audience” approach adapted to date, the Com- mission will be more effective, better equipped to deal with global challenges and better able to deliver for the people of Europe. We should not fear the loss of an automatic right to a commissioner. Rather, we should look forward to it and know that we will continue to punch above our weight. Other structures are in place to ensure that our interests are represented when we do not have a Commissioner. The challenges the Lisbon treaty is intended to address are considerable. As a small nation of 4 million people, we have no hope of dealing with them effectively without full participation in a reformed Europe. As Vice Chairman of the Joint Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security, I am learning at first hand of the challenges we face in those respects. The threat to energy security from blocs and influences outside the EU is significant and we cannot continue to take for granted that we will always have oil and gas. Unless we strengthen and equip the EU to act as a strong bloc, we will no longer be able to guarantee supply. Unless we address climate change, all the European structures may be useless in 100 years. The global challenges presented by climate change can only be dealt with on a bloc-by-bloc basis and through a strengthened EU. For 35 years, we have been told by opponents that Europe will be bad and that there will be a European army. I am one of those people who should have served in that army 35 years after Ireland’s joining, but I have not done any service, nor will anyone after this treaty. We were told that all types of things that go against our national character would be forced upon us, but there has been none. We were told that we would be taken over by all types of cultural influences and that our culture would diminish, but has Irish culture ever been stronger than it is now in terms of arts, language and traditions? This is because we have gained a confidence from and have not been afraid of embracing EU membership. Those of us who propose a “yes” 765 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Dara Calleary.] vote are proposing a continuation of this approach to Europe. This approach would tackle it head on and sees every part of our EU membership as an opportunity for Ireland, rather than as a challenge. As a nation and a people, we have the ability, brainpower and strength to make the most of European Union membership and we will continue to do so. On 12 June, we can say to the people of Europe that we are at its heart, are in its engine- room and wish to remain there. Alternatively, we could pull back and decide that, in future, we wish to be on the edges of Europe. While we will not be thrown out of the European Union if we vote “No”, our influence as a player would be considerably diminished and damaged. Such a vote would considerably damage our ability and chances to grow our economy, services and culture further. This chance is not worth taking on foot of opposition based on not be able to read the treaty or not being able to understand what it means. That is not a reason to vote “No” and nor is opposition based on allegations and mistruths that have been spread around for 35 years and which, 35 years later, remain untrue. I intend to vote “Yes” and I encourage my constituents and supporters to do so. We will be working hard to this end, as will the majority of political parties in this House. We do so from a position of strength and look forward to even more strength in future.
Deputy Damien English: I wish to share my time with Deputy Paul Kehoe. I welcome the chance to say a few words on this campaign and to discuss the proposed amendment to the Constitution and the Lisbon treaty, which is a very important subject. It is also worthwhile conducting a frank debate about facts because despite some posters that have appeared, this issue pertains to facts and not to politics. Some campaigners must realise that democracy requires the involvement of good politicians. Democracy needs people and that is what politics is about. Unfortunately, some cases and campaigns lack facts and the media should give proper and worthwhile coverage to all sides in this regard. Hopefully that man and his bus will continue on his own around the country. I will refer to a couple of areas in which Ireland has gained significantly apart from Ireland’s transformation since its accession to the EU. As I was not born until 1978, I was not present before that. However, I read about it and talk about it on a regular basis to my grandparents, parents, other family members and the people I represent. Everyone tells me that Ireland has been utterly transformed since joining the EU all those years ago. Consequently, this area is extremely important. I refer to the benefits of markets, new labour laws, greater rights for people and access to travel, for young people in particular, as well as for opportunities that now exist for people of all ages and people’s rights. Apart from such benefits, however, one forgets that the European project’s greatest original contribution was peace. This aspect also helped us in talks regarding Northern Ireland. While we have benefited greatly since 1973, the idea behind Europe pertains to peace and this point appears to be forgotten in our nationwide debates. People appear to leave this aspect to one side and talk about peace as though it always was present, which is not the case. Moreover, we did not always have the right to free travel or to move around to avail of opportunities in many countries. These are positive aspects. Were a treaty to have negative aspects — I can find none in the treaty under discussion — it sometimes would be worth certain sacrifices to be part of that greater market and that great force in Europe in future. However, this is not the case. I can only find positive aspects to this treaty and am unable to find any negative aspects. This message should get across to the people and they should engage in this issue. Now that an approximate date has been set, six to eight weeks remain for Members to debate this issue properly. People should become interested in it because it is highly important. It will be very important for Ireland in the future to be seen to be proactive 766 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) and pro-European. Our friends and counterparts, predominately in Europe but also in other parts of the world, including businesses and so on, are watching Ireland. We have a good reputation and enjoy strong good will in Europe and its markets. However, this will not con- tinue were we to continue to say “No” to certain matters. We must work with them and give other countries a chance to benefit from a greater Europe in the future. I hope we will do so and I will vote “Yes” in respect of a range of issues. Those who are campaigning for a “No” vote should realise, by reading the document, that what they say is not always true. They should engage in proper debate rather than trying simply to scaremonger and put people off. It is very important to do so. I referred to a range of issues. Speaking as Fine Gael’s spokesperson on labour affairs and small business, this treaty does nothing negative in respect of our markets, Irish jobs or the economy. It can only help to expand it and will bring more benefits. It proposes a faster and more efficient Europe, which is always to the benefit of business. There will be even greater access to markets. Our businesses, exporters and those who seek jobs will have access to far greater opportunities and this can only be a good thing. We will retain our veto in respect of tax policy. We will retain our own tax policy and corporation tax rate and we will choose whether to reduce or raise it. This is not being taken away from us, despite numerous assertions to the contrary. Such assertions constitute scaremongering because it is untrue. Moreover, in many other areas, including neutrality, we will be able to make our own choice in this regard. This Parliament, together with the people of Ireland, will make the decision at any given time in this respect. By ratifying this treaty, Ireland will remain a highly attractive location for multinationals to set up and to continue working. Business will prosper under this treaty. There is an onus on the Government, as Members have asserted many times in this House, to do certain things to help business prosper. While it has done some, there are more to be done. However, that is a separate issue to Europe. This treaty can only enhance the areas of job opportunity, business expansion and growth and access to greater markets. It has helped and will continue to help in respect of employment rights and other issues that Members, including the Acting Chairman, have discussed in recent years. Various Bills have been implemented in the House regarding maternity leave, adoptive leave and so on, all of which come from a proactive Europe. Some- times we lag behind slightly but we are getting there and are catching up. Hopefully we will adopt EU initiatives more expeditiously in future, but that is for another day. Last weekend, I was disappointed to see a prominent businessman backing the “No” cam- paign in this regard. Again, the aforementioned Libertas bus is still going around with only one or two people aboard and I hope it remains empty. I will name five or six different business people and leaders in society who have positively campaigned against this. They are Turlough O’Sullivan, director general of IBEC; Maurice Pratt, group chief executive, C & C Group plc; Paul Nolan, group development manager at Dawn Meats, Waterford; Patricia Callan, director, Small Firms Association; Brian Goggin, group chief executive, Bank of Ireland; and Paul Rellis, general manager, Microsoft Ireland. These business people have stepped up to the mark, put their names to it and have campaigned for a “Yes” vote. The media also should give them coverage and get that message out there. Previously, at Question Time, I stated that business people have a major role in helping politicians to get the treaty across the line and to spread the good word because they are in tune with it. Their voices, along with many others, should drown out the one or two individuals who probably have different agendas than simply blocking this treaty. There is more to their agenda and proper coverage should be given to the comments of the aforementioned people in future. The European Union has expanded using stop-gap measures in recent years. The current structures of the EU were designed for a Union with significantly fewer member states. Over 767 Priority 23 April 2008. Questions
[Deputy Damien English.] the years, the EU has welcomed many new member states through a number of short-term reforms introduced by the Amsterdam and Nice treaties. As a result of this stop-gap approach, it now is necessary to update the workings of the EU for the 27 current member state and any future accession states. It is an accepted point that the European Union must adapt some of its structures to operate in a more efficient and effective manner with greatly increased mem- bership. This must happen by way of the treaty under discussion, the Lisbon treaty, which is beneficial to us all. It provides for faster decision-making, as well as value for money savings. The Lisbon treaty contains a number of institutional changes that are designed to improve the coherence and efficiency of the Union that, in turn, will give it a stronger voice on the world stage. For example, there will be a high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, who will act to increase the visibility and influence of the Union in international affairs. This position is necessary to increase the Union’s presence along with the powerhouses of the United States of America and Russia, as well as the emerging powers of China and India, on the world stage. The Lisbon treaty introduces into the European Union the concept of double majority voting arrangements that, in turn, will make for the more efficient decision-making system that is necessary for the existing worldwide political and economic landscape. The Lisbon treaty will make the EU more democratic by strengthening the role of Da´il E´ ireann and the European Parliament, both of which are elected by the Irish people. Ireland, in relative terms, is a small State by international comparisons. The Lisbon treaty is needed to ensure that it can prosper in a more efficient major economic and political bloc that is otherwise unavailable without the ratification of this treaty. Ireland has been a great benefici- ary of EU integration and the Union will continue to be of benefit to the State. This treaty is required to provide a more efficient and effective Union for Ireland to participate in. Cuireadh an dı´ospo´ ireacht ar athlo´ .
Debate adjourned.
Sitting suspended at 1.30 p.m. and resumed at 2.30 p.m.
Estimates for Public Services 2008: Message from Select Committee. An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Select Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources has completed its consideration of the following revised Estimates for the public services for the service of the year ending 31 December 2008: Vote 30.
Ceisteanna — Questions.
Priority Questions.
————
Telecommunications Services. 65. Deputy Simon Coveney asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the results and conclusions reached by the recently formed international forum on next generation networks; and the way he will progress the issue to promote the roll-out of next generation broadband. [14995/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): My Department has prepared a draft policy paper on next generation broadband, NGB. It is intended that the paper will be finalised shortly and published for consultation. The paper will 768 Priority 23 April 2008. Questions review current communications infrastructure policy and propose actions to promote the roll- out of NGB policy. In this context, it will address the optimum role for the Government in the planning and roll-out of next generation broadband. In February 2008 I convened a meeting of the expert international advisory forum to examine the paper. The forum critiqued a draft of the NGB paper but its members supported the broad thrust of the document and have provided valuable feedback. They offered some additional recommendations and advice on the future trends of the telecommunications and ICT indus- tries and proposed that certain suggestions be explored further. The draft paper is currently being updated to take account of the forum’s contribution and to reflect interdepartmental consultation. This will be finished shortly and I intend to submit the paper to Government prior to publication. I am confident the published paper will set out a strong framework and accompanying actions to promote the roll-out of NGB. This will enable us to build on the excellent progress made recently in the roll-out of broadband generally.
Deputy Simon Coveney: Despite the repeated references of the Minister and his Department to the growth in penetration of broadband based on last year’s figures, the reality is that Ireland continues to lag behind most European countries. The lack of urgency on the issue, particularly in comparison to the urgency accorded to other energy policy issues, has fuelled concern and speculation that the Minister is neglecting this element of his brief while doing a good job in other areas. Does the Minister agree that an international forum was established on 27 February to offer advice on next generation broadband? He said at the time that he expected a paper to be published within weeks. However, today — months later — he still expects the paper to be produced within weeks. On 9 April, in response to a parliamentary question I tabled, he claimed the paper would be ready shortly, yet we are still waiting for it. While we are waiting, the OECD has confirmed that Ireland is falling further behind other European countries on next generation broadband. Can the Minister indicate a clear timeframe as to when the paper will be published and the length of the subsequent consultation period? When will we see a Government action plan along the lines of the plan proposed by Fine Gael several weeks ago on private Members’ business?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: I do not under estimate the difficulties in this area. It is deeply frustrat- ing that people cannot get broadband in parts of the country.
Deputy Simon Coveney: This is about next generation broadband, and bandwidth and speeds.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: I was answering Deputy Coveney’s question. He made a point about what we say on the issue of broadband. I recognise we need to go further in terms of closing the gap and acknowledge that we need to improve in certain areas, but the reality is that dramatic increases have been made. We have the fastest growing broadband take-up of any country in the OECD and we are probably the leading country in respect of mobile broadband take-up.
Deputy Simon Coveney: The Minister is double counting.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: Both the difficulties and the opportunities should be recognised. I am committed to this policy area and I am working around the clock to deliver on it, just as I am in any other area. I refute the suggestion that I am more interested in one area of my brief than in others. In fact, I see the clear connection in terms of delivering energy efficiency 769 Priority 23 April 2008. Questions
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] through digital technology. The development of next generation broadband is critical for a range of social and economic reasons. In regard to the delay from 27 February, I intend publishing within a few weeks and no later than one month. However, I want to get it right and I was willing to spend time in the series of meetings we have held to discuss the feedback from the international advisory forum with the Departments of Finance, Education and Science and Transport, the State procurement agencies and other agencies involved in this area. That is one of the reasons for the slight delay. My intention is——
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: If the Minister would give way, I will allow him to conclude his comments after a brief supplementary question from Deputy Coveney.
Deputy Simon Coveney: Can the Minister tell us when the national industry steering group on next generation broadband access last met, given that it was set up by his Department to promote policy in this area?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: One of the developments in this area was the presentation of a report by the Telecommunication and Internet Federation which has agreed broad principles from its perspective on where we need to go.
Deputy Simon Coveney: When did the steering group last meet?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: That report was welcome for the crucial principles it agreed on the open access nature of broadband development.
Deputy Simon Coveney: Was it six months ago?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: I intend to publish this document and then hold a one-day forum at which industry players, users of broadband and other Departments can discuss how to develop next generation broadband. The paper will set out specific actions which the State can take but it is not only about the State. The level of private sector investment is far more significant than anything coming from the State and is the key driver of progress in this area.
Deputy Simon Coveney: When did the steering group last meet?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: As I pointed out to the Deputy earlier today in the Select Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, the international advisory forum was the main source of advice for this paper, not the steering group. However, I intend to open the paper to full consultation with the industry, users and other interested bodies to commence a process of evolving policy decisions.
Electricity Transmission Network. 66. Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if in view of his repeated statements on smart meters he will guarantee that the roll- out will start by mid-2008 as promised; when he envisages the completion of the programme for Government commitment to have smart meters installed in every home; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15629/08]
Deputy Eamon Ryan: The roll-out of a national smart meter programme is progressing in line with the commitments in the Government’s energy policy framework and the programme for Government. The programme is a central component of our strategy to significantly 770 Priority 23 April 2008. Questions enhance management of demand for electricity and achieve greater energy efficiency through the use of cutting-edge technology. The delivery of smart metering requires a collective response. This is a technically complex and ambitious initiative. The steering group overseeing programme implementation is chaired by the Commission for Energy Regulation and includes representation from Sustainable Energy Ireland, ESB networks, ESB customer supply, independent suppliers and my Depart- ment. Four working groups which also report directly to the steering group are mandated to progress the complex technical aspects of smart metering, including tariffs, billing and data services, networks and customer behaviour. The pilot phase, which will be the start of roll-out, is scheduled to get under way by mid- year. The objective remains to complete the national smart meter programme in five years. Under the ESB’s new strategic framework to 2020, the national smart meter programme will be financed under the ESB networks’ multi-annual investment programme. Smart metering has the recognised potential to deliver a range of benefits including increased energy efficiency, better demand management, reduced emissions, the enabling of micro gener- ation and distributed generation and improved customer service. A cost effective smart meter- ing system will therefore deliver tangible benefits to all consumers of electricity.
Deputy Liz McManus: Does the Minister accept that is a vague answer in terms of what will happen? The elaborate structure he described does not answer the question I asked regarding when roll-out will commence or be completed. I understand the total investment will be in the region of \600 million, so it is very important that the matter is addressed properly. What exactly will be provided to individual households? What capability will be provided by what is being called a “smart meter” and how smart will it be? Is the Minister aware, for example, of the concerns that smart meters will benefit the electricity company more than customers in that its control could be extensive? Will he indicate whether there will be a facility in the smart meter to resell energy to the grid through micro-generation? What exactly will the smart meter provide? We have never heard the answer to this question. What difficulties does the Minister envisage given the concerns expressed by one particular union and the other concerns which I presume would be expressed in regard to the redundancies that would arise from the fact we would no longer, for example, need meter readers?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: The delivery in mid-year will be in July-August and there will be 25,000 meters in the first test phase. It is proper to do this before going to every single house in the country. We need a significant sample such as this so we can test which technologies we want to use and what level of intervention or complexity we need to apply. It is right and proper that those details are worked out in the organisational structure I have just set out involving the regulator, the supply companies, the Department and Sustainable Energy Ireland. My instinct and my direction to them is to be as extensive and elaborate as possible in what we are trying to do. It is not just a meter such as one would have on a wall, as I have in my own house, which tells the customer how much electricity is being used at the time, although that is useful and gives a clear indication of exactly how much electricity is being used when turning on and off devices. However, we need to go beyond that to have the option of variable pricing so the householder may have the benefit of saying: “I will allow people to switch off devices in my property on the basis that I get a lower tariff because I will not be using electricity at the most expensive peak time.” This is an evolution I would like us to avail of because it is the peak electricity supply that is the most expensive in terms of emissions as well as cost for the customer. 771 Priority 23 April 2008. Questions
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.]
The Deputy is correct that it also allows benefits to the supply company, which is not a bad thing. There is a clearly defined gain at present in that it gives the supply company much greater control so it knows where its electricity is going and there is much less opportunity for people to take unpaid electricity off the grid. I see no reason to restrict this as it benefits consumers in the end. We have already seen a change in the regulations to allow micro-generators to supply elec- tricity back to the grid and to sell it within the grid. Those regulatory changes occurred at the end of November when the Commission for Energy Regulation, CER, published a paper recognising a change. The smart metering programme will facilitate and further that develop- ment of micro-generation.
Deputy Liz McManus: Midsummer is in June. Will the Minister be specific as to what, when and where? We are talking about a \10 million investment for this year alone. We have seen many examples, such as with e-government and e-voting, where a lot of money was invested for experimental purposes and proved pretty disastrous. What precisely will be provided through this scheme? Where will it be provided and, in terms of the overall roll-out, what timeframe are we talking about?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: We are talking about mid-year. I will not tie people down to a part- icular date. Mid-year is satisfactory in terms of a timeline indication.
Deputy Liz McManus: This is out for tender.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: We are talking about 25,000 houses, the selection of which will be undertaken on a basis that gives a good statistical analysis of the country overall. It will be done by way of a test grouping which can be measured and which will have to reflect a range of different types of housing and different geographic circumstances. I have every confidence in the engineers in the ESB and other supply companies to deliver this. They are companies that have proven themselves——
Deputy Liz McManus: What exactly are they delivering?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: To a certain extent, the detail of what is actually delivered is something that will be gone through in the test process. I will not pre-empt the work that is ongoing with CER, ESB and others to decide which meters they use and which functions they have. That is something which is being undergone at present by the committee to which I referred. As electrical engineers, they are best placed to come back to us with a selected product and test it——
Deputy Liz McManus: When will they do that?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: It is an ongoing process of engagement on a range of different issues in terms of the meters, prices and the networks for which the customers pay.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: We must move to the next question.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: There is a complex product on which I am confident our best energy people are now delivering.
Deputy Liz McManus: The Minister does not know. 772 Priority 23 April 2008. Questions
Electricity Generation. 67. Deputy Simon Coveney asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he will introduce legislation to set a time period for the complete phasing out of peat as a source of fuel for power generation by setting a clear date after which peat or turf will not be legally allowed to be used in power generation; and if he will introduce legislation to ensure that no new bogs are opened for commercial turf cutting. [14997/08]
Deputy Eamon Ryan: Peat has been and remains an important element of Ireland’s energy mix and still contributes significantly to security of supply by providing diversity in the fuel mix and as the primary indigenous fossil fuel resource in Ireland. It is, however, a declining resource and its overall contribution to the fuel mix for power generation will continue to progressively reduce over the next decade. Environmental sustainability is a key consideration in the con- tinued production and utilisation of the peat resource. Peat has been used for electricity generation since the 1950s. Its contribution peaked in the mid-1960s when it provided just under 40% of Ireland’s total power generation. In 1980, it contributed 21% of the mix for power generation, while in 1995 this figure was 16%. It cur- rently contributes approximately 7% of Ireland’s electricity generation capacity. Peat also contributes significantly to economic activity and the social fabric of the midlands region, with Bord na Mo´ na providing employment for over 1,700 people, both full-time and seasonal, in 2006 and 2007. Bord na Mo´ na owns approximately 7% of Ireland’s peatlands and is the only company involved in the extraction of peat for electricity generation. The current public service obligation order imposes an obligation on the ESB to have avail- able electricity generated from indigenous peat at the generating stations in Shannonbridge, County Offaly, and Lanesborough, County Longford, up to 2019. It also imposes an obligation on the ESB to purchase electricity generated from indigenous peat at Bord na Mo´ na’s Edend- erry power station up to 2015. Bord na Mo´ na is working to progressively deliver 30% co-firing at its Edenderry power plant and is working with the ESB to assess the technical feasibility of a co-firing strategy at Shannonbridge and Lanesborough peat stations. Bord na Mo´ na, with Government agreement, is to develop a portfolio of renewable energy, waste-to-energy and energy research and development projects as part of new strategic directions. Reflecting the environmental significance of Ireland’s bogs, Bord na Mo´ na has developed policies and programmes aimed at protecting and restoring the peatlands in its ownership. Bord na Mo´ na has already confirmed it will not acquire new peatlands for commercial development.
. Additional information not given on the floor of the House Bord na Mo´ na is committed to preserving different bog types as well as areas of special natural beauty and significance. The company mitigates as far as possible the impact of its operations on wildlife habitats and rehabilitates its peatlands after use. To date, it has rehabili- tated some 22% of its landholding. This includes the largest such programme undertaken to date in Europe, where 6,500 hectares have been successfully rehabilitated in north-west Mayo. It is also the case that commercial turf cutting on special areas of conservation and natural heritage areas is already prohibited under the EU habitats regulations and the Wildlife (Amendment) Act 2000. In summary, therefore, the progressive reduction of the contribution of peat to power gener- ation is ongoing as we work to re-balance Ireland’s energy fuel mix towards renewable energy resources. At this point in time, peat still has an important contribution to make to security of supply. The Government is also very mindful of the continued important socio-economic contribution of the peat industry to the midlands region. A legislative ban on all peat extraction 773 Priority 23 April 2008. Questions
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] for electricity generation purposes would not be appropriate at this time. However, the long- term development of any energy supply source can only be ensured within the context of our meeting our overall greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.
Deputy Simon Coveney: I wish to clarify why I put down this question. The issue has raised concerns, particularly among certain employees in the midlands, and understandably so. What I want to ask the Minister is whether he would deem it appropriate to introduce legislation that would give leadership as to the timescale for a phasing out of peat as a fuel source in power stations over a medium to long-term period, which is already Bord na Mo´ na policy, as we increase, over a period of time, the level of biomass and other power-generating fuels in the blend that is mixed with peat. While peat is being phased out over a period of 15 to 20 years, we are also planning for the industries that need to follow peat production in the parts of the country that are hugely reliant on peat as a power source. This is the main reason I ask the Minister whether he intends to introduce legislation on the issue of opening new peat bogs — it makes environmental sense to continue to cut already opened peat bogs until they are finished — and also whether he intends to put legal certainty around when the phasing out of peat would be complete in power station generation.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: Bord na Mo´ na has already committed not to acquire new peatlands for commercial development. With regard to the medium to long-term use of the fuel, there are a number of constraints, one of which is our climate change targets. What we do in the energy area must ensure we meet, for this sector and as part of the overall national effort, our climate change targets. As the price of carbon increases, this will put certain constraints on heavy emissions fuels, regardless of what we do. The market systems will sometimes make it difficult for coal or peat plant to come into operation if carbon prices are set at a high level. We do not have control of that but it is a constraint. Any energy policy must bring us within the constraints of climate change. There is another real constraint. In the substitution of peat in our power plants, we have an opportunity to develop a viable industry with the development of wood or other materials for burning in the peat plants. The difficulty in doing the detailed analysis of it is that even at a 30% replacement rate very large volumes of timber will be required which may divert timber supplies from other end uses for which they may be required. There is a constraint and in that it is difficult to know how we can completely replace peat in the existing power plants with a biomass substitute but it is something that makes sense because, first, it cuts our emissions and, second, it can develop a stable crop for farming. The two key constraints, therefore, are climate change and biomass alternative supplies but the company is making a clear commitment to move towards renewable energy products and renewable energy. To go back to what was said earlier about people who are experts——
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I want to get in a brief supplementary. We are over time already.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: ——Bord na Mo´ na is very good at logistics and management of land and that would provide it with real opportunities in terms of lower emission technologies.
Deputy Simon Coveney: The point of the question is whether the Minister intends to leave this issue to the market, essentially, and to Bord na Mo´ na to bring about change in its own timeframe or whether he intends to introduce legislation to set that timeframe. 774 Priority 23 April 2008. Questions
Deputy Eamon Ryan: I do not have legislation planned in that regard. It is not completely down to the market. That is not what I said. Any energy policy decisions must be made on the basis of us meeting our climate change targets but also, looking at the broad energy security issues, three constraints must be taken into account: security of supply, cost and environment. There are constraints in that regard in terms of the alternative fuel supplies we can get to replace the peat and that is something we will take into account in a wide range of policy decisions.
Energy Policy. 68. Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if the current targets for bio-fuels still stand; if he will review these targets in view of growing concern regarding food prices and supplies worldwide; the percentage he estimates will be imported from developing countries in order to reach Ireland’s target on bio-fuels; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15630/08]
Deputy Eamon Ryan: Growing concerns are being expressed internationally about the con- sequences of increased global demand for bio-fuels for global food stocks as well as a range of sustainability concerns. Developments in European Union policy relating to bio-fuels must take account of these concerns and this is recognised by the Commission and all member states. Ireland is currently working to deliver the target of 5.75% penetration of bio-fuels by 2010. The EU Commission’s new renewable energy directive proposes a minimum mandatory target for all member states of 10% market penetration of bio-fuels in transport by 2020. The directive is currently under discussion with a view to Council agreement by end 2008. The Government is committed to existing targets, but they must be set in the context of a framework for robust sustainability criteria regarding production and deployment. The Commission has proposed such a framework in the new renewable energy directive. The criteria proposed by the Commission aim to ensure that bio-fuels deployed by member states are produced in a sustainable way. They must not contribute towards the degradation of the natural environment, notably the destruction of forests, wetlands or long established grass- land. The criteria will also set strict targets for bio-fuels in terms of the greenhouse gas emis- sions they must save before they can be considered eligible as counting towards national targets. As things stand currently, the feed stocks used for bio-fuel production by member states are generally sourced on the open internationally traded commodities market with little or no information about their origins. It is only by setting stringent sustainability criteria that member states will be able to verify the source of these fuels, and mitigate the cumulative effect of unsustainable practices. I fully support the Commission’s work to ensure member states agree a rigorous sustainability frame- work under the new directive. Monitoring, verification and compliance will be critical to the effectiveness of the sustainability criteria. Moreover, these criteria will place a premium on more sustainable bio-fuels, further encouraging investment in second generation bio-fuels. These fuels, made from non-food crops, are much more productive in terms of fuel produced per hectare and do not have a direct effect on food prices. My Department is also supporting the development of second generation bio-fuels through the Charles Parsons research awards announced last year. I will shortly be launching the public consultation on the proposed bio-fuels obligation as set out in the programme for Government. In that context, EU developments on bio-fuels policy, in light of the emerging concerns in respect of sustainability, will be fully factored in and will 775 Priority 23 April 2008. Questions
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] be publicly debated. The recent introduction by the United Kingdom of a bio-fuels obligation will also be closely monitored by us for lessons to be learned.
Deputy Liz McManus: I thank the Minister for that reply and look forward to the debate on the criteria because it is a matter of great concern. Targets have been set by the Government and by the EU. The EU Commission has stated it will not change those targets yet at the same time we are getting information from bodies as diverse as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank stating the production of bio-fuels is responsible for approximately 30% of the problems relating to food prices, to Oxfam Ireland which is proposing that we change our targets. At the same time motorists who have invested in cars using bio-fuels are com- plaining they cannot easily access the fuels because it is difficult to get them on garage fore- courts and the outlets are few and far between. The Minister is saying we cannot say whether, in importing bio-fuels, we are participating in and encouraging the use of land in a destructive way that should be used for food production. Is he saying we are powerless when it comes to importing? It would be useful to know how much we currently import. On the EU Presidency discussions, I am aware the Slovenian President set up a working group on this area and Ireland participates in that working group. What view are we expressing to our European colleagues? The Minister said we must have a debate but food shortages are happening now and it appears to me that from the point of view of policy the response is very vague in terms of the way the Government is addressing what is literally a burning issue.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: We are being very precise in supporting the European Commission’s proposals that sustainability monitoring be put in place on any bio-fuels bought or sold in the European Union. It is correct that under World Trade Organisation rules we cannot differen- tiate between bio-fuels from one country or another and we do not have full traceability in place to examine the origin of the supply. It is right for the European Commission to insist that we develop this system. We are far more effective in adopting such a system as part of the European Union than developing it ourselves. It is much more effective to do it as part of the Commission proposals. The second point is that we develop bio-fuels which have a genuine emissions reduction because there is a question over certain bio-fuels where the extent of energy put into the product exceeds that which is taken out of it. Those two key developments in bio-fuel policy in the European Commission is something we support within the agreement that must be reached on the overall EU Commission policy by the end of this year.
Deputy Liz McManus: How much do we import currently? I do not know if the Minister appreciates our concerns regarding the approach he adopts as a green Minister. When he talks about sustainability there is a concern about climate change and increasing CO2 emissions but this is a separate issue. This is a matter of world poverty and people being directly affected. That does not necessarily come within the term “sustainability”. It must be guaranteed that that is part of the requirements.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: I will come back to the details. I do not have the figures with me on the amount of bio-fuels. I agree that sustainability cannot be defined where it is leading to real food poverty across the world.
Deputy Liz McManus: Why does the Minister not have the information? It is part of the question. 776 Priority 23 April 2008. Questions
Deputy Eamon Ryan: In Opposition in recent years I continually referred to concerns that existed about the development of bio-fuels in that it was not the panacea and that it would raise significant environmental and food price issues. I raised that issue on numerous occasions for several years before it started to evolve as a clear problem because we were 3 o’clock aware of those sustainability issues. There is, however, a good policy reason for us to try to maintain a fuel supply source separate to the conventional oil supply source, particularly if it is one where we can lower emissions and it can be a second generation bio-fuel and we can benefit from non-food crops. That is a worthy ambition because if we suffered a serious oil shock similar to the 1970s when oil from the Middle East was cut off, it would benefit us to have even a 5% availability of fuel supply that would keep essential machin- ery running. For that strategic policy reason alone we should develop such a supply but we should be careful that it is not at the expense of the world poor.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Ceist 69.
Deputy Liz McManus: Can I ask a brief question?
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I am sorry, Deputy. We are two minutes over time.
Deputy Liz McManus: I asked a question and the Minister did not answer it.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Chair has no control over the nature of the answer given.
Deputy Liz McManus: We continue to get such responses from this Minister.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I call Question No. 69 in ainm an Teachta Joe McHugh.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: I will come back to the Deputy on the statistic. She has a valid point and I will ensure the statistic, if available, is provided.
Deputy Liz McManus: I thank the Minister.
Telecommunications Services. 69. Deputy Joe McHugh asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the number of MANs that do not have sufficient backhaul connection; the number of MANs that do not have sufficient last mile connection; and the initiatives he will take to maximise the usage of MANs to assist in the roll-out of next generation networks. [14998/08]
Deputy Eamon Ryan: The provision of broadband services is, in the first instance, a matter for the private sector. Broadband service providers operate in a fully liberalised market, regu- lated, where appropriate, by the independent Commission for Communications Regulation, ComReg. The role of the Government is to formulate regulatory and infrastructure policies to facilitate the provision of high quality telecommunications services by competing private sector service providers. The widespread provision of broadband services continues to be a priority for the Government. In that regard my Department has undertaken initiatives to address the gaps in broadband coverage. These include grant aid under the group broadband scheme, the procure- ment of broadband services under the national broadband scheme to those remaining areas of the country without broadband and investment in metropolitan area networks, MANs. By the middle of this year, local and regional authorities will have constructed high-speed, wholesale, fibre optic networks in more than 90 cities and towns under the MANs programme. 777 Priority 23 April 2008. Questions
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] Wholesale connectivity to international points of presence, also known as backhaul, is available to service providers using the MANs through the main backhaul providers, currently Eircom, BT Ireland and ESB Telecoms. All MANs have the option of connectivity to the Eircom backhaul network and a number of MANs also have additional backhaul connectivity to the other networks. Backhaul connections can be negotiated between the service provider and backhaul provider as required. Service providers are using the fibre-optic MANs to allow last mile connectivity over a range of platforms, including fibre, wireless, mobile, digital subscriber line or DSL and cable. A policy paper on next generation broadband is being finalised in my Department and will be published shortly for public consultation. The objective of the paper is to set out a frame- work for the development of next generation broadband in Ireland, including addressing the optimum role for Government in facilitating the delivery of new broadband services by the private sector. The deployment of State assets, including MANs, to assist the telecommunica- tions sector move to next generation broadband will also be addressed in the context of the next generation broadband paper. A value for money and policy review of phase 1 of the MANs programme is also being finalised and is due to be published shortly. Both the review and the policy paper on next generation broadband will guide the further development of broadband policy, including in the specific area of future investment in the MANs programme.
Deputy Joe McHugh: On a point of information, I did not quite catch the number of MANs programmes.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: There are 90.
Deputy Joe McHugh: How many of the 90 are complete?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: There are 90 due to be completed by the middle of this year.
Deputy Joe McHugh: We must be realistic about this argument concerning MANs and the overall deployment of broadband. MANs will eventually be a solution. I do not have the specifics today but many MANs have fibre optics underground and are not live. Some of them certainly do not have backhaul or backbone driving them. That is a serious issue and I require specifics on how many MANs are live. When MANs become live, they will be a solution for our urban areas. How are we competing in light of international standards already set with respect to next generation broadband? For example, Singapore, Finland and Sweden have up to 50 megabit services in their broadband deployment solutions. How do we compete in terms of public policy intervention? There is public policy intervention in the UK and Ofcom has realised there must be public policy intervention. I am somewhat disappointed the Minister noted in his preamble that broadband is a matter for the private sector. Broadband is not completely a matter for the private sector and the public sector is also relevant. If we do not have public sector policy intervention, we will never have broadband in rural areas. I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for his patience. Simply put, what confidence can the Minister instill into the Irish electorate, who are trying valiantly to get broadband in rural areas, that the new national broadband scheme which the Minister has massive confidence in will service rural areas? MANs are not the solution. 778 Priority 23 April 2008. Questions
On a final note——
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I will call the Deputy again.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: The national broadband scheme is designed exactly to cover rural areas. We are currently tendering and the winning company will cover areas which are not currently covered. That is the purpose of the scheme and it is exactly what it is designed to do. Going back to what Deputy Coveney stated, the provision of broadband completely across the country is a first step, not the conclusion. We must then leap forward and get next gener- ation broadband, which is faster and has new characteristics. For example, there will be move- ment from one network to another, as a person may well be on a mobile network connecting to a fixed-line network. In that context, the development of MANs has been very useful. It was an important invest- ment in 2003, when 3,000 people were connected to broadband, to push the existing operators into the market to start delivering products. Eircom and the main cable companies, in part- icular, were not doing this. The market will not deliver everything, but the experience internationally in those countries which are most successful is that competition between the likes of a cable company and a mainline provider delivers the quickest and cheapest products. Pushing the companies to com- pete with each other is a very good public policy to benefit the public approach. There are instances where it does not deliver and with such cases, we intervene with projects like the national broadband scheme. There will be others. I will give an example that may make use of MANs in a very effective way. CMOD, the State body with responsibility for procurement of public service development, is engaging with every Department and State agency and telling them to use a number of different service providers when contracting for telecommunications and broadband services. This helps to gen- erate the business case, particularly in smaller rural Irish towns so the services can be delivered to other businesses as well. The State is providing a lead by its own procurement policy to make the business case for people to connect to towns and MANs that might not otherwise be connected. In the long run, MANs will be a good investment because we will need quality fibre optics. They provide this. I want to see all operators, including Eircom, using them in a very effective way to deliver new services.
Deputy Joe McHugh: In fairness to the Minister, he knows his subject area. Not unlike the Liverpool football team, which I follow, it is a good thing on paper. Much of the Minister’s theory is very good on paper. Getting down to the basics, we are discussing next generation broadband but we are in the business of playing catch-up with countries I mentioned, such as Finland, Sweden and Singa- pore. My fear and that of the public is that the company which wins the tender for the national broadband scheme will resort to using outdated broadband technologies to act as a solution for 100% coverage. Is now not the time to ensure we are aiming for next generation broadband? The Minister referred to the technicalities, as it will be a new type of system. In what way is that stipulated within the tendering contract? On the original question, of the 90 MANs, how many are live or running with backhaul?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: I cannot, in the middle of a tendering process, go into the specific contract details because the issue is subject to a competitive tendering process. On a broad 779 Other 23 April 2008. Questions
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] basis, we wish to be in a position where we can ramp up speeds. The number of MANs is currently approximately 60 or 65. It changes as many will have been opened in the first quarter or half of this year. To apply a football metaphor on our work, unlike the poor defender last night, we will put our right foot on the ball rather than try to head the ball out of the goal. I am confident we can make a leap and not just play catch-up with broadband.
Other Questions.
————
Energy Resources. 70. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his views on IBEC’s concerns regarding potential loss of competitiveness in view of the renewable energy sector here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14675/08]
Deputy Eamon Ryan: Our capacity to deliver a secure energy supply at competitive cost is critical for Ireland’s ability to attract and retain foreign direct investment. It is also critical for all sectors of indigenous Irish enterprise competing in global markets. Increasing the contri- bution of indigenous renewable energy will improve security of supply by substituting for expensive and volatile fossil fuel imports. It will also enhance environmental sustainability by reducing CO2 and other emissions. Renewable energy contributes, therefore, to the creation of a long-term, secure and stable energy investment framework and to competitive energy supply. The exponential rise in gas, oil and coal prices on global markets during the past 12 months is the key factor in increased energy costs for Irish business and consumers. In an era of high fossil fuel prices, the competitiveness of renewable energy technologies will continue to grow demonstrably. Ireland is a price taker in terms of fossil fuels. Indigenous renewable energy sources will progressively reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. Some renewable technologies are already at or near market competitiveness and their relative position will only be improved in the face of increasingly expensive fossil fuel prices. Some international experts are of the view that increasing renewable energy usage also helps reduce overall prices by reducing the fuel risk exposure of companies to volatile fossil fuel price rises. We are investing significantly in national energy infrastructure, which is critical for social, economic and regional development. IBEC has endorsed the priority need for invest- ment in transmission and distribution networks, power generation capacity and electricity inter- connection. This investment will underpin economic competitiveness and enable the integration of renewable energy on to the grid.
Deputy Liz McManus: This question was tabled in the context of job losses and the concerns expressed by the business community and Forfa´s regarding inflation and the high cost of services, not only in the energy sector but in the extremely expensive area of telecommunica- tions. I fully endorse what the Minister stated. The business sector and IBEC support the policy he promotes. However, questions arise as to how that policy will be paid for. When one con- siders the extent of infrastructural investment required, one must also ask how we will get from here to there. The ESB referred to an infrastructural investment of \22 billion and the relevant report indicates that an investment of approximately \800 million will be required in respect of the grid. These are enormous commitments. Apart from a notional commitment in the Department’s Vote, which was discussed, in the context of the Revised Estimates, at this morning’s meeting of the Select Committee on 780 Other 23 April 2008. Questions
Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, the Government is offering nothing in respect of the developments to which I refer. I presume consumers will be obliged to pay the bill. The latter is the issue that concerns those in business and the people who are paying these bills at present. During this morning’s debate at the select committee, it emerged that the dividend paid by energy companies to the Government is not included in the figure for appropriations in aid. I presume that money could be invested in infrastructural development. Will the Minister clarify how he envisages how the bill will be paid?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: As I understand it, the dividend is paid to the Department of Finance. Our overall budget allocation is then given to us by that Department. The issue of high energy prices is crucial. We are engaged in a retreat from fossil fuels. At the same time, my Department is promoting an advance in digital technologies. The latter requires a great deal of electricity. As the advance into such technologies proceeds, it is a real competitive issue to have good, clean, green electricity available for use. There were several reasons electricity prices here were so high in recent years. However, the key reason was our exposure to fossil fuel as a percentage of our fuel mix.
Deputy Liz McManus: Those prices were artificially managed for reasons of competition. What the Minister is saying is not strictly true.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: It is my opinion.
Deputy Liz McManus: I do not believe the Minister is correct.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: The second reason related to very poor performance by a number of ESB plants during peak periods. We have, therefore, an urgent need to keep electricity prices here low. By investing in renewable sources of energy, we can do so. The fuel price is free. As already stated, renewable energy often provides a good hedge against varying gas prices and brings the overall cost of electricity down. It also subvents the public service obligation to support peat power plants. It is open to us to develop a renewable energy industry that will bring about price competitiveness rather than increased costs. We must, however, consider the long-term position. We are approaching a peak in global oil production and we are also at the end of the gas supply lines. If we continue to rely on fossil fuels for 90% of our needs, we will be placed in an increasingly poor competitive position. It makes economic sense to switch to renewable sources of energy because they are cheaper and represent a direct return for the people.
Deputy Liz McManus: No one is arguing about the need to move to renewable sources of energy. I wish the Minister would not give the standard reply on each occasion these issues are raised. This matter revolves around businesses surviving in an extremely difficult economic climate. The Minister must respond in respect of the difficulties businesses have at present in the context of paying high energy bills. I presume those businesses will also be obliged to pay for the infrastructural development required to move to renewable sources of energy. This is a practical and short-term issue and concerns have been expressed about it by IBEC. Who is carrying out the economic analysis required to ensure that people who can pay the bills relating to the development of our infrastructure are employed here?
Deputy Simon Coveney: There is no need for the Minister to convince us on the merits of the shift to renewable energy. The issue at hand is how we are to adapt existing infrastructure to facilitate that shift. One of the factors in the increasing price of energy is that we are required to factor the cost of carbon into the price of electricity. Is the Government examining ways in 781 Other 23 April 2008. Questions
[Deputy Simon Coveney.] which some of that money can be recouped? Electricity producers such as the ESB are given their allocation of carbon for free but they factor the cost of carbon into the price they charge to consumers. Is the Minister considering introducing something similar to, for example, a windfall tax which could create the type of fund, to which Deputy McManus referred, that is needed to facilitate competitiveness and infrastructural development?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: Yes. I explicitly support the development of the emissions trading scheme in such a way that rather than giving free allocations, energy providers will be obliged to auction in order to purchase. I look forward to the introduction of such a change to the scheme so that we can obtain greater efficiencies in our electricity system. This change will also deliver funds that will help develop some of the infrastructure we need.
Deputy Simon Coveney: That will not happen until after 2014.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: No, it will be 2012. If possible, we will do it sooner. However, it must be done within the European Union context. We will need to develop the infrastructure, particularly that relating to the grid, and this will help us deliver some of the technologies to which I referred earlier. That will probably be one of the biggest constraints. I replied to Deputy McManus’s original question in the context of IBEC’s concerns. While we may agree regarding the wisdom of switching to renewable energy sources and the competi- tive advantage that comes therefrom, it is clear that work remains to be done with IBEC in this regard.
Deputy Liz McManus: IBEC supports the Minister.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: Perhaps what we should do is cite the work of the CBI — IBEC’s counterpart in the UK — which has drawn up a very progressive and ambitious programme of change.
Deputy Liz McManus: The Minister is being very unfair. I do not normally defend IBEC because it is not my role to do so. In this instance, however, he should listen to what IBEC has to say.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: I listen with due consideration and every respect to IBEC. However, I cite the CBI’s recent report as a best case example of industry groups seeing the opportunities as well as the challenges that exist in the context of our new energy future.
Mining Industry. 71. Deputy Noel J. Coonan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he plans to introduce compensation for people suffering health problems as a consequence of working in underground mines in the past; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15455/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Tony Killeen): I have no plans to introduce a specific scheme to provide for compen- sation to people suffering health problems as a consequence of working in underground mines. While mining requires a State mining facility lease or licence under the Minerals Development Acts 1940 to 1999, it is undertaken in this country by private enterprise. Accordingly any issue of compensation would be a matter between the relevant employees and their employers. Former miners who suffer health problems as a consequence of working in underground mines may be entitled to disability or occupational injuries benefits under the social welfare 782 Other 23 April 2008. Questions code. It is now a standard condition of any mining lease or licence that the holder take out and maintain both employers’ and public liability insurance for the duration of the term of the lease or licence. Employers are also required to comply with the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005.
Deputy Noel J. Coonan: I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I am disappointed he is not prepared, or is indicating an unwillingness, to introduce a scheme for miners who kept the industry going during the so-called bad times and who now suffer from an extremely debilitat- ing disease, pneumoconiosis, which affects their respiratory systems, particularly their lungs. A similar scheme was introduced in Europe, particularly in Britain by miners there, but they were stronger in numbers and had more power. We are ignoring them here. The Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan’s party leader, expressed concern about human rights in Tibet but one does not have to go that far. The human rights of people in Ballingarry, Arigna and Castlecomer are being denied by this Government and have been denied by previous Governments. Last year, the Minister’s former ministerial colleague indicated publicly on radio that the Government had settled on a compensation scheme for those miners, but an election came up. I call on the Minister to honour the commitment of his colleague who did a lot of work for this country and for the Minister’s party. During the term of the previous Government, he said that a scheme was ready to be introduced. Why is the scheme not being delivered now? Why is the Minister ignoring the matter now that he is in a new Administration? I welcome the Minister’s commit- ment to meet the miners. I would also like to hear the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan’s com- ments on this matter as he is the Minister with responsibility for it. Is he prepared to introduce this scheme?
Deputy Tony Killeen: Deputy Coonan is correct in saying that previous Ministers have grappled unsuccessfully with this matter. I am not familiar with whatever undertakings he is referring to prior to the election, but I am sure he will make that information available to me at some stage. The fundamental difference between the situation in this country and in the United Kingdom is that the British mining industry was nationalised. Clearly, in that instance, the government was de facto the miners’ employer and ultimately responsible for whatever occupational ill health, including respiratory difficulties, they suffered from. If we want to progress this issue seriously I am more than happy to meet the people involved. It will be necessary, however, in conjunction with the Department of Social and Family Affairs to come up with an innovative scheme that will successfully ring-fence these people and distinguish them from others. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle will know, more than most, that quite a number of others suffer from workplace-related illnesses or disabilities. Ultimately, if there is to be success in this area, such an innovative approach will be required. I am more than happy to meet those involved and to discuss the matter with the Minister for Social and Family Affairs.
Deputy Noel J. Coonan: I thank the Minister of State for his reply and I look forward to working on the matter with him. From a political viewpoint there is nothing to be gained from it for any of us, but it is important to look after the well-being and welfare of miners and their families. These were State mines. They were leased by the State to people who ran them for the State. In effect therefore it is not true to say that the State can wipe its hands of the matter. These people must be looked after.
Deputy Tony Killeen: I will certainly examine that element. There is a short time period within which the State had some responsibility in this regard — a more direct responsibility than employers in other instances. Unfortunately, if a solution is to be found on that narrow point, the information I have is that it would benefit no more than a handful of people, perhaps 783 Other 23 April 2008. Questions
[Deputy Tony Killeen.] as few as two or three. Deputy Coonan and others who have raised this issue have a slightly larger number of people in mind.
Telecommunications Services. 72. Deputy Shane McEntee asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the progress on the National Broadband Scheme; his views on whether it will achieve 100% coverage; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15454/08]
78. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the position regarding the commencement of the national broadband scheme; the qualifying criteria and application process for areas currently not served by broadband; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14640/08]
Deputy Eamon Ryan: I propose to take Questions Nos. 72 and 78 together. The role of the Government is to formulate regulatory and infrastructure policies to facilitate the provision of high quality telecommunications services by competing private sector service providers. The widespread provision of broadband services continues to be a priority for the Government. In that regard my Department has undertaken initiatives to address the gaps in broadband coverage. These included providing grant aid under the group broadband scheme and ongoing investment in metropolitan area networks. There are still some parts of the country where the private sector will be unable to justify the commercial provision of broadband services. Accordingly, the procurement process for a national broadband scheme, NBS, is under way. The NBS will provide broadband services to areas that are currently unserved and will ensure that all reasonable requests for broadband are met. Homes and premises that are more difficult to reach are also being examined and potential solutions are being considered. Consequently, it is expected that all homes and prem- ises in currently unserved areas will be offered a broadband service. The first phase of the procurement process — the pre-qualification questionnaire — is now complete and four candidates pre-qualified to enter the next phase of the procurement process. The four candidates were, in alphabetical order: BT Communications Ireland Limited Consor- tium, Eircom Limited, Hutchinson 3G Ireland Limited, and IFA-Motorola Consortium. Following the withdrawal of the IFA-Motorola Consortium as a candidate, the remaining three candidates participated in competitive dialogue with my Department and are developing their proposed solutions to meet my Department’s requirements for the delivery of broadband to the unserved areas of the country. It is anticipated that a preferred bidder will be selected and appointed in July 2008, with roll-out to commence as soon as possible thereafter.
Deputy Simon Coveney: While I feel like something of a broken record on this issue, there is nonetheless a number of questions I would like to ask the Minister about recent events. We know now that there will be a judicial review following a challenge taken by a satellite broad- band company to the terms of reference for the national broadband scheme. Can the Minister outline what the basis of that challenge is? He obviously cannot get involved in making the case one way or the other because that is for the courts to decide, but he can certainly give us an outline as to the basis of the concern behind that legal challenge. Do the Minister and his Department anticipate that this will delay the national broadband scheme proceeding? The scheme was due to start from June onwards. Perhaps more importantly, can the Minister clarify how an area qualifies to be part of the national broadband scheme? The Minister seems to be suggesting that they are areas where 784 Other 23 April 2008. Questions the private industrial sector says it cannot provide broadband under normal market conditions — in other words, there is market failure. However, the areas the industry says it cannot cover do not tally accurately with areas where consumers say they cannot get broadband. What will happen in small pocket areas after July when consumers contact me or the Department to complain that they cannot get broadband facilities, but the industry does not necessarily agree? A map on the Minister’s own website marks in red areas of the country that supposedly cannot currently receive broadband but which will be covered by this scheme. Those areas do not tally with the reality of many parts of the country which cannot get it. Will the Minister clarify how areas qualify to benefit from this scheme?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: First, I am reluctant to say anything in terms of anyone’s court chal- lenge, and particularly not to outline the case for someone from the other side. If the Deputy does not mind, I will restrict my comments in that regard.
Deputy Simon Coveney: Perhaps the Minister can comment on the timetable.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: The timetable is that there is a hearing for a judicial review on 10 June. My expectation and hope is that it will not unduly delay the development of the completion of contracts and the roll-out of the programme. That is something that will be subject to judicial decision but my firmly held expectation is that we will continue this project on time and deliver as soon as possible because we do need it urgently as a piece of public infrastructure. As regards how an area qualifies, the only way is to see what services are available at present. The nature of the scheme is designed to concentrate on areas that do not have coverage, which is exactly what it is doing. This is a changing area and broadband penetration has effectively doubled in the past year. Nine months ago we did not have a single customer on mobile broadband, while now there are 129,000 such customers. Therefore the facility is rolling out and changing in an evolving process about which we cannot be exact until we actually set the deadline. Even in the two or three months between now and that time we may see technology being rolled out. It is right for us to concentrate on areas that do not have coverage.
Deputy Simon Coveney: Is it the industry or the consumer that makes the case?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: It is the technical and scientific assessment. There will always be houses that cannot be covered for a variety of reasons. Even in our current system under the universal service obligation, which we discussed earlier, there are houses that the fixed-line provider cannot get to. In such circumstances alternatives will always be put in place. In terms of broad- band, the most likely development is the use of satellite to connect such locations if they cannot be connected by any other means. We are not leaving any houses behind. The aim of the scheme is to ensure that areas currently without broadband get it by whatever technology is selected by the winners of the competitive tender — whether it is Y-Mex, wireless, 3G or fixed- line. That is something the winning company in the tendering process will have to decide. The design of the scheme is to get to those areas that are not covered. One must use a map to decide what those areas are. The only way of deciding it is on the basis of scientific analysis of what is available.
Deputy Liz McManus: I refer to the idea that the consumer will be facilitated where it is technically possible. There is a stipulation that the scheme will provide for the consumer on reasonable request. That seems like a lot of wriggle room for a company to say that this is an unreasonable request and that it will not be provided for even though, from the point of view of the individual, it may be reasonable in enabling him or her to work from home in a rural 785 Other 23 April 2008. Questions
[Deputy Liz McManus.] area. Who will arbitrate on whether a request is reasonable? If we are dependent on the private company to provide, and it is allowed this wriggle room, it seems very easy to cherry-pick. Does the Minister accept it is curious that he says satellite is the option in exceptional cases that cannot otherwise be provided for when the satellite providers are seeking a judicial review?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: I said I am reluctant to discuss the details of the judicial review but there will always be exceptions, no matter what technology we deliver and what country one is in. By dint of geography there will be houses that cannot be covered as there are in the delivery of the universal service obligation with regard to fixed lines. In those circumstances, it is right for us to allow for an alternative technology. The companies have an interest in attracting customers — it is a way of building a customer base. Whatever technology is used, it is likely to involve masts and an extensive network of radio connectivity in some areas. One does not want to leave those customers behind. The specific decision on any individual house is a technical decision. Currently, ComReg, in conjunction with the companies, determines how the technical term of all reasonable requests is defined. That will continue as it works at present with Eircom or a fixed line provider.
Deputy Joe McHugh: Continuing in the same vein as Deputy McManus but bringing it to a local level, let us consider a small dispersed community with a small population, outside the unbundling loop and for whom fibre optic technology and wireless solution is not available. This is not hypothetical; I refer to places such as Meenletterbale, Leckemy and places like north Inishowen. Will there be a facility within the national broadband scheme to ensure that communities that are not profitable for a satellite solution are part of the 100% access? Hypo- thetically, if Eircom does not win the contract, will it be favourable to unbundling the exchanges?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: Just as I do not wish to talk about a legal case, we are in the middle of a tendering process so I will not speculate on what a company might do.
Deputy Joe McHugh: Is it likely to?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: The principle here is to get to those communities and the definition used is the areas that do not have coverage at present under mobile, fixed line or other wireless services. Satellite covers most of the country so that exists as a covering system but was not what we were examining in the mapping process. It was to do with the communities that do not have other technologies. There may be exceptions such as houses that are always difficult to get to. We must allow flexibility in that regard but the principle of the scheme is to get to communities with a new technological platform. To a certain extent, whatever company wins, the benefit from this process will be that it will increase competition and encourage other companies not involved in this scheme in rural Ireland. It is no harm to have competing plat- forms to get better coverage.
Deputy David Stanton: What is the penetration rate when the mobile broadband subscribers are stripped from the figures? How often is the broadband providers price comparison section of the Government’s broadband website updated? I understand from the programme for Government that there is a promise to extend the current free schemes to provide free broadband for older people. What progress has been made on the initiative and what timescale can we expect?
786 Other 23 April 2008. Questions
Deputy Simon Coveney: I have a question that will require a short answer. What will house- holds be asked to pay under the national broadband scheme? Will it be an average market price, such as \15, \20 or \30 per month? Will it be the same across the country? How is the price determined per household or per business for the provision of broadband under the broadband scheme?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: The intention is to replicate what is available in the rest of the country in these areas, in terms of speed and other conditions——
Deputy Simon Coveney: And on price.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: ——across a range of service issues, as I understand it. I am reluctant because one cannot be precise in terms of contracts when one is in the middle of a tendering process.
Deputy Simon Coveney: Surely they know what they are tendering for.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: It is a competitive tendering process and the issue of tender documents is due on 28 April, as I said earlier at a committee meeting. I do not wish to be specific because I do not wish to restrict anything. In general, the principle is to have the same service as is available in the rest of the country. I must revert to Deputy Stanton in respect of the penetration issue in terms of mobile providers. Up to the past month the OECD did not allow mobile figures to be included in penetration rates and this disadvantaged Ireland relatively because we have a high level of mobile penetration or mobile take-up compared to other countries. The size of households was another issue that disadvantaged us. I must revert to Deputy Stanton in respect of updates on the price comparison website. The broadband for older people scheme is primarily an issue for the Department of Social and Family Affairs and I apologise for not being in a position to give more details. I will revert to the Deputy with specific details from the Department.
Alternative Energy Projects. 73. Deputy Ciara´n Lynch asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if there are plans to invest in seaweed being used for bio-fuels; the situation in relation to using seaweed for bio-fuels; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14659/08]
Deputy Eamon Ryan: The programme for Government commits to the development of an Irish bio-fuels industry and to the sustainable development and deployment of indigenous bioenergy resources. In the context of our renewable energy ambitions we need to mobilise as yet untapped biomass resources, including the potential offered by marine algae or seaweed. Work is under way to determine what the marine environment might contribute to developing the national bio-fuels capacity. The analysis will include identifying the necessary research, development and demonstration projects to realise any such potential. Sustainable Energy Ireland, SEI, is therefore commissioning analysis of the potential of marine algae as a source of bio-fuels for Ireland. This work will provide a comprehensive basis on which to inform research and development work on the potential use of marine algae for renewable energy. It will also provide data on the bio-fuels capacity that could potentially be derived from the marine environment. Tenders for the study are currently being evaluated by SEI. 787 Other 23 April 2008. Questions
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.]
I am advised that the study will take up to six months once the tender is awarded. In light of its findings we will be better equipped to quantify the scale of the potential marine resource for bio-fuels development and to develop a strategy. I expect SEI to work very closely with the Marine Institute on this initiative.
Deputy Liz McManus: I welcome the initiative taken by SEI and the Minister to explore this particular possibility to use seaweed or algae for bio-fuels. A source, where there is a nutrient rich environment, is available to us and regrettably we have had problems in respect of agricul- tural run-off. Is it possible for the Departments of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to undertake a joint project when the research is complete? It may be limited in its application but it is a source that creates no problems with regard to the production of food. As in other areas, second generation bio-fuels can deal with a form of waste or the result of contamination that can be put to productive use.
Deputy Eamon Ryan: I agree with the Deputy about the potential benefits in this area. We have a fundamental problem regarding energy in that we will never get anything as good as petrol. I saw an analysis recently which showed the return on energy investment. For explor- ation petroleum which is extracted and processed, there is a return of 20 units of energy for every single unit of energy put in. The difficulty we have with biofuels and other new replace- ment technologies is that the energy return can be of the order of one or two to one. For every unit of energy put in, one might only get one unit of energy back. The real potential from second generation biofuels is the technology which allows that leap forward. Biodynamic bio- logically processes are being used to get a greater return. There is a close connection between the Irish Marine Institute and our Department in this area, and with Science Foundation Ireland. Many of the research projects our Department set up in the Beaufort and geoscience area were targeted at this issue. Many of the marine projects now come under the remit of the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, but there is still a significant connection, in tandem with a strong working group. Our renewable energy development group met for the first time three weeks ago and it includes representatives from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Irish Marine Institute as well as our own Department officials — recognising that the initiative must be interdepartmental.
Deputy David Stanton: What degree of international liaison is going on in this area? Is the Minister aware of some very exciting research in the United States, for example, where they are producing biodiesel from algae not in the marine environment, but in tanks onshore using light energy? It is very exciting and advanced. Rather than reinventing the wheel, what type of international liaison is going on? When we speak of using other materials for biofuels, has the Minister’s Department or the Government looked again recently at sugar beet to produce ethanol? This crop was grown widely in Ireland and the technology and expertise exists. Does the Minister agree that it produces a very high return and it would be very worthwhile to investigate its possibilities?
Deputy Eamon Ryan: This is an international issue because all the main energy companies are now investing in what is called clean energy finance. Investment in this area has gone from about \24 billion in 2006 to roughly \110 billion last year, a massive growth. There is enormous interest where any research initiative is exhibited by international financial people to determine who gets the technology to develop it. We are keeping our eyes on what developments are occurring internationally. 788 Adjournment 23 April 2008. Debate Matters
In terms of sugar beet and the use of ethanol as a development technology, this again is a highly scientific area and one must comply with the conditions the EU is seeking, namely, an assessment of the emission returns, which can otherwise be defined in terms of the return on energy investment, and the source. The Brazilian Government maintains ethanol produced in Brazil gives a much higher return in terms of the reduction in emissions than similar Irish technology. That has to be proven and tested. Going back to what we discussed earlier in terms of the food price rises that are occurring, the real problem is developing around ethanol because the use of corn and maize for its pro- duction in the mid-west of the United States in particular is driving up prices, as well as oil prices generally, since oil is an input for food production. This is something we can discuss in more detail when we come to debate our biofuels obli- gation, but I am reluctant to hang my hat on any single technology at present, particularly where one is competing against Brazil directly. The Brazil technology is based on sugar cane, which fits the sustainability criteria, as long as rain forests are not being knocked down, and they have a much higher return on their energy inputs. However, that is not to rule it out. Where we had the infrastructure in place, it made sense to use it. Whether it may be retrospec- tively introduced is something we have to look at in more detail.
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) Deputies John O’Mahony and Joe McHugh — the ongoing dispute between the Irish Pharmaceutical Union and the Health Service Executive; (2) Deputy Martin Ferris — the need for a new primary school building at Blennerville, Tralee; (3) Deputy Dinny McGinley — the critical situation in Scoil Mhuire, Stranorlar, County Donegal, due to lack of space, inadequate facilities, overcrowding and the urgent need to replace the school as soon as possible; (4) Deputy Jimmy Deenihan — the delay in appointing design team consultants for the proposed new school at Blennerville, Tralee, County Kerry; (5) Deputy Denis Naughten — the need for the Minister for Health and Children to outline her plans for the provision of acute medical and surgical care for the people of Roscommon, Galway, Westmeath, Longford, Leitrim and Offaly following the HSE’s decision to close the inpatient surgery and accident and emergency departments at Roscommon County Hospital and transfer them to Portiuncula Hospital, Ballin- asloe, on an interim basis; (6) Deputy Dan Neville — funding for A Vision For Change; (7) Deputy Chris Andrews — that the Minister introduces the sale of flats scheme as a matter of urgency and that he gives a timeframe for its introduction and outlines the reasons for its delay; (8) Deputy Kieran O’Donnell — the plans the Minister for Health and Children has in place to resolve the dispute with pharmacists so as to ensure that the public can have access to medicines under all community drug schemes; (9) Deputy James Bannon — the need for the Minister to give the go-ahead for Ballymahon vocational school’s refurbishment project to go to tender without further procrastination or reconsideration on her part and if she will make a statement on the matter; (10) Deputy Joe Costello — the need to update the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977 to ensure that multiple sclerosis patients can avail of best treatment under medical prescription; (11) Deputy Leo Varadkar — that the Minister for Foreign Affairs make a state- ment to the Dail on the efforts he is making to support the struggle for individual freedom, human rights, press freedom and democracy in the Peoples Republic of China and whether he will use the opportunity of the Olympic Games to increase pressure on the socialist regime; (12) Deputy Willie Penrose — the need for the Minister for Education and Science to ensure 789 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[An Leas-Cheann Comhairle.] progress on the new school building for Athlone Community College, which was given approval for architectural planning in November 2006; (13) Deputy Margaret Conlon — the need to look at patient services and patient safety in Cavan-Monaghan given the publication this week of an interim report on the east transformation programme which will see a reduction in services in Monaghan Hospital; (14) Deputy Charlie O’Connor — the need to ensure that the Health Service Executive continues to fund the hospital in the home service, based in Tallaght; (15) Deputy Rory O’Hanlon — the provision of facilities for post mortem examinations in the north east; (16) Deputy Tom Hayes — the need to maintain the summer works scheme prog- ramme; (17) Deputy Tom Sheahan — to confirm that the Minister has sent proposals to Europe designating 5,000 acres by the banks of the Kenmore River, without publicly advertising same, without public consultation with landowners and denying landowners their right to appeal; (18) Deputy Alan Shatter — the closure of respite care services in Leopardstown Park hospital; (19) Deputy Richard Bruton — the designation of the filling in of 52 acres of Dublin Bay as a strategic infrastructure; and (20) Deputy Pat Breen — the exclusion of the air navigation and transport (pre-clearance) Bill from the Government’s legislation programme for the summer session 2008 and the urgent need for the Minister for Transport to have the heads of this Bill approved by Government as the delay in proceeding with this project is placing Shannon Air- port at a serious disadvantage. The matters raised by Deputies John O’Mahony and Joe McHugh, Charlie O’Connor, Tom Hayes and Richard Bruton have been selected for discussion
An Bille um an Ochtu´ Leasu´ is Fiche ar an mBunreacht 2008: An Dara Ce´im (Ato´ ga´il).
Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed).
Atairgeadh an cheist: “Go le´ifear an Bille an Dara hUair anois.”
Question again proposed: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time.” Deputy Damien English: As I said earlier, the Lisbon treaty will introduce a greater level of democracy in Ireland and throughout Europe in general, despite the impression being given that it will not. It will strengthen our democracy because for the first time a mechanism will be in place so that the Da´il will be able to signal at a very early stage its unhappiness with proposals from Brussels. The Oireachtas will be able to communicate with other parliaments and in co- operation with them can put a stop to any such initiatives. The Lisbon treaty will enable Ireland or an individual citizen to bring a case before the European Court of Justice if it is felt the European Commission is overstepping the mark. That is very important because people have a fear of the Commission opting to do what it likes. If it is thought the Commission has gone too far, there is a backup plan. The role of the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny will be copperfastened with the ratification of the treaty. This will allow for a more thorough investigation of EU legislation prior to its adoption in Ireland. That is a very important committee, which I believe does not get sufficient recognition in the House. It is especially important as regards the Lisbon treaty. I am lucky enough to have served on it for the last seven or eight months. It deals with hundreds of items of legislation annually. In the five years before I was a member, it dealt with more than 5,000 items of legislation that came from Europe. Irish people do not appear to know that this work is being done and they would be very reassured if they did. I found that when one tells people about the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny, they really open up to the whole idea of Europe and are reassured that things do not just get shoved through. There is an opportunity to discuss such matters in this House, bring in people to research issues and to 790 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) make suggestions to the Commission and our own people as well. Irish departmental officials go to Europe to discuss such legislation well before they are passed. It is important that this should be clarified and we need to highlight accordingly the role of the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny, which will have greater powers as well when the treaty is ratified. The Lisbon treaty will foment greater EU influence for member states on the world stage. A new and purposeful approach to the common foreign and security policy will see the Euro- pean Union finally strengthen and enhance its role internationally. After it is ratified, there will be one EU high representative for foreign affairs which will enable us to have a strong united voice speaking on our behalf as regards world affairs. In the past, foreign policy was implemented by the representative of foreign affairs and security policy, while the EU budget was controlled by the EU Commissioner for External Affairs. These roles will be merged to provide greater coherence and unit to EU external policy. Europeans will have one strong united voice, which will be critical in global trade nego- tiations, such as the WTO talks. A strong unified voice representing a Europe of more than 490 million people puts all Europeans in a much stronger position. Remember, Ireland has only 4 million people against a global population of 6 billion. It makes common sense to be part of a stronger united negotiating hand. The new EU high representative for foreign affairs will have a dedicated diplomatic service at his or her disposal, one that will be superbly equipped to fight our corner globally, and we need that, going forward, to take on the other superpowers. The Lisbon treaty will ensure that the European Charter of Fundamental Rights will become legally binding within the EU. This is a very positive move as it will strengthen the protection rights for citizens of Ireland and other member states. These fundamental rights include the right to life and the prohibition of torture as well as the broad range of economic rights. There are no new rights, but greater protection for existing ones. Basically, if a person believes his or her rights are not being adequately protected in a particular member state, he or she will have recourse to the European Court of Justice. This is a much clearer and stronger path. Basically, citizens will have more protection in law for the future, which is right. I spoke earlier about the benefits for business under the Lisbon treaty. Under the treaty there will be faster more efficient decision-making in Europe, which will lead to greater value for money and speedier decisions. In the world of business, one needs to be moving fast to maintain national economic competitiveness. A “Yes” vote will see qualified majority voting introduced in more areas, namely in respect of the environment, energy, security, justice and urgent humanitarian aid. This system will speed up decision-making by ensuring that just one member state can no longer hold up the entire process for the other 26 member states. A “Yes” vote will mean a majority of states and a majority of the EU population will be required to block a process to protect the right of opinion and consequently the big states will not be seen to dominate the decision-making process. Importantly for Ireland, a vote in favour of the Lisbon treaty will ensure that we retain our veto in vital areas such as taxation and neutrality. If the treaty is accepted, Ireland will have a greater role in peacekeeping. Ireland has been a successful participant in a number of UN-EU peacekeeping missions, such as those in Bosnia and Kosovo. A “Yes” vote to the Lisbon treaty will increase our Defence Forces’ participation in conflict-prevention missions and in post-conflict peacekeeping missions. This will happen through the introduction of permanent structured co-operation between EU member states that wish to commit to taking part in EU military equipment programmes and to provide combat units available for immediate dispatch as EU peacekeepers. The provision on structured co-operation is a long way from a provision for a European army. It negates the fear of our losing our neutrality. I hope those who are campaigning for a 791 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Damien English.] “No” vote will realise what is being asked of us. The treaty encourages those countries that want to co-operate and train together and pool resources for peacekeeping and post-conflict missions. The treaty does not force countries to send troops on peacekeeping missions to areas to which they do not agree to go. We still have our neutrality and it can only be changed by this House and the people. There is a belief that acceptance of the treaty will result in new armies. There is a provision in the treaty that encourages countries to strengthen and greatly increase their armies and give them better equipment. This is correct. We would be crazy if we sent our own troops, both ladies and gentlemen, abroad with equipment that was less than perfect. Imagine if they went to Chad with equipment that is not up to scratch. Addressing this is what the treaty is about. It is a matter of equipping armies properly and not of having a European army or removing Ireland’s neutrality. This issue has been twisted and turned, which is not correct. Concerns were raised over the fact that we will not have a permanent Commissioner. We must be very clear that we will have one for ten of 15 years and this provision will not come into effect straight away. This is not the end of the world because every other member state, including Germany, France and all the big powers, will be treated in the same way. We are on a level playing field. EU legislation involves a very slow process, as we all know, and can take three to five years to be passed. It is more than likely that if legislation is initiated when we do not have a Commissioner, we will have one when it is being passed. The Joint Committee on EU scrutiny will have the opportunity to discuss everything. The treaty will give greater powers to our MEPs and therefore there is no cause for concern. It is important to point out that a Commissioner is meant to be independent. A former Minister and member of Fianna Fa´il, Charlie McCreevy, became a Commissioner and often sends us information we do not like to hear, such as threats to fine Ireland. However, he is acting independently and that is what he is meant to do. Commissioners are supposed to wear their European hats rather than their national hats. It will not be the end of the world if we do not have a Commissioner from Ireland for a couple of years. I have said repeatedly that politicians in this House, especially those on the Government side, very often use the European Union as a scapegoat. They blame it if a measure is being implemented that is not very nice. The charging of schools for water rates was blamed on the European Union but it was not its fault. We got it wrong and did not fight our case correctly. All legislation that comes through Europe is debated by our Ministers, officials, members of the Joint Committee on EU Scrutiny, etc. We have ample opportunity to improve circumstances for Ireland. It is not good enough to blame Europe in this House because doing so does not help our case when we try to sell a treaty. If the public is told membership of the Union is not always good for it, it will not necessarily vote in favour of a treaty. If membership failed any Irish citizen, it is because we sent the wrong people to Brussels to battle for us. There is ample opportunity for good, strong politicians to fight our corner. We should be glad to be a member of the Union. I stated some of the negative campaigners are trying to make their case with fancy posters without using proper facts. This is not good enough. We must ask what will happen if we vote against the treaty. Will we be laughed at if we must vote for a second time, as was the case with the Nice treaty referendum? There is nothing wrong with voting again, or with voting three or four times; that is democracy and it is great. Voting is good, especially if it is the paper system of voting. We should not be worried and will not have to vote “No” but I fear that if 792 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) we do not back the treaty or delay it, it will affect the goodwill of other countries towards Ireland. I do not like saying this publicly too often because I do not want to be seen to be scaremongering. Ireland is well regarded in other member states but they will lose some respect for us and their good-will will be eroded if we continue to say “No” to positive developments in Europe. It is therefore important that we vote in favour of the treaty. If we delay the treaty or vote “No”, we will have a less efficient European Union, still moving along under old treaties in a haphazard way that could have been made more efficient. We will not have new initiatives in respect of cross-border crime prevention, climate change and energy security. Progress in this regard will be slower. If we vote against the treaty, I fear other member states will claim there is no point waiting any longer for Ireland. They will get together and work on initiatives themselves, leaving us behind. We would be much better off as a major player at the negotiation table, fighting to make progress at every chance we get.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Ciara´n Cuffe): The Deputy’s time has expired.
Deputy Damien English: I was to share time but it has expired. The treaty is very good for Ireland and I will certainly be voting “Yes” and encouraging everybody I know to do likewise. There is misinformation being circulated and a lack of leader- ship. While there have been other events taking place today and over the past few weeks, they are now over. We therefore need to get real about the treaty, circulate the relevant information and have a proper debate. It is fundamentally wrong of politicians of this House to circulate untruths about the treaty. I have no problem with them advocating a “No” vote for genuine reasons but to claim to find provisions in the treaty that are not contained therein is wrong. That is telling lies to the public. It is a shame we cannot do anything about it because it is fundamentally wrong and could have serious consequences.
Acting Chairman: I need not remind the Deputy about particular words that should not be used in this Chamber.
Deputy Damien English: They should be used more often.
Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science (Deputy Sea´n Haughey): I wish to share time with Deputy Michael Mulcahy.
Acting Chairman: Is that agreed? Agreed.
Deputy Sea´n Haughey: I am delighted to express my views on the EU reform treaty. I support strongly a vote in its favour in the referendum as I do the Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill. It is the Government’s desire that the referendum will result in the ratification of the EU reform treaty by the Irish people. My late father had what he once referred to as “total dedication to Europe” and a desire to see Ireland playing a positive and central role in its affairs. As Minister for Finance in 1967, he published the White Paper on entry to the EEC, as it was then known, and visited several of the EEC capitals with the Taoiseach of the day, Jack Lynch, with a view to 4 o’clock facilitating Ireland’s membership. While addressing this House in 1967 following the introduction of this White Paper, he stated we were facing a great opportunity not to be missed to “give our people, and especially our young people, access to new horizons” in the stimulating climate of the new Europe. Some of the issues and “new horizons” we will address in the next decade may be different from those envisaged in the 1960s but the aims and aspirations are as relevant today as they were then. 793 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Sea´n Haughey.]
Many of the improvements envisaged by those supporting a “Yes” vote in the 1972 refer- endum have come to pass, often in spectacular fashion. These include the doubling of our workforce to 2 million, twice what it was before we joined the EU; a marked improvement in national income per head to well above the EU average; and increased trade opportunities through the completion of the Single Market. In 2006 the value of our exports to EU member states was a staggering \87 billion. We are now attracting billions of euro in foreign direct investment which in 1972 was a mere \16 million. We benefit greatly from various EU transfer funds and the stability and protection that membership of the European Monetary Union provides. There has been support for the farming sector and rural communities through the Common Agricultural Policy. I also strongly believe that our future prosperity lies in Europe and that our nation can continue to play its role as an active, committed member at the centre of its affairs. The reform treaty is a relatively short but vital piece of legislation for Ireland and for Europe. It incorporates to some degree the substance of the draft treaty agreed during Ireland’s EU Presidency in 2004. The treaty aims to increase the roles of the national and European parlia- ments, to reform decision making within its institutions, to give legal effect to the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, to make Europe more effective on the world stage and to prepare Europe for the major challenges which all member states will face, both individually and col- lectively. Some of the issues Europe will need to address in the next decade are climate change, the possibility of a global economic downturn, demographic change and immigration, and problems in the developing world. It is in Europe, as part of a grouping of 500 million people, that we can best help address these issues rather than as individual member states. The creation of the post of high representative for foreign affairs will allow a more coherent EU voice in the external aspects of the Union’s affairs. It is also through Europe that we will continue to make our own distinctive impact. The reform treaty proposes changes designed to make the European Union function more democratically and more effectively. Among the new initiatives proposed is the citizens’ initiat- ive whereby a petition signed by 1 million citizens from a number of member states may request the Commission to take a specific initiative. There will also be a new full-time elected president of the European Council who will chair and take forward the work of the European Council. There is also provision for a new voting system which means that 55% of member states representing 65% of the EU’s population must support a measure before it is carried. It is true that both the European Commission and Parliament will be capped. However, capping is considered necessary to ensure that they do not become too large or unwieldy to be effective. In effect the original institutions, designed for a founding community of six member states, have operated for 50 years without rudimentary reform, but also, it might be stressed, without losing any of the 27 member states in the interim. The introduction of the enhanced role for the Houses of the Oireachtas is a further positive development. The national parlia- ments are given an enhanced role in evaluation of measures in a number of areas, which parliamentarians must surely welcome. It must be recognised, however, that not everyone is in favour of this treaty. This is nothing new and has been the case during previous referenda. To listen to some detractors it might appear that the Irish had, as the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, recently said, somehow “abandoned their good sense and their national interests during the nego- tiations”. It did not, and will not happen. Any fair assessment of the treaty must recognise that 794 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) the changes envisaged are for the better, reflecting the changing circumstances in which the Union finds itself. Ireland’s place lies at the heart of Europe. Ireland has been a major beneficiary as a member state over the past 35 years. Ratification of the reform treaty will continue to see Ireland play its role at the centre of European affairs. For these reasons I am urging people to vote “yes” in the forthcoming referendum and to continue the central role of our nation at the heart of Europe. I firmly believe this treaty is in the best interests of the people and demonstrates our desire to continue to be a committed member of the European Union.
Deputy Michael Mulcahy: I am delighted to be able to contribute to this debate and speak in favour of the Lisbon treaty, the reform treaty. It is worth remembering how we got to this stage. With the accession of the eastern European states and others, the European Union became much larger and now consists of 27 member states. We had the famous convention, which was composed of members of national parliaments, representatives of governments and representatives from the European Parliament. They came together and drafted a treaty at the convention. It was very difficult to negotiate between all the governments. As we heard this morning and as we well know where others had failed our current Taoiseach and Ta´naiste successfully negotiated the final text of an agreement for a constitution for Europe, a copy of which I am holding. We all know what happened to that proposed constitution. It was passed by many national parliaments but was rejected in plebiscites in the Netherlands and France. We then had a period of reflection for one or two years, followed by the Lisbon treaty. If I am to be totally honest I must admit that despite the fact that this constitution was a remarkable achievement and despite the fact that it took enormous work, I share the view that there was considerable wisdom in the outcome of those plebiscites in France and the Nether- lands. Perhaps this constitution represented a step too far. Perhaps the constitution was regarded as being the work of the super-staters and the federalists who wanted to see the whittling away of the nation state in Europe and wanted to create a united states of Europe. I certainly do not count myself among those people. I count myself among those who are strongly pro-Europe and who agree the European project should be advanced within the machinery where member states pool their sovereignty but sit around the table on an equal basis while maintaining their national status. That is what happens and is thankfully encapsulated in the Lisbon treaty. I have in my hand a consolidated version of the treaties amended by the Lisbon treaty, which is another treaty that weaves into all the existing EU treaties. Unfortunately it is a complicated text. Somebody suggested — I agreed at the time — that every person should get a copy of the consolidated text. Of course it should be available to everybody should they wish to read it. However, in reality one would want to be a very good European lawyer to tread one’s way through it sentence-by-sentence and paragraph-by-paragraph. It is not an easy document to read and there is no point in trying to say it is. That does not mean it is not important. Those of us who believe in the European project also believe that European partners sitting around that table must be able to make decisions. Of course with 27 individuals representing all the member states, if there was the right of veto on every single point, progress would be imposs- ible. It would be impossible to move the agenda that many speakers have mentioned in this debate. Some people might claim this is a great treaty or a perfect treaty. I do not agree with that and I do not believe there has ever been such a thing as a perfect treaty. I do not believe the Congress of Vienna was perfect, I do not believe the Treaty of Versailles was perfect, I do not believe the Good Friday Agreement was perfect and I do not believe any of the EU treaties 795 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Michael Mulcahy.] is perfect. However, they fit their purpose, were as good as it gets and are only man-made creations. I do not think people who support the treaty should overstate its perfection as a text. It is a working document and is the best we could do in trying to get 27 governments to agree. A similar compunction of honesty applies to those who are against this treaty, particularly members of Sinn Fe´in and its allied organisations. They have consistently opposed every treaty involving Ireland and Europe, without exception. They have never said what they would sup- port or what would amount to a good treaty. Their contribution to the debate is always negative and destructive and I find this particularly unhelpful. I call on groups that are genuinely pro- Europe but oppose this treaty to emerge from the shadows and state clearly what they object to. What in this treaty is not good for Europe? Many other speakers have referred to the increase in democracy that will result from this treaty. I am a member of both the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny and the Joint Com- mittee on European Affairs and have been since the last Da´il. I welcome the fact that the Lisbon treaty gives a hugely enhanced role to national parliaments in scrutinising legislation proposed by the Commission. As we all know, the Commission has the sole right to initiate legislation in the EU and it is criticised by many of us because it does so with great zeal and may create too much legislation. If this treaty is passed there will be a hugely important role for European affairs committees and scrutiny committees. They will be able to talk to each other to formulate a reasoned opinion to give the Commission on why a certain proposal may breach the principle of subsidiarity or proportionality. We must beef up the resources of both the Joint Committee on European Scrutiny and the Joint Committee on European Affairs if we are to tackle the challenge the possible passing of this referendum could present in the coming months. Despite the excellent staff that support both committees, the reality is that the burden of work that will fall upon the committees, if the new scrutiny proposals come to pass, will be too great for their staff. I am glad the Minister of State is here because more resources, in terms of European lawyers and experts from line Departments, must be made available to these committees so that the Oireachtas, independent of the European Commission and the Government, will have the staff and resources to properly scrutinise what can, at times, be a mountain of European legislation. Some parts of the media and some politicians should be a little more honest regarding Irish neutrality. I read a headline in a newspaper that said “Lisbon treaty could take Ireland to war”. That is absolute poppycock because Ireland’s position on neutrality is guaranteed. We have the Seville Declaration, our protocol and the triple lock, which means only a decision taken by the United Nations, the Government and the Da´il will see Ireland partake in a military exercise. Ireland’s neutrality is guaranteed and, in fairness to some of those opposing the treaty, they have not used the neutrality angle as an argument against the treaty. That argument is now, rightly, off the table. The question of our tax regime, specifically our low level of corporate tax, is of great and legitimate concern. I believe some countries in Europe are considering introducing an element of common taxation policy for their own benefit but I feel this is not playing by the rules. It is quite clear that under the treaty each country has a veto on taxation measures and Ireland will exercise this, if it must, against a change to the tax regime. The European Commission Pres- ident, Mr. Jose´ Manuel Barroso, made it clear that there would be no change to Ireland’s corporate tax regime and I welcome this. My colleagues mentioned important institutional changes, including the right to make a pet- ition of 1 million citizens, the new Presidency of the European Council, the new high represen- tative for foreign affairs and a new rotating Commission. We complain that we may only have 796 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) a commissioner for ten out of 15 years but this will also apply to Germany and France. There will be periods when Germany and France will not be represented by a commissioner at the table, which is a great sacrifice for them. If it is a big sacrifice for Ireland, with a population of 4 million or 5 million, the sacrifice is a lot greater for countries with populations of 50 million, 60 million and 70 million. They are saying that they trust the other commissioners to look after their interests and move the European project forward. In general, I believe this treaty is extremely important for Ireland and Europe. We all want a dynamic Europe that is not constrained by vetoes over every decision and that can move forward on the important issues the Minister of State alluded to in the past ten minutes. For all these reasons I urge the people of Ireland to vote “Yes” to the Lisbon treaty. I again ask those who genuinely oppose the treaty, but are pro-Europe, to come forward and explain how it should be improved.
Deputy Sea´n Sherlock: I wish to share time with Deputy Broughan. Most of the arguments in this debate have been well thrashed out and I will not repeat points that have already been made and that I support. I am in favour of the Lisbon treaty and will vote for it. I worked in the European Parliament for three years and, though it is an august institution, the first 12 months of my time there were spent seeking to interpret the Byzantine language that emanates from it. This is an issue for ordinary citizens of the European Union who find it hard to interpret national legislation at the best of times, never mind European treaties and some of the language used therein. This has negative consequences for the relation- ships citizens have with the European Union and terms like “co-decision” and “subsidiarity” may be examples of language used in a manner that is sometimes deliberately designed to obfuscate or confuse people. Be that as it may, my experience of the European Union has led me to see it as a positive force. I grew up in Ireland in the 1980s and 1990s and transfers from the European Union helped members of families like mine to attend college and benefit from the European Social Fund. I was able to get a grant for third level education. The investment in education through the fund helped thousands of people of my age who, otherwise, may not have benefited from a third level education. Neither would we have seen the resultant economic benefits derived by this country. This is, however, more of an historic context. What is needed is a simplification of the language used in EU documents. The treaty should be voted for if for no other reason than that it incorporates the Charter of Fundamental Rights, a simplified document that codifies the rights of EU citizens. Whether one is from Ballyhooly or Budapest, one is a citizen of the European Union and, therefore, one’s rights are guaranteed by this provision. The problems encountered by people in this country are exactly the same as by those in other countries. Our rights should be as inalienable as those in other member states. I speak as a republican and subscribe to the ideals of this republic. No provision in the treaty is at variance with any of these ideals. Everything enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights gives succour to those ideals of egalitarian principles and seeks to ensure every citizen has a defined set of rights. That is the most important issue. The farming organisations have stated a position on the referendum vis-a`-vis the WTO nego- tiations. While I am sympathetic to their arguments, I would not advocate a vote against the Lisbon treaty on the basis of an argument over the WTO negotiations. The treaty will broaden the powers of the European Parliament through enhanced co-decision procedures. The Council of Ministers it would seem has sway over agricultural decisions affecting this country. If the powers of the agricultural committee of the European Parliament are broadened and national 797 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Sea´n Sherlock.] parliaments are given a greater say in transposing EU legislation, the voice of Irish agriculture will be strengthened and have more power on decisions affecting it. It is important to note we have had little in transparency on the decisions made at EU ministerial council level. I would bet any money that if the attendance records for EU Council meetings were checked, Irish Ministers would be noted for a fair degree of absenteeism. Little information is available publicly as to what goes on at these meetings. Returning to the demise of the Irish sugar industry, a deal was hammered out at European level yet we do not know what happened on that fateful night in November 2005 at the relevant EU Council meeting. We do not know what Minister took what decision or what was said. The treaty will make every Council of Ministers meeting more transparent. I welcome this and it will allow us to know what our Ministers and the Permanent Representation are doing in Brussels. When the Convention on the Future of Europe was held first, the imposition of Vale´ry Giscard d’Estaing probably set a negative tone. There was a large-state view on how the pro- posed EU constitution should proceed with the larger member states seeking to control the agenda. I do not blame smaller member states for kicking over the traces. There was a clear modus operandi of seeking to impose a certain set of values in the constitution. I am glad this has been rolled back and its replacement is a treaty. The ideals of the constitution have been simplified in the treaty. If the treaty gives more power to the European Parliament, it gives more power to the people of Europe. If it gives more to national parliaments, it gives more power to us as Irish citizens to have a say in how the European Parliament proceeds on any legislative matter, which can only be welcomed. The treaty also puts in place further checks and balances against the Commission, a necessary mechanism. EU Commissioners such as Frits Bolkestein have been hell-bent on a liberalisation agenda. Some from a left-wing perspective will oppose the Lisbon treaty because of that very agenda. I contend we should agree with the treaty so that checks and balances can be put in place against that neoliberal agenda. It is also an agenda for which our own Commissioner, Charlie McCreevy, has been a strong advocate and has done us no favours in that regard. I support the Lisbon treaty. While it is not perfect, on balance we will derive far more benefits than negatives from it.
Deputy Thomas P. Broughan: The Lisbon reform treaty is a significant legal document, although some of its proponents have erroneously tried to dismiss its importance or its impact on Irish society if it is accepted by the Irish people and adopted into law. For this reason, I welcome that the Irish people have the right to exercise their democratic right to vote on this treaty. It is extremely regrettable that none of our fellow citizens in any other EU member states will have the chance to do this. It was disappointing and rather perplexing that one of our most celebrated aviation entre- preneurs recently admitted that he simply could not understand the treaty document after reading it four times. I wonder if he checked the Government’s White Paper, the consolidated version of the treaties, edited by Peadar O´ Broin and Brendan Halligan, documents produced by Deputy Costello for the Labour Party or the various helpful websites. Even after a cursory reading of the treaty, several key measures are striking and highlight its importance. Since the Maastricht treaty established the European Union in 1993, the Union has operated on three distinct pillars — the European Communities, the Common Foreign and Security Policy and police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters. Significantly, the Lisbon reform treaty provides for the merging of these three pillars and establishes the EU as a legal political identity. It provides for EU citizenship, a permanent Council President, an EU prosecutors’ 798 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) office and, importantly, the new Charter of Fundamental Rights. Even from this brief list of some of the treaty’s measures, it is obvious it will fundamentally change key structures of the EU. The core of the treaty — and a core reason for voting “yes” — is the series of innovations that represent positive moves in the better governance of the EU. This is particularly important given the expansion of the Union to 27 member states. The EU is not a perfect construct or organisation, far from it. For those of us who want an EU that is more effective, more demo- cratic and more responsive to the needs of its citizens, the measures contained in the reform treaty will contribute to achieving these aims. Most significantly, the new measures include the extension of the co-decision powers, particularly in terms of the European Parliament and the budgetary area, the proposed election of the President of the Commission and enhancing the transparency of European Council procedures by having public Council sittings. The citizen’s initiative must also be welcomed because it allows EU citizens to act, that is, I note the term “significant group of states” in respect of 1 million signatures. It is an important consti- tutional development. The reform treaty strengthens the weight of national parliaments within the overall EU system of governance and proposes a new orange card. All Deputies and Senators would be interested to know how that system will work in practice because we find managing certain European legislation, such as that currently before the Joint Committee on Transport and to which I shall return shortly, difficult. We need more supports and resources to invigilate European legislation. An important element of the reform treaty is the enhancements to the social Europe agenda, which will prioritise new social objectives for the EU in terms of full employment, social pro- gress and inclusion, justice and tackling poverty. The social clause ensures that these objectives must be given full consideration in any EU policy. A critical innovation contained within the treaty extends the qualified majority voting, QMV, system to social services for workers, which will hopefully benefit temporary and migrant workers. The expansion of the new QMV system to include 40 new policy areas will strengthen EU-wide efforts to tackle a range of issues such as climate change, asylum, immigration and border issues and the important areas of crime and justice. Undoubtedly, some elements of the reform treaty raise concerns. It is regrettable that Ireland will lose a European Parliament seat, most likely in the Dublin region, even though the citizens of Dublin are probably under-represented in the European Parliament. From 2014 on, the reform of the Commission will also see Ireland without a permanent commissioner for five years out of every 15 years. As a small country and irrespective of party, we have always believed the presence of an Irish commissioner at the table was beneficial because the person would know our issues. Last week, we marked the passing of our first distinguished Com- missioner. The new double majority voting system of 55% of member states and 65% of the EU’s population raises concerns, particularly for smaller states. On many issues, the Union divides into three main blocs according to the size of member states, namely, the six large states — often, one or two differ with the others vigorously, such as in the current case of France and Germany — the ten middle-sized states, such as Holland and Sweden, and the 11 smaller states, of which Ireland is one. The six large states have a combined population of approximately 350 million, 70% of the EU’s population of 500 million. It is true, however, that four states will be able to constitute a type of blocking minority under the so-called Ioannina clause, but there are concerns for a small state of 4.25 million people. 799 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Thomas P. Broughan.]
The changes to representation and voting structures have some logic in the context of an expanded EU of 27 member states. However, I have listened with interest to the contributions of some of the more thoughtful advocates of a “No” vote and accept that there are three areas in which Ireland needs to be constantly vigilant in terms of the reform treaty and beyond. The EU has a strong defensive element. The treaty refers to a common defence. The incorporation of the Petersberg Tasks in the 1997 Amsterdam treaty and the subsequent establishment of the EU battle groups programme have raised grave concerns among many people. It is also an unassailable fact that, for many states, particularly the newer members from central and eastern Europe, NATO membership has preceded EU membership. For some of those states, NATO and the EU appear to be two sides of the same coin. The EU must not be allowed to become interchangeable with NATO or become in any way its political wing. Instead, it is important for the European project that the traditions of countries such as Ireland, with our strong com- mitment to neutrality, should be given complete equality within the culture and governance of the EU. To be fair, our negotiators attempted to achieve this in the document. However, it is also true and must be celebrated that one of the EU’s outstanding achieve- ments in the past 50 years has been the creation of the largest zone of peace and security in European history between countries that were riven by war and strife for centuries. Recently, some historians compared the peace and stability zones of the United States and Europe and called them two of the greatest achievements in political history. We must be vigilant of the effect of EU policy on Ireland’s fiscal well-being. The euro has been a successful currency and we have become used to the idea that monetary policy is decided in Frankfurt and that the ideal of a strong currency seems to take preference over states’ employment needs. None the less, the euro is flourishing and has achieved much in economic terms. However, the right to set taxes is a core and exclusive privilege of a democratically elected national government. This right must be protected by every means possible. The recent comments by the French Minister of Finance, Madame Christine Lagarde, on this matter dis- played an unwarranted and unacceptable breach of the national rights and prerogatives of EU member states. We have safeguarded our taxation rights in treaties to date and it will be necessary to continue to do so to the advantage of our people. Ireland and our neighbour, the United Kingdom, have a common interest in enhanced legal and security issues as regards crime. There are question marks over the operation of the com- mon asylum policy. The development of the prosecutor’s office must take into account differ- ences between the Irish common law tradition and the Roman civil law tradition that is com- mon in many other EU states. Taking into account these serious concerns, EU involvement in the past 35 years has ben- efited Ireland considerably and the reform treaty will strengthen the ability of the EU as an institution to govern effectively and to address the social and economic concerns of its citizens. On balance and after intense consideration of all the issues involved, a “Yes” vote is the right choice, which is the recommendation I make to my constituents and supporters. I was first asked this question last December by a new Chinese-Irish citizen. The referendum may be the first time he will vote here. I examined some of the documents to which I referred and reverted to him. The points I am making today are my considered opinion. Given Europe’s difficult history and the recent East-West division, the achievement of the EU is unprecedented and undeniably great. The EU constitutes the successful working together of an unparalleled number of nations, cultures and 21 languages, in which Gaeilge is proudly included. Recently through a series of parliamentary questions and my membership of the Committee of Public Accounts, of which the Acting Chairman is also a member, I asked the 800 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
Secretary General of the Department of Finance about the exact figures for Ireland’s contri- butions to and funding received from the Union. He informed me that Ireland has received just less than \60 billion in payments and made contributions to the EU budget of \20 billion. While we will become a net contributor, this may not occur until 2011-2013. I will remark on the benefits of that funding, particularly in areas such as the north side of Dublin and in my constituency. The EU’s Social Fund has played a critical role in providing funds and support for many local and community programmes. The Minister of State, Deputy Haughey, and I are long-standing directors of the Northside Partnership and other local bodies, such as the Coolock Development Council. We could not have run the types of training and jobs programmes undertaken without the fund. Hopefully, the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs and his colleagues will introduce other initiatives in light of the economic downturn towards which we are moving and during which such projects will again become significant. We depended on EU support considerably. An area of my constituency — the Acting Chairman was made aware of this matter when it was discussed at Dublin City Council level — is that of the Darndale Belcamp village centre. The key seed money for the centre came from the EU through a people’s initiative, which I supported at city council level. When European officials visited, they went to Ballymun and Finglas in the constituency of the Mini- ster of State, Deputy Carey and Deputy Shortall and decided to include those areas. For us, Darndale village was a major achievement. Having noted the continuing grave concerns and the fact that we must be vigilant — Com- mission President Barroso told my colleague, Deputy Quinn, that this treaty will probably not be the last — in fiscal and taxation matters, we are better off in the heart of Europe. I support a “Yes” vote.
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): May I share time with Deputy Flynn?
Acting Chairman: Is that agreed? Agreed. There are 20 minutes in this slot.
Deputy Mary Hanafin: I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on this Bill at a critical juncture for both the EU and Ireland. The Irish people must make an important decision, not only about the reform treaty but also about the future of this country. I strongly believe that a “yes” vote will pave the way for Ireland to continue to benefit from EU membership as it has done successfully for the past 35 years. Nı´ ga´ du´ inn ach fe´achaint siar ar an me´id ata´ bainte amach againn mar thı´r agus mar bhall den Eoraip. Smaoinigh gur tı´r iargu´ lta ı´ E´ ire ar imeall na hEorpa agus gur e´irigh linn aitheantas agus airgead a fha´il o´ n Eoraip. Idir an da´ rud sin d’e´irigh linn dul chun cinn an-mhaith a dhe´anamh. Fe´ach ar an tı´r ata´ againn. Tı´rı´ a bhfuil daoine an-bhro´ du´ il aisti, mar a bhı´ i gco´ naı´. Ach ta´ do´ chas anois ag daoine o´ ga gur fe´idir leo a n-a´it agus a bpa´irt a ghlacadh go hiomla´n i sochaı´ na tı´re seo, i sochaı´ na hEorpa agus ar sta´itse an domhain. Fe´ach freisin ar an me´id ata´ bainte amach o´ thaobh na Gaeilge de. Ba mho´ r an dul chun cinn don nGaeilge aitheantas oifigiu´ il a fha´il don teanga cupla bliain o´ shin. Tugann se´ sprea- gadh iontach do dhaoine o´ ga go bhfuil an t-aitheantas sin faighte ag an nGaeilge. Nuair a chualthas an Ta´naiste, an Teachta Brian O´ Comhain, ag labhairt neart Gaeilge cupla seachtain o´ shin, thug se´ nı´os mo´ spreagadh do dhaoine. Ta´ 160 teanga le clos in E´ irinn inniu. Cuireann se´ sin du´ shla´nosa´r gcomhair chun a´r dteanga fe´in a labhairt agus a cur chun cinn. Tugann an Eoraip cabhair du´ inn chun e´ sin a dhe´anamh. The reform treaty was brought about as a result of long discussion on the EU treaties and agreement on it was reached last October. It provides for a settled set of structures with which today’s 27-member Union can operate effectively for the foreseeable future. The Irish Presi- 801 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Mary Hanafin.] dency had a major role to play in the formulation of this treaty because it is largely similar, albeit with some changes and improvements, to the EU constitution that was agreed during the Irish Presidency in 2004. Tribute was paid in this House today to the role of the Taoiseach in bringing about agreement in this regard. However, the reform treaty also has its origins in the Convention on Europe, a body of more than 200 public representatives from the member states, civil society and the EU institutions, which met throughout much of 2003 and in which several Oireachtas Members participated. As the voice of the Irish people participated in the making of this treaty, it is no wonder that it is now seen as an integrated and well balanced package of key changes that will improve the manner in which the Union does its business, provide for greater democracy and trans- parency and enable the EU to tackle major issues, such as climate change and globalisation, which no individual country can do alone. Each main feature of the treaty, which has been well rehearsed in this debate, represents positive improvements in the manner in which the Union conducts its business and in how that business will affect the lives of the citizens. It is important to remember that in the treaty negotiations, Ireland succeeded in achieving its key priorities, including maintaining unanimous decision-making on tax matters, protecting its traditional policy of military neutrality and ensur- ing balance in the Union’s institutions and equality with regard to membership of the Commission. The reform treaty will provide a renewed sense of direction to the EU, a more effective institutional framework, an explicit recognition of the equality of member states, a strengthened human rights base and a greater capacity for national parliaments to influence EU legislation. This latter element is particularly important because it will give the Oireachtas a new role in EU affairs. This will enhance further the democratic legitimacy of the Union by bringing national parliaments more fully into play. This is an important opportunity for the Oireachtas and is one of the many reasons the reform treaty deserves Members’ full support. The reform treaty makes a real attempt to respond to the concerns and interests of citizens. In recent times, the focus of the EU’s work increasingly has been on creating a Union that delivers results for its citizens in their capacity as consumers, workers, employers, parents and members of civil society. The reform treaty provides the political and institutional basis to meet the expectations of our citizens. EU membership has significantly underpinned Ireland’s economic, political, social and cul- tural development in the past 35 years. The economic changes that have taken place since Ireland joined the EU have been remarkable. In 1973, our wealth was barely 60% of the EU average while it is above the EU average at present. In 1973, total employment stood at a little more than 1 million, while 2.1 people are now in work. In 1973, Ireland had a trade deficit of \340 million while it now has a trade surplus of more than \30 billion. Since 1973, EU funds totalling approximately \58 billion have flowed into Ireland. These resources have made an enormous difference and we have made good use of them. The Single Market allows us unhin- dered access to a market of almost 500 million people. It is no coincidence that Ireland’s period of dramatically enhanced prosperity began in the early 1990s, at approximately the same time as the Single Market’s creation. The impact of our membership on the education sector has been hugely significant. The foundation stone of the European Union’s approach to education policy is that while each member state retains full responsibility for, and control of, the content of teaching and vocational education, as well as for the organisation of its own education system, it is acknow- ledged there is much to be gained from working together, whether to share experiences, co- 802 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) ordinate approaches to the significant common challenges facing member states or highlight their common European cultural heritage, together with celebrating Europe’s cultural diversity. The Education, Youth and Culture Council of Ministers has provided an important frame- work to achieve these goals by facilitating co-operation between member states and allowing the free exchange of information and experience on matters of shared interest at ministerial and official level. The open method of co-ordination is a fine example of how this type of co- operation works in practice and how it is grounded in the real concerns of those who work and participate in the education system. It has provided a crucial method for discovering what challenges are common to us and identifying solutions which can feed into the national domestic policy-making process. These relate to real issues, such as indiscipline in classrooms, the integration of migrants or the challenges posed by social inclusion. The tangible benefits of EU membership to Ireland’s education system extend far beyond those policy dimensions, however. It can be seen in practical terms across many aspects of the education area. EU programmes for education, training and youth have created exciting opportunities for young Irish people to study, undergo training, enhance their personal development or work on social projects in other EU countries. For example, the Erasmus programme for university co-operation and student mobility constitutes one of the great success stories of European higher education. In the past 20 years, 24,000 young Irish people have participated in the Erasmus programme and have studied at institutions throughout Europe. This tradition will continue and will strengthen in the next few years as the European lifelong learning programme will provide opportunities for educational partnerships and exchanges involving schools, higher education institutions and the vocational training and adult edu- cation sectors. In recent years, there have been more places available to Irish young people than there has been take-up and I encourage young people to avail of the opportunity afforded by these scholarships under the Erasmus programme. In the next five years, Ireland will receive nearly \81 million from the European Commission-funded lifelong learning programmes to facilitate education and training mobility. This will allow more than 18,500 Irish third level students and lecturing staff to participate in Erasmus educational exchanges, more than 4,000 Irish trainees to benefit from European work placement and approximately 900 schools and 300 adult edu- cation organisations to participate in various European partnerships. The need to enhance qualifications recognition to enable people to move between different countries in Europe has been identified as the key implementation challenge for education and training in the Lisbon process of making Europe more competitive. I recall that many years ago, while on a stagiaire scholarship, the project on which I worked concerned the mutual recognition of degrees and diplomas. Much progress has been made and the process has ben- efited from Ireland’s role in this regard because it has been to the fore in Europe in developing and implementing a national framework of qualifications and in participating in the develop- ment of the European qualifications framework. The implementation of the European qualifi- cations framework will lead to enhanced mobility for students and workers across Europe. In the area of education and training, the European Social Fund has contributed significantly to the development of Ireland’s workforce to ensure that it has the requisite quantity and quality of trained and educated people to meet the needs of the labour market and the growing economy. It also has been crucial in tackling unemployment and social exclusion, with a part- icular focus on the needs of groups facing barriers to participation, such as early school leavers, people with disabilities, women and ethnic minorities. In the last programme for 2000 to 2006, the Department was allocated \450 million in European social funds which were used inter alia to combat early school leaving, implement adult literacy programmes and back-to-education 803 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Mary Hanafin.] initiatives for vulnerable groups, broaden access to third-level education and meet the skill needs of the high technology sector. In the period from 2007 to 2013, the Department will receive ESF aid of approximately \130 million. In total, Ireland has been allocated \901 million in European social funds and \750 million for regional competitiveness and employment. Pro- jects for which this aid can be used include activating groups outside the workforce, addressing early school leaving, supporting people with disabilities and enhancing the employment of young persons facing social exclusion. Our EU membership has seen transformational growth and development in Ireland’s higher education system, including the development of institutes of technology from their origins as regional technical colleges. This week, credit was given to the late Dr. Paddy Hillery for his role in developing the regional technical colleges, which also owe much to the availability of European social funds. These colleges have been the main catalyst for the widespread access to higher education which is now our major source of national competitive advantage. These far-sighted investments in higher education capacity made possible by EU membership have created the enormous opportunities enjoyed by the present generation of young Irish people and laid the foundation for the innovation on which our future prosperity will rely. When we joined the EEC in 1972, foreign investment amounted to just \16 million but 35 years later foreign direct investment in Ireland is measured in billions of euro. Foreign companies in Ireland employ more than 135,000 people, account for exports of more than \73 billion per annum and generate \15 billion expenditure in the economy annually. This would not have happened without EU membership. A signal from Ireland that we are somehow reluctant to commit to a future in Europe would inevitably damage our standing in the eyes of foreign investors, which is all the more reason why a “yes” vote is crucial. Our experience in the EU shows that small countries can prosper and make their voices heard. By sharing our sovereignty, we have joined others to strengthen our case on many issues of national importance, including agriculture and foreign and economic policy. Without EU membership, we would have been unable to advance or protect our interests to the same degree. By operating collectively with our European partners, we have been able to achieve much more than we could have done by standing alone. It would not make any sense for us to turn our backs on Europe, which is why it is vital that Ireland ratifies the treaty.
Deputy Beverley Flynn: I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important Bill. It is more than 50 years since years since the original six countries sat down to form what would become the European Economic Community. Europe was still recovering from the scars of wars, wounds were still open and mutual hostility and suspicions were still rife, yet the statesmen who signed the first agreement had the vision and courage to realise a united Europe was the key to peace, prosperity and a new way forward. That European Community has changed dramatically in the past fifty years, both internally in terms of its present membership of 27 compared to the original six and externally in the context of a changing world order. New economic powers which were unheard of in 1957 have emerged and the power balance has shifted so that the east-west divide is no longer the fulcrum. No single country has the solution to the new threats facing the community. Climate change and globalisation, the divide between rich and poor and the depletion of the world’s resources mean that no country is an island or is able to shirk its responsibility to the common good. Few would deny that Ireland has benefitted substantially from our membership of the Euro- pean community. Our status as one of the poorest members of Europe is a thing of the past and we are blessed with a strong economy which is the envy of many of our neighbours. This would never have happened if we did not have the courage to do the right thing at the right 804 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) time. It should not be forgotten that on the day Jack Lynch put pen to paper and tied us irrevocably to Europe, dissenting voices warned that we would reap a whirlwind of economic and political disasters. We are now Europeans in the fullest sense of the word but this is a status which brings its own duties and obligations. We are once again faced with an opportunity and a challenge. We can either play a constructive role in the future shape of Europe or we can get left behind on the outside forever, while more purposeful and motivated newcomers take our place. One of the most striking aspects of the Lisbon treaty is the determination to give smaller member states equal footing in the new Europe. Those who rail against the dominance of the bigger powers seem to forget that since 2004 the larger member states have surrendered their right to a second member on the European Commission in order to make the institution more viable. Even with that concession, however, the Commission could still be regarded as unwieldy, so the treaty recommends a rotation system which, while limiting Commission numbers, will also protect the right of each member state to nominate a commissioner on a strictly equal basis. The Lisbon treaty has also gone into considerable detail in achieving a balance between a top heavy concentration of elected members and the need to retain a fair representation for member states. From next June, Ireland’s representation will decrease from 13 to 12 MEPs but this must be viewed in light of the need to put a cap on parliamentary membership while still accommodating the member states which have acceded since our allotted membership was set at 15. No country can have fewer than six or more than 96 MEPs, regardless of population, and smaller countries will have more seats than their population would warrant. With this numerical reform will come important new powers for the Parliament which will give it shared authority with the Council of Ministers through the co-decision process. Thus, while countries like Ireland may lose out in terms of seats, we stand to gain substantially by way of increased influence in decision making. A reassuring theme of the Lisbon treaty is its adherence to the ideal of representative democ- racy, that basic tenet which upholds the right of every citizen to participate in the democratic life of the Union. The fear held by many people is that as the European Union gets bigger and as they become further removed from the centre of power, so too will individual rights be diminished. This treaty is at pains to ensure that the values and democratic principles on which the EU is based will be respected. To that end, national parliaments will have a direct input into European legislation. More importantly, the EU must share power and give precedence to the principle of subsidiarity, which sets out that decisions should as far as possible be taken at local, regional or national level. Far from usurping the power and authority of national governments, the Lisbon treaty seeks to ensure power remains with the people, to be exercised by them as best they see fit. It is important to emphasise that the European Union is not now a state nor will it be one after the Lisbon treaty comes into effect. The Union is a creation of its member states and the only powers it commands are those which have been conferred on it by its members. It has no primacy unless freely given by its constituent members. Its role is to serve the community rather than disempower national parliaments, where power ultimately resides. Like our prede- cessors of three decades ago, the Irish people are being asked to stand at the gate of history and say “yes” or “no” to Europe’s destiny. We are being asked to show the same courage and vision as those who first embarked on the voyage to create a stable, peaceful and prosperous Continent. We owe it to ourselves and the generations to come to show that we are not afraid to be counted as citizens of a Europe in which democracy and freedom will be the cornerstone.
Deputy Tom Hayes: I wish to share time with Deputy McHugh. 805 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
Acting Chairman: Is that agreed? Agreed.
Deputy Tom Hayes: It is important that we hold this debate. Other speakers have highlighted the importance of putting the treaty to the Irish people and the decision which must be made in the forthcoming referendum. Our constituents are asking many questions on the Lisbon treaty. We should not run away with ourselves in this House because a considerable number or people simply do not understand the treaty. Politicians of all major parties have decided to support the treaty and campaign for its ratification and I will be doing my part in my constitu- ency. However, I give warning to the Government that significant concerns have arisen. People are wondering whether they should ratify it when they are finding it increasingly difficult to do business in Ireland and Europe. Last Monday, I attended a meeting in Dundrum at which business people and farmers spoke about the paperwork, red tape and other issues they must confront in operating and running their businesses. There is a question being asked and we in this House have a duty to in some simple way explain what we are doing with regard to the treaty. We must remind the people of how we in this country have benefited. I come from a rural constituency and can remember my first real education on Europe, European agriculture and the benefits joining the EU would have for each and every one of us in this country. It happened in Tralee in 1967 or 1968 when the then Agriculture Com- missioner, Mr. Mansholt, came to Ireland on a tour and addressed the Macra na 5 o’clock Feirme conference in the town. I was told about the benefits we, as young farm- ers, could expect and I believe we have benefited, although perhaps this did not take the road Mr. Mansholt promised. There was to be an abundance of jobs for farmers and an abundance of people to buy the products, and, while that did not happen, the reality is that Ireland prospered and rural Ireland in particular changed. On leaving that conference and walking up the street in Tralee, we were confronted by members of Sinn Fe´in. At that time, they were opposing Europe and running a strong campaign claiming we should not join Europe and should stay as we were. Now, many years later, when Ireland has gone through total change and we are one of the wealthier countries and the envy of Europe and the world, in part because of joining the EU but also because of the way we managed our affairs and economy, the same people are opposing this treaty. I want to send out a warning that we should not be complacent about the treaty, which it will be difficult to have passed. The reality is that the campaign against it seems more motivated than the campaign for it. While the major political parties have the resources and support it, there are questions among the people with regard to their lives moving forward and changing. We have a duty in this regard. Not alone should we explain what is contained in the treaty but we must also point out how this country has benefited in recent years. These benefits can be outlined in the areas of agriculture, education and infrastructure, including EU funding for roads, which were in a very poor state 15 to 20 years ago. The benefits came because in this institution, Da´il E´ ireann, all of the political parties were of the one view that Europe was good. No matter who was in Government, we negotiated hard over long hours to get benefits for Ireland and we achieved good deals on behalf of the Irish people. With regard to the farming organisations, there seems to be a huge mix-up with regard to the WTO talks and their connection to this treaty. I wonder what Padraig Walshe was saying last Thursday when he addressed the farmers. He has a duty as a leader of the largest farming organisation — I admit I am a member of that organisation — to come out and support this campaign more publicly than he has done. The truth is that the major farming organisations committed themselves at the beginning but they have not gone further because there is a protest in regard to the WTO talks, which is another issue, although it is related to agriculture 806 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) and a cause of huge fear. If the treaty is not to go down, the major farming organisations must come out clearly in the coming days and ask their members to vote for it. If we do not vote for this treaty, the other European countries will not look kindly on Ireland. They are looking at us because we are the only country that must have a referendum on the treaty. It has been asked in recent days whether we actually need a referendum and I under- stand there is a view that we do not need it. I ask the Minister of State to clarify whether the Government asked the view of the Attorney General on this serious matter. We are putting a treaty to the people and whether the Government has obtained the view of the Attorney General is a valid point. This campaign involves huge money and huge worry. There are major campaigns but we do not seem able to get to the nitty-gritty of the matter. Views were expressed in yesterday’s newspapers that we do not need a referendum and I want to know whether we do. Why should we go to the expense of having a referendum and go through weeks of debate if we do not need it? To be fair to the Government representatives — the Ministers, the officials and others who have gone to Europe for any type of negotiations, particularly with regard to this treaty — they did their job to the best of their ability and it could not have been done better. I would appreciate it if the Minister of State could clarify this point.
Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Jimmy Devins): I have been informed that the Attorney General gave advice in early December that we were required to hold a referendum to ratify the treaty.
Deputy Joe McHugh: Yesterday I visited Termonfeckin in County Louth, joined by the esteemed Minister of State, Deputy Dick Roche, to attend a meeting of the Irish Country- women’s Association, the ICA, as it is more familiarly known. It is good to see this debate is taking place. I commend all the organisations that are taking the initiative and encourage other organisations within the voluntary and community sector, and even State bodies, to show initiative and get the debate going. I welcome the fact there is a “No” camp because it certainly adds fire to the debate. If the debate really gets going, the facts will emerge. I also welcome last weekend’s announcement by a high profile businessman of his “No” candidature. The complexity of the document is and will continue to be an issue for many people. However, the issue is complex. We are talking about 500 million people, institutions, politics and 27 independent states trying to work in harmony towards greater gain on policy issues. At the same time, we are trying to hold onto our individuality and independence, which is enshrined in our Constitution. The biggest myth in this debate is that we would lose indepen- dence, which is a nonsensical argument. There is a view that we will not be able to have a referendum on another European treaty. That is nonsense because it is sacrosanct in the Consti- tution that we are independent on this issue. I have come across many people who are indifferent towards politicians in the “Yes” camp who advocate all that Europe has done for us. It reminds me of the question in the film “The Life of Brian” when someone asked what did the Romans ever do for us and the reply came that they built the roads and bridges and provided sanitation. We could also ask what Brussels or Europe has ever done for us. There is a mindset that they did not do anything for us but the reality is that much has been achieved, yet the only aspect the public are tapping into, and I am being reflective of my own neck of the woods in the north western corner of Europe, is that there is a degree of imbalance in terms of European funding spend on infrastructural projects. One only has to travel to Dublin to see the European investment in the M50. I realise it is a chicken and egg situation in that investment follows critical mass but the people living in the west argue that the only way to build critical mass is to invest money in 807 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Joe McHugh.] the region. An issue the people in the west will acknowledge when they vote in June is whether we have got our fair share of the pie from Europe. The danger is that they will blame Europe, but Europe did not design our policy. This is national policy. It is an issue about which we should be upfront and the people in the “Yes” camp should acknowledge we have not distrib- uted the fair share of infrastructural spend throughout the country. On another element, we must acknowledge the positives in terms of the social inclusion measures including, going back to our joining of the EC in 1973, the social economy project and in later years the empowerment of women projects, the active social inclusion measures for people with disabilities and people who are on the margins. We have to acknowledge that much of that came from European policy and it is something we should advocate. We should not be arguing in the past. We must make ground in the future because inequities and imbal- ances remain. We only have to consider the different wage scales. Women are still not on a par with men when it comes to top industrial wages and the top jobs. We must continue to explore those issues and by being part of Europe and buying into this Lisbon treaty we can achieve more in terms of creating more equality. Regarding disabilities, we are still not complying with our own legislation in terms of inclusion in the labour market. At local authority and Government level and throughout our State mechanism we must put up our hands and acknowledge that we are not complying with the 4% requirement for people with disabilities in employment. That measure stemmed from Europe and it is an issue on which we should keep a sharp focus within the Lisbon treaty. Regarding our international duties as a European Union, we have a role in that regard. It is unique that an Irishman, Pat Nash, is leading the peace troops to Chad. It is important that we get across the point that Irish people are not in the business of going to war for the sake of it. There are displaced people and people who are hungry who need help. They need the indepen- dent forces to give them some sort of assistance and there are no better people to do that than the Irish because of our history over 800 years, going back to colonisation, of achieving peace. We are in the business of being peacemakers. We are not in the business of going to war. The argument that we will not have a say in terms of an EU army is nonsense because it is enshrined in the Lisbon treaty that there must be unanimity and an opt-out clause. I referred earlier to regional development. The element in the Lisbon treaty about subsidiar- ity stemmed from the Committee of the Regions and the Assembly of European Regions where regions have to get autonomy. We must bring power back to the regions. That is enshrined in the Lisbon treaty and something I welcome. It is something we must aspire towards. The Minister of State, Deputy Devins, will be aware that Sligo got a range of new carriages and rail services, which I very much welcome. It is great for the region but Derry city, for example, is the fourth largest city but there is no direct rail connectivity with Dublin and there are no plans to have direct connectivity for rail. Government on both sides of the Border agreed to an integrated transport strategy through the Good Friday Agreement. They bought into that but in the policies North and South there is no mechanism or policy to consider connectivity between Derry city and Dublin up to the north west region. We must examine that issue because by being part of a workmanlike European Union they will assist us to ensure that happens. Regarding enlargement, there is a serious issue in terms of our peripherality. We are moving further away from the centre of Europe. With the eastern European bloc we are more on the periphery now than ever before from a geographical point of view. That is something that is settling into the psyche of the Irish electorate. They can feel that distancing and that we are further on the periphery, but that does not mean we should opt out. We may be further isolated but we will still have a pivotal role in terms of the United States and an enlarged European 808 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
Union. We cannot take our eye off the ball in that regard. We must be careful in setting ourselves up in terms of competitive standards. There is a role for us to play in terms of a working collaboration between the United Kingdom and Ireland. From his experience in the British-Irish committee, the Minister of State is aware that goodwill exists. Deputy Brady is a member of the British-Irish committee now and we are looking for a mechanism for that British-Irish committee to evolve. We should examine that collectively because in being part of that grouping we will be a more formidable force in terms of increased competition. The EU is too bureaucratic. There are too many layers of bureaucracy and the Lisbon treaty will try to peel back those layers. I welcome that and the fact that a citizens’ charter will give more democracy to the people. There is provision for a direct petition for 1 million signatures. I am aware those in the “No” camp are disregarding that but it means something. It is direct access to Europe on particular issues. It is important we do not take our eye off the ball on this issue. I do not know about Members on the other side of the House but I meet many people from Donegal who say they will vote “No”. They are not yet convinced and will vote “No” at this stage. They will keep an open mind but we must keep the campaign going in terms of information and clarity on this issue.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Johnny Brady): Deputies Niall Collins and Barry Andrews have 20 minutes between them.
Deputy Niall Collins: I welcome the opportunity to speak on the EU reform treaty. At the outset I wish to refute some of the criticism levelled at this side of the House by our colleagues in the “Yes” campaign, particularly in regard to their perceived view that this party and Members on this side of the House are not committed to mobilising a campaign early for a “Yes” vote. In my part of the country, Country Limerick and the wider mid-west region, we have been holding a number of meetings. I was personally involved in organising a public meeting last week and sent out over 8,000 communications not just to party supporters, but to the wider public inviting them to an information evening. We did not ask them to come to a meeting to hear the reason they should vote “Yes”. We billed it as an open public information session to hear about the upcoming referendum and we engaged in a full and interactive two- way discussion. There were people in attendance who had not made up their minds, others who were committed “Yes” voters and others still who were committed to voting “No”. I thank the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, for being present on the night and putting in a very strong performance in espousing why we should mobilise and use every opportunity to promote a “Yes” vote. Similarly, earlier this week in Limerick city there was an interactive debate between the Minister for Defence, Deputy Willie O’Dea, and a member of the “No” movement, which garnered wide publicity. Credit must be given to the Minister for putting out the reasons we should vote “Yes” in a very succinct, plain and simple manner. It received widespread publicity. I reject criticism that we were not involved in promoting a “Yes” vote from an early point in time as we certainly were. I will confine my comments to a number of areas which directly affect the constituency I represent in Limerick and the wider mid-west region. These relate particularly to the farming industry, although issues have also been raised with regard to neutrality and representation at EU level. There is quite a wide industrial base within the broad mid-west region of the country. I will knock the issue of our representation at EU level on the head. It is important this House sends out the message that all 27 member states of the expanded Europe will have equal representation at EU Commissioner level on a rotational basis. No particular power bloc or 809 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Niall Collins.] country, such as Britain, France or Germany, will have a permanent EU Commissioner with us being left with rotating smaller states. This is probably a good compromise. To have 27 Commissioners sitting around a table with what would have to be vastly diminished responsibilities and portfolios would not make sense for practical working of the new institutions for a wider Europe. At every point in time we must take the opportunity to send out the message that we are really streamlining the institutions of Europe to work for the expanded European community. On the tax code, it is welcome that IBEC has been to the forefront of the “Yes” campaign from early on. Over the past decades in my part of the world, the tax code available to foreign direct investors and multinationals has made it possible for them to come into the Shannon free zone and wider mid west and County Limerick areas to promote industry. We have done quite well and we now have companies such as Dell, Wyeth, Kostal and Vistakon. Some of the biggest foreign direct investors in the world have located many of their manufacturing and headquarters offices in the wider Limerick area, which is quite welcome. That is down to our attractiveness from a tax point of view and it is important we maintain our tax independence and the complete autonomy we have now, which we will always enjoy, to control our tax regime. We should not be subject to any outside influences from that perspective. Our neutrality has been commented on by various speakers and most people are quite comfortable that the triple lock mechanism exists. We have suffered no diminution in our neutrality. Farming is very relevant to the constituency I represent. A “No” vote for the EU reform treaty will weaken Ireland’s negotiating hand at EU level and seriously harm farmers and rural communities. Ireland has always had issues to deal with of national importance in Europe and we must deal with these from a position of strength rather than weakness. A “No” vote on this treaty would weaken Ireland’s future negotiating capacity at European Union level. I state this for a number of reasons. For example, the Common Agricultural Policy for 2009 to 2013 is being reviewed over the next six to eight months under the forthcoming Presidency of the European Union. From an Irish viewpoint, there are a number of serious issues in the context of this CAP review and we want to deal with this during the review process. A “No” vote against the European treaty will weaken our negotiating hand during this CAP review process. A “No” vote would also weaken our negotiating hand as CAP is being reviewed at EU level at a later date for the period from 2013 to 2021. I point out that Libertas, which is leading the “No” campaign against the treaty, wishes to destroy the Common Agricultural Policy in its entirety. I am not satisfied Mr. Peter Mandelson is adequately dealing with the concerns of Irish farmers in the context of the World Trade Organisation talks, and his negotiating approach has been unbalanced. The Irish beef industry is the fourth largest in the world, after America, Brazil and Australia, and we must continue to impress upon Mr. Mandelson that his negotiating strategy is simply wrong. At the last meet- ing of EU Agriculture Ministers, 20 from 27 Ministers spoke against his negotiating strategy. The round of talks has been going on for the past six years in Geneva, and it goes without saying these are not without difficulty. No World Trade Organisation deal can be secured unless there is agreement on what is known as the non-agricultural access market. The EU has asked Brazil, China and India to open its markets to imports of goods and services from the developing world but the efforts of the EU have been met with strong opposition from the other three countries to date. We should bear in mind that no debate about the EU reform treaty is possible without taking a good look at ourselves, where we come from, where we are now and where we are going. 810 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
Most commentators would agree Ireland has benefited from its engagement in Europe. I am unsure the parts of the Irish electorate campaigning for a “No” vote in the forthcoming refer- endum are aware of just how much the country has benefited. Ireland in 2008 is unrecognisable from the small, inward-looking company that first joined the EEC in 1973. I will conclude on that as we should remind ourselves of how immensely we have benefited from membership of the EU over the years. If we take a negative approach to the referendum and campaigning, and if we find ourselves beaten on the issue, we will find ourselves on the bottom of the pile in Europe in terms of credibility and negotiating strength. The issue is paramount.
Deputy Barry Andrews: I agree very much with the sentiments of Deputy Collins and thank him for sharing his time. I will begin by making a few observations about the legal framework in which we are holding this referendum and have held previous referendum campaigns. They are minor comments and do not really involve the big issue. The McKenna judgment governs, to a large extent, the way in which balance is required. It goes on at length about the requirements of the Government to achieve balance in the way it deals with the sharing of information with members of the public. It does not state what the Oireachtas is meant to do. There should be a strong distinction between the Oireachtas and the Government, which is certainly reflected in the Constitution. As a result, I find it slightly absurd that the European affairs committee, of which I am a member, is required on its current trip around Ireland to present a balanced view taking in “Yes” and “No” sides. This is in spite of the fact that almost all members of the committee are in favour of a “Yes” vote. We are nonetheless required to provide this balance, which is not in the least reflective of our opinions. The Oireachtas, and the Da´il in particular, is a constituent assembly. It has an inbuilt balance in that we were all elected by the people, and our opinions are reflective of the opinions of the people. We should not be required to carry out what is an absurd exercise. The McKenna judgment is Judiciary-made law and it is our own fault we have not legislated on the issue or set down the requirements. Another example of judge-made law is the Kelly judgment, which deals with how we, as Deputies and Senators, must behave in the three weeks before a general election. We must close our offices to ensure balance and that we do not have a competitive advantage over people who are not Deputies. The next thing we know, Patricia McKenna or somebody like her, will go to the High Court seeking that in a referendum campaign, our Da´il offices should be closed because they give a competitive advantage over “No” campaigners who are not Members of the Da´il. It is our own fault because we have not done anything in the context of clarifying what is required. Equally, the Referendum Commission will be required to painfully set out the “no” side of the matter even though no one in the Government and very few Members of the Oireachtas are opposed to the treaty. That is the corner into which we have painted ourselves by not being active in this area. To illustrate the absurdity, I wish to make one observation. The Joint Committee on Euro- pean Affairs is currently holding meetings throughout the country on the treaty. If it provides speakers to represent the “yes” and “no” camps for one of its meeting and if, during pro- ceedings, the speaker for the “no” side has a lucid interval and decides that he or she is going to vote “yes” on the basis of all the arguments that have been put to him or her, the meeting which began in compliance with the McKenna judgment will end up being in contravention of it due to the absence of a speaker for the “no” side. That is how ridiculous matters have become. 811 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Barry Andrews.]
As many speakers stated, the EU has been a fantastic project for Ireland and Europe. However, that fact will not win the referendum for us. Eaten bread is soon forgotten and that is particularly true in the European context. My view is that the European Union has been responsible for a radicalisation of the middle ground and has created a revolution in consensus building. Ireland has done well out of the building of consensus. Evidence of this can be seen in the social partnership model, developments in Northern Ireland and the work of the Govern- ment and the Civil Service in the context of the expansion of the EU. The European Union represents part of the way politics has moved away from the adversarial model of one country being pitched against another. The European project involves three phases. The first was people trying to bury the hatchet, the second related to monetary union and the expansion of services and the next phase will involve the EU taking its place on the global stage in order to address major global issues. The major issues I am bringing to people’s attention when I am campaigning in respect of and trying to explain the treaty are climate change and energy security, which, for the first time, will become shared competences for the European Union. The latter is to the intervention of Irish delegations at various IGCs and European Council meetings. We deserve much credit for that. On the expansion of the Single Market, I wish to refer to two reports. The Forfa´s report published in February, which the Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy McGuinness, had a role in welcoming, outlined the great benefits to Ireland, particularly, Irish consumers, of the expansion of the Single Market during the past ten to 15 years. Much remains to be done and the flexibility built into the Lisbon treaty means that Irish consumers will benefit from a more flexible and efficient European Union. The EU has many new member states and it must adopt new decision-making systems. The latter are contained in the treaty. I accept that the treaty is complicated. I am amazed that Ulick McEvaddy’s great argument is that he does not understand it and, therefore, he is going to spend a fortune on calling for it to be rejected. There is a great deal more to that than meets the eye. IBEC has made an interesting observation, namely, that American corporate interests invested \83 billion in Ireland in 2006, which is more than the combined figure invested by such interests in Brazil, India, China and Russia in the same period. Foreign direct investment is clearly facilitated by the Lisbon treaty and our membership of the European Union, the eurozone and the Single Market. The next phase of European Union development relates to its role on the global stage. When the Rwanda crisis arose in 1994, there was an extremely limp response from the European Union, the UN and the international community in general. What happened in Rwanda is a stain on the reputations of everyone who was involved in those days. However, we have moved on. Ordinary people want us to give them something on to which they can cling and say “That is what the European Union has done”. Ireland has sent troops to Chad and is playing a large role in the leadership of the overall force. This will be of major benefit to those of us who continue to support the European project because it stands in such stark contrast to what happened in Rwanda. We completely failed to respond to the enormous humanitarian crisis that arose in that country or to the genocide which preceded it. There has been a virtual genocide in Darfur and there is a humanitarian crisis on the borders of that region to which we are finally responding. That is to our credit and it is something that members of Fianna Fa´il have trumpeted as one of the indicators of the direction in which Europe is going. Events in Iraq have shown that America’s star has waned 812 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) to some degree. As a result, the European Union has been offered an opportunity to direct the way the international community deals with crises such as those to which I refer. On energy security, Ireland is more dependent on outside energy supplies as a result of its geographical position off the coast of England which, in turn, is located off the coast of Europe. There is no doubt that the elevation of energy security to a position as one of the shared competences of the European Union will be of great benefit to Ireland. To me, that major change represents the most attractive part of the treaty. In my view, this change is comprehen- sible for people. There is enormous political will which is beginning to catch up with that of the people to develop better policies on climate change and energy security. The European Union is, in turn, through the treaty, catching up by elevating energy security to a position of importance. Another element of the treaty is the Charter on Fundamental Rights, which will be elevated to the status of the two treaties that exist side by side. The potential for the charter to play a central role in the expansion of social and economic rights is unknown at this point. Many people are stating that it will be as important as the Convention on Human Rights in the context of its overall impact on the decisions that will be made in the High Court and the Supreme Court. The Joint Committee on the Constitution, of which I am a member, discussed the effect of the Convention on Human Rights, which seems to have an almost greater gravi- tational pull than the Constitution. Some commentators predict that the Charter on Fundamen- tal Rights will have an equal impact on Irish jurisprudence. That is a development I welcome. I commend the Bill to the House.
Deputy Paul Connaughton: Like most speakers and on behalf of the Fine Gael Party, I will do everything possible to convince people to vote “yes”. I will do so out of sheer conviction. I did not decide today, yesterday or ten years ago that the European experience is good for Ireland. There has been much adverse publicity regarding the treaty. Many “no” campaigners are beginning to paint pictures that were never painted before. I accept it is not always good to look backward but there is no harm in connecting with where this great experience began and trying to anticipate the direction in which we hope it will go. There is a much bigger picture relating to this matter which many members of the electorate have not yet seen. Perhaps that is my fault or that of others, I do not know. Deputy Treacy and I were previously members of Macra na Feirme and we campaigned for a “yes” vote at the end of 1972 and the beginning of 1973.
Deputy Noel Treacy: We did it together.
Deputy Paul Connaughton: Neither he nor I had anything to do with party politics at that stage. We were of the view that the future of Ireland would be best served by joining the six countries that had been members of the then European Economic Community since 1957. I recently noticed that the names of some of those involved with the “no” campaign on this occasion are the same as those who were in the “no” camp in 1972. They never changed the disc. They are the very same people, although there are newer models out now.
Acting Chairman: In everything.
Deputy Paul Connaughton: Some of them are saying that, because 27 countries are involved, our small country with 4 million people will be smothered. They forget that one of the smallest countries of all joined in the original six. What did European Union participation do for Luxem- bourg, for instance? It went in with the big boys at the time, including Italy, France and 813 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Paul Connaughton.] Germany, and it prospered. Luxembourg did no more or less than we did. It is to the eternal credit of all Governments and to the permanent Civil Service, which represents us in Europe, that we have punched above our weight over the years. In fairness to everybody concerned, we should take note of that. In 1973 we joined the EC with two other countries, bringing the total to nine. It was a quantum leap for Ireland to become part of that huge trading bloc and, on a personal note, I thought we had commercial and political muscle that would beat the world. That is the way it looked, particularly from the viewpoint of youth organisations. I am sure our elders knew there were serious limitations on what even nine countries could do, but we thought the Community would be a major player on the world market. To a certain degree it was. We now have a Union comprising 27 countries with a population of 500 million, which is our potential customer market. However, the combined population of China and India is four times that of the EU. As the House is aware, we are already facing fierce competition from some of those countries in markets for our goods and services. What will it be like in ten years when such countries become more sophisticated? Of course, the world will not stand still for them either and they will not always have low-wage economies. Eventually their problems will become like our current ones. However, unless we operate in a trading bloc as big as the EU, plus the might of America, we will still be dwarfed by what is happening in China, India, Russia and Brazil, as well as the countries of the Pacific Rim. They will not stand still so it is against that background that we must ensure for future generations, not alone here but elsewhere in Europe, that we have a commercial trading and political bloc that is up to speed. It must use all the available technology to produce commodities that will provide our people with jobs and a decent living. That is the bottom line. It has been said that one of the awful aspects of the Rome, Maastricht and Lisbon treaties is that no one can understand them. They are so big that they are beyond everybody’s compre- hension. The “no” campaigners are saying on the radio that nobody has read the Lisbon treaty or could read it. The only treaty I read in detail was the Treaty of Rome, which is much smaller than the Lisbon treaty. One would need staff to read all the overarching and interconnected treaties involved. It would be a massive job, but that is no reason to vote “No”. We are well used to difficult bureaucratic problems in this country, as is every democracy. For example, how many people read the conditions on the back of a simple ESB bill that comes into every house several times a year? It would take a while to do so. The same principle applies to anyone who buys a car or becomes involved in hire purchase. Very few people read the conditions that apply because it could take hours. One may talk about the bureaucratic monster in Brussels but many people find it difficult enough to deal with their local authority, not to mention our own Government Departments. The “No” campaigners are being allowed to go too far on that line. People often say it is a long way from Galway to Brussels, but it would be untrue to say that Brussels is the only difficult bureaucracy. Most people find they do not have the time to study all the reading material that comes their way. Ordinary citizens should consider what they have seen happening in the EU since we joined in 1973. In the early years tremendous progress was made on the Common Agricultural Policy. As Deputy Collins and others said, we have been able to get inward investment by virtue of our EU membership. We have done well out of it, although we should have done better in other respects. Leaving party politics out of this, the bottom line is that we have a fine generation of young educated people. In the last ten or 15 years they have proved that they can stand up with the best in the world. Can anyone tell me that any decision we take in June will somehow or another lessen the opportunity for those young people to deal in this market of 500 million 814 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) potential consumers? We will not sell Irish products to them all but there will be opportunities there. The Minister of State, Deputy McGuinness, is au fait with this matter. It is an opportunity we should not miss. When I canvass votes, some people ask what is in it for them. There is an awful lot in it for us, although we may be taking for granted what the EU has done for Ireland. The main mission statement of the Lisbon treaty states: “The Union was founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities”. It goes on to state: “These rights are common to the member states in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimi- nation, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between men and women prevail.” That is contained in Article 1(3) of the reform treaty. Would it not be an unusual person who found something wrong with that mission statement? If we had that mission statement and it was the norm in all European democracies in periods of our history such as the First World War and the Second World War, would we have had the terrible tragedies of our time? One of the great achievements of the European Union, long forgotten by a generation, was ensuring peace in our time because of its articles of association. That is something no generation should be allowed to forget. Deputy Treacy and I have direct knowledge of, and involvement with, matters such as the Common Agricultural Policy. It did not get a good name and there were problems with it but it is a European model to ensure farmers in Europe have the opportunity to produce good quality food at reasonable prices, ensuring a constant supply of food. Given that there are so many who go to bed hungry every night, it is difficult to understand why we would dismantle that policy. It is under attack but can anyone imagine the problems if we did not have this model? Like every other bureaucracy or administration, I find no fault with the change in admini- stration mentioned in the House in the past few days. I can appreciate that an administration charged with looking after six countries in 1957 is out of date in 2008 when it must look after 27 countries and 500 million people. When we came into this House, the Acting Chairman, Deputy Brady, and I saw that there were fewer people employed in Leinster House because the demands were not as great as they are now. It is the same with the European Union. I cannot understand why anyone objects to streamlining that aspect. I never liked losing the Irish Commissioner but I can see the point of it. The way it is now done, with two thirds of 27 countries having a Commissioner on a rota basis, means that Ireland has the same clout as every other country. That is of major importance and Ireland is at no disadvantage because of this. This reminds me of Luxembourg which was a small country in the presence of large countries. Ireland is a small country in the presence of large and small countries and I have no doubt we will take our place with distinction, as we have always done. I am not happy with the way Peter Mandelson has handled the WTO talks. I know this is not directly related to the treaty but there is a connection. Every political party produces manifestos before an election and must present itself in the best light. From an EU view, I would have thought it would put the best possible case before the Irish electorate. Ireland is where it is all happening next June for all of Europe. If more brainpower was put into this, the decision on the future of agriculture taken by the Commission would be what was negotiated at the WTO talks, and no further. I have met no one who wants anything other than maintain- ence of our negotiating stance. I do not have time to address what should happen but there is no point in 27 Heads of State, foreign Ministers and agriculture Ministers making a decision and taking a negotiating stand on the WTO talks and then appointing the Commissioner, Mr. Peter Mandelson, who says that if we must get a decision, he may be prepared to shift his stance above and beyond what was agreed at European level. 815 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Paul Connaughton.]
In the next few weeks it will be made abundantly clear to him and his Cabinet that the only stand that can be taken is the one that has been agreed. We lost much from it. I, as someone with a background in farming, lost much from it. If we do not go beyond our negotiating stand, it is possible, with greater efficiency, that Irish farmers will take their place among the best in the world. With the change in recent times to higher prices for farm produce, at least we can see that there is an opportunity for farmers to earn a decent living from the land. Would it not be remarkable if, approaching a most important referendum, the European Commissioner was the cause of losing it? Everyone should vote “yes” and everyone should have the opportunity to do so. They should not be tied with one hand behind their back. For the benefit or Ireland, particularly its young people, a “yes” vote is the thing for it. I hope the people see it that way.
Deputy Michael Kennedy: I propose to share time with Deputy Noel Treacy. I am thankful for the opportunity to speak on the Bill. In the presence of Deputy Connaughton, I thank Fine Gael and the Labour Party for standing so firmly alongside the Government parties on the reform treaty. There is no standing behind or in front on this issue. The treaty should transcend party politics. Its importance to the State and its citizens is reflected in the unanimous goodwill felt by so many colleagues in the House. Ar dtu´ sba´ire, ar an oca´id seo, ba mhaith liom cuimhneamh ar an bhfear uasal, an iar- Uachtara´nPa´draig O´ hIrighile, a fuair ba´scu´ pla seachtain o´ shin. Ba e´ siu´ d a shı´nigh an che´ad chonradh Eorpach sa bhliain 1971. I pay tribute to the late President, Patrick Hillery, who was Ireland’s first Commissioner and was instrumental in our entry to the European and a signatory in 1971. Ireland has greatly benefitted from being a member of the Union. This is a small country but one that has been punching above its weight at European level for some time. We deserve to be in the thick of it and play a greater role. These ambitions can be fulfilled with the ratification of the treaty. We need to support this Bill and this treaty if we are to continue to benefit from the EU in the way we have for so long. We have all heard the list of benefits that will accrue, the enhance- ment of democracy, the increased role of national parliaments and the reforms to the decision- making processes. This evening I want to dwell on just some of the larger themes of the reform treaty. The reform treaty represents the changing face of Europe as a consequence of the enlarge- ment of the EU into a body of 27 member states. The rules that previously governed the Union need to be updated. The need for progress comes in the form of the Lisbon treaty, whose ratification is necessary for the advancement of Europe. Let us not forget that this treaty is largely what was negotiated during Ireland’s Presidency of the EU in 2004. I pay tribute to the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, for his role. Today, all parties rightfully acknowledged the contribution he made to the success of Ireland’s Presi- dency in 2004. There are, of course, detractors who would have the public believe 6 o’clock the treaty was formulated privately and without consultation. Nothing could be further from the truth. The reform treaty originated from a convention of 200 public representatives from across Europe, who painstakingly crafted the infrastructure of the Bill, with the interests of all member states at heart. I am certain that Ireland’s interests are well represented and our key priorities are well protected in the reform treaty. We have maintained unanimous decision-making on tax matters. Commission President Jose´ Manuel Barroso com- mented on this recently and confirmed that tax position. The treaty protects Ireland’s tradit- ional policy of neutrality, which I shall talk about later. 816 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
Overall, the treaty has strengthened and enhances the European Union. Da´il E´ ireann will have a greater role in the legislative process of the Union. All legislation before the European Parliament will be sent to our Parliament for a longer period of time for consideration and debate and, if necessary, rejection. If sufficient states find themselves in a similar position, there will be scope for amending draft legislation. The European Parliament will have greater powers in the area of law making. It will have greater budgetary powers, increasing the efficiency of the EU Parliament, and therefore the Union itself. The number of MEPs is to be capped to prevent it from becoming too large to operate in an efficient manner. This will benefit Ireland, in particular, because it will mean the smaller countries will proportionately have more MEPs per capita than our larger neighbours. The reform treaty also provides for the appointment of a full-time President of the European Council. This office will become a full institution in its own right with the ratification of the treaty. This will replace the current system, which sees rotating Heads of State take up the mantle of President. The President will be elected by the Council for a two and a half year period and the position will be primarily geared towards ensuring the continuity of the Council’s work. The new President will also be a mediator, working to secure consensus among member states, as Ireland successfully did in 2004. He or she may be removed at any time so there is a great level of accountability involved. Many members of the public have been fooled into believing that this treaty is too complex and that it is difficult for individuals to see any direct benefit. To such people I would say that the new treaty will, for the first time, legally bind the Charter of Fundamental Rights and bring the protection of citizens to a new level. The charter sets out the rights already enjoyed by Europe’s citizens, including the right to life, the prohibition of torture, respect for family life, the right to a fair trial, the right to vote and the right to stand in European elections. The charter is largely based on the Union’s principles, democracy, freedom and equality. No doubt, many challenges face the EU, especially from outside the Union. The 27 countries that make up the Union need to be able to present themselves as a united and credible force against external pressures, global warming, poverty, injustice etc. Deputy Connaughton, in his contri- bution, mentioned China and India, noting that their combined populations were larger than those of the combined 27 member states of the EU. That puts matters in perspective. The reform treaty enhances the Union and provides it with means to equip itself against these challenges. It gives us all one voice in which we can speak together. No country can tackle these changes alone, nor stand by and allow these challenges to continue. Together we are stronger so I welcome the force this Union can become with the help of the reform treaty. I am more than aware of the fears surrounding the treaty and the scaremongers prying on such fears. Defence, of course, is a concern, as is the taxation issue. However, I stress that the reform treaty does not change Europe’s role in taxation issues — unanimity is required for any pro- posed changes in this regard. Rest assured, the Minister, with his officials, will vigorously defend Ireland’s position, should the issue arise in any future proposed amendments. Those who are concerned about security and defence issues should rest assured that this treaty merely amends the existing provisions. It enhances the capacity of the European Union for activity in support of international peacekeeping and conflict prevention. Decisions taken in respect of these missions will continue to be made with unanimity. Moreover, Ireland’s neutrality is in no way threatened. It was the formulation mooted by the Irish in previous treaties that now ensures individual member states will have their concerns about neutrality and defence respected. For those who fear that this small country will be swallowed up by such a large Union, I believe that this treaty, more than any, will protect our interests. It ensures that the interests of the smaller countries are protected in respect of the European Commission beyond 2014. The number of Commissioners will be cut to 18, on a strict rota basis. If Ireland 817 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Michael Kennedy.] were a club or a limited company, we might believe that 27 committee members was too much. This measure serves to cap the number of Commissioners. It is important to recall that when Ireland joined the EEC, larger countries retained the right to nominate two Commissioners to our one, so that position is certainly in our favour. I will conclude by urging a “yes” vote. We owe it to our European neighbours. The Ta´naiste and Taoiseach designate, Deputy Brian Cowen, this morning said loyalty is a virtue, and I certainly believe that. Our European partners need our loyalty on this occasion. Europe gave Ireland a leg up in the 1970s and 1980s and the early part of the 1990s when it was needed most. Consider the \50 billion that we have got in funding over those years to build our roads and infrastructure. It has kick-started our \34 billion Transport 21 programme. Compare our social legislation today, workers’ rights, the programme on women’s issues and our stable cur- rency and economy with the past. We have matured as a nation, as seen by how self-assured we are as ordinary citizens. We should realise the respect in which the Irish are held by our European partners and friends. Ireland is now envied by many in Europe. Prior to joining the EEC in 1973, Ireland was seen as backward, its people inward looking, lacking in self-respect and self-confidence. We had little presence on the world stage. Joining the EEC and participat- ing in European affairs has changed all that. It is incumbent on every citizen to check out all the information and not listen to the scaremongers. There is a very good website and as people delve into it, they will find that a “yes” vote is essential and is for the betterment of Ireland.
Deputy Noel Treacy: Is cu´ is mho´ ra´thas dom teacht isteach anseo agus pa´irt a nglacadh ins an dı´ospo´ ireacht an-tabhachtach faoin mBille um an Ochtu´ Leasu´ is Fiche ar an mBunreacht 2008. Cuidighim leis an leasu´ seo, beidh me´ ag cuidiu´ le mo chomghleacaithe uilig, polaitaı´ochta agus muintir na tı´re, ar an reifreann a mbe´as againn le mı´ Mheithimh seo chugainn. Le cu´ namh De´, beidh a la´n daoine, an chuid is mo´ de phobal na tı´re ag cuidiu´ linn, freisin. It is an honour to have the opportunity to speak, at this historic time for our country, on the Twenty-eight Amendment of the Constitution Bill. I support the Bill and the referendum it will enable for the people of Ireland. Never before in the history of the State has an opportunity so great been given to the people, not only to show we have a democratic country and the power of the written Constitution under which we are all privileged to serve, but also to reflect the views of the vast majority of our fellow Europeans who want the European project to proceed and have an impact, in an inclusive way, on all the peoples of the Union. If we reflect on our history, including the revolution in 1916 and the civil war, culminating in the establish- ment of the State in 1922, we will realise its founding fathers would be proud of the successes we have achieved, even though there is some work yet to be done on the island. They would understand that their successors have continued to respect democracy and fulfil the consti- tutional requirement of equality of opportunity for all. The history and evolution of Ireland are very similar to the history and evolution of the European Union. It, too, was born of conflict, after two world wars, on foot of the leadership and vision of individuals such as Monnet, Schuman and de Gaulle. They got together to ensure there would be a new opportunity to eliminate conflict and create a new structure emphasising people, democracy and economic growth such that there would never again be a disastrous conflict such as the two world wars. Ireland has moved forward in a similar vein. I endorse the statements of Deputies Connaughton and Kennedy and all my colleagues who have spoken on this very important subject in the past month. Deputy Connaughton and I worked together as young Irishmen and Europeans in the early 1970s. I had just come out of school and was an enthusiastic young European guided by our fathers and colleagues who ensured we could make a democratic contribution such that the Irish people could avail of a 818 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) global opportunity, albeit within the then European Economic Community. We were afforded a great opportunity at the time by the six founders of the European Economic Community to join that great group, becoming its seventh member, with the United Kingdom and The Netherlands. Before we joined the European Economic Community in 1973, our main export was our brilliant people who built economies in other parts of the world. We obtained political freedom in the Republic in 1922 but were not able to achieve economic freedom or make use of the intellectual talent bank and many skills of our population on the island until we became a member of the Community. One should bear in mind our emphasis on education and the resources we received from the European Union for agriculture and infrastructure and through the Social and Regional Funds, framework programmes and various measures and directives. These resources continue to enhance our growing economy and gave us new options and confi- dence to build new markets in the United Kingdom, the rest of Europe and further afield. Thus, we have more than doubled the level of employment and increased our population. I pay tribute to the Taoiseach on this historic day, the day of his last speech in the House. I thank him for his leadership in Ireland and the rest of Europe. He is now regarded as one of the great leaders of the European Union. He led the change in 2004 that expanded the Union to include ten new member states. The number of member states rose from 15 to 25 and there are now 27. Accession made democracy sustainable and afforded a transparent opportunity to all the new member states, as was afforded to Ireland in 1973. There is now the opportunity for us to consider what we have achieved and how we should move forward together. I salute the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, and all his colleagues on their work in the European Union on behalf of Ireland. We work night and day to protect what is vital for Ireland. As politicians, legislators and members of the Government, we all work to protect and sustain our national interests. The treaty on which we are to vote in June is more important than any other to the farming community. The one pillar that has sustained itself throughout the history of the European Union since 1957 has been the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP. No other pillar has sustained itself independently within the Union. It is vital that we protect the CAP, not just for Irish agriculture and rural life but for agriculture and rural life across the Union. By voting in favour of the treaty, we will have an opportunity to protect the CAP and the resources transferred thereunder. This will give greater impetus to the protection of rural Europe, including rural Ireland, and the agriculture and agri-food industries that are so important to the economy and GDP. Voting in favour of the treaty will also reduce the capacity of those who try to undermine, on a consistent basis, the CAP and its importance and will protect the transfer of vital resources nationally and internationally. Over \2 billion per annum is received under the CAP. It is a question of our being able to offset our outward transfers as a net contributor, whereby we will be transferring resources as our GDP and economy grow. That will protect all our citizens, the Exchequer, our transfer of funds, our fiscal position and economic growth. Never before was it so important to have those who have benefited most from the European Union working together to achieve more, not only for themselves but for all European citizens. The Charter of Fundamental Rights is vital and very similar to the Constitution. The Euro- pean Union was born out of conflict. In this regard, we must remember the important contri- bution EU membership has made to peace on the island and the important work still to be done in Northern Ireland. The PEACE III position we have negotiated will result in the granting of \333 million to cross-Border projects in Northern Ireland. This is vital to our future and we must be eternally grateful for it. It mirrors the great contribution exemplified by the European 819 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Noel Treacy.] project, the greatest project in the world for democracy, peace, prosperity and consensual conclusions to achieve progress for all citizens, individually and collectively. On behalf of all my colleagues, I appeal to the people to endorse the reform treaty over- whelmingly when the opportunity is presented to them in June.
Deputy Martin Ferris: The Minister of State, Deputy Roche, referred last week to the intriguing collection of opponents to the current proposals. He was similarly intrigued, not to say flabbergasted, when such an intriguing alliance succeeded in defeating the first attempt to pass the Nice treaty. Instead of accepting the democratic will of the people of the State and renegotiating that treaty to meet the concerns expressed, his party decided to hold another referendum. Already, we have heard some supporters of the Lisbon treaty state it does not matter what the people decide as what is proposed will go ahead anyway. A member of one of the Opposition parties voted in the European Parliament to the effect that if the Irish electorate votes “no”, it should be ignored. The Minister of State also stated Ireland’s “key interests” would be protected. Surely that will not be the case if, as will happen, the State has less power to prevent implementation of measures that may be inimical to its interests. However, there have been instances in which Ireland’s key interests have been damaged because policy in key areas has been set by Brussels. One such area is fishing. In this regard, Deputy Feighan referred last week to \60 billion in EU funding for Ireland. Perhaps that was a fair exchange for the equivalent value in fish that has been taken from our waters both legally and illegally by foreign vessels since 1973. It is probably much higher given that no one knows the true scale of illegal fishing here and no one in Government seems inclined to answer any questions about it. In 1972 my party opposed our entry into the EEC because we said it did not represent a good deal for Ireland. People living in or familiar with our coastal communities know the mistakes of those negotiations in 1972 and what they have done to our coastal communities, and the scale to which they have been decimated. I refer to fishing because it is a prime example of a natural resource with massive potential that was basically surrendered by this State following decades of earlier neglect when countries like Norway were making fishing one of the main stays of their economies. It is an example of how sovereignty was surrendered to Brussels and how Brussels through the Common fisheries policy exploited our fisheries and many believe is currently planning their virtual closure. Bear- ing in mind how Norway has exploited its resources to develop its economy, it is clear that what was done in this country at that time left much to be desired. My party makes no apology for pointing this out or for challenging successive attempts over the past 35 years to further surrender sovereign control over this country to Europe. No doubt we have made predictions that were not fulfilled but so too have the europhiles and we certainly make no apology for being the only party in this House to represent the large number of people, including many members and supporters of all parties here, who are opposed to the ongoing leaching of powers over sovereign states to Brussels. I referred to false predictions on the part of europhiles and we only have to go back to the Nice treaty to find lots of examples of these. We were told, for example, that enlargement would have no consequences for employment or employment conditions and anyone who begged to differ was attacked as a racist or hysterical. Opponents of the Nice treaty pointed out that the treaty was designed to facilitate the mobility of capital and labour with the inevitable consequence that employers would use this to undermine wages and conditions of employment. Then we had the case of Irish Ferries and other cases of job displacement. Even some sup- porters of the Nice treaty are now realising that enlargement has indeed facilitated the 820 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed) undermining of wages and conditions by the employment of agency workers. This is why at least one major union, Unite, is calling for a “no” vote, and why many other trade union activists and members will also vote against the proposal. Farmers, who have traditionally been among the strongest proponents of further empowering the EU, have become increasingly concerned over the consequences of surrendering more power to Brussels, as was witnessed last week with the large protest concerning the WTO. In recent months we have had the situation regarding Brazilian beef which, despite the fact that the Minister, Deputy Coughlan, did an about-face and reversed her previous opposition to a ban, is ongoing. This is an illustration that when Ireland’s vital interests are at stake the Govern- ment is unable to protect them if sufficient other interests in the Commission think otherwise. The same also applies to the current concerns over what will take place in the World Trade Organisation negotiations. It appears that Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson, with the support of the Commission, is prepared to accede to the demands of other trading blocs for concessions that will mean entire sectors of farming in Europe will be unsustainable in the face of imports from Brazil, New Zealand and elsewhere. When the Treaty of Rome was signed, food security in Europe was a major consideration. Commissioner Mandelson’s negotiations will take away whatever subsidies and support exist for the production of food in order to open up imports into the EU. If allowed to continue it will effectively make it impossible for Irish and other EU farmers to be able to compete and survive. This is a major concern for the rural community here. This could also mean that the reformed CAP will be totally undermined and would mean that farmers were misled in 2003 when they agreed to decoupling. I went to meet EU personnel in Brussels at the time to advocate for decoupling as the way forward. Sinn Fe´in was the first party in this House to do so. We went out and acquainted ourselves with the motivation behind it. We were told that decoupling allowed the EU to meet its promise to move away from production subsidies and that the CAP would be safe from any future attack at the WTO. That is why I travelled throughout the country, in the Twenty-six Counties and the Six Counties, to convince farmers that it was in their best long-term interests to accept the decoupling package. However, if Commissioner Mandelson gets away with it and takes away whatever support exists, that will be the end of food production in this country as we will not be able to compete with imports from outside the EU. The Government and the other parties here are desperate to reassure farmers that the WTO has nothing to do with the proposals embodied in the treaty. Of course it has, and nowhere more explicitly than in article 2 which proposes to give the Commission exclusive competence over international trade agreements. Therefore, if the Lisbon treaty was currently in effect and if Commissioner Mandelson had the qualified majority support, there would be nothing that this country or France, if in a minority, could do about it. This illustrates that when Irish vital interests are at stake the Government will not have the power to prevent measures inimical to those interests from proceeding. With no Commissioner for five years out of 15 and no veto and with exclusive competence for international trade agreements given to the Commission, the Commission will be better able to implement decisions that damage vital areas of our economy and we will be able to do nothing to prevent it. Supporters of this proposal claim that it will introduce greater efficiency into the decision- making process. That will be cold comfort if those decisions are ones that are against Ireland’s interests. Much has been made about the fact that 27 states leading to 27 Commissioners would be unworkable. I would argue that it is working better at this time than at any time previously. Even as it stands the Government must prove that it is capable of preventing the Mandelson 821 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Martin Ferris.] proposals from being presented as the EU position. If it is not, farmers and others must ask themselves how much worse the situation will be if this treaty is passed. This is a major chal- lenge to the leadership of the farming organisations. If Commissioner Mandelson is allowed to get his way, are the farming organisations prepared to instruct their members and lobby for a “no” vote on the Lisbon treaty as a means of staking their claim? While those on the “yes” side maintain the fiction that the Commission’s position at the WTO is somehow bizarrely distinct from the way in which the Commission adopts that position, they are well aware that those directly involved in farming and fishing will take into account such issues when deciding how to vote. There is a significant difference within the “yes” campaign on the issue of neutrality. Fianna Fa´il claims, despite the existence of the battle group, that there is no move towards having an EU armed force, but Fine Gael has recognised that is the reality and has welcomed it, as outlined in its Beyond Neutrality policy document. The Labour Party differed radically and publicly at the time from Fine Gael on this issue. The Green Party has also, until recently, consistently opposed any weakening of Irish neutrality and linked that to the ongoing use of Shannon Airport by the US military. However, despite their differences all four parties are singing from the same hymn sheet. They cannot all be right. How can they all have different positions and sing from the same hymn sheet? Sinn Fe´in is not arguing that this State ought never to co-operate with others if mutual interests are threatened. However, we are certainly opposed to Ireland being part of a military structure where control of that structure would be outside of Irish Government control. If the European Commission can decide by a majority to pursue policies damaging to member states’ interests in areas such as agriculture, the logic of EU centralisation is that it will also encompass powers over other key areas, including foreign policy, and similarly end up potentially going against the wishes and interests of individual member states. There has been a persistent attempt by the “yes” side to paint the “no” campaign as somehow unrepresentative. It cites Sinn Fe´in’s position and the involvement of other smaller groups. We certainly do not claim to speak on behalf of all those opposed to previous referenda. Prominent members and supporters of other parties are involved in the “no” campaign, including members of Fianna Fa´il, almost half the Green Party, a big section of the Labour Party, members of Fine Gael, members of the trade union movement and farming bodies.
Deputy Joe Costello: Martin McGuinness is on the “yes” side.
Deputy Martin Ferris: He is not, although the Deputy may like to think he is. Members of the groups I mentioned are opposed to the Lisbon treaty. In 2001 and 2002 more than 500,000 people voted against the Nice treaty. The combined vote of the anti-Nice treaty parties, including Sinn Fe´in, the Green Party before its conversion, the Socialist Party and some smaller parties and independents, was over 200,000 in the 2002 general election. The fact that 500,000 people voted against the Nice treaty leads one to accu- rately assume that many supporters of other political parties voted “no”; in other words, members of the Minister of State’s party and other parties in the House which advocated a “yes” vote were not railroaded into accepting a treaty that they believed was not in the best interests of the people. People from all political viewpoints, all parts of the country and all backgrounds realise the implications the Lisbon treaty will have and will make their voices heard. I hope this will be sufficient to defeat the proposal and, if that is the case, the Government will actually pay heed, unlike last time when the Nice treaty was first rejected and then put to the people again. 822 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
Deputy Connaughton referred to how difficult the contents of the treaty were to read and Deputy Brady, who was in the Chair, agreed. He mentioned an ESB bill, suggesting we tended not to read the conditions on the back. That is probably the case for most people but most cannot understand the text of the Lisbon treaty, even Pat Kenny admitted as much on the radio and said it would be almost impossible for ordinary people to understand it. Deputy Connaughton says we do not read the conditions on the back of an ESB bill but many in Ireland who do not read or understand small print find themselves at a significant loss in insurance cases. The contents of the Lisbon treaty should be debated. They should also be readable and comprehensible. I have some quotations that have enlightened those at meetings I have attended. In 2005 the Netherlands and France rejected the EU constitution, a forerunner of the Lisbon treaty. In 2007 the German Chancellor, Ms Angela Merkel, said “within the Lisbon treaty the substance of the constitution is preserved,” and that is a fact. In 2007 the Taoiseach said “90% of the constitution is still there. These changes have not made any dramatic change to the substance of what was agreed in 2004.” Ms Astrid Thors, the Finnish foreign Minister, said: “nothing from the original institutional package has been changed.” In 2007 Giscard d’Estaing said “public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly. All earlier proposals will be in the next texts but will be hidden and disguised in some way.” The Belgian foreign Minister, Mr. Karl de Gucht, said the aim of the consti- tutional treaty was to make it more readable, while the aim of the Lisbon treaty is to be unreadable. The constitution aimed to be clear but the treaty had to be unclear and, in that respect, it is a success. Mr. Jean-Claude Juncker, the Prime Minister of Luxemburg said: “Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty, but would I be intelligent to draw the attention of public opinion to that fact?” This is what European leaders have said about the treaty but I have heard supporters of it from both sides of the House make very different arguments. We are very fortunate to have the opportunity to hold a referendum. Were it not for Mr. Raymond Crotty, a very brave man, this would not be the case.
Deputy Billy Kelleher: Eamon de Valera wrote the Constitution. I do not mean to give history lessons but the Deputy is factually incorrect.
Deputy Martin Ferris: Mr. Crotty was ridiculed by the Government and the political estab- lishment in the State. Incidentally, he was supported by some Opposition parties which now support the “yes” campaign. He took a case and won rights for the people. The referendum gives us the opportunity to stand up for the peoples of the rest of Europe who have been denied the opportunity to vote to give their views on the Lisbon treaty. Over 60% of people surveyed on the treaty in other EU jurisdictions oppose it but they do not have the opportunity we have. The political establishment in the State is trying to push it through, disguised in such a way that people will not understand it. As one person said, it does not matter whether we vote “No” because it will go ahead anyway. Sinn Fe´in stands for people who are opposed to the contents of the Lisbon treaty. We are not anti-European and believe Ireland’s place is in the European Union. Co-operation with our European partners is valuable and must continue. Sinn Fe´in has supported EU measures on agriculture, the environment and equality that are in Ireland’s interests.
Deputy Joe Costello: What treaty has Sinn Fe´in supported?
Deputy Martin Ferris: Deputy Costello once stood here and said what I am now saying but he has, unfortunately, been compromised by the system and the Establishment. He was once revolutionary, radical and adopted a position of principle but that is no longer the case. 823 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
Deputy Joe Costello: If Sinn Fe´in supported the European Union, it would have supported at least one treaty.
Deputy Martin Ferris: The referendum campaign will be very different from previous refer- enda. Contrary to what the Government claims, no matter how the people vote, Ireland’s place in the European Union is secure. The Minister of State knows this. We fought the Nice treaty campaign in a dignified and informative way, especially the second campaign. We won in the first referendum, minor negotiations ensued and the people voted in favour of the treaty on the second occasion. I accept that they made that decision but believe the demonisation of those who stand against the Lisbon treaty is a disgrace to those charged with the responsibility to run the country. The Government is trying to demonise those who stand for the wishes and rights of people. I am sorry that the Labour Party which is supposed to represent the working class is prepared to promote a treaty that will do damage to the ordinary working people of this island.
Deputy Joe Costello: The Deputy will have to read the treaty.
Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Billy Kelleher): I listened with interest to the previous speaker and wish to point out that the political establishment to which he refers is the democratically elected assembly of this country. The parties in this House are not the political establishment but sent here by the people who vote in general elections. The political establishment is not an elitist organisation, as Deputy Ferris implied, it consists of Members of this House who have been sent from various constituencies after a general election to form a Government. There is no elitism or political establishment in this context. This is the democratic assembly of the Republic of Ireland. I take great offence that some infer that Members are elected by means other than the voice of the people in general elections. Members are the elected representatives of the people who cast their votes in a general election. Deputy Ferris has the same mandate as I have. Unfortunately, there are only a few in the Deputy’s party, while there are many of us. However, we respect his right to say what he wants.
Deputy Martin Ferris: I am democratically elected by the people of north Kerry.
Deputy Billy Kelleher: I am here on the same premise as the Deputy.
Deputy Martin Ferris: I have a right to say what I have to say.
Deputy Billy Kelleher: Voices were heard in the Chamber claiming there was a political establishment. I reject that categorically. Members in this Chamber have been elected by the de facto votes of the people. I take grave exception to the view that there is a political establish- ment. The people are mature and cast their votes. People are sent to the Da´il on an equal basis.
Deputy Martin Ferris: The people cast their votes like they did on the first Nice treaty.
Deputy Billy Kelleher: There is a myth that there is elitism in Irish politics. It is a myth I reject categorically as a Member who espouses the values of republicanism and equality, partic- ularly of all Members in this Chamber. I respect Deputy Ferris’s views. I listened to the Deputy’s history lesson on Ireland and Europe. It was not the same history lesson I learned in national or secondary school. I take great pride as a member of the Fianna Fa´il Party in the fact that when Ireland joined the EEC in 1973, there were people of vision in the party who realised Ireland could not remain isolated and not embrace the European pro- ject. The people were asked to ratify that decision and did so overwhelmingly. 824 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
The European project is not about centralising power to a bureaucracy in Brussels. It is the greatest peace process established in modern times, an oft forgotten fact. In 1939 the Second World War started and by its end over 40 million people had died on mainland Europe fighting for various ideologies. Out of this emerged the European project. It is an important issue which is often lost in the debate as to whether member states are surrendering their sovereignty or young Irish men and women could die on foreign shores. The European project is contrary to everything Deputy Ferris claimed. It is about ensuring people are equal and brings citizens, ideologies and opinions together to serve all. This morning I launched the Leonardo da Vinci programme in the Kimmage-Crumlin-Walk- instown-Driminagh area of Dublin 12. It is the opposite to all of Deputy Ferris’s claims about the European Union which has funded projects not only from the top but from the bottom up. If the Deputy claims the European system is centralised, I suggest he visit that project where he will see the opposite. Through the project the European Union has funded a programme to assist employers and the long-term unemployed in areas of social disadvantage. For those who claim the Union is anathema to our sovereignty and the bottom-up approach, they are wrong. It has encouraged us to think outside the box, have a broader vision and implement policies through this Parliament and the Government it elects. It has provided resources, too. The history lesson given to us in the past 20 minutes by Deputy Ferris suggests Ireland would be a better place if we had never joined the European Union. What about being able to tackle massive emigration and high unemployment problems? What about the infrastructural development, investment in education, the ability to export to broader markets without tariffs that the European Union has provided us? Perhaps my view of history is very different from that of those opposing the twenty-eight amendment to the Constitution. Membership of the European Union has been positive, not only in the context of social inclusion and the economy but also in the Northern Ireland context. It encouraged people to broaden their minds. Perhaps Deputy Ferris should consider it differently instead of saying no, no, no like a former British Prime Minister or never, never, never, as the First Minister of Northern Ireland once did. Even they have changed their views. I suggest the Deputy and his party change their views on European integration which respects the sovereignty of member states and the diversity of Europe. Ireland is a small country. When I left secondary school, options were limited. I was lucky because I came from a farm. Many of my peers in school and college had to emigrate or take up substandard jobs. The European Union has been good to this country. Any policy intro- duced by the Union through the Commission, the Council of Ministers or the European Parlia- ment has impacted positively on people’s lives.
Deputy Martin Ferris: How many farmers have left the land since 1973? What about coas- tal communities?
Acting Chairman (Deputy Brian O’Shea): The Minister of State to continue without interruption.
Deputy Martin Ferris: The Minister of State should be honest and tell us how many small farmers have left the land. Large numbers have done so.
Deputy Billy Kelleher: I will take no lectures from anyone on milking cows at 4 a.m. I would even suggest I have done a little more of it than the Deputy.
Deputy Martin Ferris: What about coastal communities? 825 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
Acting Chairman: Deputy Ferris, there will be one voice only.
Deputy Billy Kelleher: There have been dramatic changes in Irish agriculture.
Deputy Martin Ferris: I accept that.
Deputy Billy Kelleher: I accept many have left the land but it is because they have alterna- tives in accessing education, decent employment and other opportunities. Other opportunities emerged besides remaining in a homestead that could not support them or their families. When considering the changes in Irish agriculture, it is for positive reasons that most have embraced the European project.
Deputy Martin Ferris: What about the fishing communities in Union Hall and Skibbereen?
Deputy Billy Kelleher: Historically, the farming community has always been supportive of EU referenda. It knows we cannot live on an isolationist island on the periphery of Europe, ignoring market realties and globalisation which I accept pose challenges.
Deputy Martin Ferris: What about fishermen in west Cork?
Deputy Billy Kelleher: Regarding employment rights, Ireland has benefitted from judgments of the European Court of Justice and equality legislation initiated in the European Union. Other employment rights legislation was passed in this Parliament having been nudged by the European Union.
Deputy Martin Ferris: That is an indictment of this Parliament.
Acting Chairman: The Minister of State to continue without interruption.
Deputy Billy Kelleher: People have benefitted from it across Europe. The reason Ireland receives many migrants is the European project. Massive investment through the Cohesion Fund and the Structural Fund allowed us to invest in education, infra- structure and create a dynamic economy. The reason we have difficulties and challenges in ensuring no one is exploited in the labour market is the European Union has been successful in lifting Ireland out of economic depression. Any migrant coming to Ireland is coming because of all the reasons the European Union is good — the free movement of people, open markets and the fact that Ireland has a dynamic economy, a fact acknowledged worldwide. We have also contributed to the European Union. We have reputable and highly respected Members representing the country at the Council of Ministers. We should never be shy in stating that we are capable of representing our opinions internationally and, predominantly, on the European stage. Irish Commissioners, including the late Dr. Patrick Hillery who sadly passed away recently, took us into the European project because it was an opportunity for Ireland. However, we should never be afraid to say that we have contributed equally. We gave of our expertise, commitment, neutrality and opinions——
Deputy Martin Ferris: And resources.
Deputy Billy Kelleher: ——to bring a different flavour to that on which the European project was founded.
Deputy Martin Ferris: What about fishing? As the Minister of State knows full well, we have—— 826 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
Deputy Billy Kelleher: The Deputy knows well that one can get nothing for nothing.
Deputy Martin Ferris: It is a significant resource.
Deputy Billy Kelleher: On employment rights, previous speakers made negative references concerning people coming to Ireland to be exploited. I accept that there are challenges in the context of social partnership, such as the need to ensure the proper protection of workers arriving in Ireland. However, those workers would not be arriving on our shores were it not for Ireland’s success at the heart of Europe. When people consider the Lisbon reform treaty and the imminent referendum, they will acknowledge that Europe has been good to Ireland in two respects, namely, infrastructural funding and allowing us to develop as a nation. It has allowed us to think outside our history and to embrace new ideas. We should be proud that our small country, which is on the periph- ery of Europe, is at the heart of the EU and is respected internationally. While it has been stated that a political elite is trying to browbeat the people, the public has endorsed the European project wholeheartedly in every referendum bar one. Our people take pride in being at the political, commercial and cultural heart of Europe. Consider achievements in recent years. In education, for example, the ERASMUS project is of fundamental benefit to high-end graduates across Europe. Qualifications and accreditation from Irish universities and institutes of technology are recognised across Europe. After a recent visit to India, I believe that our third level and fourth level facilities should be promoted to Indian students. India is a country of 1 billion people who see us at the heart of Europe and admire what we have achieved. They adopted many parts of our Constitution after their independence. Our countries may be different in terms of geography, demography and the challenges facing us, but one of the main reasons the students with whom I spoke wanted to come to Ireland was that they saw it as an international, outward-looking and vision- ary country that leads in all fields, not just software and economics, but also in politics. We should acknowledge this leadership. How much time have I remaining?
Acting Chairman: The Minister of State has fewer than five minutes remaining.
Deputy Billy Kelleher: I understand the political implications of a myth that has been propa- gated and that people want to stand on a platform and say “no” for the sake of it, but listening to them for a long time in respect of other issues did not achieve much. We must tackle environmental issues globally, including carbon emissions, climate change and the targets set for each country by the Kyoto Protocol. Were we not at the heart of the European project, we would be at a disadvantage. It is important that we not only explain the political implications of the EU treaty in the context of streamlining decision making, but also the practical everyday impact it will have on people’s lives. I have explained why Europe has been good for us, but the current challenges are global warming and climate change. Given that Europe has been a driving force in this respect, we can be at the heart of the decision-making process on how humanity addresses its affairs on this planet. We should be to the fore. The treaty will allow us to make strategic decisions at an early stage and on a basis of trust and mutual respect among EU member states. Let us not forget that larger member states will give up some of their voting entitlements. Sacrifices for the greater good are being made all around. Deputy Ferris knows that my statements are factual. I have campaigned in favour of every EU treaty and, having lost only one, we will not lose this one. An issue that was raised each time was that of neutrality. While we must acknowledge this concern, it is being encouraged disingenuously. Everyone in the House has been elected with an equal mandate and knows that there will be no implications for our neutrality. Closer 827 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
[Deputy Billy Kelleher.] co-operation is being discussed to ensure that, as in respect of climate change and the challenges of globalisation, the EU becomes a dominant player in the world market in terms of economics and social responsibility. We should be at the heart of this decision making. Be it funding food aid programmes in Darfur or elsewhere in the Third World, Europe has an obligation to its citizens. We can decide not to be a part of this endeavour or to be a driving force. The people have taken pride in our troops serving in the United Nations.
Deputy Martin Ferris: As peacekeepers.
Deputy Billy Kelleher: There is not one centilla of change proposed in the Lisbon treaty in this respect as overseas missions must be UN-mandated and approved by the Da´il and the Government. While I respect any individual’s right to speak freely in the Chamber, it is important that he or she respects the fact that the majority of Deputies elected in the last general election sup- ports the treaty and the 28th amendment of the Constitution. I would hate to believe that the previous speaker suggested my mandate was lesser than his. I urge people to 7 o’clock become involved in the consultation process, to note statements in this House and elsewhere and to realise that, while Europe has been good for us, Ireland has played an important role in the development of the EU.
Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: While the debate on the Lisbon treaty has been complicated by the “no” campaign, it is a straightforward matter. As a nation, we must decide whether Europe has been and will continue to be good for us. The Minister of State, Deputy Kelleher, referred to how the EU process emerged from a desire for peace and to bring nations together, after which it evolved into an economic force. Since joining the then EEC in 1973, we have received \60 billion and returned \20 billion, a sign that we have prospered. Many of the infrastructural projects that contributed handsomely to the Celtic tiger would not have proceeded without funding from Europe.
Cuireadh an dı´ospo´ ireacht ar athlo´ .
Debate adjourned.
Message from Select Committee. An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Select Committee on Finance and the Public Service has completed its consideration of the following Revised Estimates for public services for the service of the year ending on 31 December 2008: Votes 2, 3, 4, 13 and 14.
Private Members’ Business.
————
Health Services: Motion (Resumed).
The following motion was moved by Deputy Kathleen Lynch on Tuesday, 22 April 2008: That Da´il E´ ireann, concerned at the impact on patients and those dependent on the health service of con- tinuing cutbacks, staff shortages and under-resourcing; and noting in particular: 828 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
— that there are an estimated 10,000 people who acquire a brain injury in Ireland every year; — that up to 2% of all people have disabling problems following an acquired brain injury, whether from traumatic brain injury, stroke or other causes; — that there is only one rehabilitation hospital in the country, with just 110 beds, for those who suffer from acquired brain injury; — that the number of neurologists, neurosurgeons and rehabilitation consultants avail- able to treat these patients is well below the levels available in other countries; and — deplores the long waiting times that can see patients waiting up to two years for rehabilitative care; calls for: — the establishment of a regional network of rehabilitation facilities and services to be established in the context of a national rehabilitation strategy; — the immediate publication of the national review of neurology and clinical neuro- physiology services; — an increase in the number of approved posts for consultant neurologists from 24 to 42 and neurosurgeons from nine to 16; — a significant increase in the number of rehabilitation consultants to reflect demand for these services; and — the provision of effective community rehabilitative and support services for post- medical ABI patients.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1: To delete all the words after “Da´il E´ ireann”and substitute the following: — acknowledges the substantial resources, \14.931 billion, provided by the Exchequer for the HSE to provide health and personal social services; — recognises that this is an increase of over \1.1 billion over the funding provided in 2007; — supports the Government’s position in prioritising and providing additional funding of \344 million in the 2008 budget for additional services for older people, people with disabilities and cancer control; — recognises that the number of people employed in the public health service since 1997 has increased by over 64%, from just under 68,000 to 111,505 whole-time equivalent staff in December 2007; and — in particular, by the end of 2007, there were: — 3,029 more medical and dental staff, a 61% increase; — 9,767 more health and social care professionals, a 164% increase; and — 11,660 additional nurses, a 43% increase; — notes that the HSE has been given approval for an additional 1,050 new posts arising from development funding provided by the Government in the budget day package for 2008; 829 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
— notes that the temporary recruitment pause put in place by the HSE towards the end of 2007 ended on 31 December 2007; — reaffirms the statutory requirement that the Health Service Executive should man- age its budget within the Vote approved by Da´il E´ ireann; — supports the Government’s National Disability Strategy; — recognises the substantial additional funding provided for new and enhanced dis- ability services over the past number of years; — acknowledges the Government’s multi-annual investment programme for services for people with a disability; — acknowledges the plans to develop the National Rehabilitation Hospital and increase its capacity to treat more patients; — notes that the Department of Health and Children together with the HSE is commit- ted to developing a strategy for the future of rehabilitation services and both parties have agreed to jointly address this area as quickly as possible; — welcomes the additional revenue investment of \7 million since 2006 to support the development of neurosciences (including neurology, neurophysiology and neurosur- gery services), acknowledges the increase in the level of consultant manpower on foot of this investment and notes the intention by the HSE in the national service plan to continue the development of these services in 2008; — welcomes the progress being made by the HSE in developing a framework for the future development of services in the neuroscience area; — welcomes the emphasis in the new consultant contract on providing for consultant delivered services through a significant expansion of consultant numbers across all specialties; and — welcomes the increase since 2003 of ten additional consultant neurologist posts and four additional consultant neurophysiologist posts, bringing the total approved com- plement of posts in these specialties to 24 and seven respectively; the increase since 2006 of two additional approved consultant neurosurgeon posts at Beaumont Hospital and the provision of the necessary funding by the HSE for the creation of a fourth post at Cork University Hospital; the recent advertisement by the HSE for two permanent consultant neurologists at Beaumont and Waterford and for a consultant neurophysiologist at St. James’s-Beaumont Hospitals. —(Minister for Health and Children). Deputy Alan Shatter: At the outset, I congratulate the Labour Party on the motion before the House this evening. I fully support it, as does the Fine Gael Party, although it is regrettable at this stage in the life of a Government in which some Ministers have been in office for 11 years. The Minister, Deputy Harney, who has served as Ta´naiste and now is simply Minister for Health and Children, has been a member of a Government for 11 years that has utterly and completely failed to provide the type of neurological services to which people are entitled. A myriad of reports have described the inadequacies of the services and have prescribed what is required. In the health strategy of 2001, the Government promised to prepare an action plan for rehabilitation services for people with brain injuries and recognised the shortage of inpatient and community-based services. The action plan was supposed to set out a programme to meet existing shortfalls in speech and language services, occupational therapy and physiotherapists. 830 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
Today, the usual nauseating and self-congratulatory amendment tabled by the Government in response to the motion provides an insight into the negligent manner in which the health service has been treated. One line of the Government’s amendment notes that the Department of Health and Children together with the HSE is committed to developing a strategy for the future of rehabilitation services and both parties have agreed to jointly address this area as soon as possible. In 2008, the HSE and the Government now promise to do what was originally promised in the health strategy of 2001. In seven years, the world in that sector has not moved forward. Experts recommend that patients with a brain injury must be seen within two weeks to maximise recovery. However, Irish patients must wait up to two years for an initial assessment because our sole rehabilitative hospital, which has 110 beds, only has the capacity to treat approximately one quarter of the 10,000 people who suffer from brain injury each year. The Disability Act 2005 promised an independent assessment of needs for all those with a neurologi- cal condition. At present, that is being rolled out to all children under the age of five. However, anyone over that age is not being assessed. The HSE strategic review of neurology and clinical neurophysiology services was due to be published in February 2007. I understand the review was given to the HSE in December last but it still has not been published. It is not merely unacceptable, it is scandalous that those who suffer from brain injuries as a result of a car crash, stroke or other accidents and illnesses must wait for as long as two years for rehabilitation services. Access to early rehabilitative treatment is critical to helping people to talk or walk again and to normalise their lives. Although the health budget has never been larger, accessing services such as speech and language therapy, occupational therapy and physiotherapy has not improved. Long waiting lists have resulted in patients being left in debilitating conditions, dependent on others at home or in nursing homes, for the rest of their lives. Many patients are being cared for at home by relations or spouses, who are available 24-7 to take care of them. However, the State is utterly failing in its duty, not only to those who are stroke victims but to the carers who are undertaking duties that otherwise would fall on the hospital and nursing home services, by failing to ensure they have the relief and services they require to maintain their own physical and mental well-being. I refer in particular to the problems now developing in the respite sector. I will read out a letter that I received a few days ago which states:
I am writing to you with some disturbing news, that my mother received this morning. Firstly let me tell you quickly what her story is: Both my parents are in their late 70’s and my father is suffering from Parkinson’s and also due to an operation he had a stroke, so he needs care, my mother provides this with the help of carers — so far so good, but my mother is suffering from blood pressure and on the advice of her GP and the district nurse has been told to take a break otherwise she will end up in hospital and will be of no use to either herself or my dad. So after getting the forms from the district nurse and getting them signed, getting the GP to sign them and booking him into the respite care ... in Leopardstown [Park Hospital], where I might add he attends the day centre every Thursday and then booking a holiday for 7 days with JWT, she has now found out some really disturbing news and that is — the respite care in Leopardstown hospital is being closed, so they have cancelled the respite, surely they could see their way clear in letting the people who have booked a break, have a break. 831 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
[Deputy Alan Shatter.]
How can the HSE live with itself with the deplorable way it is dealing with the sick, disabled and old of this country. Mary Harney wants you to keep “them” at home, but she does not have to look after them 24-7 — we do. ... I cannot look after [my father], I work and have 3 children of my own to look after. ...Myfather over the years paid taxes and never, never could he claim anything back, but he was able to get respite care — but now that has been snatched away from them, private care is not ... an option, due to the fact of a severe lack of “carers” they do not have the back up if a carer is not available to attend — and where does that leave the “client” as they like to call them!!
Leopardstown Park Hospital withdrew respite care for all those booked in for the months of May, June and July as a consequence of not having the requisite funding available from the HSE to maintain such care. This is a cutback that affects the most vulnerable people within our community. I understand that Baggot Street and Cherry Orchard hospitals also will termin- ate respite care. I understand, to use a good old Yiddish and American phrase, there is a schmozzle going on in the background whereby the HSE is disputing that it was necessary for Leopardstown Park Hospital to take such action. However, the hospital is asserting that in March, the HSE knew of the position in which it found itself. This constitutes a classic example of the deplorable state of the health service. I ask the Minister to take action this week to ensure the respite care service provided by Leopardstown Park Hospital is restored and to ensure that respite care is not withdrawn in other hospitals for those caring for stroke and other victims. The HSE has commissioned three reports on neurology services, first in 2003, then three years later and finally the aforementioned report that was presented in December 2007 but which has not yet been published. Like its predecessors, the third report criticises the fact that there are only 20 neurologists, nine neurosurgeons, six rehabilitation specialists and 110 rehabilitation beds in Ireland. Services are seriously under-resourced and this is having a devas- tating effect on patients. Ireland, with only 20 consultant neurologists, proportionally has the lowest number in Europe. Although the 2003 report found that 42 consultants were required, after three reports within five years there still are fewer consultants than the recommended number. The HSE and the Department are failing brain injury and stroke victims. Their function should pertain to the provision of medical care and not to the drawing up of reports that are ignored and the maintenance of a costly, bulging unacceptable and ever-growing bureaucracy that is denying resources to frontline services. In recent days, Members have learned of a variety of cutbacks being introduced by the HSE, all of which are in respect of frontline services. The Government has presided over the creation of a bureaucratic and administrative monster, in circumstances in which it should have streamlined the available administration to provide the health service that is needed and should have ensured that scarce resources went into the frontline essential patient care services that are required so badly. The Neurological Alliance of Ireland has a number of specific aims, which include increasing the number of neurologists in Ireland to 42 from the present total of 17. It also seeks to have neurologists in those parts of the country in which none is in place at present, as well as an overall increase in the number of consultant neurologists to cut down the unacceptable waiting lists. Doctors and neurosurgeons in Beaumont have pleaded for additional consultant staff and, even though the need for those staff has been recognised, there has been extraordinary lethargy in recruiting them. 832 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
The Government’s report on neurosurgery, which was published in 2006, needs to be implemented, as do the key recommendations of the Irish Heart Foundation. The latter’s report highlighted the fact that only one Irish hospital has a fully resourced stroke unit, despite the myth spread by the Government that other hospitals have such units. One in 37 hospitals, or 3% of the total, compares with the 91% of similar UK hospitals which have stroke units. It is likely that between 350 and 500 deaths per year could be avoided if stroke unit care was properly introduced in the Republic. In this and in other areas of the health service the Govern- ment has totally failed in its public duty to provide the patient care, hospital services and back- up respite care to which the people of this country are entitled.
Deputy Timmy Dooley: I wish to share time with Deputy Charlie O’Connor.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Is that agreed? Agreed.
Deputy Timmy Dooley: I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. Like many of the debates we have had on the health services, it gives us a chance to put forward our views on various topics. It is the duty of the Opposition to raise what it sees as the Government’s inability to address the issues concerned. It is unfortunate, however, that specific areas of the health services are often bandied from one side to the other. Individual cases are used to bash the Minister of the day or the Government, notwithstanding the difficulties that exist on the ground and the pain suffered by individual families. Like every other Deputy, I meet constituents on a weekly basis to discuss their real concerns and the pain and suffering they experience. To some extent, it is important this is recognised but the action required must be on a strategic level. Last night’s contribution by the Minister for Health and Children clearly took account of that. Notwithstanding strategic thinking and service plans, it is clear that funding is required to address individual cases. However, if we continue to dwell on individual cases on a daily or a weekly basis, our attention will be dis- tracted from the need to restructure our health services generally.
Deputy Alan Shatter: Is the Deputy suggesting that the plight of individuals should be ignored?
Deputy Timmy Dooley: I did not interrupt Deputy Shatter and he might afford me the same level of courtesy.
Deputy Alan Shatter: We should ignore stroke victims.
Deputy Timmy Dooley: If the Deputy wishes, I would be happy to heckle him.
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I would prefer if Deputy Dooley did not do so.
Deputy Timmy Dooley: I, too, would prefer not to heckle. It is critically important that we focus on developing a strategy. We can all be the wise man in the pub or the hurler on the ditch and play down each element of the game, but the public expects more from us. It has put its faith in us to come at this from a different point of view by suggesting solutions that meet their needs rather than acting as commentators or loudhailers on individual issues. That does not take from the individual cases raised by other contributors. The Government’s strategy is bringing the real reforms required in the health services. Debates such as tonight’s often distract us from the discussions we should be having on the strategies we need to develop. The public’s attention is turned to individual cases rather than 833 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
[Deputy Timmy Dooley.] to the broad framework for delivering a coherent policy that meets the needs of citizens. In that context, it is critical that we understand from whence we came. My mother is a retired nurse who worked as a midwife in a small district hospital with 34 or 35 beds. Nobody would suggest today that delivering children in such an environment is a safe practice. We have made significant progress over the decades in terms of delivering services. Last night, the Minister set out the improvements made on life expectancy, which has risen from considerably below the EU average to above it. The continuous efforts by vested interests to focus on individual heart-rending cases do a disservice to our attempts to introduce a better model that can address these cases. I acknowledge the tremendous work being done in the National Rehabilitation Hospital. I have personal experience of people who have been involved with the hospital over the years. Any Deputy who has ongoing contact with constituents will be aware that its limited number of places are much sought after. I look forward to the implementation of the strategy set out by the Minister for defining the services required through further research into best practice and understanding the needs of the population. We need to put in place financial supports to enhance that service in Du´ n Laoghaire and elsewhere. I would like similar facilities to be established in the south, perhaps in the Munster region, and in the north west. The Government provided \30 million this year and, while we all agree we would like to see more, that is an issue which the HSE will have to address within its overall budget. I would like to see professionals in the HSE, particularly consultants, coming together to agree strategies for progress. For too long, the HSE and the Government have been negotiating the consultants’ contract. The sooner we get beyond that to focus on the delivery of coherent services to all citizens, the better.
Deputy Charlie O’Connor: I welcome the opportunity to make a brief contribution to this important debate. I would love to have spoken this morning but I sat silent, observant and dewy eyed as tribute was paid to my fellow Dubliner, the Taoiseach. I wish to be associated with what was said in that regard. I commend Deputy Kathleen Lynch on bringing forward this motion. I do not want to pick on Deputy Shatter but sometimes it is forgotten that Fianna Fa´il Members have the same concerns and cares. We may have a different way of going about our business but we are concerned about health matters on a daily basis. With the exception of this morning’s business in the Da´il, I have spent most of my day dealing with health matters. The presence in the House of my colleague and Chairman of the Joint Committee on Health and Children, Deputy Moloney, reminds me that we held a session of that committee today. Deputy Moloney will acknowledge that we are concerned about various issues relating to this motion and other aspects of health. Later today, I will take part in the Adjournment debate — I appreciate the facilitation of the Office of the Ceann Comhairle — when I wish to raise the issue of HSE funding and the HSE threat to the hospital in the home programme, which does tremendous work. The prog- ramme is based in Tallaght and looks after not only my constituency area, its greater catchment area is in the Beaumont area. I have no doubt that many of the people Deputy Lynch and all of us are thinking about in the context of the motion have been helped by that service. I will make that point during the Adjournment debate. The presence of the Minister of State, Deputy Devins, is important as he has particular responsibility for mental health issues and disability. It is important that he hears, across the 834 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed) floor of the House, the various concerns that are being expressed. The Government amendment lists what is being achieved. All of us who listened to the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, earlier in the debate will understand that an effort is being made. While I will not be flippant, the phrase “a lot done, more to do” is perhaps accurate. It is important that all of us support the Minister of State, Deputy Devins, as he goes about that business, which he has taken on with much enthusiasm and energy. It is important that he understands this is what we want him to do. I will not stand here and say everything is perfect. In my daily political work, I come across many families affected by disability and other issues listed in the Labour Party motion. I recall the particular case of an active young family man living in Tallaght who had a horrendous crash and was badly hurt. I remember the family conveying to me their absolute frustration with the system because there did not seem to be a response. There was certainly a good response in the local hospital and when he went to the National Rehabilitation Hospital in Du´ n Laoghaire, but their issue was with regard to accessing services. This man was living a normal life when suddenly, out of the blue, there was a crash and everything stopped. In a different way, I had a similar experience nine years ago when I had a heart attack — I am never afraid to talk about it. A person is busy, active, living a normal life and able to do anything when suddenly he or she is in a hospital bed, unable to respond in the normal way and needing the help of others. In my case, thank God, I recovered and was not disabled. People sometimes need to have life experiences, although mine was very much at the lower end of the scale in terms of the stories we have heard during these two days of debate. My heart attack was a good experience in the sense that I understood even better what people had been telling me about being struck by difficulties of this nature. It is very important that the Government and the Minister of State understands the need for the system to work. When families are struck by this kind of sudden event, they need to know how to access services and that there is a service available to respond to them and help them through. I keep in touch with that family and know that in many such cases the effects last for a long time. Other issues also affect such families, for example, with regard to local authority schemes for converting houses and providing facilities in dwellings. Again, the response can sometimes be quite slow. The Minister might argue, as Deputy Dooley has, that one cannot highlight just one case and believe that to be the norm. However, it is fair that those of us who have experiences in this regard, whether through family, community or our political clinics, should be able to ask for a response. The Department of Health and Children must deal with many issues — we could talk all day about HSE accountability and how it is dealing with these matters — but in the midst of all these issues that must be dealt with, the most vulnerable in our communities should always be looked after, certainly in regard to disability and mental health. We should not be ashamed to make the point that even if there are difficulties with regard to Government or if the economy is contracting somewhat, priorities should be made. I had a conversation with a member of a disability organisation some weeks ago to the effect that sometimes in the midst of trying to make a case for everything, one has to fight one’s corner in a very specific way. We should also acknowledge the Minister’s point that the Government, in January 2008, established the Office for Disability and Mental Health to support her work in that area. It is very important that we understand it is now finding its way through this maze of bureaucracy. I repeat that it is important the Minister of State, Deputy Devins, understands there is a strong well of support, not only here in the House but in the community, for this work to continue 835 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
[Deputy Charlie O’Connor.] and for funding to be maintained. Everything we can do for people affected by disability and mental health should be done.
Deputy John Moloney: I welcome the motion and recognise the sincerity of Deputy Kathleen Lynch in moving it. I recognise that it is not the usual political motion. It is obvious a national strategy should be put in place, rather than relying on one centre, although we know of the excellence of the National Rehabilitation Hospital in Du´ n Laoghaire over many years. Times have moved on, however, and while we have always paid fulsome tribute to the excellent care in the national hospital, there are just 120 beds there while the population and its demands are growing. The possibility of acquiring greater technological supports must be embraced. I see the merit of the Minister’s response in the debate where she referred to the never before achieved level of funding of \15 billion allocated to the national health services, \30 million of which was allocated to the National Rehabilitation Hospital, which I support. I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Devins, to the House. Since his appointment, he has met the Joint Committee on Health and Children on several occasions and while he was a member of the committee he gave full support to the need for more than one centre in Du´ n Laoghaire. In that context, I am glad the Minister referred to the possibility of a satellite unit linking the National Rehabilitation Hospital and Beaumont Hospital, which must be the way forward. More important has been the commitment and time put into the development of a new hospital, which will possibly be in Dublin, although some colleagues suggest it should be located elsewhere. Whether it is located in Dublin or outside it, I welcome the fact that we will have a centre similar to the excellent centre in Du´ n Laoghaire and I hope nothing stands in its way. I fully appreciate that deals have been struck and planning permission is apparently about to be lodged. The fact that this is part of the Government programme Towards 2016 convinces me this is for real. It is the response to the motion and is a genuine attempt to provide the most up-to-date skills and services. The Minister of State’s new brief includes responsibility in this area. Having heard the Mini- ster of State, Deputy Devins, and read his recent speeches, I know the political commitment is there. I will not waffle about what funding is available in the health services. I believe the Government recognises that while we have to date tried to have the best level of services, far more can be done and will be done. In that context, I congratulate the Minister, Deputy Harney, on explaining this to the House yesterday and giving clear commitments on funding and the level of medical supports. I recognise we have a great need for another hospital to deal with the issue of spinal and brain injuries. An issue which causes huge difficulty for politicians is that of trying to secure a bed for a person who has had a serious accident. This calls into focus the involvement of politicians, which should not be necessary. I hope we can move on in light of the commitment by the Government to provide the best level of services.
Deputy Margaret Conlon: I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. I attended a presentation by Brı´ on 12 March here in Leinster House and that presentation gave me a great insight into the needs of people who suffer brain injury. While most people assume that strokes and traumatic brain injuries are the main cause of acquired brain injury, I learned there are many other causes. We must always strive to promote full recovery and allow people, if at all possible, to return to full community life. The March 2008 Brı´ newsletter points out some stark facts, one of which is that three quarters of the victims of traumatic brain injury are 836 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed) children and young adults. That is a major trauma facing those patients but also those nearest and dearest to them. In recognition of the need to develop neurology and neurophysiology services, additional revenue funding of \3 million was allocated to the Health Service Executive in 2006. In 2007, further additional revenue funding of \4 million was allocated to support the continuing development of services in the area of neurosciences. The HSE has advised the Department of Health and Children that there has been an increase in the number of consultant neurology posts arising from this investment. In the area of neurology there are currently 24 approved posts of consultant neurologist in Ireland, of which 19 are filled. These are strong and positive measures which must be furthered and enhanced. I reiterate the sentiments of some of my colleagues who said we have a lot done but we have more to do. A new national rehabilitation hospital, under the national development plan, is in the plan- ning stages. When built, the new hospital will provide additional treatment and diagnostic capacity. The aim is for a completion date of 2012. All patients will agree that when they are admitted to these centres, the treatment and the service they get is excellent. The difficulty is getting into them. The HSE has also stated that plans have been prepared to develop a satellite unit of the National Rehabilitation Hospital attached to Beaumont Hospital, linking the rehabilitation expertise of the NRH with the neurological services in Beaumont. That is to be welcomed. This neurology debate is crucial but likewise we must raise and examine other issues. For example, the HSE interim report earlier this week reflects the plan for a further removal of acute services from my own hospital in Monaghan and the north east generally. We in Monaghan were promised that no services would be removed until safer and better alternatives were put in place. We have a situation where seriously ill patients who need to be ventilated can no longer stay in the hospital but must be transferred to Cavan or any other available hospital. The HSE says patients can be stabilised in Monaghan but must be sent on afterwards when a bed is available. That is just another step in the removal of services. Cavan General Hospital and Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda are already stretched to near breaking point before any patients from Monaghan are sent there and sending more could lead to fatalities. In a speech to this House on 6 February I called for an audit of the HSE. To reiterate the central thesis of my speech that night, we need a wholescale audit of the organisation from top to bottom — financially, managerially and at human resource level. We must identify the black holes that appear to be swallowing up millions of euro, which must be prioritised for frontline services. In this debate we are talking about people with acquired brain injury. I suggest we start here. Savings must be made but they must not affect frontline services. This audit would ensure that money was directed to the patients to allow them receive the top quality care they deserve. We must always strive to help those people suffering from traumatic injuries of types such as this. As a matter of urgency, I call on the Minister to expedite the process for the new rehabilitation hospital, continue the increase in funding for neurology services and always strive to ensure that the patient is the central focus for all her work.
Deputy Frank Fahey: I express my appreciation of the opportunity to participate in this debate. There is a need for action in the development of services to support further the great work being done by the National Rehabilitation Institute in Du´ n Laoghaire. There is no doubt that excellent services are being provided there but it is always frustrating for us as Deputies 837 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
[Deputy Frank Fahey.] to have to constantly get on to the hospital to try to get people admitted from hospitals in the west for proper rehabilitation. Once people are admitted to the facility, however, it is an excel- lent service and the progress being made there by patients who in many cases have been seriously injured in tragic accidents is very welcome. There is some light at the end of the tunnel. In Galway, for instance, a new rehabilitation unit is planned for Merlin Park Hospital but unfortunately it is taking too long to have that facility delivered. The planning started when I was a Minister of State in the Department of Health and Children and it has still not commenced construction. One of the significant issues is that these facilities are costing massive amounts of money. The Galway facility was costed at approximately \30 million for 30 beds. It is clear that the intensive care provided in those facilities means that a significant current cost goes into staffing. There is no doubt that the facilities are urgently needed, however, especially in the west where there is no such facility. It is vital that the HSE should proceed with the construction of this project. I welcome the recent announcement that it would put the project to tender. The number of acute beds being occupied by people waiting to access the facility in Du´ n Laoghaire or proper rehabilitation facilities represents a terrible waste of acute beds in hospitals throughout the country. From time to time in Galway there could be anything up to ten patients occupying acute beds awaiting a transfer to Du´ n Laoghaire or a facility in which they can get the proper services. That is a waste of money and it is one of the areas where reform must take place. I share the views of everybody in the House that these extra services must be provided as quickly as possible but that must be done in the context of the fundamental reforms the current Minister, Deputy Harney, is trying to bring about. The Taoiseach was asked this morning if he was happy with the establishment of the HSE. I am convinced that the HSE structure, although it is experiencing problems, is the only way forward. We must have a properly planned health service. It must become much more efficient. We must change the old habits and prejudices of a lifetime which are to be found across the health system. We must cut out the existing wastage in terms of expenditure. In Galway last week there were a large number of people in casualty. I called the hospital on three occasions about a patient who was holding down a bed for six days waiting for an MRI scan. Eventually the patient was sent home and told to come back a week later. Holding an acute bed while waiting for an MRI scan is ridiculous. Unless and until we get these reforms, and unless the health care workers are prepared to operate this very expensive equipment for more hours each day to cut down those waiting lists, we will not see reform. Regardless of what anyone says, we can throw as much money as we like at the health services but until reforms such as that are carried out -I see my good friend, Deputy Michael D. Higgins, agrees with me — we will not see the necessary progress in this area.
Deputy Liz McManus: I wish to share time with Deputies Sea´n Sherlock, Mary Upton, Joanna Tuffy and Ciara´n Lynch. I fully support this motion and congratulate Deputies Kathleen Lynch and Jan O’Sullivan on bringing it forward for debate. At a time when crises and scandals pour out of the health service on a weekly basis, it is important we include in our debates the concerns of those who, because of the nature of their condition, do not hit the headlines yet suffer chronic disability and need constant support. 838 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
I will start with a bit of good news. With the health service, every report published seems to highlight deficiencies, loss of opportunities, mismanagement, delays and patients’ pain and frustration. Yet at times, when appropriate provision is in place, patients can benefit enor- mously. Since tabling this motion, the Labour Party has received much correspondence. One e-mail described how the life of a young Kilkenny man with acquired brain injury has been transformed for the better. His sister writes:
At the age of 23 he needed 24-hour care and specialist medical people to look after him. My family could not give him this care. Our family had to fight for everything that he got. There always seemed to be resistance from the health board in looking for care for him. This was our problem and not theirs. They were ignorant people who hid behind their desks and would not meet our family face to face.
The good news is that a voluntary body, the Peter Bradley Foundation, understood this young man’s needs and stepped in to give him a chance of independent living and a real future. In her e-mail, the man’s sister points out that despite his terrible injury, which he acquired when he was only eight, he cannot claim disability allowance because of a compensation award he received. She has asked that this issue be raised in this debate because the refusal is based on a formula that is unfair and does not recognise that this young man would be only too delighted to work. He cannot do so because of his head injury. It is remarkable that we do not know how many people living in Ireland have a brain injury. If we compare our population with that of other countries, we can very roughly estimate that somewhere between 9,000 and 11,000 people are so affected. Many of those suffer brain injury as a result of stroke, a condition for which treatment has improved significantly. However, the recently published national audit of stroke care shows our health service is failing patients who urgently need these treatments. We should have 365 dedicated stroke beds but we have 12. Some 90% of British hospitals have a stroke unit but only 3% of Irish hospitals — one hospital — has a stroke unit. The rehabilitation centre on Rochestown Avenue, Du´ n Laoghaire, provides an excellent service for patients but they are often forced to wait an inordinate period of time for vital rehabilitation, for which they pay a price. As a result, the health service has acute beds that cannot be used by anybody else. It is incredible that after 11 years of unprecedented economic success, we are still waiting for that new hospital, which is only now going to planning stage. This morning we paid tribute to the outgoing Taoiseach and we are soon to elect a new one. I sincerely hope that with the election of a new Taoiseach we will not simply get more of the same. It is time to recognise that the Minister, Deputy Harney, gave this her best shot. Nobody would question her commitment to tackling a very difficult brief. Stubbornness is no substitute for leadership, and an ideological attachment to private health care is simply not providing a solution to the problems we have. To put it at its crudest, there is no profit to be made from the chronic patient with brain injury. Private health care is interested in the quick operation and turnaround of patients.
Deputy Michael D. Higgins: Hear, hear.
Deputy Liz McManus: We need a turnaround for all patients with a new Minister for Health and Children alongside a new Taoiseach and a new vision for the health service that includes care for all patients on the basis of their need. 839 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
Deputy Ciara´n Lynch: I welcome the opportunity to speak on this motion. Head injury and related trauma is a lottery in Ireland, which I can state from my own personal experience of its effects. Three years ago, my wife was taken to the accident and emergency department of Cork University Hospital because she suffered a very serious fall. While she lay unconscious and under examination, the doctor explained that due to the com- plexity of brain injuries, it was far too early to indicate how serious the accident was and much too early to indicate the long-term consequences of the injury. I recall the very words used by the doctor that evening. She stated that head injuries are “like a lottery,” as sometimes people make a full recovery and sometimes they do not. There is no timeframe or definite outcome with regard to the recovery. It comes down simply to how quickly the patient is admitted and how he or she can be best supported on the road to recov- ery. In the words used by the doctor, it is a lottery. The accident is a lottery in terms of seriousness when the person comes in the door of an accident and emergency department, and the manner in which the patient will recover is also a lottery. In my wife’s case, we were very lucky and she made a full recovery over a matter of months. I specifically use “we” because living with the consequences of a head injury does not just affect the victim, but his or her family, relations and extended network as well. Head injury is a “we” injury, not an “I” injury or a one-person injury. We were lucky in that lottery but others are not. It should not be a game of chance when somebody has a serious head injury or stroke in this country. It should not be a matter of being lucky to live close to a hospital, as in our case that night. It should not be a matter of being lucky that there just happened to be a neurological surgeon on duty that night, by the grace of God. It should not be a matter of bad luck to learn that if a person survives the initial trauma of the injury, he or she will have to wait another two years to begin the road to recovery. We were lucky we did not have to travel that road but thousands of head injury and stroke victims must face it every year. That is two years of being denied the right to services which would radically improve their quality of life and chances of recovery. It is simply unacceptable. I will restate a number of points made by my party colleague, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, when she brought the matter before the House last night. I acknowledge the work of Headway Ireland, Brı´ — the acquired brain injuries association — Brainwave, the Irish Epilepsy Associ- ation, the Peter Bradley Foundation and others. These are all non-State services. It is out- rageous that the drivers of head injury and related services are completely in the non-State sector. Meanwhile, the Government, the senior Minister and everybody sitting at the Cabinet table has abdicated from a strategy which was supposed to be put in place ten years ago. It is outrageous. I pose again the question asked by Deputy Kathleen Lynch of the Minister relating to patients with neuro-disabilities in the HSE south area. Will the Minister quantify financially, with regard to lost beds, the cost arising from the delays in discharge or transfer to rehabili- tation services? An answer was given in an Evening Echo article earlier this year. It stated that a survey of admissions for acute stroke victims to Cork city hospitals was carried out in 2001 as part of a proposal for a stroke unit developed by medics at the hospital. The findings demon- strated how, over a two-month period, the three Cork city acute hospitals admitted a total of 72 stroke cases. The mean age was 70 and the mean length of hospital stay was over 20 days. The total number of hospital bed days consumed was almost 1,500. According to one of the doctors involved in the report, if the region’s acute hospitals had stroke units in place, they 840 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed) would cut the average length of stay for stroke victims by six days. This would mean 440 beds would be saved in two months, with an average of over 2,500 bed days saved per year. Stroke and serious head trauma injuries are life-changing circumstances but they should not be a life sentence of delayed recovery, which is currently the case. There is an absence of a national strategy, localised regional service and political leadership from those currently in Government. Treatment in respect of serious head injuries and stroke will continue to be a lottery under this Government and people will remain dependent on luck.
Deputy Sea´n Sherlock: I welcome this debate and I wholeheartedly support the motion, which calls for some simple, pragmatic solutions to a problem that afflicts the 10,000 and more people who are affected by acquired brain injury. The motion also requests the establishment of a regional network of rehabilitation facilities and services to be established in the context of a national rehabilitation strategy. The response from the Government side offers nothing that would provide comfort or encouragement to those suffering from acquired brain injuries in the context of addressing their needs. There is a regional disparity in the delivery of health care. If one lives in Cork, Kerry, Galway or Donegal, one is already at a disadvantage if one suffers with an acquired brain injury. The disparity to which I refer must be addressed as a matter of urgency. Not only does this disparity exist in the area of health, it is also prevalent in the economy and in the Government’s regional policy. I recently made representations to a neurologist on behalf of a person with an acquired brain injury. He confided in me that if he was to close the doors of his practice tomorrow, he would have sufficient clients to deep him in business for the next two years. That illustrates the seriousness of this issue. Those on the Government side stated that the development of a new rehabilitation centre is at the planning stage and that this will hopefully be up and running by 2012. That assertion does not provide any grounds for confidence. The motion before the House calls for an increase in the number of approved posts for consultant neurologists from 24 to 42. Such a development would almost, if not quite, bring us up to a standard which obtains in other European countries and would represent an immeasurable improvement on the existing position. What we are ultimately concerned with is people’s dignity. There are those who have no access to the services of which they should be able to avail as a matter of right. These individ- uals will gain no comfort from what is being said by those on the Government side because there does not appear to be a sense of urgency about this matter. The Labour Party is requesting that there be such a sense of urgency in order to preserve people’s dignity and give them the right to a standard of health care their tax euros should afford them. Be they resident in Dublin or the regions, they should be treated as equals. That is what we are calling for in this debate.
Deputy Mary Upton: I welcome this opportunity to contribute to the debate on the serious issue of acquired brain injury. It is often stated that a society is judged on how it treats its most vulnerable. If that is the case, I fear we are failing badly in respect of those with acquired brain injuries. We are also failing their families, friends and carers and those professionals who are working with them and doing their best to deliver a quality service in absolutely impossible circumstances and unbearable conditions. If one applies international studies to Ireland, one discovers that between 9,000 and 11,000 suffer from acquired brain injuries each year. In addition, some 30,000 people are living with 841 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
[Deputy Mary Upton.] long-term problems following brain trauma and over 7,000 people suffer strokes each year. I accept that these figures were already alluded to but they bear repeating, particularly in light of the huge numbers of people in respect of whom poor-quality services are being provided. Every brain injury is unique and a fully complemented staff of neurologists and neurosurg- eons is required accurately to assess its extent and the level of treatment required. The very least to which those afflicted with such injuries, and their friends, families and those who work in this area, are entitled is that the Government, without delay, should increase the number of neurologists and neurosurgeons to the level required by our population base. As Deputy Sherlock stated, this would bring us up to the European average, namely, 16 neurosurgeons and 42 consultant neurologists. Furthermore, there is a need to ramp up our rehabilitation services. As previous speakers stated, there is only one rehabilitation hospital in the country, at which there are only 110 spaces available. Priority must be given to addressing this appal- ling situation. Non-critical care represents the greatest hope for people across the health services. It can give a patient an opportunity to recuperate in a non-acute centre, offer him or her the chance to redevelop his or her independence skills in more familiar surroundings and help ease the pressure on our critical and hospital services by freeing up beds. When the HSE is required to trim its sails, it immediately targets non-critical care. There is evidence of this in my constitu- ency in the aftermath of the decision to cut roll-over respite care in Cherry Orchard. The level of such care was also reduced at other respite centres throughout the country. I received a telephone call from an extremely distressed constituent this afternoon. The woman’s husband suffered a stroke and she wants him to remain at home. The city council will provide some funding towards the provision of the facilities she requires in her house. In order to provide her husband with care, she also requires a top-up grant. However, top-up grants are no longer available from the HSE. The woman to whom I refer consulted me to discover where she might obtain the additional funding necessary to allow her husband to remain at home in the environment with which he is familiar and also to relieve the burden on the State. However, the money is simply not available. The Labour Party’s motion calls for the establishment of a regional network of rehabilitation facilities. This is not an unrealistic request. The report, Acute Hospital Bed Capacity Review: A Preferred Health System in Ireland to 2020, published in January states that community- based services have a vital role to play in meeting our hospital bed space requirements in the future. The Government and the HSE must realise that regional rehabilitation centres form part of a cogent, long-term strategy to develop community-based non-acute services that are decentralised and present the opportunity for people to leave hospitals or long-stay care facilities. Central to all of this is the provision of the various forms of therapy. I refer here to physio- therapy, occupational and speech therapy, which are crucial to ensuring patients can make a full recovery. The groundbreaking Bacon report, published in 2001, stated that a major expansion is necessary in the number of therapy professionals in order to pre-empt a persistent and growing deficit in our service provision. I wish to draw attention to another major anomaly in the system. In response to the Bacon recommendation to which I refer, the number of college places in occupational therapy and physiotherapy has significantly increased in recent years, particularly since 2003. While the number of graduates has also increased, the employment opportunities on offer from the HSE have declined. The latter is in part due to the HSE’s recruitment freeze last year and the cutting of many so-called non-essential services, such as 842 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed) roll-over respite care in many centres. Figures from the Irish Society of Chartered Physiothera- pists indicate that 89 physiotherapy posts that were in place prior to the HSE recruitment pause no longer exist and many of the current temporary posts will not be renewed. While the Government is providing college places for physiotherapy students, there are no jobs for them when they graduate. That is a problem for both the graduates and those who require, but are not being provided with, physiotherapy services. Physiotherapy, occupational therapy and speech therapy are essential services to those striving to regain a better quality of life. If these services are denied, then those with acquired brain injury face a bleak future. I urge the Mini- ster of State to address as a matter of urgency the shortfalls in the many facets of treatment and services for those patients dependent upon them. Despite all the issues that have been raised here, many people are urgently in need of sup- port. One of the most demanding services in terms of the provision of family care is for those with acquired brain injury. Stroke is one of the most commonly acquired brain injuries and many of us are familiar with it. Historically it was often associated with older 8 o’clock people, but unfortunately I hear quite regularly of young people who are suffering from stroke. They also need the chance of rehabilitation. They require services such as physiotherapy, speech therapy and occupational therapy that are so important to their rehabilitation. In that way they can regain a place in society and will have an opportunity to lead a full life of quality. What does it say about this Government and this country when such people do not have access to hospital beds, neurosurgeons, neurologists or therapists? We have heard so much about the financial resources that were available to us in recent years. However, while we provide further physiotherapy courses, encourage people to pursue them, produce graduates and make professionals available, we fail to provide such services to those most in need of them.
Deputy Joanna Tuffy: Deputy Stanton has noted that in yesterday’s debate the Minister, Deputy Harney, and the Minister of State, Deputy Devins, just made general statements. He said that while the Minister spoke about billions in expenditure, there were no specific dead- lines or actions. Deputy Stanton was right. The Minister did not engage in debate on the Labour Party motion, choosing instead to make a general statement. She basically read out a script that was provided to her beforehand. The motion referred to a specific aspect of the health service and a group of people with acquired brain injury. The Minister should have responded to the problems and gaps in the health service that we have identified in the motion. Given her experience both as a Deputy and a Minister, she could have spoken about cases of which she is aware or should be aware, in addition to how such problems are being faced by those with acquired brain injury and their families. The Minister should have outlined what actions she will personally see are taken to improve the quality of life for all those affected, but she did not do that. In paying tribute to the Taoiseach earlier today, the Minister for Health and Children said the Government was not perfect. In her contribution last night, she would have given much more hope if she had acknowledged that fact concerning services for people with acquired brain injury. She should have outlined the failings and gaps, as well as what commitment she could give to deal with them. Instead she made generalised comments — the way the Govern- ment does nowadays — about projects way in the future. She gave a vague commitment to a satellite centre for Beaumont Hospital but it was just a proposal with no specific date. She also spoke vaguely about plans for rehabilitation beds but there was no specific commitment on numbers or locations. 843 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
[Deputy Joanna Tuffy.]
Deputy Stanton said the Minister is not currently engaged with the health debate. She could start with the experiences of people in her own constituency. Like Deputy Upton, I have received a few calls about Cherry Orchard Hospital where respite care beds were recently closed. The 70-year-old husband of a constituent who rang me suffered a severe stroke a few years ago. She is now ill herself and finds it difficult to care for her husband at home. She took advantage of the respite care facilities in Cherry Orchard Hospital, which was a godsend for her. However, she was recently told by the hospital that the service is at an end. I have come across similar cases, including the family members of a frail 91-year-old man who were caring for him at home. They used to carry him upstairs to bed every night. Every couple of weeks he went to Cherry Orchard Hospital for a few days’ respite care. That was the family’s lifesaver but it has now been taken away. When I and Deputy Mary Upton raised the issue in the Da´il I got a generalised two-page reply about millions being spent here and there for older people. There was nothing in the reply that responded to the specific issue I had raised concerning the closure of respite care beds at Cherry Orchard Hospital. There was one sentence which stated that the matter would be kept under review. Despite the gloss of the Government amendment, the Minister’s speech and speeches by various Government backbenchers, there are cutbacks in the health service. As a result people are losing services they relied upon up to now. Those being hit are the most vulnerable. They are easy targets. If the Minister took responsibility and engaged with the health service, she could start with Cherry Orchard Hospital. She could intervene and halt the closure of those respite care beds, which affects the most vulnerable people. She is not doing that, however, and takes no responsibly, claiming that it is nothing to do with her. That kind of generalised response to the problem is not only happening in the Department of Health and Children; it is also happening in many other Government Departments. Ministers are always talking gener- ally about the expenditure of millions and billions, national development plans, strategies and reviews, but these solutions are far in the future — it is basically deferred Government. Last night the Minister spoke about a rehabilitation centre for which the target opening date is 2012, but her tenure as Minister will then be at an end. We will probably be told that they do not have the money anyway, so it will be left as a problem for the next Government. Ministers often look hurt when they are told they are remote, not engaged in the process and out of touch, but that is the reality. The Minister is disengaged and is not taking responsibility for her Department. Apart from incompetence and remoteness, what is really wrong with the health service is the ideology involved. The reason we have a poor public health service is that the Minister is not committed to providing a good one.
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher): All Members on this side of the House share the concerns of Opposition Deputies and of the concerned individuals, their parents, relatives and friends, some of whom are in the Visitors Gallery. Let me first put in context the Labour Party motion, referring as it does to cutbacks and staff shortages. This year alone the Government has increased funding to the HSE for the provision of health and social services by some \1.1 billion.
Deputy Jan O’Sullivan: What have they done with it?
Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher: An approved staffing level of over 111,000 whole-time equivalents has been agreed for the health service.
Deputy Michael D. Higgins: When will we get neurosurgery in the west? 844 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
Deputy Ulick Burke: It was promised in 2006.
Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher: In addition, the recruitment of an extra 1,050 staff has been approved as part of the 2008 budget investments in the areas of services for older people, those with a disability, and cancer control.
Deputy Emmet Stagg: Where are they putting them?
Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher: The motion refers to the National Rehabilitation Hospital, whose allocation is nearly \30 million. The hospital provides a range of diagnostic, treatment and training services to people from all over the country. We are planning a brand new hospital on the site of the present hospital which will dramatically increase the treatment and diagnostic services to the public.
Deputy Ulick Burke: Not a red cent yet.
Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher: The design will be submitted for planning approval this year. Deputies will appreciate that this is part of the process. Plans have also been prepared to develop a satellite unit at Beaumont Hospital, to which Deputy Tuffy referred, linking the National Rehabilitation Hospital with the national neurological centre in Beaumont to provide acute medical rehabilitation services and early rehabilitation for those suffering from brain injury.
Deputy Michael D. Higgins: For an injury in Donegal.
Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher: A clear policy direction is needed on rehabilitation. I give credit to those in Letterkenny hospital who are providing rehabilitation across the road from the general hospital. I am glad Deputy Higgins gave me the opportunity to pay tribute to them.
Deputy Michael D. Higgins: It is a disgrace that there are no plans for neurological services in the west of Ireland. The current situation is costing the taxpayer millions of euro.
Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher: The Department of Health and Children and the HSE are committed to developing a strategy for the future of rehabilitation services. A working group with broad representation from relevant stakeholders, including users of the services, is being established. The motion and the debate have raised the issue of neurology services. A review of these services has recently been completed and the final draft report of the review has been submitted to the director of the National Hospitals Office for consideration. The findings of the report will help to inform the approach taken by the HSE to the future development of these services. In recognition of the need to develop these services, additional revenue funding was provided to the HSE. Some \3 million was provided in 2006 and a further \4 million in 2007 to support the continuing development of neurology and neurosurgery services. This funding has resulted in an increase in the number of consultant posts for these services throughout the country. The HSE and agencies such as Headway, the Peter Bradley Foundation, the Irish Wheelchair Association and BRI are involved in providing services and support to people with acquired brain injury and their families. Ministers have met with these organisations and many families feel, and maybe rightly so, that they have had to fight hard to access appropriate services for their loved ones. A range of services are provided to people with acquired brain injury and their families by the HSE and the other agencies mentioned. 845 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
[Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher.]
Two of the main service providers for people with an acquired brain injury are the Peter Bradley Foundation and Headway. With the help of the HSE they have developed a range of community-based services throughout the country including assisted living community residen- tial services, community rehabilitation services, clinical support teams, rehabilitative training and occupational day services. BRI is a voluntary advocacy group for people with acquired brain injury whose focus has been on establishing support groups throughout Ireland. The need for acquired brain injury specific services is acknowledged due to the highly indi- vidualised nature of the disability. The HSE has a greater awareness and is developing a more integrated multidisciplinary approach to acquired brain injury. It acknowledges the need for facilities that are appropriate for people with acquired brain injury.
Deputy Michael D. Higgins: It has done nothing about it.
Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher: The Irish Heart Foundation national audit of stroke care was raised in this debate in the context of, among other things, the need for rehabilitation following a stroke. This audit was conducted with the support of the Department of Health and Children. The report covers the spectrum of care for people who suffer a stroke, from prevention to treatment and rehabilitation. In 2007 the Minister established the cardiovascular strategy policy review group to advise on how to prevent the occurrence of cardiovascular disease and stroke and how to improve services. The audit highlighted a number of areas where clinical care and the organisation of stroke services can be enhanced. I am glad of the opportunity to respond to a number of the issues raised and I conclude by referring to a feature article in The Irish Times this morning about four young men living with acquired brain injury living in a Peter Bradley Foundation house in Waterford. A presenter on “Morning Ireland” referred to the four young men being in “A house full of life, music and hope” and another presenter said “It was great to read a health story that has wonderful consequences for the people involved”. Despite the substantial increase in service provision, this Government acknowledges the significant demand for new services and a growing requirement to enhance existing services. This Government will continue its commitment to develop public health services in line with our budgetary strategy to provide a sustainable and significant level of funding for public——
Deputy Michael D. Higgins: There goes the rights-based approach.
Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher: I do not want to enter dialogue with Deputy Higgins but I could go back a number of years when there was very little money provided.
Deputy Michael D. Higgins: I did a lot more with it than the Minister of State.
Deputy Pat The Cope Gallagher: The Irish people did not give that result last year. This Government will continue to invest in high quality health and personal social services.
Deputy Eamon Gilmore: I wish to share time with Deputy Kathleen Lynch.We are winding up a debate on a Labour Party motion on the issue of care for people with acquired brain injuries. These are the thousands every year who suffer a stroke, an accident or who survive a car crash. These are the thousands who form part of the 700,000 people in Ireland living with a neurological condition, an average of one in every two households in the country. 846 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
It is time that the care of so many of our citizens, particularly rehabilitative care, became a political issue. I thank Deputies Kathleen Lynch and Jan O’Sullivan for their work in bringing this motion to the House, researching the case they made so eloquently last night and putting this issue on the political agenda, where it will remain until satisfactorily addressed. This debate is about the fundamental right of our citizens to be cared for when they are sick and cared for to the best of our ability. It is about the enormous contribution of unpaid carers, whose invalu- able work needs more than gratitude. If the litmus test of a society is how its most vulnerable members are treated, then it is a debate about ourselves and our society. An estimated 10,000 people a year suffer from some form of acquired brain injury. In total, one out of six of our fellow citizens, neighbours, spouses, parents and children, are living with a neurological condition, including acquired brain injury. However, they are not the only ones affected. Acquired brain injury can have a devastating effect on the patient’s family, who often provide care and support on a 24-hour basis, and with very little assistance. A brain injury or a stroke can change a person’s life, and that of his or her family, overnight. It can make a sufferer dependent on others for assistance in everyday tasks, it can change personality, and it can leave the sufferer physically impaired. It can turn a breadwinner into a dependant, and a child into a carer. The trauma of acquired brain injury can be lifelong, for both the patient and those who care for him or her. How does our society, and the health service we pay for, respond to the silent epidemic of acquired brain injury? The good news is that appropriate rehabilitation care can make an enormous difference to the quality of life of acquired brain injury sufferers. The bad news is that Ireland only has one, 110-bed rehabilitation hospital. The exceptional work of the National Rehabilitation Hospital deserves to be recognised. It is located in my constituency and, every- where I go, when I say I am from Du´ n Laoghaire, I hear nothing but praise for the NRH staff and their commitment to their patients. I welcome plans to build a new hospital on the site. However, one hospital is simply not enough to cope with the flow of acquired brain injury patients every year. A person with a brain injury can wait up to two years for a place in the National Rehabilitation Hospital, instead of the 24 hours which is the recommended time lag between acquiring a brain injury and specialist rehabilitative care. It should come as no surprise that the Peter Bradley Foundation estimates that 69% of patients with acquired brain injury end up in inappropriate facilities, such as geriatric services. Ireland has less than half the recom- mended number of neurologists, and half the recommended neurosurgeons, for our population. Only six consultants in the country specialise in rehabilitation. This shortfall in rehabilitation and specialist care is replicated in outpatient and community services. ABI patients wait up to two years to see a specialist consultant. They can wait up to three years for an appointment with a speech and language therapist, an occupational therapist or a physiotherapist. Respite care to relieve carers is scarce. None of this is news to the hun- dreds of thousands of sufferers of ABI and carers, for whom this is the daily reality. Nor is it news to the Minister for Health and Children or the HSE, which has commissioned no less than three reports to examine the needs of ABI sufferers since 2003. What we need are solutions and I offer some to the Minister, Deputy Harney, and her Government. Build more regional rehabilitation beds as part of a joined-up national rehabili- tation strategy. Increase the number of posts for neurologists, neurosurgeons and rehabilitation consultants in line with our population needs. Instead of cutting back frontline services in the HSE, put patients first, and employ sufficient speech therapists, physiotherapists and occu- pational therapists to meet the real needs of ABI sufferers. Recognise that carers are invalu- able, but not inexhaustible, and provide sufficient community respite care and counselling. 847 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
[Deputy Eamon Gilmore.]
Around one in six of our population lives with a condition which affects the brain. Over the next ten years, that number is expected to grow by 100,000. Delays in accessing life-altering medical and rehabilitation care are already unacceptable. Without urgent action now to deliver care that matches people’s real needs, an already chronic situation is set to get worse. Let us be clear about what is being debated here. For many ABI sufferers, rehabilitation is the differ- ence between being alive and living. For some, successful rehabilitation will mean a return to work. For others, it will mean regaining some independence and some dignity. For their families and carers, it is about being able to manage the new circumstances in which they find them- selves, instead of being overwhelmed by them. ABI sufferers, and their families, are not asking for special treatment. All they are asking for is a fair chance of recovery and dignity as well as a fair chance at living. The neglect they suffer through grossly inadequate resources and disjointed services denies them this fair chance. I ask the House to accept the Labour Party motion and take a step towards giving these patients — our fellow citizens — their due.
Deputy Kathleen Lynch: I thank all who contributed to the debate on both sides of the House. My first encounter with people who have acquired brain injury was on several levels. The one that made me take a serious look at this issue and try to persuade others to use our very valuable Private Members’ time was a presentation given here by Brı´. The one thing that stuck in my head — and this is all about heads — was the caption, “Mind your head because your head minds your mind.” That was something I had never thought about before. Whether ABI comes as a result of an injury from outside or inside, the fact that so much can be done, but is not, is shameful for all of us. Neither the Labour Party nor, I dare say, Fine Gael or any of the other party wants to just have a go at the Government on this. That would ultimately be pointless since this Government is beyond that. It is shameless and simply does not react to anything. This is not about that, but rather holding out hope for the tens of thousands of people who know their lives could be better — and for those who look after them, their carers. It is a question of saying to them, in effect: “Your struggle will not be in vain. We will do something better for those who come after you.” In my opening address last night I spoke about one rehabilitation unit with 110 beds. The Minister spoke about a rehabilitation unit with 120 beds. What she did not tell us, and should have — and I just hope that she knew — was that 11 of those beds are closed because of cost cutting. At present we do not have 110 beds, but less than 100 because 11 are closed owing to shortage of funding. The HSE has cut the funding and the Minister has allowed it to do so. The Minister can talk all she likes in general terms about the millions put into health care, an extra billion here or there. Let us talk about the 10,000 people who will this year acquire a brain injury, and the few chosen ones who will be able to get into a rehabilitation unit and have an expectation of a proper life as a result. I can quote all night from e-mails I have been receiving this week, but they are too many. Deputy Liz McManus quoted from one e-mail, but we could cite hundreds. I am sure the Minister of State has received them as well. There was a young family here last night, a brother, sister and a mother, whose son received the type of rehabilitation that is required for seven months, and came home to nothing. All that he had gone through had been for nothing. No speech therapy was available to him, as the Minister of State implies in his speech, and no physiotherapy. They are trying desperately to provide it 848 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed) from their own means on a private level, but that cannot happen. How can the average worker afford to provide the type of service that only a communal pot can pay for? All types of issues are attached to this. It is not about having a go at the Government but rather shining a light on an area of health that has been left in the dark for far too long — that is all. Last night and again today in her eloquent tribute to the Taoiseach, the Minister made a big play of the fact we are all going to live three years longer than average. Darwin will confirm it is about the survival of the fittest. Is that what this Government is about as well, the survival of the fittest? Ultimately, it is a question of quality of life, not just longevity. What is the point if one’s quality of life is not what one knows it can be? Imagine what it is like to be trapped within a body that, with the right expertise, development and processes, can be returned to normality and a fully functioning life. We are not even talking about something that would cost us more, but rather the fact that if the resources were shifted, millions would be saved, and those of us who are expected to live three years longer could have the quality of life we deserve. In ten years time some 800,000 people will have acquired brain injury because we are going to live three years longer. It makes no sense for the Government to do what it is doing. It is about the inherent waste within the system. Someone once told me the system did not encour- age savings. Neither does it encourage good sense or the type of shift we are suggesting. We are not asking the Government to study this issue any longer. We have the studies and figures and know what needs to happen. We are not asking for miracles overnight. A regional roll-out is not possible in one go. We are looking for teams to be put in place to assess needs and work on the ground and for an inpatient service to be developed from this. It is not right that the chances of survival should be better if one acquires a brain injury in Dublin, nearer to Beau- mont or Du´ n Laoghaire, for instance, than they would be in Limerick, Galway, Wexford, Cork, Mallow, Kerry or any of those areas. We should not and cannot conclude a debate such as this without acknowledging and paying tribute to all the consultants, therapists, nurses and workers who struggle daily to try to raise awareness and enhance the quality of life of ABI sufferers. I have in mind in particular the often unpaid and overlooked carers and family members who dedicate their lives to improving the lot of their loved ones. I trust and I hope that this motion will be a landmark step in providing proper services. This is an opportunity for politicians to stand up and be counted. I am not fussed as to who provides the service as long as it happens. As Deputy Gilmore has just said, acquired brain injury is a silent epidemic in Ireland. Those of us who have the ability to speak out should not be silent about it. I move the motion, in anticipation. Someone once said the job of all backbenchers is to hold the Government to account. Maybe they will have the courage of their convictions and vote for this motion.
Amendment put.The Da´il divided: Ta´, 71; Nı´l, 67.
Ta´
Ahern, Michael. Calleary, Dara. Ahern, Noel. Collins, Niall. Andrews, Barry. Conlon, Margaret. Andrews, Chris. Connick, Sea´n. Ardagh, Sea´n. Coughlan, Mary. Aylward, Bobby. Cowen, Brian. Behan, Joe. Cuffe, Ciara´n. Blaney, Niall. Cullen, Martin. Brady, A´ ine. Curran, John. Brady, Johnny. Devins, Jimmy. Browne, John. Dooley, Timmy. 849 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
Ta´—continued
Fahey, Frank. McGrath, Mattie. Finneran, Michael. McGrath, Michael. Fitzpatrick, Michael. McGuinness, John. Fleming, Sea´n. Moloney, John. Flynn, Beverley. Moynihan, Michael. Gallagher, Pat The Cope. Mulcahy, Michael. Gogarty, Paul. Nolan, M. J. Grealish, Noel. O´ Cuı´v, E´ amon. Hanafin, Mary. O´ Fearghaı´l, Sea´n. Harney, Mary. O’Brien, Darragh. Haughey, Sea´n. O’Connor, Charlie. Kelleher, Billy. O’Flynn, Noel. Kelly, Peter. O’Hanlon, Rory. Kenneally, Brendan. O’Rourke, Mary. Kennedy, Michael. O’Sullivan, Christy. Killeen, Tony. Power, Peter. Kirk, Seamus. Roche, Dick. Kitt, Tom. Ryan, Eamon. Lenihan, Brian. Scanlon, Eamon. Lenihan, Conor. Smith, Brendan. Lowry, Michael. Treacy, Noel. Mansergh, Martin. Wallace, Mary. McDaid, James. White, Mary Alexandra. McEllistrim, Thomas. Woods, Michael. McGrath, Finian.
Nı´l
Allen, Bernard. Lynch, Ciara´n. Bannon, James. Lynch, Kathleen. Breen, Pat. McCormack, Pa´draic. Broughan, Thomas P. McGinley, Dinny. Bruton, Richard. McHugh, Joe. Burke, Ulick. McManus, Liz. Burton, Joan. Mitchell, Olivia. Carey, Joe. Naughten, Denis. Clune, Deirdre. Neville, Dan. Connaughton, Paul. Noonan, Michael. Coonan, Noel J. O´ Caola´in, Caoimhghı´n. Costello, Joe. O’Donnell, Kieran. Coveney, Simon. O’Dowd, Fergus. Crawford, Seymour. O’Keeffe, Jim. Creed, Michael. O’Mahony, John. Creighton, Lucinda. O’Shea, Brian. D’Arcy, Michael. O’Sullivan, Jan. Deenihan, Jimmy. Penrose, Willie. Doyle, Andrew. Perry, John. Durkan, Bernard J. Quinn, Ruairı´. English, Damien. Rabbitte, Pat. Enright, Olwyn. Ring, Michael. Feighan, Frank. Shatter, Alan. Ferris, Martin. Sheahan, Tom. Flanagan, Charles. Sheehan, P.J. Flanagan, Terence. Sherlock, Sea´n. Gilmore, Eamon. Shortall, Ro´ isı´n. Gregory, Tony. Stagg, Emmet. Hayes, Brian. Stanton, David. Hayes, Tom. Timmins, Billy. Higgins, Michael D. Tuffy, Joanna. Hogan, Phil. Upton, Mary. Howlin, Brendan. Varadkar, Leo. Kehoe, Paul.
Tellers: Ta´, Deputies Tom Kitt and John Curran; Nı´l, Deputies Emmet Stagg and Paul Kehoe.
Amendment declared carried. 850 Health Services: 23 April 2008. Motion (Resumed)
Question put: “That the motion, as amended, be agreed to.”
The Da´il divided: Ta´, 71; Nı´l, 64.
Ta´
Ahern, Michael. Kennedy, Michael. Ahern, Noel. Killeen, Tony. Andrews, Barry. Kirk, Seamus. Andrews, Chris. Kitt, Tom. Ardagh, Sea´n. Lenihan, Brian. Aylward, Bobby. Lenihan, Conor. Behan, Joe. Lowry, Michael. Blaney, Niall. Mansergh, Martin. Brady, A´ ine. McDaid, James. Brady, Johnny. McEllistrim, Thomas. Browne, John. McGrath, Finian. Calleary, Dara. McGrath, Mattie. Collins, Niall. McGrath, Michael. Conlon, Margaret. McGuinness, John. Connick, Sea´n. Moloney, John. Coughlan, Mary. Moynihan, Michael. Cowen, Brian. Mulcahy, Michael. Cuffe, Ciara´n Nolan, M.J. Cullen, Martin. O´ Cuı´v, E´ amon. Curran, John. O´ Fearghaı´l, Sea´n. Devins, Jimmy. O’Brien, Darragh. Dooley, Timmy. O’Connor, Charlie. Fahey, Frank. O’Flynn, Noel. Finneran, Michael. O’Hanlon, Rory. Fitzpatrick, Michael. O’Rourke, Mary. Fleming, Sea´n. O’Sullivan, Christy. Flynn, Beverley. Power, Peter. Gallagher, Pat The Cope. Roche, Dick. Gogarty, Paul. Ryan, Eamon. Grealish, Noel. Scanlon, Eamon. Hanafin, Mary. Smith, Brendan. Harney, Mary. Treacy, Noel. Haughey, Sea´n. Wallace, Mary. Kelleher, Billy. White, Mary Alexandra. Kelly, Peter. Woods, Michael. Kenneally, Brendan.
Nı´l
Allen, Bernard. Gilmore, Eamon. Bannon, James. Gregory, Tony. Breen, Pat. Hayes, Brian. Broughan, Thomas P. Higgins, Michael D. Bruton, Richard. Hogan, Phil. Burke, Ulick. Howlin, Brendan. Burton, Joan. Kehoe, Paul. Carey, Joe. Lynch, Ciara´n. Clune, Deirdre. Lynch, Kathleen. Connaughton, Paul. McCormack, Pa´draic. Coonan, Noel J. McGinley, Dinny. Costello, Joe. McHugh, Joe. Crawford, Seymour. McManus, Liz. Creed, Michael. Mitchell, Olivia. Creighton, Lucinda. Naughten, Denis. Deenihan, Jimmy. Neville, Dan. Doyle, Andrew. Noonan, Michael. Durkan, Bernard J. O´ Caola´in, Caoimhghı´n. English, Damien. O´ Snodaigh, Aengus. Enright, Olwyn. O’Donnell, Kieran. Feighan, Frank. O’Dowd, Fergus. Ferris, Martin. O’Keeffe, Jim. Flanagan, Charles. O’Mahony, John. 851 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
Nı´l—continued
O’Shea, Brian. Sheehan, P.J. O’Sullivan, Jan. Sherlock, Sea´n. Penrose, Willie. Shortall, Ro´ isı´n. Stagg, Emmet. Perry, John. Stanton, David. Quinn, Ruairı´. Timmins, Billy. Rabbitte, Pat. Tuffy, Joanna. Ring, Michael. Upton, Mary. Shatter, Alan. Varadkar, Leo. Sheahan, Tom.
Tellers: Ta´, Deputies Tom Kitt and John Curran; Nı´l, Deputies Emmet Stagg and Paul Kehoe.
Question declared carried.
An Bille um an Ochtu´ Leasu´ is Fiche ar an mBunreacht 2008: An Dara Ce´im (Ato´ ga´il).
Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed).
Atairgeadh an cheist: “Go le´ifear an Bille an Dara hUair anois.”
Question again proposed: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time.” Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: It is vital that the people of Ireland vote for the treaty and the reasons to support it are straightforward. The population of the EU is now almost half a billion, which is unwieldy, and this, effectively, is an administrative treaty that seeks to streamline the EU’s administrative procedures. A question in this debate is why should people vote “Yes”? I think the reasons for voting in favour are strong because the EU has been very good for Ireland. Since joining the then EEC in 1973 we have received \60 billion and have given back \20 billion, a sign we have become prosperous and have done well out of Europe. We have received \41 billion through the Common Agricultural Policy and are due to receive another \12 billion up to 2013. We have received \17 billion in Structural and Cohesion Funds. One of the reasons we have done so well, in terms of the Celtic tiger, is the funding from Europe which has allowed us put the infrastructure in place, but more needs to be done. In this context, the Government will have to push forward with the national development plan as quickly as possible. The EU has contributed to peace in Europe. In the first half of the last century there were two world wars that resulted in the deaths of 40 million people. There have been wars in other areas of Europe since but there has been peace in mainland Europe, which is to be welcomed. The EU has been a major benefit to Ireland in a number of ways. The Single Market has allowed us to trade throughout Europe and the area I represent, Limerick, has a large multi- national base. Multinationals came to Ireland because the country gave them access to Euro- pean markets through the Single Market. Following on from this, we joined the euro currency and now have common interests throughout Europe. If one sought to pinpoint external factors that contributed significantly to the Celtic tiger, one would be the exchange rate mechanism that reduced anxieties related to exchange rates. Another is the fact that, with the European Central Bank in place, interest rates were extremely low. One of the adverse consequences of this is the current bust that has followed the housing boom. Low interest rates allowed people to borrow a lot of money and the Government should have introduced other factors to prevent a bubble forming.
852 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
Some anxieties on the “No” side are emerging in a number of ways. The issue of taxation has arisen recently and the European Commission President, Mr. Jose´ Manuel Barroso, came to Ireland and spoke about key aspects of the taxation issue. The corporation tax rate in Ireland of 12.5% was introduced by the rainbow coalition that governed until 1997 and 9 o’clock was implemented by the following Administration. This was one of the most important factors in creating the Celtic tiger. The large multinationals I have spoken to want the corporation tax rate of 12.5% retained and there is nothing in this treaty that will cause it to change. We have a veto that protects our taxation rates and the rate of 12.5% is secure. There has been talk of enhanced co-operation that could see some states, of their own accord, form alliances in this regard but this requires nine of the 27 states and it has not happened to date. It is important that Ireland shows that it supports the European model because it has ben- efited us. I am adamant that we should give the Lisbon treaty a resounding “Yes” vote and that our tax system should remain intact. There has been much talk of tax harmonisation but for this to occur it must be shown that it will not in any way interfere with commercial realities for individual states. This matter should be put aside and people should be aware that our corporation tax rate of 12.5% is secure because the Lisbon treaty will have no impact on it. The treaty has no impact on Ireland’s neutrality, something I believe in. Under our Consti- tution anything that affects our neutrality must be put to the people in a referendum. The fact that we are voting on the Lisbon treaty is a healthy measure of our democracy. I am confident the Irish people support Europe because we have done very well from being part of the EU. People have fears but if they are addressed and if they ask whether Europe been good for us in the past the answer will be “Yes”. The other issue that has been thrown up in this debate concerns the WTO negotiations. Ireland has a veto in the negotiations. The Lisbon treaty has no impact on the talks. Com- missioner Peter Mandelson comes from England where the farming sector is not as vital a factor to its economy as it is in Ireland. There will always be trade-offs in world trade negotiations but the agriculture sector appears to be of no relevance to Commissioner Mandelson. The Government must get across that while we want free trade and the opening of markets in Brazil, India and China, it cannot be done to the detriment of Irish farming. Farming is the lifeblood of rural Ireland, a pillar of our society and economy which must be protected. I congratulate Deputy Michael Creed on the great work he has done in this area. The loss of a commissioner has arisen in the debate. Ireland will have a commissioner for every ten of 15 years. However, this applies to all member states and not just Ireland. The proposal of rotating commissioners will not come into play until 2014. The current commissioner system with 27 positions is unwieldy. A great benefit of the Lisbon treaty is that it will give extra powers to the European Parliament in legislative decision making in the EU. The European Parliament, as provided for in the treaty, must when bringing forward any directive make the Da´il aware eight weeks beforehand to allow it to be debated. This is very democratic and will allow debate to take place. As my party’s deputy spokesperson for finance, I am aware that Irish legislation is increasingly governed by EU directives. Many mistakes and oversights have been made when directives were dealt with at EU level. I am glad that at national parliament level we will have an input in decision making. Control mechan- isms are in place to ensure the EU Commission gives valid explanations as to why it is bringing forward directives, a welcome development. Another welcome development is the placing of the Charter of Fundamental Rights on a legislative basis. It is vital for Ireland’s interests that we vote for the Lisbon treaty. Ireland has benefitted significantly from EU membership and will continue to do so. The danger is that people will 853 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Kieran O’Donnell.] vote against the Lisbon treaty for reasons that have nothing to do with its contents. It is up to Members to explain to people what the treaty means and to deal with their concerns over our neutrality, taxation, accountability and the world trade talks. This will mean that when the people vote on the Lisbon treaty, they will be aware they are voting for streamlined EU insti- tutions that will allow progress in a sustainable, strong manner and have a peaceful and prosper- ous Europe of which Ireland can continue to be a member.
Deputy Michael Creed: One of my earliest political memories is the black and white grainy television footage of the former President, Patrick Hillery, and the former Taoiseach, Jack Lynch, signing the accession treaty for our membership to the then EEC in 1972. It has been an overwhelmingly positive experience for Ireland. Deputy O’Donnell listed the benefits in pounds, shilling and pence from the Structural Fund for the farming community and other areas. I challenge anyone to deny that EU membership has been a successful experience for Ireland in economic, social and political terms. The challenge for Members in selling the Lisbon treaty is to raise the level of debate and expectation from the filthy lucre and to sell it at a higher level of idealism and political aspir- ation. There is a danger in some quarters that we may oversell the treaty, claiming it is a panacea for all our ills, which in many respects it is not. While the European movement has been successful for Ireland, this is an administrative treaty that takes into account a Union that has grown incrementally from six member states to nine, 12, 15 and 27, comprising a population of 500 million people. If one was running the mid-Cork board of the GAA and the number of clubs increased in a similar way, one would have to change the standing orders to ensure efficient decision making. I accept this might be an overly simplistic view of what is contained in the treaty but it illustrates the point. If we were writing it ourselves as a single member state for 27 member states, we would ensure we did not lose our commissioner. However, this has been hammered out in great detail, involving compromises between all member states. In all negotiations and deals, we learn to live with compromise. On balance, it is a good deal and we should sell it as such to the people. What has been visibly absent from the debate to date has been the presence of the Govern- ment side in selling it. There is a danger that the treaty vote will be lost. We have the forces that have been consistent since day one in opposing it. They have also been consistently wrong. It behoves those of us committed to the European movement to get up off our backsides and sell it. This side of the House has organised a nationwide series of meetings on the treaty. There is a visible absence, however, from the debate of the Government parties which runs a substantial risk of the treaty being lost. It is regrettable a link between the treaty and the world trade talks has been created in the mind of the farming community. It was welcomed that the IFA, the main farming organisation, decided to support the treaty in January. However, since then it has rowed back and watered down this commitment. Undoubtedly, Mr. Mandelson is damaging the prospects of passing the Lisbon treaty on 12 June. That is a failure of the Government and the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food at EU Council level to rein in and issue appropriate instructions to Com- missioner Mandelson. I ask individual farmers to ask themselves what they will achieve if they vote “no” and the treaty goes down. Where will we stand on the morning of 13 June as we pick up the pieces and attempt to continue negotiations on CAP reform? Would our negotiating position be strengthened or weakened? It is patently obvious that the WTO negotiations have nothing to do with the Lisbon treaty and our negotiating position among Ministers and Heads of State would be significantly weakened during the mid-term “health check” of the Common Agricultural Policy. Farmers would do well to take stock of these issues. 854 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
The usual red herrings have been used in the debate, namely, corporation tax, neutrality and the loss of identity, the supposed merging of Ireland into a blancmange of European identities. The contrary is more true now than it has ever been. In Europe, we stride more confidently as Irish people than we did in the early 1970s when we joined the EEC. This is due to the prosperity we have attained with Europe’s assistance. To ensure that Europe is in a position to make efficient and effective decisions, it must face the challenge of emerging eastern countries and the political instability therein that has only recently ended. Europe must be resolute and efficient in its decision making processes, the subject matter of the treaty. I would encourage everyone to vote “Yes”. By virtue of inactivity and political failure on the Government benches to handle the WTO talks better, there is a substantial danger that the Lisbon treaty and those talks will be deliber- ately or otherwise linked in the minds of members of the farming community. It is not too late to rescue the talks and the treaty, but it will require resolute and immediate Government action. I regret that there are no signs of that, but I hope it occurs. Time is not on our side, as there are only six weeks until polling day. At this late stage, I encourage the Government to commence its campaign to sell the Lisbon treaty.
Deputy Ciara´n Cuffe: My party has held a strong and robust debate on the European treaty, which has divided us in some respects. Most are in favour of the treaty, but there is a substantial minority with significant concerns regarding various aspects of the document. I am in favour of the treaty. While it is not a perfect document, we are better served by critically engaging with the EU project from within by ratifying the treaty rather than by rejecting it and remaining outside the project. In a sense, the choice is similar to that made by the Green Party on whether to participate in Government. We did not believe that being in Government with a party that does not share all of our opinions would be perfect, but the choice has worked out well and we are slowly altering the course of the ship of state. If we ratify the treaty, we will be slowly manoeuvring the European ship of state in the right direction. There have been significant changes in the EU in recent years. In terms of democracy, the treaty will take us in the right direction. It will remove a substantial amount of power from the Commission and give it to the European Parliament. While this will not occur in exactly the way we would have liked, it is a start in addressing a democratic deficit that has been part of the European project to date. Whenever I go to Brussels, it is to engage in the issues I hold dear. Irrespective of whether one likes it, the decisions on many issues — energy, farming or the environment — are being made in Brussels. When I find myself in the Berlaymont or one of the offices close to the heart of Brussels engaging with the European project, I feel good about it due to the strong support for the type of issues espoused by the Green Party. There is a considerable push in the right direction in terms of proper planning, the sustainable use of resources, renewable energy and so on. There are many other issues. For example, the EURATOM Treaty is, for many of us, the elephant in the corner of the European project. A large nuclear industry is consuming more European taxpayers’ money than renewable energy. If we wish to alter this situation, we must do so from within. The Lisbon treaty will make no material changes to the EURATOM Treaty, which promotes nuclear energy, but the Irish, German, Austrian, Swedish and Hungarian Governments have added a declaration calling for the revision of the EURATOM Treaty. The best place to participate in this revision is at the forefront of the discussion on the EU. While previous treaties refer to the concept of sustainable development, that concept is not clear. The 855 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Ciara´n Cuffe.] reform treaty will give it a higher profile and a clearer definition. Sustainable development is listed in the treaty as one of the fundamental objectives of the Union in its relations with the wider world. This is a new provision and a significant improvement. Many around the Chamber have asked what is being done in respect of climate change. Ireland is engaging in a considerable amount of domestic discussion and policy formation, but the EU is at the forefront of the global movement to tackle climate change head on. A signifi- cant amount of research is being done and the emissions trading system, which is being pion- eered in Europe, is showing the world how carbon trading can fit into world economies. This is a crucial factor in the fight against climate change. While I have been critical of trading our way out of the climate change issue, it is a useful economic instrument to achieve global buy- in as long as we do not use carbon trading as a way to avoid action at home. It makes sense to the Americans and the Chinese. In a short period, there will be significant buy-in. The next US President will engage more deeply with the subject than the incumbent. While one may argue that this would not be difficult, it is movement in the right direction. The treaty incorporates the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which sets out a catalogue of civil, social and political rights and freedoms. The legally binding nature of its provisions is a positive aspect of the treaty. When particular well-funded individuals argue strongly against the treaty and refer to these provisions, I am more confident about arguing in its favour. The treaty brings the EU closer to its citizens through the greater involvement of national parliaments and the directly elected European Parliament in the EU’s decision making process, thereby bolstering the EU’s democratic legitimacy. It is a project in which I believe. I am proud when I see a European flag above a building. I am proud to be a Dubliner, an Irishman and a European. The European treaty is worth supporting. However, I urge people not to vote for or against the treaty on national issues but to consider the wider project and what it will achieve for the many hundreds of millions of citizens living within the European Union. I believe that, on balance, this is a positive treaty that deserves our support.
Deputy Paul Kehoe: I welcome the opportunity to speak on this Bill. When Ireland joined the European Union in 1973, it was a much poorer State than is the case at present. I was born in 1973 and when one considers the progress that has been made since then in business, employment, education, infrastructure or whatever, many of the benefits have flowed from Ireland’s membership of the European Union. It is sad that some who are involved in politics and some political parties are willing to vote against the Lisbon treaty, which can only be of benefit to Ireland. The number of jobs, companies and dynamic young people that have come to Ireland through the openness arising from the European Union, in the past ten years in particular, have been unbelievable. While Ireland is a small country, it is highly respected in the European context. Other coun- tries have double or triple our population but our small island is well respected in Europe. Fine Gael is a highly-respected member of the largest European political grouping, the Euro- pean People’s Party, and Ireland is fortunate to have the leader of the Fine Gael Party serve as its vice president. Fine Gael has a proud tradition of supporting Ireland’s involvement in European affairs. As a party, it always has put the country and its position in Europe first and this is the reason it seeks a “Yes” vote on this occasion. Fine Gael will not use the opportunity to oppose the Government and asks people to vote “Yes”. They should vote on the issue before them, rather than voting “No” because they consider it to be correct to vote against the Government. People who wish to criticise the Government should wait until the local and European elections. 856 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
In recent months, Fine Gael has been highly active in promoting the Lisbon treaty. Last week, I was disappointed to hear that the Leader of the Seanad, Senator Donie Cassidy, criti- cised the Fine Gael Party, and other parties, and asserted that his was the only party that was doing anything for the promotion of the Lisbon treaty. Had Senator Cassidy been reading his local newspapers or the national newspapers or following Da´il debates, he would have been made aware of the degree to which the Fine Gael party is active in this respect. Fine Gael recently held a treaty meeting in Wexford that attracted a huge attendance of non-political people who came simply to acquire information on the treaty. It was highly interesting to hear such people’s viewpoints on the treaty as they were there to get information on it rather than to criticise it. They attended to establish whether to vote “Yes” or “No”. Speaking to the wider audience after that public meeting, I noted their belief in the positive aspects of the treaty had been reaffirmed. The misleading “No” campaign raises issues such as neutrality, taxation and abortion. This is unbelievable and I fail to understand from where they get the arguments. The real purpose of this treaty is to provide for the enlargement of the EU, as well as to improve the workings and efficiency of the Union. Hopefully, following the passage of this treaty, the proper structures will be put in place to make a far better European Union in which to be involved and Ireland will benefit tremendously in that regard. People’s positive attitudes towards Europe also are very welcome. It is brilliant to observe younger voters becoming involved in the treaty and wondering what is happening. While Sinn Fe´in, Libertas and others assert that Ireland will lose its EU Commissioner, they should study the job prospectus of a Commissioner. Ireland is fortunate to have a fine man like Charlie McCreevy serve as its EU Commissioner. However, the “No” campaign should be aware that Charlie McCreevy does not work in Europe for the betterment of Ireland. He works for the betterment of the projects in Europe with which he is involved and he takes the wider Europe into consideration. It is not his job to wear an Irish hat and fight on our behalf. His job is to work within the European Union with different countries for the Union’s betterment. Irrespective of our size and whether we have a Commissioner, we will still enjoy the same rights as at present and will not lose such rights. It is strange to assert that the loss of a Commissioner would cause the entire European Union to collapse or that Ireland would col- lapse because it was not going to have a Commissioner or that it would lose a degree of influence. As for taxation, the “No” vote claims that were the treaty to be passed, odd taxation systems would be introduced. However, this will not happen. I refer to the lack of education displayed by the “No” campaign when neutrality is being discussed. The triple lock ensures our neutrality and the “No” campaign should study and understand this point. I hope the Lisbon treaty will be passed and that in the coming years, the European Union will become far stronger and far better, both for itself and for Ireland. When one recalls the benefits that have accrued to Ireland in recent years, I ask the Irish people to look into their hearts, consider the purpose of the treaty and educate themselves on it. Were they to do so, they undoubtedly would vote “Yes”.
Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Brendan Smith): It is a pleasure to make the concluding contribution to the Second Stage debate of this important Bill. When the Minister for Foreign Affairs introduced the Bill on 2 April, he cor- rectly reminded the House that the reform treaty is important for Ireland and for Europe. The Government considers the treaty to be a logical step for the EU in an increasingly globalised world. Ratification of the treaty will provide for a more effective Union that will be more democratic and accountable, that will be better prepared to address the global challenges we 857 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
[Deputy Brendan Smith.] all face and that will allow Ireland to consolidate the gains made since it became a member 35 years ago. The referendum on 12 June should not be treated lightly. The decision then reached will not simply pertain to the wording of a European treaty but also will concern our country’s future. The result to which we will wake up on the next day will tell us much about ourselves. It also will tell us much about what we want to say to others about ourselves. We will be sending a message to our partners in Europe and to the international political and investment com- munities. The choice we will make will be between confidently embracing the future or stalling at a vital time for Ireland and the Union. No Irish interest would be served by a failure to ratify this treaty, which represents the outcome of compromise and consensus among 27 member states. It fully respects Ireland’s key interests, including our political and economic interests and our interests in the areas of sovereignty and social policy. Some would say that we have benefited more than any other country from EU membership, which has been a force for progress, jobs, peace and wider national development. The Euro- pean Union has given us a secure and comfortable place in which to articulate our views, realise our hopes and contribute to the wider world. It has given us the confidence to shake off many of the preoccupations with which history burdened us. We have been participants in a process that has helped unite our Continent as never before. Former enemies are now committed partners and firm friends. The east-west divide is now a thing of the past and, closer to home, the EU and its member states have played their part in helping to end the conflict in Northern Ireland. None of this happened in one fell swoop. The EU has been built slowly, brick by brick. It was founded on the rules and laws written by many hands. Some find fault with this, although many outside the EU observe us with a mixture of envy and awe. Given the combined interests and histories of 27 countries, it is inevitable that our treaties are complex and even inelegant in places. However, what matters most are the outcomes. I do not believe that any sensible person can look at the economic, political and social balance sheet and still say the EU has not been overwhelmingly positive for Ireland and Europe. The reform treaty has been negotiated and agreed in the spirit of all previous European treaties, each of which allowed Ireland and Europe to progress. The reform treaty is no differ- ent in this respect and that is why the Government signed it and is now encouraging the people to vote “yes” in the upcoming referendum. We appreciate the support of other parties which are also campaigning for the treaty’s ratification. We have heard much comment outside this House about how the reform treaty represents a charter for the few large countries in the EU to bully the smaller ones. Such a view ignores the behaviour of large countries throughout the long history of the EU and suggests a lack of confidence in how small countries like Ireland can find our way in the world. A quick glance at the map makes clear that Europe is a small Continent full of small countries, many of which are smaller than Ireland. Those countries are not expressing disquiet about the future because they concur with the Government’s view that small countries will be a crucial part of the future European Union. Ratifying the referendum will confirm our faith in an international order based on solidarity, international co-operation and equality between member states. It will confirm for the inter- national political and economic community that we continue to keep our feet firmly in Europe and our focus on economic prosperity, political stability and social progress. That is why the Government believes the reform treaty should be ratified. 858 Twenty-eighth Amendment of the Constitution 23 April 2008. Bill 2008: Second Stage (Resumed)
The treaty will boost Ireland’s capacity to address the domestic and international challenges we face. It will also allow us to continue to exploit the considerable opportunities that come with being members of the EU. It will enable us to maximise our capacity to act in our own interests. Ireland’s sovereignty is not abstract but is a function of our capacity to act for our people and to enhance the quality of their lives. Ireland’s sovereignty is to be measured in terms of our ability to defend prosperity, safeguard the environment and protect the jobs and livelihoods which the Irish people have worked so hard to create. These cannot be achieved in isolation because they depend on Ireland’s capacity to nurture and protect our essential interests. Although our capacity to act is minimal if we are alone, it is enhanced and multiplied through the unique partnership of today’s European Union. Membership has given us the Single Market, practical co-operation between member states and greater clout on the world stage. The reform treaty further increases Ireland’s capacity to act by making the EU function better. This will benefit Ireland, which has always gained from an effective Europe. It will give a greater role to national parliaments and the European Parliament, make the EU more responsive to citizens’ concerns, give Europe and European values more influence in the world and empower the EU to combat climate change. The treaty also allows us to make decisions on the policies which are of vital national interest to us, such as taxation, neutrality and the right to life of the unborn and other sensitive social policies. Compared with previous EU treaties, the reform treaty is modest. While it makes necessary adjustments to the existing treaties, it does not propose radical change. Previous treaties have brought about the establishment of the Single Market and the introduction of the euro but the present treaty does nothing of that magnitude. Opponents of the treaty are of course making outlandish and misleading claims in increas- ingly shrill terms. Certain opponents who in the recent past clamoured for increases in corpor- ation tax now present themselves as champions and defenders of the corporate tax system. The treaty makes no change to the unanimity rule. No tax change can be imposed on Ireland or any other member state and it is dishonest to suggest otherwise. The parties supporting this treaty have designed our corporate tax policy and have a track record on this subject. They need no lessons from anti-EU opportunists. IBEC, the Chambers of Commerce and the men and women who have a track record in creating jobs in Ireland all recognise this. The business and wider communities will not be hood-winked by the nonsense being peddled by those who have always opposed our position in Europe or by groups which have appeared overnight. Some opponents of the treaty are against the Common Agricultural Policy and the benefits it has brought to Irish farmers and rural communities. Others speak in apocalyptic terms about Ireland losing all influence in the EU and of sell-outs and takeovers. They falsely suggest the treaty will hand over policy on foreign direct investment to the European Commission. We will continue to pursue high quality investment projects and nothing in the treaty will cut across this. They claim the treaty will put an end to future referendums on EU treaties, which is also untrue. Holding a referendum will continue to be a matter for us to decide. No Irish Govern- ment would sign a treaty that affects our capacity to control taxation policy, foreign direct investment or national constitutional procedures. Many others around the EU table would equally resist such moves. Ireland’s future progress is tightly bound to our involvement in the EU. The way to ensure maximum progress is through full engagement in the Union. Through the EU we can continue to achieve our key economic and social goals, pursue our wider interests and maintain our particular identity on international issues. Without the EU, we would not have made the gains we have registered in recent years. We have higher levels of prosperity and employment than we could ever have achieved without membership. The transformation of our agricultural sector could not have happened without generous EU support. Foreign direct investment would not 859 Pharmacy 23 April 2008. Services
[Deputy Brendan Smith.] have reached the massive levels of today without guaranteed access to the Single Market and many infrastructural improvements would not have come about without the generous provision of Structural Funds. It is fair to say that past behaviour is a good indicator of future performance. For this reason, Ireland has nothing to fear and everything to gain by supporting the treaty. The benefits of active and positive EU involvement have far outweighed the costs and this will continue to be the case. The Union should not be seen as a zero sum game because it is not. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Why should we vote “Yes”? To make the European Union more efficient, effective, demo- cratic, fit for purpose and capable of meeting the challenges that lie ahead, such as globalisation, energy security, climate change, mass migration and crime. It is my pleasure to have the oppor- tunity to draw to a close Second Stage of this Bill.
Cuireadh an cheist.
Question put.
Deputies: Vota´il.
An Ceann Comhairle: Will the Deputies who are claiming a division please rise?
Deputies Ferris, Gregory, O´ Caola´in and O´ Snodaigh rose.
An Ceann Comhairle: As fewer than ten Members have risen I declare the question carried. In accordance with Standing Order 70 the names of the Deputies dissenting will be recorded in the Journal of the Proceedings of the Da´il.
Faisne´iseadh go rabhthas tar e´is glacadh leis an gceist.
Question declared carried.
An Ceann Comhairle: When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?
Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Deputy Dick Roche): I note that support for the Bill in this House is more than 40 to 1 in favour. Committee Stage will be taken next Tuesday, subject to the agreement of the Whips.
Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in: Do not put too much money on it.
Ce´im an Choiste ordaithe don Mha´irt, 29 Aibrea´n 2008.
Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 29 April 2008.
Adjournment Debate.
————
Pharmacy Services. Deputy John O’Mahony: I wish to share one and a half minutes of my time with Deputy McHugh and one minute with Deputies Kieran O’Donnell and Jimmy Deenihan.
Acting Chairman (Deputy Jack Wall): Is that agreed? Agreed. 860 Pharmacy 23 April 2008. Services
Deputy John O’Mahony: I raise a serious issue to which a solution is needed immediately. For the past six months there has been a stand off between the Irish Pharmaceutical Union and the Health Service Executive. Disputes are usually settled by negotiation but that has not even been attempted in this case. The Minister and the HSE refuse to negotiate. 10 o’clock Instead, we now have threats of injunctions and as 1 May approaches real concern is being generated. That is what I want to raise tonight because people want to know where they will get their medicines and what will happen if they cannot pay for them, which is the case for many people. I have been advised that out of 48 pharmacies in Mayo, 46 are pulling out of the scheme on 1 May. It is not acceptable that those people should be put through that trauma and stress in addition to coping with their medical conditions. I met with approximately 100 people in an active retirement group in Ballina on Tuesday morning and there was genuine anxiety among the group because with 1 May looming there is no contingency plan to allay their concerns about where they will get their medicines. Real confusion and fear is being experienced. I have received hundreds of calls from people and patients in the past few days. A 92 year old woman telephoned me today wanting to know who would tell her what tablets to take. The pharmacy service in Mayo and other counties involves more than just a drug store dispensing medication. People come to seek advice and clarification on how to take their medi- cation. It is a vital community service. Mayo’s pharmacies depend on medical card holders for 80% of their business. If they are forced to close, it will be another strike at the heart of rural Ireland. As a matter of urgency, will the Minister indicate what will be the contingency plans on 1 May? I tabled a question on the matter today but was told it was a matter for the HSE to answer. I am not here to score political points, nor are the other Deputies. I want to allay the fears of the people who need answers. Only the Minister can instruct the HSE to remove the cause of the panic among the sick and the less well-off about where they will get their medicines in a few weeks from now.
Deputy Joe McHugh: As Deputy O’Mahony said, we are not here to score political points. We are facing a crisis. Almost 800 pharmacists have submitted letters tendering their resig- nation. In addition, there is fear among the people on the drugs payment scheme and the medical card scheme. We must provide a solution to this impending disaster. Why did a senior official from the HSE pull out of the Oireachtas joint committee meeting tonight? The answer to that question will not be in the Minister’s script but an answer is required as to the reason the official did not turn up to that meeting today. The pharmacists are in a corner because the HSE will not negotiate with their union rep- resentatives. They will not allow union representation in any negotiations. There has not been a level playing field in that regard from day one. The IPU has always indicated it is in favour of cost cutting and has put forward its own proposals. We need a quick intervention. There is fear among the public. Pharmacists are in a corner and the intimidatory mechanisms used by the HSE in issuing High Court injunctions will not solve the issue. We are facing a crisis and something must be done about it soon.
Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: I echo what my colleagues have said. This is probably one of the most serious issues that has arisen in terms of medical services in a number of years. Why is the Minister not here? Where is the Minister, Deputy Harney? This is a serious issue but her absence is an indication of the way she regards it. Patients are concerned about getting their 861 Pharmacy 23 April 2008. Services
[Deputy Kieran O’Donnell.] medications. The livelihood of pharmacists is being threatened. They are taking an 8.2% reduction from pharmacists but many pharmacists are not getting that level of discounts. When the old dispensary system was abolished in the early 1970s, pharmacists were to set up a net- work throughout the country from which they could dispense. The Minister is standing over the dismantling of this service. She must demand that the HSE enter into negotiations with the IPU to resolve this issue before a disaster occurs. Pharmacists are being backed into a corner, where they are being forced to threaten to terminate their contracts individually. That is totally unacceptable. The Minister should be here tonight dealing with the issue. She should, as a matter of urgency, demand that the HSE enter into formal negotiations with the IPU. They should sit down, engage in consultation and allow the pharmacists go on with their business, providing a very good service in all areas of the country and being an efficient part of the HSE. Many other parts are not so efficient.
Deputy Jimmy Deenihan: According to 2006 HSE figures, 42,792 individuals — 30% of the Kerry population — depend on community pharmacies for medicines dispensed under various community drug schemes. As has been stated, local pharmacies have dispensed not just pre- scriptions but expert medical advice and reassurance to their customers while building up an invaluable personal relationship with the local community over the course of years. As a result of the unilateral decision taken by the HSE under the direction of Government, patients will now have to pay for their medicines on 1 May. Many people will just not have the capability or capacity to pay for their medicines and will do without them. As a result, there will certainly be fatalities. It is unfortunate the Minister of State, Deputy Brendan Smith, is here as I saw he took all the Adjournment matters in the Seanad tonight. He would not want to become Minister for the Adjournment. Will the Minister of State convey to the Minister and the Government our concerns? At this stage it is in their hands and they must intervene. I appeal to the Minister of State, and other Ministers, to get the Government to intervene before it is too late and all the consequences mentioned by the three previous speakers come into effect.
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Brendan Smith): I will be taking this Adjournment matter on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Mary Harney, who is unavoidably absent due to other Department business. I thank the Deputy for raising this matter as it provides me with an opportunity to outline to this House the current position. Over recent years, the Health Service Executive has reviewed the pharmaceutical supply chain with a view to seeking value for money in the State’s drugs bill, in order to better fund existing and innovative therapies without compromising patient safety or continuity of supply. Following the completion of public consultation, and informed by the independent economic analysis carried out by Indecon International Economic Consultants, new wholesale pricing arrangements were announced by the HSE on 17 September. The report by Indecon was pub- lished by the HSE on 13 November 2007. In response to demands from community pharmacists to address what they see as the impact of the new wholesale pricing arrangements, the HSE offered a voluntary interim contract with a flat rate dispensing fee of not less than \5 for all dispensing under the GMS and community drugs schemes. Pharmacists and the Irish Pharmaceutical Union did not see this as a positive gesture and have not taken it up. Following engagement and discussion with the Irish Pharmaceutical Union in February, the Minister established an independent body to assess an interim, fair community pharmacy dis- 862 Pharmacy 23 April 2008. Services pensing fee to be paid for the medical card scheme, the DPS and other community drug schemes. This initiative is aimed at supporting pharmacists in rural or inner-city areas with predominantly medical card patients, as the Government is concerned to support community pharmacy services particularly to less well-off patients and areas. This body is being chaired by Mr. Sean Dorgan, former head of IDA Ireland. It has been asked to make its recommendations by the end of next May and I understand it is on course to produce its report and recom- mendations in that time. Both the HSE as the contracting body and the Irish Pharmaceutical Union as the representa- tive organisation for community pharmacists, along with other stakeholders, are entitled to make submissions to the independent body. I understand the Irish Pharmaceutical Union has made a submission to the independent body and that it had a detailed and comprehensive engagement with Mr. Dorgan’s group last week on a wide range of matters pertinent to his terms of reference. I reiterate that the Government recognises the IPU as the representative body for pharma- cists and wishes to maintain its longstanding relationship with the union as a key stakeholder in health care. Unfortunately, the HSE has reported that it has, to date, received notification from over 500 community pharmacy contractors indicating their intention either to cease providing services from 1 May 2008, or otherwise reserving their right to do so.
Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: It is now 800.
Deputy Joe McHugh: It is 800 as of today.
Deputy Brendan Smith: Community pharmacy contractors are required under the terms of their contract to give three months’ notice of their intention to withdraw. This is a serious obligation to ensure continuity of dispensing services to patients. The HSE has written to each of the contractors concerned, seeking formal confirmation of their intentions and pointing out that three months’ notice of cessation of service is required. As of now, only two contractors have given formal notification of termination in accordance with the requirements in the contract. The HSE has been obliged to develop a national contingency planning framework which will inform and provide direction to local operational management for the development of local area-specific contingency plans. As service provision, geographical and demographic circum- stances will vary from area to area, each local health area is developing its own area-specific contingency plan within the context of the overall national framework. However, I emphasise that it is the Minister’s and the Government’s earnest hope such contingency arrangements will not prove necessary and a withdrawal of services by pharmacists will not take place. The process engaged in by the Dorgan group is under way, as the IPU can attest, and it offers a real prospect of a way forward in this dispute.
Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: Its reference should be extended to include discounts.
Deputy Brendan Smith: It should be allowed complete its work——
Deputy Joe McHugh: There are two parties in the process.
Acting Chairman: Allow the Minister of State to speak.
Deputy Brendan Smith: It should be allowed complete its work in just a few weeks’ time. 863 Health 23 April 2008. Services
[Deputy Brendan Smith.]
In the meantime and while that work is still under way, a withdrawal of services by pharma- cists is not a response that is fair to patients who, for good reasons, have——
Deputy Joe McHugh: There are two parties in the negotiations.
Deputy Brendan Smith: Could we have the common decency to listen? In the meantime and while that work is still under way, a withdrawal of services by pharmacists is not a response that is fair to patients who, for good reasons, have developed a trust and confidence in their community pharmacist to supply the medicines they need.
Deputy Joe McHugh: This is fuel to the fire. Negotiations are ongoing.
Deputy Brendan Smith: Threats of withdrawal from the community pharmacy contract in this context are surely not in anyone’s interest. The Minister has repeatedly stated she does not wish to see any patient inconvenienced in any way. She believes that if community pharmacists reflect on the position and the fully independent——
Deputy Joe McHugh: Is this before or after they get the High Court injunction?
Acting Chairman: Deputy McHugh, please allow the Minister of State to conclude.
Deputy John O’Mahony: This is ridiculous.
Deputy Brendan Smith: Will the Deputies show some common courtesy for just one second?
Deputy Joe McHugh: It is ridiculous, this is not even an answer.
Acting Chairman: Allow the Minister of State to conclude.
Deputy Brendan Smith: The Minister, Deputy Harney, believes that if community pharma- cists reflect on the position and the fully independent and impartial engagement by the Dorgan group——
Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: That is the end of May.
Deputy Brendan Smith: ——they will choose responsibly to fulfil their professional obli- gations to their patients.
Deputy Kieran O’Donnell: What about the confined terms of reference?
Health Services. Deputy Charlie O’Connor: I thank the Ceann Comhairle for being kind enough to allow me raise this item. I acknowledge the presence of Deputy Brendan Smith, Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children. I hope the Minister of State will carefully note the con- cerns I will express. Very often, I raise issues on the Adjournment and through other business which is Tallaght- based. The service I will discuss tonight is Tallaght-based but I stress to the Minister of State that this is not just a Tallaght issue but one which concerns Dublin as a whole. It involves most Dublin constituencies and I know other colleagues are as concerned as I. I particularly acknowledge the support I have received on this issue from Deputy Darragh O’Brien, our colleague in Dublin North. 864 Health 23 April 2008. Services
The Acting Chairman knows that not a week goes by when we do not raise issues relating to hospital services. I have always been very supportive of my local hospital in Tallaght, which I have been involved with since its planning stages and through its opening. I was a member of the board when it opened in June ten years ago. All of us know the hospital in Tallaght, as well as St. James’s, Beaumont and all the other hospitals in Dublin, are regularly under pressure. Not a week goes by when the Mater Hospital is not highlighted for its particular challenges. There is no question there is a need to find a way to deal with the crisis in accident and emergency departments and the input of patients. Some months ago, a number of my constituents in Tallaght brought to my attention the fact that they had availed of what they described as a dynamic new HSE initiative which provided a hospital in the home service. One individual recounted being plucked from a trolley in the accident and emergency department and transferred to this programme. I took the time not only to visit Tara Healthcare at the South City Business Centre in Killinarden. As a result of the co-operation of those who work there, I was able to visit patients in my constituency who were availing, in a positive way, of this service. They told me great stories about being kept off trolleys in hospitals and out of accident and emergency departments and being provided with a service by highly professional people. Not only were the latter providing such a service, they cared about the patients’ plight. I was deeply impressed by the service on offer and I thought that, for once, the HSE had come across a tremendous initiative that is well worth funding. To my distress and that of many others — as already stated, the effects of what is happening will be felt across Dublin — Tara Healthcare was informed last week that the HSE intends to suspend the service for the summer months. The management at Tara Healthcare informs me that this will effectively mean an end to the service. At a time when we are seeking innovative ways to preserve a good health service and cater for the needs of patients in a caring and effective way, I do not understand how the HSE can say to the 2,000 patients treated by Tara Healthcare and the 70 nursing staff, six doctors and ten administration staff who work there that the service will not be continued. I obtained access to the HSE’s evaluation of the service and it makes for amazing and positive reading because it points out that the service has provided a valuable alternative to hospital care for almost 2,000 patients since its introduction in March 2007. The evaluation proceeds to state that referrals to the service have increased steadily over time and that the service has been working to capacity over the winter months. It further states that the service provided by Tara Healthcare has evolved over time to cater for patients with a number of different diagnoses. It also highlights the success of the service. I visited Tallaght hospital in recent days and the acting chief executive stressed that the service provided by Tara Healthcare has been a great boon to the hospital. Having checked with colleagues, I am aware that it has also been of tremendous value to other hospitals. The HSE has been the subject of many bad news stories in recent times. This is a good news story. The HSE stated in its evaluation that this service is effective and first class. However, it is now stating that it will no longer fund it through the summer months. Effectively, this means that the service will no longer be provided for those who benefit from it and who it keeps off trolleys and out of hospital accident and emergency departments. I am informed that Beaumont is the largest catchment area for this programme at present and, therefore, this matter relates not only to Tallaght. I want to fight on behalf of people throughout the Dublin region who will be deprived of a first-class service. I ask the Minister of State to reply to the matter I have raised and to make it clear to the Minister, Deputy Harney, that the service must be retained. 865 Summer Works 23 April 2008. Scheme
Deputy Brendan Smith: I thank Deputy O’Connor for raising this important issue, to which I will reply on behalf of the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney. One of the key challenges facing the Health Service Executive is the need to ensure that services are planned and provided in line with the clinical need of patients. A number of experimental initiatives were put in place by the HSE with a view to providing, where appro- priate, care in community-based settings instead of hospital settings. The hospital in the home service, with the introduction of primary care teams, community intervention teams, a rapid access service for the elderly and the GP out of hours service, is one of these initiatives. The hospital in the home service was delivered by the service provider in question on the basis of a service level agreement with the Health Service Executive and for a period of one year. This agreement came to an end on 16 March. However, it was subsequently extended to 18 April.There are approximately 400,000 presentations to accident and emergency depart- ments in Dublin annually. Some 100,000 of those who present are admitted. During the period of the agreement, the hospital in the home service treated in the region of 2,000 patients at an annual cost of \6.83 million. The hospitals benefiting from the service are Beaumont, Connolly, the Mater, St. James’s, St. Vincent’s and Tallaght hospitals. A review of the service was carried out between January and March of this year under an independent chairman. The review made a number of recommendations. The main recom- mendation in the report, which has been adopted by the HSE, is that the concept of hospital in the home be retained and that it should be repatriated within existing HSE post-acute care and community services. The HSE is considering the manner in which it can best mainstream the service, previously offered by the service provider, into the executive. There is capacity within the community intervention teams in the greater Dublin area to absorb this service. Accordingly, the HSE is not in a position at this time to commit to a further 12-month contract. However, it is considering a number of points put to it by the service provider. The HSE has emphasised that no patient will be disadvantaged by this decision. I assure Deputy O’Connor that the points he raised will be brought to the attention of senior management in the HSE tomorrow.
Summer Works Scheme. Deputy Tom Hayes: I thank the Ceann Comhairle for the opportunity to raise this important matter. The summer works scheme relates to minor projects involving gas, electrical and mech- anical works, roof replacement or repair, window replacement, toilet upgrades, structural improvements and access works. On her Department’s website, the Minister for Education and Science refers to the benefits of these projects to local areas and schools. Summer works projects are managed by the schools to which they relate and have had a major impact since the scheme was first introduced. I am aware of schools in my constituency that benefited from the scheme. It is amazing that I have been given the opportunity to raise this matter on the day when it emerged that students at a school in Glenville, County Cork, were obliged to attend classes in a converted toilet. There was major concern about this matter in the media today and the parents of the children involved outlined their plight on television news programmes this evening. Several schools in south Tipperary were hoping to carry out remedial works this year. I know that arguments have been put forward that the economy is not doing so well and that there is not as much money available. A review is taking place but if we are obliged to wait for the results of this it will be too late. I ask the Minister for Education and Science to consider reintroducing the scheme on an emergency basis. I am aware of no other scheme which was administered in such an easy fashion, without the need for checks and rechecks. 866 Dublin Bay 23 April 2008. Development Plan
I ask the Minister of State to bring the issues I have raised to the attention of the Minister for Education and Science. This is a great scheme and its reintroduction warrants consideration by the Minister. I hope the Minister of State is in a position to provide a positive reply.
Deputy Brendan Smith: I am taking this matter on behalf of the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Hanafin, who is unavoidably absent. I thank Deputy Tom Hayes for raising it because it provides me with the opportunity to outline the Government’s strategy for capital investment in education projects and the current position in respect of the 2008 summer works scheme. Modernising facilities in our 3,200 primary and 750 post-primary schools is not an easy task, particularly in light of the legacy of decades of underinvestment in this area and the need to respond to emerging needs in areas of rapid population growth. Nonetheless, the Government is determined to improve the condition of school buildings and to ensure that the appropriate facilities are in place to enable the implementation of a broad and balanced curriculum. The Government has dramatically increased investment in the school building programme from just over \90 million ten years ago to almost \600 million this year. During the lifetime of the National Development Plan 2007-2013, almost \4.5 billion will be invested in schools. This is an unprecedented level of capital investment, which reflects the commitment of the Government to continue its programme of sustained investment in primary and post-primary schools. The summer works scheme was introduced in 2004. Since its inception more than 3,000 projects costing in the region of \300 million have been completed. With so many small projects having been completed over the past few years, the concentration is on delivering as many large-scale projects as possible this year, as well as delivering improvements in the quality of existing primary and post-primary school accommodation throughout the country. To maximise the delivery of large-scale projects — thus ensuring that sufficient pupil places are available for next September’s intake of new pupils, particularly in rapidly developing areas — it was necessary to concentrate the maximum amount of funding available on these projects. On 1 February, the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Mary Hanafin, announced the first phase of large-scale projects that will commence construction during 2008 and 2009. The Minister’s announcement included details of the 18 large-scale building projects approved for construction and a further 30 primary school projects in rapidly developing areas. This is the first phase of projects that will commence construction during the course of this year and next year. It is the Minister’s intention to make a further announcement shortly to allow a further batch of schools to commence construction and to update progress on the delivery of new schools planned for September 2008 in developing areas. In this light, there is not therefore a summer works scheme as part of the Department’s building programme for this year. However, the Minister has announced that there will be a summer works scheme in 2009. I again thank the Deputy for affording me the opportunity to outline to the House the current position concerning the summer works scheme. I also thank him for his appreciation of the great work undertaken in recent years under that particular scheme. All Members of the House can agree on that point.
Dublin Bay Development Plan. Deputy Richard Bruton: Before the Minister of State, Deputy Brendan Smith, leaves the Chamber, I have to say that his explanation that the community care service in Dublin can absorb \6.83 million worth of special programmes for people who could be kept out of hospital, defies any understanding of what is happening in community care in the city. I know he has 867 Dublin Bay 23 April 2008. Development Plan
[Deputy Richard Bruton.] taken note of what Deputy O’Connor wisely said to him, but perhaps he can also take note of my point.
Deputy Brendan Smith: Yes.
Deputy Richard Bruton: I am glad of the opportunity to raise this serious issue. An Bord Pleana´la recently decided to designate the infill of 52 acres in Dublin Bay as a strategic infra- structure. This means that it can proceed to planning permission without going to Dublin City Council. It will go straight to the board for a decision, so it cuts out the entire democratic element of the decision process. This is disturbing for several reasons, one of which is that the Government decided that Dublin City Council should draft a development plan for what should happen in the bay. That role was given to the council under the Planning Act 2000 and it is in the middle of preparing that document. The document would balance all the different interests, including commercial, port, com- munity and amenity. It was going to be a vital document that would balance such interests, instead of which we have a wholly owned State company seeking to pre-empt a Government decision giving this authority to Dublin City Council. It is unacceptable and shows the lack of joined-up thinking within Government, which allows agencies to paddle their own canoe. It has happened at a time when it is pre-empting the Government’s own decision to have a review of the most appropriate location for future port capacity. The Government indicated that it will deliberate on this matter and make decisions. It recently indicated that it sees potential in Bremore Port and has sanctioned development there. It is wrong to move in this way before the Government has made its strategy clear, thus pre- empting important decisions. The Government indicated in the programme for Government that it will establish a task force for the protection of Dublin Bay to maximise its potential for the citizens of Dublin and that it will consider legislation if necessary to deliver that. However, we clearly now have a pre-emptive move by a wholly-owned State company to prevent the Government from doing what it has set out in the programme for Government. This under- mines a democratic process that was decided upon by the Government. It also undermines State policy on picking the most appropriate location. The Government should decide policy directions, rather than allowing individual agencies in pursuit of their own commercial interests, which is what is at stake here, to scuttle Government policy. Like many others, I am content to allow the process the Government has agreed upon to take its natural course. We will live with the outcome as best we can, regardless of whether people are happy with it. We need some joined-up thinking in Government whereby one can start to put teeth behind one’s own intention. My worry is that we will sleep-walk through this issue. A strategic planning application will go to the board, a decision will be made and the Government will be caught flat-footed because the task force for Dublin Bay still has not been established, the strategic plan for ports has not been decided and Dublin City Council’s development plan is totally frustrated. That is not joined-up thinking. The Minister of State should say what the Government’s strategy is so that we can obtain a proper balance and achieve a fair method of making this decision.
Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Tony Killeen): I thank Deputy Bruton for raising this important matter to which I am responding on behalf of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy John Gormley.
868 Dublin Bay 23 April 2008. Development Plan
At the outset, I wish to make it clear that under section 30 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, the Minister is precluded from exercising any power or control concerning any indi- vidual planning application or appeal with which a planning authority or An Bord Pleana´la is or may be concerned. As regards the particular project proposal referred to, the Department has made general inquiries with the board and understands that the Dublin Port Company was advised on 20 November 2007, following consultation with the board, of this project’s designation as strategic infrastructure. However, the board has not yet received any formal application from the Dublin Port Company. In the event that an application is received in respect of the project referred to, the Act requires the board to notify Dublin City Council, as the planning authority within whose area the proposed project would be situated, that an application for strategic infrastructure develop- ment has been received. The Act requires the manager of the relevant planning authority to prepare a report on the likely effects of the proposed development on the proper planning and sustainable development of the area. The views of the elected members of the planning authority must also be sought and attached to the manager’s report. In making a determination on such an application, the board is required to consider this report. Furthermore, as any proposed development may also have implications for the designated bird habitats in Dublin Bay, the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Govern- ment will have to be consulted on the natural heritage implications of the proposal, as set out in the environmental impact study. In the coming weeks, the Minister, Deputy Gormley, intends to publish revised and extended boundaries for the Dublin Bay special protection areas for birds. The national development plan includes a proposal to undertake a comprehensive study of the role of Dublin Port. This is being put in train by the Department of Transport, which has advertised for a consultancy firm to undertake the study this year. This is intended to address the role of Dublin Port and its future, taking account of, inter alia, all-island port capacity, wider transport and urban development policies, the national spatial strategy and national economic policy. It will examine the feasibility, costs and benefits of various scenarios concern- ing Dublin Port, including relocating all or part of Dublin Port’s existing activities to an alterna- tive location or locations; existing port activities continuing to expand with demand; and port activities continuing at current levels with growth being catered for at alternative locations. In accordance with the Government commitment, the study will take account of the findings of the research commissioned by Dublin City Council on the role of Dublin Bay and the Dublin port area. It will also be framed in the context of urban development policy and implementation of the national spatial strategy, which fall within the remit of the Department of the Envir- onment, Heritage and Local Government. The programme for Government has also committed to establishing a Dublin Bay area task force to protect the bay area and to maximise the potential of the bay for the city’s residents. The task force’s work encompasses a broad range of environmental, economic, social and heritage issues and will build on the work undertaken by Dublin City Council and relevant stakeholders in Dublin Bay. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Department of Transport have agreed that both the NDP Dublin Port study and the task force can progress simultaneously. It is intended that the Dublin Port study will be completed before the task force finalises its work. 869 The 23 April 2008. Adjournment
[Deputy Tony Killeen.]
The terms of reference, composition and operational arrangements of the Dublin Bay task force are being finalised and will reflect the Minister’s determination that key stakeholders and decision-makers will be represented to ensure that a comprehensive strategy for the bay is devised and implemented. Any relevant decisions of An Bord Pleana´la on Dublin Bay will be taken into account by the task force. As I have already outlined, it is clear that the future of Dublin Bay is being considered in a holistic and sustainable way, with key decision-makers and stakeholders working together towards a shared future vision for the bay.
The Da´il adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 24 April 2008.
870 Questions— 23 April 2008. 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 Nos. 1 to 64, inclusive, resubmitted.
Questions Nos. 65 to 73, inclusive, answered orally.
Internet Safety. 74. Deputy John Deasy asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if his Department has involvement in the new Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform initiatives on Internet safety; the plans these groups have to address the problem of explicit imagery being sent to children’s phones; his views on the compulsory registration of all pre-pay as well as bill phones and the compulsory inclusion of filtering software in all phones bought by children; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14753/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The Internet lends itself to being used for a wide range of activities, both legal and illegal, and the protection of children from the potential of accessing harmful content is an issue of great concern. In this regard, I welcome the establishment by my colleague, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, of the Office of Internet Safety and the proposed Internet Safety Advisory Council. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has overall responsibility for malevolent Internet activity and information on the remit of these new bodies can be obtained from that Department. Separate from those initiatives, my Department, in conjunction with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, and other private sector and not-for-profit organisations, recently conducted a public awareness campaign called “Make It Secure”, to promote the safe use of the internet. The campaign was designed to increase awareness among citizens of the most common security risks related to accessing and transacting on the Internet, such as identity theft, spyware, phishing and child safety, particularly with regard to the potential risks from social networking. The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform participated in the work of the campaign both directly and through the Internet Advisory Board. As Minister with responsibility for Communications, I will continue to support the mobile phone industry in their work on the safe and responsible use of mobile phones. The Irish Cellular Industry Association (ICIA) has taken many steps in this regard, including the pro- 871 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] motion of public awareness, exploring the benefits of content filtering software, the launch of a Parents Guide and a Code of Practice, which represents the minimum set of standards for operators. There is legislation in place to prosecute the issue of nuisance and criminal calls, and the sending of pornographic images by mobile phones. It is an offence under Section 13 of the Post Office (Amendment) Act, 1951 as amended, to send by phone any message or other matter, which is grossly offensive, or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character. It is an offence under Section 10 of the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act, 1997 to harass a person by use of a telephone. However, an important line of control rests with parents, and I would like to emphasise the role of parents in decisions concerning the purchase and use of mobile phones by their children. Their supervisory role is key to safeguarding them from the abuse of such technology. On the question of a register of mobile phones, my Department has previously reviewed this proposal. Having consulted with the Office of the Attorney General and other interested par- ties, it was concluded that the proposal would be of limited benefit, in that it would not solve the illegal and inappropriate use of pre-paid mobile phones. A particular consideration was the ease with which an unregistered foreign or stolen SIM card can be used and the difficulties that would be posed in verifying identity in the absence of a national identification card system.
Fisheries Protection. 75. Deputy Catherine Byrne asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he plans to increase the enforcement capacity of the fisheries boards to combat the growing problem of poaching; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15413/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Under the Fisheries Acts, primary responsibility for the management, conservation, protection and development of inland fisheries stocks rests with the Central and Regional Fisheries Boards. A considerable proportion of fisheries boards’ resources and personnel time is devoted to the protection of fish stocks. I am not aware of any recent increase in poaching and no such increase has been reported to me. Funding of \35 million has been allocated in my Department’s vote for 2008, for Inland Fisheries, including over \31 million for the operations and activities of the Fisheries Boards, including stock protection and enforcement efforts of the Boards. Fur- thermore, as in 2007, the Inland Fisheries allocation included additional funding this year, to cover enhanced protection and enforcement activities being undertaken by the Boards, while the new salmon management regime is introduced following cessation of the mixed stock fishery.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. 76. Deputy Tom Hayes asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if his Department is working with State agencies or companies to progress a pilot project on carbon storage as part of the power generation process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15445/08]
122. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the steps being taken to pursue the option of carbon capture and storage; the legis- lation required to advance this method of addressing CO2 emissions; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14676/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I pro- pose to take Questions Nos. 76 and 122 together. 872 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
The issue of carbon capture and storage (CCS) has emerged globally as a key dimension to the continued use of fossil fuels for electricity generation. Energy efficiency and renewables are, in the long term, the most sustainable solutions both for security of supply and climate change but EU and global emissions cannot be reduced to necessary levels without the use of other options such as carbon capture and storage. We are monitoring developments at EU level and globally in terms of research and development initiatives under way as well as specific projects in Norway, Germany, Algeria and elsewhere. Developments in the UK including work on regulatory frameworks are of particular interest from the Irish perspective. A number of different technologies are under investigation around the world, some of which involve dealing with carbon before or during the combustion process, and some which remove carbon dioxide after combustion and then sequester them in various places — in underground aquifers, at the bottom of deep oceans, in salt caverns and in disused oil and gas wells. The assessment of the prospects for geological storage of carbon in Ireland is at a relatively early stage. A study is underway by Sustainable Energy Ireland (SEI), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Geological Survey of Ireland (GSI) and the Geological Survey of Northern Ireland (GSNI). The study is examining the potential for carbon storage on the island of Ireland. In addition, the EPA has recently sought tenders for a geological assessment of the potential to store carbon dioxide in aquifers. The ESB is planning a pilot or demon- stration project at its Moneypoint coal fired power station, under its new Strategic Framework to 2020, which includes a commitment to halve its carbon emissions within 12 years and to become a zero carbon emissions company by 2030. The potential use of one or more of the depleting Marathon field structures is also under consideration. These structures, however, could also prove suitable for much-needed strategic natural gas storage. Given the complexity and range of issues and the number of stakeholders involved in pro- gressing the Carbon Capture and Storage agenda, I have asked my Department to establish a cross-cutting group which will oversee a fully joined up approach to CCS developments at home and at EU and international level. The group will comprise the Department, SEI, GSI, EPA, the ESB, the Commission for Energy Regulation (CER) and other players as necessary. The question of legislative underpinning for future carbon storage and capture projects will be kept under review in light of developments. The Commission’s recent proposal for a Directive on the storage of carbon will be of particular relevance in this regard. The Directive will be enabling rather than mandatory and will provide a framework to manage environmental risks and remove existing legislative barriers.
Telecommunications Services. 77. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources when the value for money review on the metropolitan area networks will be pub- lished; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14795/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Value for Money and Policy Reviews are carried out by Departments on Exchequer spending in the context of the Public Service Management Act 1997 and the Comptroller and Auditor General (Amendment) Act 1993. The objectives of a Value for Money and Policy Review are to analyse Exchequer spending in a systematic manner and to provide a basis on which informed decisions can be made. It is one of a range of modernisation initiatives aimed at moving public sector management away from the traditional focus on measuring inputs to a more holistic perspec- tive, examining the effectiveness with which interventions operate. A Value for Money and Policy Review of Phase I of the Metropolitan Area Networks Programme is currently being finalised in my Department. Additionally, a policy paper on Next Generation Broadband is 873 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] also being finalised. Both reports, which I intend to publish simultaneously in the coming weeks, will help to inform future decisions in this area.
Question No. 78 answered with Question No. 72.
Broadcasting Services. 79. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the steps he will take to ease the effects of the close down of analogue television in Wales on Counties Wexford, Waterford, Wicklow and Dublin; the time-scale of this impact; his views on the consequences of this signal shutdown; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14651/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The UK has a schedule to switch off analogue TV in different regions from 2008 to 2012 in favour of Digital Terrestrial Television (DTT). Analogue TV services in Wales, for instance, are expected to switch off in 2009. In the development of a switchover plan, the Commission for Communications Regulation (ComReg) is working closely with its UK counterpart to ensure the continued protection of analogue TV in Ireland. Notwithstanding, it should be noted that as the UK switch-off of analogue TV progresses, reception in some Irish homes will be affected because Irish terrestrial analogue TV viewers will no longer be able to receive overspill of UK channels. Viewers on cable and satellite will not be affected by these changes. In Ireland the development of DTT is well under way. The Broadcasting (Amendment) Act 2007, provides for RTE´ to develop a public broadcasting DTT service with space to carry RTE´ , TG4 and TV3. In addition, the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland is currently running a competition to provide commercial DTT services. In these circumstances it is expected that Irish digital terrestrial services, providing a significant range of television services, will be avail- able in the south east of the country in 2009. Digital terrestrial services will offer more to viewers in terms of digital quality pictures and sound, more services such as programme guide information and more channel content.
Alternative Energy Projects. 80. Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he is satisfied that the greener homes scheme will have sufficient funding in 2008; if he has plans to increase the funding available over the course of 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14652/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The Greener Homes Scheme has proved extremely popular since it was initially launched in March 2006. There have been over 24,000 applications received to date under the scheme. The scheme, which was designed to stimulate take-up of renewable technologies in the domestic sector, is succeeding well beyond the initial expectations. I am satisfied that the Greener Homes scheme has been allocated sufficient funding for 2008 to meet existing and projected commitments. My Department is liaising closely with Sustainable Energy Ireland in relation to monthly outturns and take-up trends and expenditure under the scheme is being closely monitored. I do not anticipate a need for increased funding for the scheme this year.
Fuel Prices. 81. Deputy Michael D. Higgins asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the steps he is taking, in view of the unprecedented increase in diesel prices here, 874 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers to curb these increases; his proposals to ease the burden on the consumer; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14666/08]
231. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he has had discussions with the regulator with a view to identifying the cause or causes for fluctuations between the prices of petrol and diesel; if he has sought an explanation as to the reason diesel is regularly more expensive than petrol having particular regard to the fact that diesel is more eco-friendly; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14946/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I pro- pose to take Questions Nos. 81 and 231 together. I have no function in relation to oil, diesel or petrol prices. The Irish oil industry is fully privatised, liberalised and deregulated. There is free entry into the market. Prices at the pump reflect global market price, transportation costs, Euro/Dollar fluctuations and other operating costs. The Competition Authority is a statutory independent body with a specific role in the enforcement of competition law. The National Consumer Agency has specific responsibilities for protecting the rights of consumers. Its function is to ensure that competition works opti- mally for the benefit of consumers throughout the country. The Commission for Energy Regu- lation (CER) is the independent body statutorily responsible for overseeing the liberalisation of Ireland’s electricity and gas sectors. The CER has no role in regard to the oil industry. There are no proposals to bring forward measures to give the CER a role in regard to the Irish oil industry, given the roles and responsibilities of the Competition Authority and the National Consumer Agency. Ireland’s high dependence on imported oil makes us price takers, sensitive to the volatility of the markets and reflecting the combination of world prices and the relative strength of the Euro against the Dollar. According to the March and April International Energy Agency (IEA) Oil Market Reports, middle distillates, including diesel oil, reached new peaks in Europe in recent months due to weather-related demand and tight supplies, which have been exacerbated by low refinery throughputs. In the same period, Europe has seen lower imports of distillates from the US and elsewhere as cargoes have been diverted to Latin America, South Africa and the Middle East. The IEA also notes that US refiners have been producing substantially more barrels of petrol than usual and domestic US stocks have been well above their 5 year range. High stocks and low US prices are likely to have curbed flows of exports of petrol from Europe to the US, leaving Northwest European petrol stocks high. The combination of these market factors has contributed to the rise in diesel prices relative to petrol. In an era of sustained high oil prices and concerns about supply, addressing our dependence on fossil fuel imports is a key imperative. The Government has committed to a range of actions in the Energy Policy Framework and the Programme for Government to break that depen- dency. In addition to accelerating the deployment of renewable energy in electricity, transport and heating, the implementation of wide ranging energy efficiency and demand management programmes are the major immediate priority. The roll out of the National Energy Efficiency Action Plan in the coming months will set out the Government’s measures and programmes in detail. I am working with my colleagues, the Minister for Transport and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, to deliver a sustainable energy future across all sectors, including the transport sector. Improved public transport, sustainable infrastructure, and radical energy efficiency and demand management strategies are key to achieving a sus- tainable energy future for Ireland’s citizens and the economy.
Broadcasting Services. 82. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and 875 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Thomas P. Broughan.] Natural Resources his views on providing a channel dedicated to the democratic discussions in Da´il E´ ireann and making it available on terrestrial television; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14655/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Section 28(2)(b) of the Broadcasting Act, 2001, mandates RTE´ to provide programmes of news and current affairs in the Irish and English languages, including programmes that provide coverage of proceedings in the Houses of the Oireachtas and the European Parliament. In addition section 45(4) of the Broadcasting Act 2001 mandates TG4 to provide programmes, primarily in the Irish language, of news and current affairs and to provide coverage of pro- ceedings in the Houses of the Oireachtas and the European Parliament. Both RTE´ and TG4 devote resources and efforts, within the constraints of their programming schedules, to cover- age and commentary of the proceedings of the Houses of the Oireachtas. Whilst I would compliment Irish broadcasters on the extent and quality of their coverage, I still favour the establishment of a new Oireachtas channel, which would provide for extended free-to-air television coverage of the proceedings of the Houses of the Oireachtas and of other democratic fora. The programme for Government contains a commitment in this regard. I firmly believe that the roll out of Digital Terrestrial Television in Ireland provides an ample opportunity for the development and establishment of such a channel. In that regard, and on foot of discussions with the Joint Administration Committee and officials of the Commission of the Houses of the Oireachtas, I propose to bring forward legislative proposals in the forth- coming Broadcasting Bill to facilitate the development of such a channel.
Fuel Poverty. 83. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the position regarding the proposed publication of the findings of the Fuel Poverty Action Research Project; the most recent figure of the number of people living in fuel poverty; if he has plans to increase the budget of the warmer homes scheme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14654/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The final report of the Fuel Poverty Action Research Project is scheduled for publication in mid 2008. There are currently no comprehensive up to date national statistics available on the number of people experiencing fuel poverty in Ireland. The EU Survey on Income and Living Conditions, which is carried out by the Central Statistics Office each year, measures the number of households that have gone without heating at least once, over the previous year, due to lack of money. The most recent figures available from this survey indicate that in 2006, some 5.7% of households in Ireland went without heat at some stage during the year, a slight reduction on 2005. I am keeping the overall level of funding available to the Warmer Homes Scheme under review and in light of the level of demand for funding under the scheme I am increasing the amount of funding available to the scheme this year from \2.5m to \4m.
Telecommunications Services. 84. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his preference for the functional or structural separation of Eircom; the advice he has received on this matter; if regulatory changes have been considered or agreed to facilitate such separation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14647/08]
876 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I have no specific role in relation to any form of restructuring of Eircom. Eircom is a private company and is entitled to implement the corporate structure that best meets its needs provided that appropriate engagement takes place with the Commission for Communications Regulation (ComReg), which is independent in the exercise of its functions, on any regulatory issues that might arise in a separated company. I understand ComReg has engaged consultants to assist in the review of Eircom’s proposals for structural separation and this work is already under way. However, as the roll out of high quality, competitive broadband infrastructure is a key priority for Government and as Eircom operates an extensive network in this regard, their investment and organisational plans are of major interest to me and I welcome all plans to upgrade our communications infrastructure. It might also be noted that there is some debate around whether customers would be best served by functional opening of the network or by a structural split between the retail and network divisions of the business. The key issue is the implementation of the operational model that provides the optimum competitive environment and promotes investment and innovation by all telecoms providers. The Government is due to produce a policy paper on Next Gener- ation Networks shortly which will set out the policy framework in this area and I look forward to Eircom’s input into the consultation process on this document in light of their investment plans in this area.
85. Deputy Eamon Gilmore asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his views on the recent publication of figures from the Central Statistics Office, Information Society and Telecommunications 2007, that found that 54% of households here had a broadband connection compared to an EU27 average of 77%; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14641/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The provision of broadband services is, in the first instance, a matter for the private sector. Broad- band service providers operate in a fully liberalised market, regulated, where appropriate, by the independent Commission for Communications Regulation, ComReg. The role of the Government is to formulate regulatory and infrastructure policies to facilitate the provision of high quality telecommunications services by competing private sector service providers. The Central Statistics Office Information Society and Telecommunications survey has found that in the first quarter of 2007, 57% of Irish households had access to the internet compared to the European Union average of 54%. Of Irish households with Internet access in the first quarter of 2007, 54% had a broadband connection. This represents a significant increase on the 2006 figures when 26% of such Irish households had a broadband connection. Although broadband is now widely available in Ireland there are still some parts of the country where the private sector will be unable to justify the commercial provision of broad- band services. These areas are being addressed by the National Broadband Scheme (NBS), which will provide broadband services to areas that are currently unserved, and will ensure that all reasonable requests for broadband are met. The first phase of the NBS procurement process (Pre-Qualification Questionnaire (PQQ)) is now complete, and four candidates pre- qualified to enter the next phase of the procurement process. Following the withdrawal of the IFA/Motorola Consortium as a candidate, the remaining three candidates have now com- menced “Competitive Dialogue” with my Department and are developing their proposed sol- utions to meet my Department’s requirements for the delivery of broadband to the unserved areas of the country. It is anticipated that a preferred bidder will be selected and appointed in July 2008, with roll out to commence as soon as possible thereafter. 877 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Ministerial Meetings. 86. Deputy Sea´n Sherlock asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the number of formal meetings he has had with the Department of Transport in 2008; the topics for discussion at these meetings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14644/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I have regular discussions on an ongoing basis with my colleague the Minister for Transport. In addition there is regular contact between officials of both Departments. Topics of discussion have included a range of issues across the transport, energy and climate change spectrum as well as the Sustainable Travel and Transport Action Plan.
Telecommunications Services. 87. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources further to the recent meeting of the International Advisory Forum on Broadband, the timeframe for publication of the report; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14646/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): My Department has prepared a Draft Policy Paper on Next Generation Broadband. The Paper reviews current communications infrastructure policy and analyses policy options in light of industry developments in relation to the optimum role for the Government in the planning and roll out of next generation broadband. In February of this year I convened a meeting of the expert International Advisory Forum to examine the Paper. The Forum critiqued draft options and recommendations on how to meet the challenges that lie ahead. The Forum members supported the broad thrust of the document and have provided valuable feedback. They offered some additional recommendations and advice on the future trends of the telecommunications and ICT industries and proposed that certain suggestions be explored further. The draft paper is currently being updated to take account of the Forum’s contribution. This will be finished soon and I will shortly publish the paper for public consultation.
Broadcasting Services. 88. Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the progress made to date in the establishment of a digital terrestrial television transmission system; when he expects DTT broadcasting to begin; the plans he has in place to deal with the extra expense that will have to be incurred by people to buy receiving equipment in order to continue to receive free-to-air channels after switch-off; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14801/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The Broadcasting (Amendment) Act, 2007 provides for the development of digital terrestrial tele- vision in Ireland. Under this Act, RTE´ is required to provide a digital terrestrial television system with capacity to carry RTE´ , TG4 and TV3. The legislation also requires the Broadcast- ing Commission of Ireland (BCI) to seek commercial applicants who are interested in providing commercial digital terrestrial television services. In this regard both RTE´ and the BCI are progressing and I expect that digital terrestrial television services should be available in Ireland from 2009. I am confident that Ireland can meet the target EU analogue switch-off date of 2012. In the meantime, TV services will be simulcast on both analogue and digital networks so that viewers may choose to switch or to remain on analogue during that period. I consider that the digital 878 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers terrestrial television services which will be made available in Ireland prior to that date will be attractive for the general public. Whilst there will be some cost in accessing digital television services for those who currently only have access to analogue, I do not anticipate that this will be excessive in the context of the services offered. I will, however, keep the matter under ongoing review, including, in conjunction with my colleague the Minister for Social and Family Affairs, in relation to those persons who are currently entitled to free television licences.
Postal Services. 89. Deputy Kieran O’Donnell asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the terms of reference of the analysis of the wider economic and societal benefits of a postcode system here that was undertaken after the presentation of the National Postcode Project Board’s recommendation to Government in 2007; if this analysis has a deadline; the shortcomings of the NPPB’s recommendations this analysis intends to address; when a postcode system will be implemented; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14797/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The National Postcode Project Board (NPPB) presented its recommendation as to the most appro- priate postcode system for Ireland, the costs and benefits arising from its introduction along with a detailed implementation, promotion and maintenance plan. A proposal concerning the introduction of postcodes went to Government in May 2007 and Government decided that prior to the introduction of postcodes, further analysis to quantify the wider economic and societal benefits should be carried out. The work of the NPPB focused on quantifying the costs and benefits of postcodes to the postal sector including postal operators and customers and did not explicitly address non-postal costs and benefits. My Department has recruited consultants to assist it in carrying out this analysis, in order to establish a more complete estimate of the costs and benefits of postcodes to the public sector. This work will be completed shortly. On receipt of the analysis it would be my intention to revert to Government.
Telecommunications Services. 90. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the degree to which high speed broadband is available throughout the entire country to all sectors; the degree to which he has had discussions with service providers and those seeking service with a view to bringing availability, standards and quality of service here into line with best international practice; if his attention has been drawn to the necessity to at least meet international levels; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14696/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): My Department has prepared a Draft Policy Paper on Next Generation Broadband. The Paper reviews current communications infrastructure policy and analyses policy options in light of industry developments in relation to the optimum role for the Government in the planning and roll out of next generation broadband. Part of the preparatory work on the paper involved consultation with service providers on their plans in this area. While recent reports confirm the continuing strong growth in broadband take-up — Ireland has the fastest broadband growth in the OECD — my officials’ consultations with service providers confirmed that the market is starting to focus on increased quality at competitive prices. Speeds of up to 15 Mbps are now being offered to homes and businesses and competition is intensifying. In addition to consulting with service providers, a group of national and international experts have critiqued the draft policy paper and the final draft will take account of this critique. When this is completed the paper will be published for public consultation inviting the views of both industry and user. I would expect that the paper will be published within weeks. 879 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
91. Deputy Seymour Crawford asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he has a strategy to combat the growing problem of spam or junk e-mailing; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15421/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Spam is a global problem and the capacity of an individual State to control it in isolation is very limited because spam can originate outside the State’s jurisdiction. The combating of spam requires an approach encompassing legislation, education and awareness raising and cooper- ation between regulatory authorities, both nationally and internationally. The ICT industry and communications operators also have a role to play in devising technical solutions to protect their customers’ privacy. As Minister with responsibility for Communications, my role is to provide national legislation underpinning EU legislation on spam and to provide for effective enforcement provisions. Primary responsibility for the enforcement of the legislation in relation to the control of spam rests with the Data Protection Commissioner. The Commissioner has powers under the European Communities (Electronic Communications Networks and Services (Data Protection and Privacy) Regulations 2003, to prosecute offences relating to unsolicited communications for the purpose of direct marketing. The sending of each unsolicited communication or making of each unsolicited call constitutes a separate summary offence which carries a maximum pen- alty of \3,000. The Data Protection Commissioner also investigates complaints in relation to the receipt of spam. The 2003 Regulations are currently being updated on foot of the Communi- cations Regulation (Amendment) Act 2007, and I intend to provide for fines on summary conviction of \5,000 and to provide for an indictable offence carrying a penalty of up to \250,000 or 10% of turnover, whichever is the greater. This will bring the penalties in line with the highest in the EU and should provide an effective deterrent. Under the 2003 Regulations the Commission for Communications Regulation (ComReg) also has a role in monitoring compliance with the Regulations in cooperation with the Data Protection Commissioner. ComReg is also empowered to issue directions from time to time for the effective implementation of the Regulations. The EU Commission has included pro- visions to reinforce legal action against spammers in its proposed reform of the legislative framework for electronic communications. This proposal is currently being considered by Member States in the Council Working Group on electronic communications. My Department has participated in an OECD Taskforce on spam control, which published recommendations in April 2006 on best practice. These covered legislation, enforcement, international cooperation, education and awareness, and the development of technical solutions. My Department, in con- junction with the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, private sector and not-for- profit organisations and the Northern Ireland authorities, recently conducted a public aware- ness campaign on the fundamentals of secure Internet access and some of the most common threats.
Electricity Generation. 92. Deputy Pat Rabbitte asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his views on concerns from ESB unions regarding the roll-out of smart meters; if the roll-out will be funded by the ESB as originally planned; the position in relation to the roll- out of smart meters; when the roll-out will be completed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14649/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The roll out of a national smart meter programme, in line with the commitment in the Government’s Energy Policy Framework and in the Programme for Government, is a central component of 880 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers our strategy to significantly enhance management of demand for electricity and to achieve greater energy efficiency through the use of cutting-edge technology. The delivery of smart metering requires a collective response. That is why I have made it a priority for my Depart- ment to work intensively as part of the Steering Group overseeing the smart meter programme. The group is chaired by the Commission for Energy Regulation and consists of Sustainable Energy Ireland, ESB Networks, ESB Customer Supply and independent suppliers as well as my Department. There are also four working groups which are mandated to progress the complex technical aspects of smart metering including Tariffs, Billing/Data Services, Networks and Customer Behaviour. Under the ESB’s new Strategic Framework to 2020, the national smart meter programme will be financed under the ESB Networks Multi Annual Investment Programme. With instal- lation of meters set to begin this summer, the objective is to complete the national roll out in 5 years. The recognised potential of smart metering in terms of increased energy efficiency, reduced costs, reduced harmful emissions, facilitation of micro and distributed generation and improved customer service, will deliver tangible benefits to all consumers of electricity. In regard to the concerns potentially raised by the ESB unions, the management of industrial relations within ESB is, in the first instance, a matter for the board and management of the company. I am aware of comments earlier this year by a representative of one of the constituent Unions of the ESB Group of Unions in relation to the roll out of smart meters. I am not aware, however, of any explicit concerns raised by the ESB Group of Unions in relation to the Smart Metering Programme.
Energy Resources. 93. Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if his attention has been drawn to the scale of interconnection projects being advanced by other European countries, particularly the 580 kilometre 700MW interconnector being built between Norway and the Netherlands at a cost of \500 million; if his attention has further been drawn to the fact that the time from decision to operation on this project will be slightly over three years; the reason that interconnection with Britain and north-west Europe is proceeding so incredibly slowly by comparison; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14802/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): There are a significant number of interconnector projects planned and underway in Europe. Greater interconnection between Member States is a key urgent priority for the European Union to ensure the effective working of the internal market and security of supply. It is also critical for the integration of renewable energy into the grid. The EU Commission has identified in its Priority Interconnection Plan some 40 high-priority projects of European Interest, which includes Ireland’s East/West interconnector. Enhanced interconnection right across Europe is critically important for Ireland as a peripheral regional energy market. The East/West Intercon- nector and potential interconnection with Europe in future is of national strategic importance. The reality is that a significant number of European interconnection projects have experi- enced delays for various reasons. The complexity of planning and other approval procedures is the major reason for most delays. Relevant factors include opposition from local communities, complexity in identifying cross-border points, difficult terrain and the need for major grid reinforcements. In that context I am advised that the Norway–Netherlands interconnector pro- ject has been considerably longer than three years in the making. The need to accelerate the delivery of interconnection projects is underlined in the European Priority Interconnection Plan. The Commission is reviewing the existing guidelines for Trans-European Energy Net- 881 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] works with a view to requiring Member States to have planning and approval procedures completed in a maximum timeframe of five years. The Commission for Energy Regulation (CER) and EirGrid are working intensively to expedite delivery of the East/West Interconnector. The CER and EirGrid have planned the project to ensure that it is delivered in line with the 2012 target for completion. Where oppor- tunities exist to undertake work in parallel, these are being taken. For example, the selection of the developer to construct the interconnector is being carried out in parallel with advancing the various planning processes, under the Strategic Infrastructure Act and the Foreshore Acts. Since the Government Decision to proceed with the interconnector in July 2006, a number of milestones have already been achieved. EirGrid has secured connection points for the intercon- nector on both the Irish and UK transmission systems, at Woodland in County Meath and Deeside in Wales. Detailed preparations are ongoing in relation to formal applications for planning and other consents. EirGrid is also finalising a seabed survey to determine the most suitable route for the undersea cable. The CER and EirGrid will continue to work to deliver the project to schedule by 2012. EirGrid is targeting the end of 2008 to announce the successful bidder for the design and construction of the interconnector. 2011 is targeted for the completion of works with 2012 targeted for the start of commercial operations. The recently published Bill provides for the expansion of the functions of EirGrid to include the construction, ownership and operation of an interconnector, subject to the granting of relevant licences and authorisations by the CER. A high-level coordination group has been established to oversee the project and ensure com- pletion to schedule. The Group is chaired by CER and comprises representatives of EirGrid and my Department.
EU Directives. 94. Deputy Kieran O’Donnell asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the results of the examination by his officials of the third postal directive which was published in the Official Journal of the European Union in February 2008; when the public consultation process to examine the key issues arising from the directive will be held; if he has decided whether he will consolidate postal legislation here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14796/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): My Department has reviewed the Directive with a view to establishing the key issues arising from it for Ireland and I intend to shortly hold a public consultation process examining these issues. The results of this process will assist my thinking with respect to the transposition of the directive into Irish law, including any possible consolidation of existing postal legislation.
Alternative Energy Projects. 95. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the progress that has been made in the development and introduction of a biofuels obligation scheme by 2009 as included in the Agreed Programme for Government; if his biofuel targets will be met; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15468/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): My Department is currently finalising a consultation paper in relation to the proposed biofuels obligation. The consultation process will be rolled out shortly and this will allow all interested stakeholders to submit their views on the proposal. Specific details of the obligation will be developed as part of the consultation process. Ireland’s national biofuels obligation will take 882 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers full account of EU developments in relation to biofuels policy and in particular the imperative to ensure sustainability. The proposed biofuels obligation scheme has the objective of enabling Ireland to move progressively towards meeting EU targets for biofuels penetration in a cost- effective way while taking full account of environmental sustainability in line with EU developments.
Electricity Generation. 96. Deputy Pat Rabbitte asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the position in relation to and his views on the 8000 MW of wind applications to the grid at the present time; the position regarding these applications; if the onshore providers awaiting access to the grid will be given less favourable status than offshore wind applicants; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14648/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The processing of applications for connections to the electricity network is a matter for ESB Net- works or EirGrid in the first instance. The processing of Gate Three applications and adjudicat- ing on disputes in relation to connection requests and decisions are matters for the Commission for Energy Regulation. I have no statutory function in the matter. Projects which have secured a connections offer and planning permission can apply to my Department’s Renewable Energy Feed-in Tariff (REFIT) programme. The programme offers guaranteed prices to projects across a variety of renewable energy technologies. The provision of a higher price in any category over another is indicative of the higher average production costs in that category. A number of technologies have been added to REFIT in recent months. The different prices under the various REFIT categories do not indicate any preference or priority for any technology over another. The programme does not set out to pick winners in that sense but does aim to reflect the differing investment costs for level of payments required to ensure the completion of projects in the higher cost technologies. My recent announcement of a higher price for offshore wind projects reflects both the higher investment costs and operating costs in that category.
Postal Services. 97. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his views on the VAT advantage enjoyed by An Post in comparison with its competi- tors; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14799/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Para- graph (xia) of the First Schedule to the Value-Added Tax Act 1972, as amended, provides for an exemption from VAT for public postal services (including the supply of goods and services incidental thereto) supplied by An Post, including postmasters. Essentially, the exemption covers services provided within the “universal service” in the EU Postal Services Directive. Any specialised postal services, such as courier services provided by An Post or any other entity are liable to VAT. The VAT Directive of 2006 provides that Member States shall continue to exempt public postal services from VAT. In addition to a VAT exemption, the providers of public postal services, such as An Post, are required to fulfil universal service obligations. These obligations are not imposed on private operators.
98. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his views on the report from ComReg that shows the quality of service for 2007 for An Post on next day delivery was 77% and that the target is for 94%; the steps he will take to 883 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Joan Burton.] ensure standards in the post industry are maintained; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14673/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I have no statutory function in relation to this matter. Matters relating to quality and levels of postal service are a matter, in the first instance, for the management and board of An Post. The Commission for Communications Regulation, ComReg, is responsible under the European Communities (Postal Services) Regulations 2002 for monitoring quality of service standards in relation to the postal service. I will shortly amend the postal regulations using powers conferred on me by the Communications Regulation (Amendment) Act 2007. Once amended, these regu- lations will permit ComReg to apply to the High Court for the application of a financial penalty to An Post, as universal service provider, in the event that the company fails to comply with a direction issued by the regulator including in relation to quality of service targets. In my own meetings with the management of the company I have however taken the opportunity to stress the Government’s support for the quality of services targets that the company is seeking to achieve and encourage the company in adopting innovative changes in their operations to help meet them.
Energy Efficiency. 99. Deputy Emmet Stagg asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he will provide a full report on all available insulation grants for householders; the funding being provided for same in 2008; the measures he is taking to provide householders with full information on all available assistance to access low carbon home heating systems and home insulation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14643/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I have provided some \4 million to Sustainable Energy Ireland (SEI) in 2008 to fund the Warmer Homes Scheme, which is an increase over the \2.5m available to this scheme in 2007. This scheme provides insulation and other energy efficiency solutions to low income homes across Ireland. The service is coordinated by SEI and is delivered principally through community based organisations. The scheme is targeted at householders who are in receipt of the Fuel Allowance, Disability Benefit or Invalidity Benefit and is provided either free of charge or for a nominal fee (less than \100). Households are identified by community based installers work- ing closely in association with other intermediaries including the St. Vincent de Paul Society, Health Services and GP networks. In relation to promoting low carbon home heating systems, I have provided some \26 million to SEI in 2008 for the Greener Homes Scheme. The scheme provides grants to homeowners investing in renewable energy heating technologies, including solar panels, biomass boilers and stoves and heat pumps. I will shortly be launching the \5 million pilot Home Energy Saving Scheme. The pilot scheme will be delivered by SEI and through selected Local Energy Agen- cies. It will inform decisions in relation to the development and roll out of a national Home Energy Saving Scheme for householders in line with the Programme for Government commit- ment. My colleague, John Gormley T.D., Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, introduced a new Housing Aid for Older People Scheme on 1 November 2007. The scheme provides targeted support to improve housing conditions of older people. The scheme may assist with works that can improve the energy efficiency of homes, such as insu- lation, provision of central heating and repair or replacement of windows and doors. Appli- cation is through the local authorities. 884 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
My Department’s Power of One energy efficiency awareness campaign makes available infor- mation and advice to householders on home insulation, with links from its website to SEI’s guide to Home Insulation. SEI also provides information on its website on the main manufac- turers and suppliers of energy efficiency products for the home building and home improve- ment markets in Ireland.
Telecommunications Services. 100. Deputy Emmet Stagg asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the steps he is taking to mitigate the growth of the digital divide; the method to ensure equality of access to information technology and Internet; and if he will make a state- ment on the matter. [14642/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The provision of broadband services is, in the first instance, a matter for the private sector. Broad- band service providers operate in a fully liberalised market, regulated, where appropriate, by the independent Commission for Communications Regulation, ComReg. The role of the Government is to formulate regulatory and infrastructure policies to facilitate the provision of high quality telecommunications services by competing private sector service providers. The widespread provision of broadband services continues to be a priority for the Government. In that regard my Department has undertaken initiatives to address the gaps in broadband cover- age. These include providing grant-aid under the Group Broadband Scheme (GBS) and invest- ment in Metropolitan Area Networks (MANs). Although broadband is now widely available in Ireland there are still some parts of the country where the private sector will be unable to justify the commercial provision of broad- band services. These areas are being addressed by the National Broadband Scheme (NBS), which will provide broadband services to areas that are currently unserved and will ensure that all reasonable requests for broadband are met. The first phase of the NBS procurement process (Pre-Qualification Questionnaire (PQQ)) is now complete, and four candidates pre-qualified to enter the next phase of the procurement process. Following the withdrawal of the IFA/Motorola Consortium as a candidate, the remaining three candidates have now com- menced “Competitive Dialogue” with my Department and are developing their proposed sol- utions to meet my Department’s requirements for the delivery of broadband to the unserved areas of the country. It is anticipated that a preferred bidder will be selected and appointed in July 2008, with roll out to commence as soon as possible thereafter. I should also mention that \0.97 million will be distributed by Pobal this year to support ICT initiatives aimed at disadvantaged communities. Finally, I understand that almost 1,500 public access Internet PCs are currently available in public libraries throughout the country.
Broadcasting Services. 101. Deputy Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his proposals for banning junk food advertising aimed at young people; his time- frame for this proposal; if this will be addressed by the Broadcasting Bill; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14658/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Section 19(1)(c) of the Broadcasting Act, 2001, provides that the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland (BCI) shall, upon being directed by the Minister to do so, prepare a code specifying standards to be complied with, and rules and practices to be observed, in respect of advertising, tele-shopping material, sponsorship and other forms of commercial promotion employed in any 885 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] broadcasting service or sound broadcasting service which relate to matters likely to be of direct or indirect interest to children. The BCI is an independent statutory organisation responsible, inter alia, for the development of codes. Under the newly adopted Audiovisual Media Services Directive, EU Member States and the European Commission are required to encourage media service providers to develop codes of conduct regarding inappropriate audiovisual commercial communication, accompanying or included in children’s programmes, of foods and beverages containing nutrients and substances with a nutritional or physiological effect. This relates in particular to those such as fat, trans- fatty acids, salt/sodium and sugars, excessive intakes of which in the overall diet are not recom- mended. While Member States have until December 2009 to transpose this requirement I propose to use the opportunity afforded by the forthcoming Broadcasting Bill 2008 to bring forward proposals in this regard.
Electricity Generation. 102. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the most up to date position in regard to the reconfiguration of the ESB and the separation of generation, transmission and distribution, including the transfer of assets; the degree to which discussions have taken place with management and unions in this regard to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14695/08]
119. Deputy Dan Neville asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the process, including deadlines and timescales, that will surround the transfer of grid assets from the ESB to Eirgrid; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14793/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I pro- pose to take Questions Nos. 102 and 119 together. I would refer the Deputy to my Statement of 13th March on the future of Ireland’s electricity sector. In that Statement I affirmed the Government’s policy commitment in the Energy Policy White Paper and the Programme for Government to transfer the ownership of the electricity transmission assets from ESB to EirGrid. It is also fundamental Government policy that we retain the electricity and gas networks as strategic national assets in state ownership which will never be privatised. The unbundling of the transmission assets involves the resolution of com- plex technical, financial and operational issues as well as legislation. In the context, not least, of wide-ranging challenging priorities for ESB and EirGrid, I have proposed that an indepen- dent analysis of the transmission issues, including costs, benefits and regulatory impact assess- ment, be conducted in the context of EU developments and the all island single electricity market. Statements by my predecessor and I, on this issue, have consistently underlined the need for transparent and inclusive engagement with all relevant stakeholders in the process of imple- menting Government policy in relation to transmission. Input to the process of independent analysis will accordingly be invited from the direct key stakeholders. These are the management and unions of ESB and EirGrid, the ESB Employee Share Ownership Trust, as well as the Commission for Energy Regulation and the Department of Finance. As I also announced in my statement, I intend to appoint a senior independent figure to chair this process. This will include the commissioning of independent consultants to carry out the technical and econ- omic analysis. All the direct stakeholders have pivotal roles to play in the process of engagement and analysis and in achieving outcomes that are good for EirGrid and ESB and which are satisfac- 886 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers tory for all parties concerned and in the best interests of the economy and consumers. I look forward to getting this collective process under way following my appointment of the senior independent chair shortly. Government policy is clear in relation to ensuring the strategic future of both EirGrid and ESB as strong viable Semi State bodies with key roles to play in delivering national goals for emissions reduction, renewables and energy efficiency as well as security of supply and competitiveness. I welcome ESB’s announcement of its new Strategic Framework to 2020, which will see an unprecedented capital investment programme by the company at home and abroad in support of our goals for renewable energy, energy efficiency, emissions reduction and energy security. I look forward equally to EirGrid’s forthcoming Transmission Development Strategy 2025. This will set out an ambitious national plan for investment in the transmission system over the next two decades in support of economic, social and regional development and the integration of renewable energy generation.
Telecommunications Services. 103. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the steps which he is taking to ensure the availability of quality broadband through- out the country; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15330/08]
110. Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the percentage of the country which has access to broadband; when he expects there will be 100% coverage; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15467/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I pro- pose to take Questions Nos. 103 and 110 together. The role of the Government is to formulate regulatory and infrastructure policies to facilitate the provision of high quality telecommunications services, by competing private sector service providers. The widespread provision of broadband services continues to be a priority for the Government. In that regard my Department has undertaken initiatives to address the gaps in broadband coverage. These included providing grant-aid under the Group Broadband Scheme and ongoing investment in Metropolitan Area Networks (MANs). There are still some parts of the country where the private sector will be unable to justify the commercial provision of broadband services. Accordingly, the procurement process for a National Broadband Scheme (NBS) is under way. The NBS will provide broadband services to areas that are currently unserved and will ensure that all reasonable requests for broadband are met. Homes and prem- ises that are more difficult to reach are also being examined and potential solutions are being considered. Consequently, it is expected that all homes and premises in currently unserved areas will be offered a broadband service. The first phase of the procurement process (Pre-Qualification Questionnaire (PQQ)) is now complete, and four candidates pre-qualified to enter the next phase of the procurement process. The four candidates were, in alphabetical order, BT Communications Ireland Ltd Consortium, eircom Ltd, Hutchinson 3G Ireland Ltd and IFA/Motorola Consortium. Following the with- drawal of the IFA/Motorola Consortium as a candidate the remaining three candidates partici- pated in “Competitive Dialogue” with my Department and are developing their proposed sol- utions to meet my Department’s requirements for the delivery of broadband to the unserved areas of the country. It is anticipated that a preferred bidder will be selected and appointed in July 2008, with roll out to commence as soon as possible thereafter.
887 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
104. Deputy Ciara´n Lynch asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the discussions he has had with the Department of Social and Family Affairs to ensure that older people will be entitled to avail of free broadband as per the programme for Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14660/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I have not had any discussions with the Department of Social and Family Affairs regarding this matter. I understand however, that under that Department’s Telephone Allowance Scheme, where people access the Internet using a landline, the telephone allowance applies to their bill usage and will cover the cost of calls or Internet usage up to the level of their allowance. I also understand that the Department Social and Family Affairs is currently examining how best to address cases where a landline does not exist and customers are not availing of their allowance in respect of a mobile phone.
Natural Gas Grid. 105. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he will comment on reports that Bord Ga´is is positioning itself for a possible privatisation in three to five years; his views on this matter; the implications for the energy sector here; if he is in talks with Bord Ga´is on same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14661/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The Government has no plans for the privatisation of Bord Ga´is E´ ireann and there have been no discussions with Bord Ga´is E´ ireann on the matter. The Government, in the Energy Policy Framework 2007–2020, recognises the fundamental role played by the Semi-State Energy bodies, including Bord Ga´is E´ ireann, in the economic and social development of Ireland and underlines the strategic value of maintaining these bodies as strong, commercially viable State owned companies into the future. The Energy Policy Framework and the Programme for Government state clearly that the electricity and gas network infrastructures will be kept as strategic national assets in State ownership and that these assets will not be privatised.
Nuclear Plants. 106. Deputy Liz McManus asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if, in view of his calls for a debate on nuclear power, he has plans to propose a change in legislation that would legalise the development of nuclear power stations; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14664/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The use of nuclear fission for the generation of electricity in Ireland is statutorily prohibited under Section 18 subsection 6 of the Electricity Regulation Act 1999. It is also relevant in this context that Section 3 of the Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Act 2006 amends the Planning and Development Act 2000 to state that “Nothing in this Act shall be construed as enabling the authorisation of development consisting of an installation for the generation of electricity by nuclear fission”. My position is clear and consistent on the question of a debate on nuclear power. I welcome and encourage debate on the issue and I have previously sug- gested the Oireachtas Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security as an appropriate forum for such a debate. I would, however, stress that the Energy Policy Framework and the Programme for Govern- ment make it clear that the Government fully intends to maintain the statutory prohibition on nuclear generation in Ireland. Ireland’s position on nuclear generation is shared by several EU 888 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Member States. The EU Reform Treaty reaffirms the fundamental right of Member States to determine their own choice between different energy resources and the general structure of their energy supply. Any debate on nuclear power should be set in the context of the actions, which the Government is taking to deliver fully sustainable and diverse energy resources in transport, heating and power generation. In each of the three areas of energy use I firmly believe that we have sustainable solutions. In my view the priority should be to accelerate delivery on our targets for renewable energies and energy efficiency. However, I would wel- come a debate where those with a different view can advance their case for a different approach.
Regulatory Bodies. 107. Deputy Kathleen Lynch asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he has plans to enhance ComReg’s enforcement powers; his views on whether the powers given to Ofcom in the UK in this regard, particularly in terms of the levels of the fines it can impose, could be used as a model; if he is satisfied that the regulator is empowered to regulate the broadband sector effectively at present; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14656/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The provision of electronic communications services, including broadband is primarily a matter for private sector operators. Statutory responsibility for the regulation of electronic communi- cations service providers rests with the Commission for Communications Regulation (ComReg). In relation to ComReg’s enforcement powers, the Deputy may be aware that these were substantially enhanced by the Communications Regulation (Amendment) Act 2007 including:
• the creation of new summary, indictable and continuing offences for breaches by oper- ators of obligations imposed by ComReg;
• the conferral on ComReg of competition law powers to allow it to investigate and pros- ecute anti-competitive behaviour or abuse of dominance in the electronic communi- cations sector; and
• the provision of increased information gathering powers and power to investigate over- charging.
As part of the preparatory work on the 2007 Act, international regulatory models were looked at. The final shape of the legislation reflects international best practice while also having regard to the constitutional position here. I am satisfied that the current suite of powers available to ComReg enables it to effectively regulate all the sectors for which it has responsibility, including the broadband sector. I have no further plans to change ComReg’s enforcement powers.
Energy Resources. 108. Deputy Ruairı´ Quinn asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the position regarding the publication date of the joint study on natural gas storage and liquefied natural gas on an all-island basis; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14653/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): My Department and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment for Northern Ireland jointly commissioned a study in 2007 to assess the medium to long-term position with regard 889 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] to security of natural gas supply on an all-island basis and the scope for an all-island approach to natural gas storage and Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG). The Executive Summary of the Report was published in recent days on my Department’s website and on the website of Depart- ment of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, Northern Ireland. It is not proposed to publish the Report in its entirety for reasons of confidentiality and commercial sensitivity. The report assesses the security of national gas supplies for the island of Ireland in the context of our reliance on gas imports via undersea pipelines from the UK. The report examines possible supply/demand scenarios for natural gas between now and 2020 and recommends ways in which gas security of supply could be addressed. My Department and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, Northern Ireland, together with the two Regulatory Auth- orities North and South are assessing the report’s findings, which range from short and medium to longer term options, with a view to advising myself and my Northern colleague, Minister Nigel Dodds, on the costs, benefits, feasibility and advisability of the various recommendations, some of which are already in train.
Electricity Generation. 109. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the steps which he is taking to ensure the availability of quality electricity supply throughout the country; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15331/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The Government is committed to ensuring that electricity supply consistently meets the needs of Irish consumers and business. My Department liaises closely with the Commission for Energy Regulation (CER), which has primary independent statutory functions with regard to monitor- ing and ensuring security of electricity supply, and with EirGrid as the independent Trans- mission System Operator. Reporting to the CER, EirGrid has responsibility for managing gen- eration adequacy and monitoring generation capacity. In December 2007 EirGrid produced a Generation Adequacy Report (GAR) covering the period 2008 -2014. The GAR is produced annually by EirGrid and sets out the estimates for demand of electricity for the next seven years. This report provides a rigorous analysis of Ireland’s electricity generation capacity to meet expected demand. Our generating capacity must ensure an adequate margin between electricity supply and demand. Medium term capacity will be enhanced with the two 400 megawatts power generation plants currently under construction at Aghada and Whitegate for delivery in 2009/10 as well as the new electricity interconnectors scheduled for 2011 (North/South) and 2012 (East/West). The additional interconnector capacity will significantly enhance Ireland’s security of supply. The provision of new flexible power generation plant and achieving our targets for wind and other renewable energy is equally critical. It is expected that connected wind capacity which is currently installed at a capacity of 804 megawatts will reach 2792 megawatts by end of 2014. As with any power generation system, it is not possible to give definitive guarantees that generation adequacy will always be maintained. By their nature, high level forced outages on the system cannot be predicted. Plant outage, whether planned or unforeseen, must at all times be critically managed to maintain security of supply. EirGrid operates a range of demand control measures to assist in managing demand at peak times. These include reducing demand by agreement with large users in the interests of ensuring domestic customer supply is main- tained. Key imperatives for electricity supply and demand are energy efficiency and a diverse fuel mix. Radically improving energy efficiency and achieving the ambitious renewable energy 890 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers target set by the Government will significantly enhance security of supply and ensure that demand itself is managed in a fully sustainable way.
Question No. 110 answered with Question No. 103.
Telecommunications Services. 111. Deputy Michael D. Higgins asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources when he expects to receive the draft policy paper on next generation broadband networks; if he will implement the value for money and policy review of phase one of the MANs programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14637/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I refer the Deputy to my reply to Parliamentary Question No. 268 of 3 April 2008.
Energy Resources. 112. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the deadlines that have not been met in relation to the energy White Paper; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14650/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The Programme for Government underlines the imperative to secure long term energy security and sustainability and a low carbon future for Ireland, responding to the urgent and massive chal- lenge of climate change. The comprehensive policy actions set out in the Energy Policy White Paper, reinforced and augmented by the Programme for Government, will result in a transfor- med landscape for the Irish energy sector. My priority is to oversee and drive sustained imple- mentation of all our commitments in partnership with my Government colleagues and with all stakeholders. The Energy White Paper sets out over 200 policy actions, measures, goals and targets that are designed to deliver on security of supply, sustainability and competitiveness over the period to 2020. By delivering consistently on all actions we are making fundamental changes to the way we provide and use energy, in order to ensure a sustainable energy future. These ambitious policy actions and measures have different timelines and challenges. Work is ongoing in relation to all the actions with delivery across a range of key immediate challenges for 2007, 2008 and beyond. I am satisfied that sustained and tangible progress is being proactively made across the measures in the Energy Policy Framework and the Programme for Government.
Electricity Generation. 113. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the position regarding the grid development strategy; the time frame for publication; the benefits of this strategy; the budget allocated; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14677/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The availability of reliable, secure and competitively priced electricity supply is critical to Ireland’s economic social and regional development and the competitiveness of Irish industry. The chal- lenge is underlined by the continued growth in electricity demand in our economy, the need to accelerate the growth of renewable energy sources and the imperative to reduce green house gas emissions. The Government’s Energy Policy Framework and the Programme for Govern- ment commits to a range of actions to deliver a secure and sustainable energy supply. The finalisation and implementation of a Grid Development Strategy to 2025 by EirGrid will be 891 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] pivotal in terms of planning and delivering vitally necessary transmission infrastructure at regional and national level to 2025 and beyond. The Grid Development Strategy is being finalised by EirGrid, in consultation with stake- holders. EirGrid is the wholly State-owned independent body with responsibility for the elec- tricity transmission system in Ireland, including the wholesale electricity trading system. EirGrid delivers connections, transmission and market services to generators, suppliers and customers. EirGrid is also responsible for planning and delivering the investment and construc- tion of the transmission networks system and the delivery of the East West Interconnector. The Grid Development Strategy will provide a comprehensive plan for the development of the electricity transmission grid system over the next two decades. Enhancement of the electricity grid will support the increased integration of renewable electricity, and support balanced regional development by meeting the needs of business and domestic consumers across Ireland. The Strategy will identify transmission network development options to cater for forecast demand, renewable electricity targets, future conventional generators and planned intercon- nection. It will build on the existing \770 million capital investment programme in the trans- mission networks under the National Development Plan. All investments in electricity trans- mission and distribution networks are funded through use-of-system charges approved by the Commission for Energy Regulation. The additional investment needs required for the imple- mentation of the Grid Development Strategy will be the subject of discussion and agreement between EirGrid and the Commission for Energy Regulation.
Telecommunications Services. 114. Deputy Brian O’Shea asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his views on the EU Telecoms Commissioner’s views that retail prices in broadband must come down; if he will comment on her view that there would be no objection at EU level if the Government decided to buy or invest in Eircom’s network arm; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14674/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I wel- come Commissioner Reding’s recent praise for Ireland’s progress in increasing take-up of broadband. In addition I acknowledge her comments on the cost of retail broadband pricing. However, we have already seen a steady fall in the price of retail broadband in Ireland which can be attributed to an increase in competition. In 2002 the cost of eircom’s standard DSL product was \107.70 per month. It has decreased on various occasions over the last number of years. In Q4 2007 the cost of the standard eircom DSL package was \24.99. I would anticipate that, as more providers with varying offers via different technologies have entered the market, the prices will fall further. The introduction of pay-as-you-go mobile broadband will further extend the choice available to consumers.
Alternative Energy Projects. 115. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the grants available for individual wind turbines at a private house or for residential development; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14639/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): There are currently no grants available to support the installation of individual domestic wind tur- bines. At my request Sustainable Energy Ireland is putting in place a microgeneration prog- ramme which will underpin and inform development of appropriate cost effective measures to support the deployment of small renewable generators. 892 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Electricity Transmission. 116. Deputy Sea´n Sherlock asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the position regarding the study on the comparative merits of overhead electricity transmission lines versus underground cables; when it will be published; if such a study will be carried out in every instance in the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14645/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Inter- national consultants Ecofys have been appointed to undertake the independent study on the comparative merits of overhead electricity transmission lines versus underground cables. The consultants were appointed on 8th April 2008 following a tender process launched on 29 February on the Government’s eTenders website. Ecofys, which is based in the Netherlands, with offices in twelve different countries worldwide, specialises in energy saving and renewable energy solutions. Ecofys will also utilise the services of Golder Associates, a global group of consulting companies specialising in ground engineering and environmental services. Golder has provided environmental consultancy services for a range of electricity generation and trans- mission related projects both in Ireland and the UK. The independent study is being undertaken by Ecofys at a national, not a project-specific level and will offer professional advice on best international practice for the construction of transmission lines, thereby informing debate and decisions on national transmission develop- ment. It is not therefore intended that such a study would be carried out in relation to future individual projects which will in any event be subject to the full range of assessments and analysis as required under the planning process. In tandem with the tender process, my Department placed advertisements in nine national newspapers requesting submissions from the public on the issue. Over 500 submissions were received by the closing date of 7th March. The consultants have been furnished with these submissions and will consider points raised, in their analysis of the merits or otherwise of underground and overground options. The consultants will also be available to meet with the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, to discuss the details of the report, once published. The report is scheduled to be finalised by early June and will be published thereafter. The time frame for completion of the work is in line with the tender specification.
Electricity Generation. 117. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he has set a target for the percentage of electricity generation here that will come from renewables by the year 2020. [14794/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The Government’s target as set out in the Energy Policy Framework and the Programme for Government is to increase the contribution from renewable energy sources to electricity by 33% by 2020. This national target is fully reflected in the legally binding target for Ireland proposed by the EU Commission in the Renewable Energy/Climate Change Package. I have stated previously that 33% should be our minimum level of ambition for 2020 in light also of the assessment in the All-Island Grid Study that a target of 42% renewables on the system is technically feasible for the island of Ireland. Our ambition is to achieve such a higher target given that the same study indicated that this could be done without significant additional costs to the market. There are many challenges inherent in reaching these targets, which I am work- 893 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] ing with colleagues and stakeholders to address. In addressing those challenges I believe that we will position the renewables sector to deliver an even higher share of electricity after 2020.
Postal Services. 118. Deputy Jim O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his views on whether it is appropriate that An Post has a specific role in postal regulation under clause 8(3) of S.I. 616 of 2002; his further views on whether this role should instead be granted to the regulator; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14800/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The postal regulations provide that An Post may apply to the High Court to make an order pro- hibiting the provision by an individual of services legally reserved for An Post. The reserved area has been gradually reduced since 2000 and the transposition of the third postal directive into Irish law will see the complete removal of the reserved area on 31 December 2010. Conse- quently, postal regulation 8(3) will no longer be relevant.
Question No. 119 answered with Question No. 102.
Alternative Energy Projects. 120. Deputy Joe Costello asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his views on Ireland’s commitment to the biofuels directive in view of ethical con- cerns regarding land use for biofuels, particularly in developing countries; the percentage he estimates Ireland will import from developing countries in order to reach the target on biofuels; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14662/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Iam aware that growing concerns are being expressed on the consequences of increased global demand for biofuels for global food stocks as well as a range of sustainability concerns. The EU Commission’s proposed Renewable Energy Directive sets a minimum mandatory target of 10% market penetration of biofuels in transport in all Member States by 2020. It also includes an explicit framework for sustainability criteria in relation to biofuels. These criteria are designed to ensure that biofuels deployed by Member States are produced in a way that ensures they do not contribute towards the degradation of the natural environment, including through the destruction of forests, wetlands or long established grassland. The criteria will also set strict targets for biofuels in terms of the Green House gas emissions they must save before they can be considered eligible as counting towards national targets. My Department is actively engaged in the EU Council Working Group, which is working to agree these criteria. Currently, the feedstocks used for biofuels production are generally sourced on the open internationally traded commodities market with little or no information attached to these with regard to their origins. It is only by ensuring that Europe sets robust sustainability criteria that Member States will be able to track the source of these fuels, and mitigate the cumulative effect of unsustainable practices on developing countries. I therefore fully support the stated commitment by the Commission to ensuring that rigorous sustainability criteria are put in place and complied with under the new Directive. I will shortly be launching the public consultation on the proposed Biofuels Obligation as set out in the Programme for Government. In that context EU developments on biofuels policy in light of emerging concerns in relation to sustainability for the environment will be reviewed and publicly debated. The recent introduction by the UK of a Biofuels Obligation will also be closely monitored for lessons to be learned. 894 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Postal Services. 121. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his views on ComReg’s finding that only 77% of mail was delivered within one working day in 2007 compared to the target of 94%; his further views on whether this is an acceptable level of next day delivery; if he plans to give more powers to ComReg to enforce delivery targets; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14798/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Matters relating to quality and levels of postal service are a matter in the first instance for the management and board of An Post and one in which I have no statutory function. In addition, the Commission for Communications Regulation, ComReg, in accordance with the 2002 Euro- pean Communities (Postal Services) Regulations, is responsible for the monitoring, measure- ment and regulation of the postal sector including measuring the levels of service to be achieved by An Post and ensuring that the company abides by its statutory universal service obligations. In relation to the matter of additional powers being given to ComReg to enforce its delivery targets, I will shortly amend the postal regulations using powers conferred on me by the Communications Regulation (Amendment) Act 2007. Once amended, these regulations will permit ComReg to apply to the High Court for the application of a financial penalty to An Post, as universal service provider, in the event that the company fails to comply with a direc- tion issued by the regulator including in relation to quality of service targets. In my meetings I have had with the company I have taken the opportunity to support the service level targets that have been set and encouraged An Post to be innovative in the development of its oper- ations to make sure the targets are met. Question No. 122 answered with Question No. 76.
Alternative Energy Projects. 123. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if his attention has been drawn to the calls for a review of policies on promotion of biofuels by the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon, due to the risks posed by rising world food prices as well as concerns expressed in relation to the risks of biofuels by the chair of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Dr. Rajendra Pachauri; if he is taking steps to take into account the risk of biofuels and to review commitments in the national climate change strategy, his Department’s statement of strategy and the environment heading of the programme for Government, in relation to the mandatory use of biofuel mixes in transport fuels, and minimum requirements of use of biofuels in public service vehicles; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14486/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Iam aware that the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon, has called for a full review of international biofuels policy in light of increasing global food prices and food security concerns. I am also aware of the concerns about the environmental impacts of unsustainable biofuels production expressed by Dr. Rajendra Pachavri in the context of climate change. I welcome the fact that the EU Commission is taking explicit account of concerns about the consequences of unsustainable biofuels development in the context of the proposed Renewable Energy Directive. The Directive proposes a target for all Member States of 10% market pen- etration of biofuels in transport by 2020. Crucially, the Commission is proposing the adoption of rigorous sustainability criteria for biofuels production and deployment. Our collective objec- tive in the European Union must be to ensure that production and investment in biofuels is fully sustainable worldwide and does not have harmful consequences for developing countries 895 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] in environmental and food security terms. I fully support the Commission’s objective in relation to setting a sustainable framework for biofuels policy, which will see the EU taking a lead in this complex area. Ireland is working with the Commission and other Member States to deliver an agreed sustainability framework. From our own national perspective I am working with all relevant Ministerial colleagues to ensure that our biofuels targets are met with full regard for sus- tainability at home and internationally. We will also continue to reflect EU and international developments as they emerge.
Departmental Expenditure. 124. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Taoiseach the policy decisions he has made to keep the current expenditure of his Department within the parameters allocated in his Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15563/08]
The Taoiseach: There is a decrease of \600,000 (2.7%) in the Administration Budget allo- cation for my Department in 2008, which has been achieved through the implementation of a range of efficiency measures including the increased use of shared services and better procure- ment practices. It is my Department’s policy to ensure that all expenditure under the Depart- ment’s vote is within the total allocation of the Revised Estimate for the year. In doing so, the Department seeks at all times to achieve best value for money in the procurement of goods and services, consistent with the continued delivery of the range of services which we provide in line with the Department’s overall objectives. Specific initiatives in 2008 include:
• the use of Shared Services for the provision of Financial Management Services and trans- action processing which is estimated to result in a saving of \140,000 in 2008 (full year cost);
• measures to monitor and reduce energy use and increase efficiency. It is estimated that this could result in savings in the region of \21,000 per annum; and
• an examination of the provision of telecommunications services. While it is anticipated that this should result in efficiency gains and possible savings, these cannot be quantified at this point.
The Department will continue to identify initiatives to increase efficiency which may contribute to further expenditure savings in 2008.
Housing Statistics. 125. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Taoiseach if his attention has been drawn to the critical nature of the data on household vacancy rates as recorded in Table 46 of Volume 6 of the 2006 Census for projecting housing supply requirements; if he will seek a report or a detailed explanation from the Central Statistics Office on its interpretation of the high house- hold vacancy rates as recorded in Table 46 specifically requesting a spatial analysis, an analysis of possible methodological shortcomings or possible inconsistent recordings by householders and enumerators, an explanation of the treatment of unsold new units, over the shop units, tenancy voids, semi-derelict units, units for sale and other non-standard units and an analysis of vacancy rates in terms of bed spaces or unit capacity; and if he will seek a revised estimate 896 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers from the CSO of the number and rate of vacant housing units that would normally be available for occupancy. [15566/08]
Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Deputy Tom Kitt): Information on vacant dwellings arises as a direct result of the enumeration work carried out by enumerators at the time of a Census of Population. In the case of the 2006 census, attention was first drawn to the extent of vacant dwellings on publication of the Preliminary Report in July 2006. The tentative estimate at the time was 275,000 housing units. Table 40 of the Principal Demographic Results published in March 2007 provided a classification of the definitive number of unoccu- pied housing units distinguishing those where the residents were temporarily absent at the time of the census, vacant houses, vacant flats and holiday homes. This analysis which was provided on a county basis was also given as Table 43 in Volume 6 — Housing, and is reproduced in the table with this reply. A further spatial breakdown by electoral divisions, towns etc. has been made available on the CSO website since June 2007 distinguishing occupied and unoccupied housing units at the time of the census. The CSO were aware from previous censuses, the most recent being in 2002, and from other household surveys such as the Quarterly National Household Survey, that conducting field operations was becoming more difficult. They therefore had to plan to mitigate these diffi- culties. The first decision they took was to stick to the tried and trusted model of using enumer- ators to deliver and collect census forms. The CSO employed 4,400 enumerators, each of whom covered on average about 350 households. As part of their duties the enumerators had to list in their record books every building capable of being occupied on census night and mark the building on an up to date map of their enumeration area (EA). They then had to make contact with householders over a nine week period in April/May 2006, first to distribute blank census forms and then to collect the com- pleted forms. Bearing in mind the increased complexity of Irish society with more people at work and greater mobility the enumerators made extensive use of calling cards in cases where contact with householders was not easy to achieve. The CSO issued each of the enumerators with a mobile phone and the phone numbers were entered on the calling cards to facilitate texting or phoning the best time for the enumerator to get the householder at home. The enumerator’s job entailed making personal contact with householders even where this involved multiple visits. The field supervisors contacted management companies for access codes in the case of gated communities of private apartments — a growing phenomenon as the CSO knows from some of its other surveys. From the CSO’s experience with censuses they believe that using enumerators to establish personal contact with householders is the best method of ensuring a complete count and establishing which housing units are vacant at the time of the census. Alternative methodologies such as mailing out census forms and/or mailing back completed forms or transmitting them over the internet will not achieve the same coverage. The fact that enumerators have responsibility for their own Enumeration Area is a powerful motivating factor. They have to account for every dwelling in their EA. When a household is temporarily absent on census night the householder is obliged to indicate where the household will be and if the address is elsewhere in the State the relevant enumerator checks to see that the household is enumerated there. Otherwise they will be approached later to fill out their census form at their original address. The instructions issued to enumerators regarding the identification of vacant dwellings were very comprehensive. All buildings and places of possible habitation were visited. For regular habitable dwellings, before deciding that a particular dwelling was vacant enumerators were instructed to verify that that was indeed the case, by speaking with neighbours. They were to 897 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Tom Kitt.] try to determine why the dwelling was vacant and note it in their records. Dwellings with a For Sale sign up and no sign of habitation were identified as vacant. If builders or decorators were visible contact was made to determine if the dwelling was occupied. Holiday homes, which covered all dwellings which were only occasionally occupied, including city apartments used for week-end breaks etc. were identified by contact with neighbours. Derelict buildings (where the roof was partly or completely missing, or the entrance doors were missing) were not recorded, once the enumerator was satisfied that no person was living there. In the case of private accommodation with doors or windows bricked or boarded up (usually as a precaution against vandalism), enumerators were instructed that if the dwelling was habit- able and they were clear that no one was living there to mark such buildings as vacant. Apartment/flat complexes being prepared for demolition where some flats were boarded up were not recorded unless someone was living in them. Dwellings that were identified as “under construction” were not recorded as vacant dwell- ings. For census purposes, a dwelling was to be considered “under construction” if it was in the process of being built but was not yet ready for occupation. In the case of building sites where large numbers of houses were under construction, enumerators were instructed to make one listing in their record books. However, enumerators were specifically instructed in newly built housing estates that any dwelling that was ready for occupation but not yet occupied was to be separately listed and identified as vacant. In summary, the enumeration carried out by the CSO at the time of the 2006 census was comprehensive. As identifying vacant housing units can realistically only be done as part of a census operation it is not proposed to issue revised figures until after the next census has been carried out.
Census 2006
Occupancy Status Vacant house Vacant flat Holiday home Total
Geographic Area Leinster 70,437 25,697 10,781 106,915 Carlow 1,857 310 308 2,475 Dublin City and County 27,122 18,765 418 46,305 Dublin City 12,557 13,424 111 26,092 Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown 4,661 2,207 60 6,928 Fingal 5,841 1,804 233 7,878 South Dublin 4,063 1,330 14 5,407 Kildare 5,363 1,359 116 6,838 Kilkenny 3,393 309 406 4,108 Laoighis 3,673 464 103 4,240 Longford 2,931 331 261 3,523 Louth 4,692 840 575 6,107 Meath 5,414 725 346 6,485 Offaly 3,023 307 220 3,550 Westmeath 3,894 850 271 5,015 Wexford 5,236 855 6,601 12,692 Wicklow 3,839 582 1,156 5,577 Munster 54,490 9,519 18,721 82,730 Clare 5,534 653 3,624 9,811 Cork City and County 20,200 4,228 6,561 30,989 Cork City 4,017 2,150 28 6,195
898 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Occupancy Status Vacant house Vacant flat Holiday home Total
Cork County 16,183 2,078 6,533 24,794 Kerry 9,379 997 5,990 16,366 Limerick City and County 7,457 1,757 346 9,560 Limerick City 1,703 1,210 8 2,921 Limerick County 5,754 547 338 6,639 North Tipperary 2,796 311 557 3,664 South Tipperary 3,575 449 317 4,341 Waterford City and County 5,549 1,124 1,326 7,999 Waterford City 2,088 837 11 2,936 Waterford County 3,461 287 1,315 5,063 Connacht 33,068 4,745 11,062 48,875 Galway City and County 11,967 2,428 3,172 17,567 Galway City 2,430 1,349 205 3,984 Galway County 9,537 1,079 2,967 13,583 Leitrim 2,942 339 1,192 4,473 Mayo 9,136 946 4,216 14,298 Roscommon 4,564 383 942 5,889 Sligo 4,459 649 1,540 6,648 Ulster (part of) 16,940 1,637 9,225 27,802 Cavan 4,806 412 779 5,997 Donegal 9,725 1,043 8,275 19,043 Monaghan 2,409 182 171 2,762
State 174,935 41,598 49,789 266,322
Tax Code. 126. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance the respective cost to the Exchequer, in terms of tax receipts foregone, on the basis of projected 2008 activity levels, of cutting the 7% rate of stamp duty on residential property to 6%, 5% and 4%, while leaving the existing exemptions and thresholds unchanged. [15489/08]
127. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance the respective costs to the Exchequer, in terms of tax receipts foregone, on the basis of projected 2008 activity levels, of cutting the 9% rate of stamp duty on residential property to 8%, 7% and 6%, while leaving the existing exemptions thresholds unchanged. [15490/08]
Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Cowen): I propose to take Questions Nos. 126 and 127 together. I am informed by the Revenue Commissioners that the estimated cost of reducing the current 7% rate of stamp duty on residential property to 6%, 5% and 4% is estimated at \94 million, \188 million and \282 million respectively, based on Budget 2008 projections. The correspond- ing estimated cost of reducing the current 9% rate of stamp duty on residential property to 8%, 7% and 6% is estimated at \13 million, \26 million and \39 million respectively, on the same basis. As these costs are a function of the actual and estimated number of transactions, and the price levels at which these transactions take place, they are therefore sensitive to cyclical changes in the housing market. 899 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Public Sector Remuneration. 128. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance the salaries, including Da´il E´ ireann salaries, of An Taoiseach, Ta´naiste, Ministers and Ministers of State; the increases to these salaries that have been agreed by Government; the percentage increase in each case; the effective date of such increases; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15512/08]
Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Cowen): The attached salaries are the current salaries in payment with effect from 1 March 2008 following the implementation of the third phase increase of 2.5% under Towards 2016 agreement.
\
Taoiseach 180,870 TD 97,747
Total 278,617
Ta´naiste 141,594 TD 97,747
Total 239,341
Minister 121,956 TD 97,747
Total 219,703
Minister of State 53,219 TD 97,747
Total 150,966
The following are the salaries and percentage increases recommended by the Review Body on Higher Remuneration in Report No 42.
Recommended Rate % Increase \
Taoiseach 310,000 14.0 Ta´naiste 270,000 15.6 Minister 240,000 12.0 Minister of State 165,000 12.0
The above recommended rates are a composite of the overall level of salary and incorporate both the relevant parliamentary salary and the office holder’s salary. As the Deputy is aware, it was agreed by Government on 18 December 2007 that implementation of the increases recommended by the Review Body on Higher Remuneration in respect of political offices holders would be deferred and would be phased as follows:
• 4% from 1 September 2008;
• half the balance from 1 September 2009; and
• the remainder from 1 September 2010. 900 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Theatre Licences. 129. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance the procedure and circumstances in which the Revenue Commissioners have the power to grant a theatre licence in respect of licensed premises which in effect permits late bars to open; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the Revenue Commissioners recently granted a theatre licence to a company (details supplied) in County Meath and that the granting of a theatre licence fol- lowed a refusal by the District Court of a dance licence in view of the concerns of local residents regarding late drinking leading to increased anti-social behaviour; and if he will make a state- ment on the matter. [15515/08]
Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Cowen): I am advised by the Revenue Commissioners that the applicants in this instance were granted a licence for public music and singing under section 51 of the Public Health Acts Amendment Act 1890 and section 33 of the Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961 at Dunshaughlin District Court on 15 November 2007. On foot of the receipt of this licence, an application was made to the Revenue Commis- sioners for a theatre licence under section 7 of the Excise Act, 1835. The application was accompanied by the public music and singing licence, a valid tax clearance certificate and a list of acts engaged to perform at the venue. In accordance with the normal procedures, an inspection of the premises was carried out by an official of the Revenue Commissioners. As all legal requirements for the granting of a theatre licence had been met, a licence duly issued. The Courts have determined that, under the current law, the Revenue Commissioners may not refuse to grant a theatre licence solely on the grounds that the premises for which the licence is sought is a public house. The question of theatre licences is among the issues considered by the Government Alcohol Advisory Group appointed by my colleague the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. The Group has now reported and I understand that legislative proposals arising from the work of the Group were published earlier today. The matter of the refusal by the District Court to issue a dance licence is outside the remit of the Revenue Commissioners.
Registration of Title. 130. Deputy Michael Kennedy asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance the progress on the handing over of title of open spaces and so on at an estate (details supplied) in County Dublin to Fingal County Council following the liquidation of the developer. [15516/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Noel Ahern): Fingal County Council has submitted an application for a Deed of Waiver in its favour for lands contained within Folio 45020F (Strand Estate, Donabate). The matter is currently receiving attention in the Chief State Solicitor’s Office and its recommendation is expected shortly.
Departmental Expenditure. 131. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance the policy decisions he has made to keep the current expenditure of his Department within the parameters allocated in his Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15558/08]
Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Cowen): The overall current expenditures for Vote 6 (Office of the Minister for Finance), Vote 7 (Superannuation) and Vote 12 (Secret
901 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Brian Cowen.] Service) will be maintained within the approved budget limits. No policy decisions have been made in this context.
Tax Collection. 132. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance when a person (details supplied) in County Galway will receive the money which was deducted incorrectly from their pension payment. [15579/08]
Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance (Deputy Brian Cowen): I understand that the money deducted in error will be refunded in the next pension payment on 1 May 2008. Any incon- venience caused is regretted.
Hospital Services. 133. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Health and Children when a person (details supplied) in County Mayo can expect to be called for an operation in view of the fact that this person’s operation has been cancelled on three different occasions and that this person is on the waiting list for two and a half years. [15499/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services is a matter for the Health Service Executive and funding for all health services has been provided as part of its overall Vote. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular case raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Execu- tive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
Health Service Staff. 134. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Health and Children the number of people working in the health services both part-time and full-time that are not included in the payroll system for dates (details supplied); if all these people are being paid through the accounts payable system; if not, the other ways they are paid; if everyone on the payroll system is included in the head count figure when calculating the total number of employees in the health services; if not, the number of people this is at 17 April 2008; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15502/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The main source of employment data in the health services is the Health Service Executive’s Health Services Personnel Census. The census collects data on actual staffing level for each staff grade in each health agency at a given point in time. The census is carried out quarterly at the end of March, June, September and December each year and is derived from payroll history in each agency. The health service employment ceiling approved by the Minister for Finance ceiling determines the health service census return, including the addition, or exclusion of certain grades (e.g. home helps) and agencies (see footnote 3 in the table below). Furthermore, overtime and agency costs are not captured in personnel census.
902 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Grade Category National Primary Corporate Population Total Hospitals Community Health Office & Continuing Care
Medical/Dental 6,049 1,821 35 102 8,007 Nursing4 21,481 17,353 161 14 39,009 Health and Social Care Professionals 6,257 9,333 54 61 15,706 Management/ Administrative2 8,141 6,822 2,782 310 18,055 General Support Staff 7,131 5,338 431 1 12,901 Other Patient and Client Care 4,667 13,102 14 44 17,827
Total 53,726 53,769 3,477 533 111,505 Notes 1 Excludes Home Helps. 2 Management/ Administrative includes staff who are of direct service to the public and include Consultant’s Sec- retaries, Out-Patient Departmental Personnel, Medical Records Personnel, Telephonists and other staff who are engaged in front-line duties together with staff in the following categories Payroll, Human Resource Management (including training), Service Managers, IT Staff, General Management Support and Legislative and Information requirements. 3 The methodology under which employment figures are compiled changed during the course of 2007 with the addition of circa 4,000 wte not previously included in subsumed agencies such as the Health Service Executive- EA (HSEA), the Primary Care Reimbursement Service (GMSPB), Health Boards Executive (HeBe) and the Office for Health Management (now part of the HR function) together with many other posts in projects or post previously excluded such as HRBS/PPARS and Value-for-Money posts (all of which are largely in the Management/Administrative stream) together with the inclusion of student nurses and chaplains. This change was undertaken to represent health service employment on a like-for-like basis with employment ceilings and to more accurately represent a reconfigured health service’s employment information. 4 The figure of 111,505 includes student nurses — if these are excluded the figure is 110,597.
The Executive is the appropriate body to consider the matter raised by the Deputy. My Depart- ment has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
Health Services. 135. Deputy Timmy Dooley asked the Minister for Health and Children if changes are envis- aged in the priority ratings for physiotherapy to persons with identified long-term illnesses, in particular, those suffering from muscular dystrophy; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15506/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Jimmy Devins): The Deputy’s question relates to the management and delivery of health and personal services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Execu- tive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
136. Deputy Dan Neville asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will make a statement on a matter regarding a person (details supplied) in County Limerick. [15509/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Jimmy Devins): The Deputy’s question relates to the management and delivery of health and personal services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Execu- 903 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Jimmy Devins.] tive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
137. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will support the case of a person (details supplied) in Dublin 5. [15513/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services is a matter for the Health Service Executive and funding for all health services has been provided as part of its overall vote. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular question raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy in relation to the matter raised.
Telecommunications Masts. 138. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Health and Children her views on whether the health of persons who live near telephone masts is endangered; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15517/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The World Health Organisation (WHO) assesses on an ongoing basis the many reviews carried out in this area and has indicated that exposures below the limits recommended by the International Commission on Non-Ionis- ing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) in their 1998 Guidelines do not produce any known adverse health effects. These guidelines are based on a careful analysis of all peer-reviewed scientific literature and include thermal and non-thermal effects. In 1999, the European Community introduced recommendations on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromag- netic fields, based on the ICNIRP guidelines. The Commission for Communication Regulations (ComReg) monitors compliance with these guidelines with regard to telecommunication masts on an ongoing basis. Ireland complies fully with the limits set by the ICNIRP.
Pharmacy Services. 139. Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Health and Children the specific contin- gency plans being put in place to supply medicines to patients in Mayo affected by the ongoing pharmacists dispute after 1 May 2008; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15522/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The information sought by the Deputy relates to matters within the area of responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
Cancer Screening Programme. 140. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Health and Children the centres here where cervical smear tests are available for public patients; the waiting list in each for the test; the average waiting time for tests to be analysed and reported back to the patients; the waiting list and average analysis time for secondary test in the case of abnormalities in the first; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15523/08]
904 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
141. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Health and Children the steps being taken to speed up the cervical smear test system to increase the chances of early detection of cancers or other abnormalities. [15524/08]
142. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Health and Children the Health Service Executive hospitals and centres which previous to 1 April 2008 provided cervical smear tests for public patients and are no longer doing so; and the reason for not doing so in each case. [15525/08]
143. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Health and Children the reason the Coombe Women’s Hospital, Dublin is no longer providing cervical smear tests for public patients, while the private facility on the campus is providing tests for private patients. [15526/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I propose to take Questions Nos. 140 to 143, inclusive, together. The roll out of a national cervical screening programme is the most efficient population approach to preventing and controlling cervical cancer. The National Cancer Screening Service (NCSS) is planning to roll out such a programme on a national basis around the middle of this year. Women aged 25 to 44 years old will be screened every 3 years; women aged 45 to 60 will be screened every 5 years. The service will be available free of charge to eligible women everywhere in the country. Approximately 230,000 women will be screened annually, assuming an 80% take up by eligible women. All elements of the programme — call/recall, smear taking, laboratories, colposcopy and treatment services will be quality assured, organised and managed to deliver a single integrated national service. Additional revenue funding of \5.0m was allocated to the NCSS in 2007 for the roll-out of the programme and an additional \15.0m has been allocated in 2008. An additional 30 posts have been approved to facilitate integration and roll-out of the programme. The Deputy’s specific questions in relation to smear tests are the responsibility of the Health Service Execu- tive (HSE). Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy in this regard.
Health Services. 144. Deputy Edward O’Keeffe asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will arrange for a medical item to be replaced in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Cork. [15536/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Operational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services is a matter for the Health Service Executive and funding for all health services has been provided as part of its overall Vote. Therefore, the Executive is the appropriate body to consider the particular case raised by the Deputy. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Execu- tive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
Services for People with Disabilities. 145. Deputy Ulick Burke asked the Minister for Health and Children if her Department will issue a comprehensive information leaflet for parents of children with special needs in the age group of up to five years in order that these parents will know the way, when and where to access the appropriate services, the service providers, the level of service to expect, and their
905 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Ulick Burke.] entitlements to support from these service providers; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15546/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Jimmy Devins): On June 1 2007, Part 2 of the Disability Act 2005 was commenced for children under 5 years of age. Under Part 2 of this Act, children with disabilities have a right to:
• an independent assessment of their health and educational needs arising from their disability
• an assessment report
• a statement of the services they will receive
• make a complaint if they are not happy with any part of the process
The HSE produced an information leaflet for parents, which is available from GPs, pharmacies, hospitals and Local Health Offices. The leaflet is also available on the HSE website at http://www.hse.ie/eng/Find a Service/Disability Services/Disability Act 2005/Leaflet Disability Act.pdf. Further relevant information is also available on the HSE website at http://www.hse.ie/eng/Find a Service/Disability Services/Disability Act 2005/ or directly from Local Health Offices. In addition, the National Disability Authority published a leaflet entitled “New Disability Plans: What they mean for you and your family”, which was distributed to all households in the country. This is also available on the NDA website, http://www.nda.ie.
146. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Health and Children her views on the concerns regarding respite care for a person (details supplied) in County Louth. [15547/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Ma´ire Hoctor): Oper- ational responsibility for the management and delivery of health and personal social services was assigned to the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004. Therefore, the Execu- tive is the appropriate body to consider the particular case raised by the Deputy. My Depart- ment has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Executive to arrange to have the matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
Vaccination Programme. 147. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for Health and Children the latest situation in regard to the shortage of BCG vaccinations; and the effort in view of the ongoing problems the Government is making to source a different supplier. [15548/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I understand from the Health Service Executive (HSE) that, owing to regulatory difficulties experienced by the manufacturer of the BCG vaccine, there was a shortage of the vaccine from late 2007. This was a Europe- wide problem as the manufacturer in question is the only company which supplies the vaccine to the European Market. Unfortunately, it is not possible to stockpile the vaccine as it has a very short shelf life. These difficulties have now been resolved and new stocks of licensed vaccine are now available. I understand from the HSE that clinics have now resumed and that
906 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers parents of any baby who has not received BCG vaccine will be contacted by their Local Health Office with an appointment to receive the vaccine.
Cancer Screening Programme. 148. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for Health and Children the reason medical card patients are being charged for cervical smear tests; if her attention has been drawn to the fact that medical card patients are being charged \50 for such testing, which is vital for early diagnosis; and if she will take steps to ensure that medical card patients are provided with this service free of charge. [15549/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Cervical smear testing is not cur- rently provided by GPs or family planning clinics under the scheme for medical card holders. However, where cervical smears form part of recognised protocols for the ongoing treatment of individual patient illnesses, they should be provided free of charge to eligible women under the General Medical Services (GMS) Scheme. Any necessary follow-up treatment is available to all women, including medical card holders, within the public hospital system. The roll out of a national cervical screening programme is the most efficient population approach to preventing and controlling cervical cancer. The National Cancer Screening Service (NCSS) is planning to roll out such a programme on a national basis around the middle of this year. Women aged 25 to 44 years old will be screened every 3 years; women aged 45 to 60 will be screened every 5 years. The service will be available free of charge to eligible women everywhere in the country. Approximately 230,000 women will be screened annually, assuming an 80% take up by eligible women. All elements of the programme — call/recall, smear taking, laboratories, colposcopy and treatment services will be quality assured, organised and managed to deliver a single integrated national service. Additional revenue funding of \5.0m was allo- cated to the NCSS in 2007 for the roll-out of the programme and an additional \15.0m has been allocated in 2008. An additional 30 posts have been approved to facilitate integration and roll-out of the programme. Currently, my Department is preparing legislation to clarify and update existing legislation on eligibility for health and personal social services. The Bill will define specific health and personal services more clearly; define who should be eligible for what services; set out clear criteria for eligibility; establish when and in what circumstances charges may be made and provide for an appeals framework. As part of this exercise, a review of the assessment criteria for medical cards in the context of financial, medical and social need is being undertaken and is expected to be completed by autumn 2008.
Departmental Expenditure. 149. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Health and Children the policy decisions she has made to keep the current expenditure of her Department within the parameters allo- cated in her Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15560/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The Revised Estimates Volume for Public Services 2008 provides for net current expenditure of \508.8 million for my Depart- ment, Vote 39, and \583.8 million for Vote 41, the Office of the Minister for Children. Based on the returns for the 1st Quarter 2008 it is expected that expenditure for both Votes will remain within profile throughout the year.
907 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Paediatric Illnesses. 150. Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Health and Children the extent of the increase in the incidence of positional plagiocephaly or cranial asymmetry here since the adop- tion of back to sleep positioning recommendations; if, in view of US estimates that the condition affects up to 48% of infants, Irish maternity hospitals provide or will in future provide parents with advice in relation to dealing with and minimising the effects of the condition and the opinion of the chief medical officer on the treatment of positional plagiocephaly in infants; if a product (details supplied) is considered to be of assistance in the treatment of this condition; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15586/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): Positional plagiocephaly or cranial asymmetry refers to the development of a flattened area either on the back or to one side of the head in infancy. It is related to a baby’s sleep position, however there are other causes. Data on positional plagiocephaly is not routinely collected and therefore the incidence of this condition is not known. The diagnosis and treatment of this condition is a clinical responsibility and I have therefore asked the Chief Medical Officer to bring this to the attention of the Faculty of Paediatrics for their consideration.
Health Services. 151. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Health and Children the position regard- ing a project (details supplied). [15588/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): I identified the need to improve services for persons with cystic fibrosis as a priority in the Estimates process over recent years. Since 2006, additional revenue funding of \6.78m has been allocated to the HSE to develop services for patients with cystic fibrosis. I also asked the HSE to place a particular focus on the development of services at the National Adult Tertiary Referral Centre at St. Vincent’s Hospital, where concerns had been raised regarding the need to improve facilities. A number of capital projects have been completed at the hospital and further developments are in progress. In the longer term, a new ward block is to be built at St. Vincent’s which will include 120 replacement beds in single en-suite accommodation. The new facility will accommodate cystic fibrosis patients and will include appropriate isolation facilities. The HSE advises that planning permission has been obtained, financial provision has been included in the HSE Capital Plan and the contract is to be awarded in 2008. It will be a condition of the contract that the design build period be no more than 24 months from the date of contract award. In the interim, work is underway on the refurbishment of accommodation to provide eight single en-suite rooms for patients with cystic fibrosis. The project is due to be completed over the coming months. The HSE advises that on completion of this first phase, work will commence to further increase the number of single rooms for patients with cystic fibrosis.
Grant Payments. 152. Deputy Dan Neville asked the Minister for Health and Children when she will provide the extra funding to cover the respite grants administered by the Health Service Executive to allow people to take a break during summer 2008; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15631/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Jimmy Devins): The Deputy’s question relates to the management and delivery of health and personal services, which are the responsibility of the Health Service Executive under the Health Act 2004.
908 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Accordingly, my Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Execu- tive to arrange to have this matter investigated and to have a reply issued directly to the Deputy.
Departmental Expenditure. 153. Deputy John Deasy asked the Minister for Health and Children the amount of interest paid to suppliers (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15634/08]
Minister for Health and Children (Deputy Mary Harney): The amount of Prompt Payment Interest (PPI) paid by my Department in the years 2005 to 2007 was \16,216. The table shows the three suppliers paid the highest amount of PPI each year.
Year Supplier Amount \
2005 Grayling Gilmore 6,288 QMP Publicis 6,056 Hunter Red Cell Ltd 694 2006 Icon Systems 253 Club Travel 186 Fitzpatrick & Associates 116 2007 Brindley Advertising 167 Brunswick Press Ltd 61 Office Depot Ireland Ltd 32
A total of \273 was paid by the Office of the Minister for Children for PPI in 2006, the only year in which PPI was incurred. Details of the three suppliers in receipt of the highest PPI payments in that year are IPPA, Brunswick Press Ltd and Freastal who were paid \114, \47 and \33 respectively. My Department has requested the Parliamentary Affairs Division of the Health Service Executive to forward information directly to the Deputy regarding PPI it paid in the years 2005 to 2007.
Public Transport. 154. Deputy Barry Andrews asked the Minister for Transport if any decision has been made on the application for a licence under the Road Transport Act 1932 (details supplied); if his attention has been drawn to the benefits of the operation for users, for reducing congestion and the environment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15519/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): The Road Transport Act, 1932, as amended, provides the statutory basis for regulating the provision of public bus services by private bus operators. In accordance with the legislation, private bus operators apply to my Department for licences to operate scheduled bus passenger services within the State. Applications for annual licences are generally dealt with on a first come, first served basis. The presence of a prior application for a licence from another private operator, or a notification from Dublin Bus or Bus E´ ireann for services on a similar route, necessitates that the consideration of any sub- sequent application must be held in abeyance until the prior application/notification has been determined. In the case of the application referred to by the Deputy, on the 20 February 2007, my Department received an application from the operator concerned, for a licence to operate bus passenger services between Dalkey and Dublin Airport. At that time, my Department advised 909 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Noel Dempsey.] the applicant that the application was being held until such time as a decision on a prior application for services on a similar route from another private operator had been determined. This prior application has been finalised and the licence has issued. My Department under- stands from the licence holder that some services have now been introduced. In the case of the service referred to by the Deputy, on the 16 July 2007 my Department was made aware that the operator concerned had commenced the operation of an unlicensed bus passenger service between Dalkey and Dublin Airport. My Department immediately con- tacted that Company and advised that failure to cease the operation of the service in respect of which a licence had not been issued under the Road Transport Act 1932, is an offence under section 7 of that Act. As the unauthorised service continued to operate my Department advised the Company that the matter was being passed to An Garda Sı´ocha´na for its investigation. This matter is currently the subject of an on going Garda investigation. I believe that a considerable shift from car dependence to public transport, cycling and walking will be required if a sustainable travel and transport system is to be delivered and congestion is to be reduced. Accordingly, my Department strongly supports the use of public transport. However, all such services must be carried out in a manner consistent with the statutory requirements that relate to their provision.
Air Services. 155. Deputy Olivia Mitchell asked the Minister for Transport if his attention had been drawn to the lack of rigour in enforcement of maintenance of aircraft requirements in the US in view of the fact that there has been a fine in one case and the grounding of a large number of aircraft; if he will ensure that the utmost vigour is applied in this area with regard to airlines within this jurisdiction; the steps he has taken to ensure that the foreign based aircraft observe such requirements; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15532/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): Safety oversight of civil aviation in Ireland is the responsibility of the Irish Aviation Authority (IAA) under the Irish Aviation Act 1993. The IAA has informed me that the matter the Deputy refers to occurred in the United States and involved aircraft types which are operated by their respective airlines on internal flights in the US. The Authority has informed me that it carries out rigorous surveillance and enforce- ment in the conduct of its safety oversight functions. Furthermore the standards applied and the quality of the surveillance is subject to standardisation inspection by the Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) on behalf of the EU Commission. The IAA is subject to several of these inspections per annum. These standardis- ation inspections are detailed and rigorous and provide independent assurance of the standards applied by the Authority. The Deputy may also be aware that a harmonised approach to the effective enforcement of international safety standards in the Community has been established under Directive 2004/36/EC. This requires Member States to carry out surveillance on foreign aircraft operating into and out of the EU. The IAA is the Competent Authority in the State for the purposes of the Directive. The IAA carries out such inspections, the results of which are used in the deter- mination of the EU blacklist of aircraft and airlines which are excluded from operating into the EU.
Ministerial Appointments. 156. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Transport if he will confirm the
910 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers inclusion of elected members of the seven local authorities on the proposed Dublin Transport Authority. [15539/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): The Dublin Transport Authority Bill 2008 has been published and circulated to members of the Houses of the Oireachtas. The Bill pro- vides for the establishment of a 10-member Authority (section 14) and 13-member Advisory Council (section 17). Membership of the Advisory Council will include 2 members of the Dublin Regional Authority and 2 members of the Mid-East Regional Authority, all four of which will be elected members of Local Authorities in the area.
Rail Network. 157. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Transport the position regarding and the delivery date for metro north. [15541/08]
159. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Transport if he will provide a detailed breakdown of the full cost of the proposed metro north underground system; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15583/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): I propose to take Questions Nos. 157 and 159 together. As I have stated previously, I am not in a position to publish the estimated capital cost of the Metro North project in advance of the completion of public procurement procedures. The publication of such commercially sensitive information prior to the completion of the competi- tive procurement process would prejudice the State’s capacity to derive maximum value for money in respect of the project. The Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) will be issuing the tender documentation to the four bidding consortia in the coming weeks. Detailed planning and design work on Metro North is ongoing and RPA expects to lodge an application with An Bo´ rd Pleana´la for a Railway Order in the current year. The target date for completion of the project is 2013. The completion of the project will be critically determined by the outcome of both the planning and procurement processes. Once these processes have been completed the RPA will be in a position to provide greater certainty on the completion date of Metro North.
Departmental Expenditure. 158. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Transport the policy decisions he has made to keep the current expenditure of his Department within the parameters allocated in his Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15564/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): My Department actively monitors expendi- ture to ensure that annual budgets are not exceeded. No excess is expected this year as these same expenditure monitoring arrangements are in place for 2008. In his Financial Statement to the Da´il in December 2007, the Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance announced that the Government had agreed to an efficiency review of administrative expenditure across the public service. While there are no specific savings proposals planned for 2008, my Department has identified initiatives in respect of administrative expenditure under the aforementioned Efficiency Review to take effect from 2009. The Department is not in a position to estimate what, if any, savings might arise before year-end but the advancement of the initiatives associ- ated with the Efficiency Review may lead to some reduction in demand on current budget expenditure in 2008.
911 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Question No. 159 answered with Question No. 157.
Public Transport. 160. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for Transport the reason his Department told Dublin Bus to withdraw buses or withdraw the departure of buses on the 25X route from south Lucan at a time when there is a need for more buses to and from Lucan to meet demand for public transport; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15636/08]
Minister for Transport (Deputy Noel Dempsey): I refer to my response to Parliamentary Question Number 135 on 9th April, 2008 in which I advised the Deputy that my Department has made no demand on Dublin Bus to cease any of its authorised Route 25X departures operating from the South Lucan area and has not refused any proposals from the Company for the provision of additional Route 25X departures.
Human Rights Issues. 161. Deputy Michael D. Higgins asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if, following the sending of three Brazilian students to Mountjoy prison upon their arrival here, he will give details of the contact which has been made by the individuals involved or their embassy with his Department. [15535/08]
Minister for Foreign Affairs (Deputy Dermot Ahern): On 28 March 2008, the Secretary General of my Department met with the Charge´ d’Affaires of the Embassy of Brazil, at the latter’s request, to discuss the case referred to by the Deputy. The meeting was conducted in a very positive atmosphere. As to follow-on, and as the requirements for those seeking per- mission to enter the State are the responsibility of the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the Secretary General has briefed the latter Department on his discussion with the Brazilian Embassy. Neither the individuals referred to by the Deputy, nor their families, have been in direct contact with my Department.
Departmental Expenditure. 162. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the policy decisions he has made to keep the current expenditure of his Department within the parameters allocated in his Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15559/08]
Minister for Foreign Affairs (Deputy Dermot Ahern): Under Vote 28 (Foreign Affairs), most of my Department’s expenditure relates to administrative costs. Every effort is made, on an ongoing basis, to ensure that these costs are kept under control and that value for money is obtained for all public expenditure, including through the rigorous application of public pro- curement procedures. Similar controls are in place in relation to programme expenditure. In certain areas, such as support for the UN peacekeeping, it is not possible to predict exact expenditure in advance but, by using information drawn from a range of sources, the Depart- ment can generally anticipate likely requirements, and make the necessary budgetary provision. Under Vote 29 (International Cooperation), every effort is likewise made to keep administra- tive expenditure to a minimum, in order to release the maximum resources to the front line of the aid programme. I firmly expect, therefore, that the current expenditure of my Department will remain within allocation in 2008.
Work Permits. 163. Deputy Pat Breen asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, further
912 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers to Parliamentary Questions Nos. 108 and 110 of 10 April 2008, when a green card will issue to a person (details supplied) in County Clare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15488/08]
Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Michea´l Martin): The Employment Permits Section of my Department informs me that the issue of a work permit has now been approved in this case.
Departmental Expenditure. 164. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the policy decisions he has made to keep the current expenditure of his Department within the parameters allocated in his Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15556/08]
Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Michea´l Martin): My Department’s budgetary allocation for 2008 was published in December 2007, in parallel with the presentation to the Da´il by the Ta´naiste and Minister for Finance of the 2008 Budget. The allocation made to my Department will finance the programmes which I have prioritised for 2008, as well as funding the running costs of my Department and its agencies. My Department has a structured system in place to monitor expenditure against budgets on a regular basis. Monthly Expenditure Reports are prepared for, and reviewed by, my Department’s Management Board. The Expen- diture Reports identify, and explain the reasons for, any variances from budgetary targets. The reports serve to ensure that both current and capital expenditure remain within the parameters of my Department’s budget. The monthly Expenditure Reports have not, to the end of March, identified any net savings which are likely to materialise by the end of the year. However, the situation will be kept under review on an on-going basis.
Consumer Protection. 165. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment his views on whether retailers, particularly those who price goods in both euro and sterling, are not passing on to consumers the benefits of the strong euro exchange rate vis-a`-vis sterling; if he proposes measures to ensure that these savings are passed on to consumers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15580/08]
Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Michea´l Martin): I am aware of the concerns expressed by some commentators that the benefits of recent movements in exchange rates between the Euro and Sterling may not be passed on to consumers. I understand that the National Consumer Agency has raised these concerns in bilateral discussions with retailers. In the course of those discussions, retailers have advised that the benefits of recent exchange rate movements may not be fully reflected in their prices as in many instances they are tied into long term hedging arrangements, which do not make it possible for them to respond to short-term exchange rate fluctuations. As such, it may take some time for exchange rate movements to be reflected in pricing. This is also likely to be the case for goods that are pre-labelled, often far in advance of hitting the shops. Notwithstanding such considerations, I understand that the National Consumer Agency remains concerned that in some instances the price charged by retailers reflects a price level that the retailer anticipates the Irish market will bear, and this may or may not take into account movements in exchange rates. For that reason the Agency continues through its advocacy and public information campaigns to raise awareness among consumers in relation to the price they
913 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Michea´l Martin.] pay for goods and services and particularly in relation to the importance of consumers achieving the best value for money when purchasing such goods and services. The Deputy will be aware of the Agency’s recent survey in the area of food prices. I under- stand that following the publication of its Grocery Price Comparison Survey, research carried out by the Agency indicated that a significant number of consumers have already changed their shopping behaviour based on the Survey’s results. This clearly demonstrates the importance of price surveys and information campaigns of this nature in providing consumers with the neces- sary information so that they can make informed choices as to where they wish to purchase goods and services. I very much welcome the Agency’s activities in this area and I would urge all consumers to consult the Agency’s surveys in order that they can achieve the best value for their money. I am confident that the work of the National Consumer Agency, together with the awareness of consumers themselves, will help to ensure that consumers are sufficiently informed to direct their business to those retailers who do offer them a fair deal and the best value for money.
Work Permits. 166. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if an early decision can be taken in respect of a work permit application by a person (details supplied) in Dublin 24 which was sent to his Department on 2 April 2008 seeking a permit for a dependent work permit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15590/08]
Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment (Deputy Michea´l Martin): The Employment Permits Section of my Department informs me that they have no record of a work permit being applied for in this case.
Departmental Expenditure. 167. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the policy decisions he has made to keep the current expenditure of his Department within the parameters allocated in his Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15551/08]
Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism (Deputy Se´amus Brennan): A total of \424.542 million in current expenditure has been allocated to my Department in 2008. The proposed allocation of this expenditure across the areas for which I am responsible is shown in the Revised Estimates for the Public Services 2008 which was published in February. The various divisions of my Department will operate within the allocations made to them in 2008. At present, there are no indications that there will be savings on my Department’s vote in 2008.
Arts Plan. 168. Deputy Olivia Mitchell asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the progress of the work of the interdepartmental committee on public art; when it is expected this committee will complete its review of the guidelines for the per cent for arts scheme; when the new guidelines will be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15584/08]
Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism (Deputy Se´amus Brennan): The Inter-Departmental Group, chaired by my Department, was reconvened in September last to review the working and implementation of the Per Cent for Art Guidelines. To date the group, which is representa- tive of a wide range of Government Departments and agencies with construction budgets, has met on three occasions and significant progress has been made. The group is also examining
914 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers ways in which information on public art could be made more easily accessible to the public and their plans on this are at an advanced stage.
Sports Capital Programme. 169. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism the number of appli- cations to his Department for capital sports grants in County Kildare for each of the past three years including 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15724/08]
Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism (Deputy Se´amus Brennan): Under the 2008 prog- ramme, forty-four applications have been received from Kildare. The corresponding figures for the years 2006 to 2007 are 33 and 38 respectively.
Registration of Deaths. 170. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if it is possible for a death certificate to issue in respect of a person in view of the circumstances (details supplied). [15500/08]
171. Deputy Michael Ring asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if the death of an Irish person (details supplied) can be registered here. [15501/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Martin Cullen): I propose to take Questions Nos. 170 and 171 together. The legislative provisions governing the registration of deaths are contained in the Civil Registration Act 2004. Section 38 of the Act makes provision for the registration in Ireland of the death of an Irish citizen domiciled in the State, which occurs outside the State in the following circumstances:
(a) If there was not at the time of the death a system of registration or a system that applied to that particular death in the country in which the death took place, or
(b) If it is not possible to obtain from the country in which the death took place a copy of or extract from civil records of the death.
Provision is also made in the Civil Registration Act 2004 for the registration of a death of a person aboard an Irish aircraft or Irish ship, or the death of an Irish citizen on board a foreign aircraft or foreign ship travelling to or from an Irish airport or port, as the case may be. The death of a member of the Garda Sı´ocha´na or the Permanent Defence Force, or the spouse or specified members of the family of such a member, while the member was serving outside the State as such a member may be registered in Ireland. Where a family considers that these circumstances apply in respect of the death of a family member, an application may be made to an tA´ rd Chlara´itheoir, Government Offices, Convent Road, Roscommon, who will decide, on the basis of evidence available to him, whether such a death may be registered in the State. The legislative provisions governing the registration of deaths, applicable in England and Wales, are quite similar to those in operation here and it is likely that the death in question falls to be registered there, under the appropriate legislation. Any such registration, and any death certificates issued on foot of it, would be acceptable for all the usual purposes here.
Social Welfare Code. 172. Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if it is possible
915 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Richard Bruton.] to have job seeker’s allowance paid by electronic transfer; and if not, the reason this means should not be available to qualified recipients. [15520/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Martin Cullen): Customers in receipt of Job Seekers Allowance can choose to collect their payment using a Social Services Card at the post office or by Electronic Fund Transfer (EFT) at a financial institution such as a Bank, Building Society or Credit Union. In February 2008, some 46,000 (51%) of Job Seekers Allowance recipients were paid using a Social Services Card at the post office. In addition, some 37,000 (41%) of Job Seekers Allowance recipients were paid by EFT at a financial institution.
Social Welfare Benefits. 173. Deputy Jack Wall asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason rent supplement has been stopped for a person (details supplied) in County Kildare; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15527/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Martin Cullen): The Health Service Executive has advised that payment of rent supplement was suspended in this case pending a review of the financial circumstances of the person concerned. The Executive has further advised that it expects to be in a position shortly to complete its review and issue a written notification of its decision to the person concerned.
Departmental Expenditure. 174. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the policy decisions he has made to keep the current expenditure of his Department within the parameters allocated in his Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15562/08]
Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Deputy Martin Cullen): I have made no policy changes with a view to reducing expenditure this year.
Decentralisation Programme. 175. Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the timeframe, now that a site has been selected for the decentralisation of his Depart- ment to Charlestown, for the planning, design and building of the offices; when the building will be completed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15521/08]
Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): I am advised by the Office of Public Works that the indicative timescale for the completion of the new headquarters for my Department in Charlestown is end-2010.
Departmental Expenditure. 176. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the policy decisions he has made to keep the current expenditure of his Department within the parameters allocated in his Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15553/08]
Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs (Deputy E´ amon O´ Cuı´v): My Depart- ment’s estimate for gross expenditure for 2008 is \557.1m, comprising \398.6m and \158.5m in
916 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers current and capital expenditure respectively. This figure was agreed as part of the normal estimates process and was published in the Revised Estimates Volume in February 2008. The progress of spending across my Department’s Vote is monitored on a continuous basis in order to ensure optimal use of the available resources. In addition to providing frequent expenditure reports to both the senior management of my Department and to the Department of Finance, an Expenditure Committee meets regularly to monitor expenditure within the parameters of my Department’s 2008 budget. I also meet formally with senior management on a monthly basis to consider expenditure trends and any issues arising. The Deputy may be aware that, on foot of an announcement in the 2008 Budget of an efficiency review of administrative spending across the public service, each Department has been asked to examine such spending, both within its own ambit and of bodies under its aegis, and to provide proposals for administrative savings to the Department of Finance. Any pro- posals for changes to existing schemes or services that may emerge from this process will be fully considered by my Department and discussed, as appropriate, with the Department of Finance.
177. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the policy decisions she has made to keep the current expenditure of her Department within the parameters allocated in her Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15550/08]
Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Mary Coughlan): The gross estimate for my Department in 2008 is \1.868 billion. Some \1.439 billion of this relates to current expenditure on a range of measures including research and development, food safety and ani- mal health, income and market supports, fisheries supports, grants-in-aid to state bodies and rural development support measures. It also includes administrative budget expenditure. I am keeping all aspects of current expenditure under on-going, close scrutiny to ensure that the Department’s budget is managed in a prudent and appropriate manner and in order to remain within the Vote allocations for the year. It is premature, at this stage in the year, to indicate what, if any savings, may occur. In addition, on the initiative of the Minister for Fin- ance, Departments have been engaged in an efficiency review to identify measures which might be taken to effect efficiencies in service delivery. My Department has put forward a number of proposals which are being further examined with a view to identifying and introducing specific efficiency gains.
Coastal Protection. 178. Deputy Dinny McGinley asked the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if appli- cations have been submitted by Donegal County Council under the coastal protection prog- ramme 2008; the number of areas submitted and their location; if they are being assessed at present; when it is expected that approval will be given; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15578/08]
Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Mary Coughlan): In February 2008, my Department invited proposals from Local Authorities for inclusion in the 2008 Coastal Protection Programme. The applications are currently under consideration and the Coastal Protection Programme for 2008 is expected to be announced shortly. A list of the projects submitted by Donegal County Council is available from that Local Authority.
917 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Schools Refurbishment. 179. Deputy Dinny McGinley asked the Minister for Education and Science if an application has been received in her Department for refurbishment of a college (details supplied) in County Donegal; when it was received; if it is being considered at present; when it is expected that a decision will be made on the application; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15485/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I can confirm to the Deputy that an application has been received from the college to which he refers for large scale capital funding. The application is being assessed in the Department’s Modernisation and Policy Unit. The commencement and progression of all large scale building projects from initial design stage through to construction phase, including this project, will be considered on an on-going basis in the context of my Department’s Multi-Annual School Building and Modernisation Programme.
Schools Building Projects. 180. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Education and Science the position regard- ing the proposed extension of a school (details supplied) in County Dublin; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15493/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The Developing Areas Unit of the Department is in receipt of an application for major capital works from the school to which the Deputy refers. This application was assessed and assigned a Band 3 rating according to the published prioritisation criteria. Earlier this year, the Department asked the school to complete an updated application for major capital works to reflect expanding enrolments. This appli- cation will be re-assessed in the context of rapidly developing areas and the proposed project will be considered in the context of the school building and modernisation programme.
Special Educational Needs. 181. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Education and Science if she will assist in a case (details supplied). [15507/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The National Council for Special Education 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. All schools have the names and contact details of their local SENO. Parents may also contact their local SENO directly to discuss their child’s special educational needs, using the contact details available on www.ncse.ie. SNA support in schools is intended to address the care needs of pupils with special edu- cational needs. In many cases, the SNA will be providing care to help with toileting and feeding. It would be expected that very often this level of care should diminish as the child matures and consequently the level of SNA support required in the school will diminish also. Where a pupil in receipt of SNA support transfers from one school to another, this may mean that the SNA support in the child’s former school is no longer required. I have arranged for the details supplied by the Deputy to be forwarded to the NCSE for their attention and direct reply.
Public Private Partnerships. 182. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Education and Science if she will explain public private partnership; the way it will operate in relation to education and specifically in
918 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers relation to the issue of a school (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15529/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): A Public Private Partnership is an arrangement between the public and private sectors to provide public services or infrastruc- ture. It is recognised that both the public sector and the private sector have experience and skills in dealing with particular situations and PPP aims to tap into each of these sources and to allocate project risks to the party best able to manage them. The Government’s Public Private Partnership Programme from 2006 to 2009 was announced in 2005 with \300m being provided for the provision of 23 new post-primary school and 4 new primary schools. \270m was allocated for the provision of 17 new Third Level projects in 9 locations. Under the NDP 2007-2013 and further \565m was allocated for the provision of PPP projects at first, second and third levels. A number of individual projects are procured together in a Bundle. My Department is responsible for all aspects of the assessment and approval of project bundles, including the decision to procure as a PPP, the setting of project budgets, output specifications and other service requirements and agreeing the Public Sector Benchmark (compiled with the assistance of the NDFA). Once my Department has carried out these func- tions and handed the Bundle over to the NDFA, the NDFA will procure the project and will hand the bundle back to the Department after construction is complete and the schools oper- ational. The indicative timeframe for the delivery of a PPP schools currently stands at approxi- mately 4 years for the date the Bundle is announced. To date the Department of Education & Science has completed five post-primary schools under the pilot PPP schools. These schools were operational in January 2003, the second PPP project the National Maritime College was completed in October 2004. The Cork School of Music was completed and in operation by September 2007. A preferred tenderer has been appointed for the 1st bundle of 4 schools in the current PPP programme and it is intended, subject to the completion of the planning process, that these schools will go to construction later this year. Pre procurement work on the 2nd Bundle is nearing completion and it is intended that this Bundle will be handed to the NDFA for procure- ment shortly. While the accommodation provided in a PPP school is similar to a school that is provided by traditional procurement there are differences in the operation of the school build- ing post construction. Under the terms of a Project Agreement, cleaning, caretaking and main- tenance of the schools are the responsibility of the PPP Operator for a period of 25 years. The PPP Operator is paid for these services by means of a Unitary Payment and a portion of that payment is based on the services being provided in a satisfactory manner. I intend announcing further PPP project bundles during the year and the school referred to by the Deputy will be considered in this context.
Cla´rTo´ ga´la Scoileanna. 183. D’fhiafraigh Deputy Dinny McGinley den Aire Oideachais agus Eolaı´ochta cad e´ an dul chun cinn ata´ de´anta maidir le scoil u´ r (sonraı´ tugtha) a tho´ ga´il, an bhfuil suı´omh u´ r aimsithe, an bhfuil an suı´omh ceannaithe, ce´n staid ag a bhfuil cu´ rsaı´ pleana´la don scoil ag an phointe seo; ce´n uair a chuirfear tu´ s leis an obair; agus an nde´anfaidh sı´ ra´iteas ina thaobh. [15530/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Ta´thar tar e´is a iarraidh ar Oifig na nOibreacha Poiblı´, a fheidhmı´onn thar ceann mo Roinnse go gineara´lta maidir le fa´il suı´omhanna do scoileanna, suı´omh oiriu´ nach a aimsiu´ don scoil ata´ i gceist. Ta´thar tar e´is suı´omh oiriu´ nach a shainaithint agus ta´ fa´il an tsuı´mh sin dulta ar aghaidh go dtı´ ardche´im.
919 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Mary Hanafin.] Machno´ far ceannach an tsuı´mh agus an tionscadal to´ ga´la ata´ molta don scoil i gcomhthe´acs an Chla´r ilbhlianach To´ ga´la agus Nuacho´ irithe Scoileanna ata´ ar siu´ l ag mo Roinnse.
Site Acquisitions. 184. Deputy Barry Andrews asked the Minister for Education and Science when a report from her Department’s architects arising from a visit to schools (details supplied) in County Wicklow in February 2008 will be made available for publication in order to continue progress on the project. [15531/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): A site visit was carried out recently at the school referred to by the Deputy. A technical report on this visit is currently being compiled. The commencement and progression of all large scale building projects from initial design stage through to construction phase, including this project, will be considered on an on-going basis in the context of my Department’s Multi-Annual School Building and Modernisation Programme.
Third Level Education. 185. Deputy Paul Connaughton asked the Minister for Education and Science the number of students who registered for PhD. degrees in universities (details supplied) between the years 1997 to 2007 who were conferred with PhD. degrees, and who were conferred with masters degrees rather than PhDs; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15533/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The numbers of Full Time and Part Time PhD enrolments and graduations since 1996/97 academic year for the seven universit- ies is outlined in the table. It should be noted that the enrolments show the entire cohort of PhD enrolments in the given year, not just the first year enrolments. Under the current data collection methodology, data on the number of students who registered for PhD. degrees but who were conferred with master’s degrees rather than PhDs, are not available.
Combined Full Time & Part Time PhD Enrolments
UCD UCC NUIG TCD NUIM DCU UL Grand Total
1996 / 97 779 344 238 566 96 115 122 2,260 1997 / 98 795 389 232 631 99 189 175 2,510 1998 / 99 770 370 204 666 122 194 215 2,541 1999 / 2000 912 338 305 717 132 157 226 2,787 2000 / 2001 828 387 334 698 182 166 252 2,847 2001 / 2002 934 429 389 718 227 191 276 3,164 2002 / 2003 1,005 511 458 733 270 223 304 3,504 2003 / 2004 1,135 550 548 813 305 246 390 3,987 2004 / 2005 1,334 632 579 912 303 241 447 4,448 2005 / 2006 1,361 604 628 987 344 278 470 4,672 2006 / 2007 1,547 673 575 1,002 377 374 482 5,030
920 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Combined full-time and part-time PhD Graduates
UCD UCC NUIG TCD NUIM DCU UL Grand Total
1996 110 72 54 136 17 20 21 430 1997 104 70 44 146 16 36 16 432 1998 152 71 66 175 18 31 20 533 1999 168 103 65 140 12 40 28 556 2000 156 75 58 186 20 37 38 570 2001 151 101 38 166 23 25 61 565 2002 156 76 63 177 21 44 54 591 2003 180 98 51 172 24 61 47 633 2004 192 97 75 181 51 32 74 702 2005 182 122 61 196 38 73 72 744 2006 197 135 79 239 51 97 88 886
School Transport. 186. Deputy Ulick Burke asked the Minister for Education and Science if she has received a report on the Ombudsman’s findings regarding the refund of school transport costs to parents in a catchment area (details supplied) in County Galway; the number of refunds involved; and when the matter will be finalised. [15543/08]
Minister of State for the Department of Education and Science (Sea´n Haughey): My Depart- ment is carrying out a detailed review of records to establish the number of children who might benefit from the Ombudsman’s recommendation. In that regard, my Department has liaised with the Transport Liaison Officer for County Galway regarding any relevant records held in that office. The review will be completed as quickly as possible.
Schools Building Projects. 187. Deputy Ulick Burke asked the Minister for Education and Science the position with regard to the school extension and refurbishment at a school (details supplied) that has waited for several years for sanction and approval with no indication from her Department; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15544/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I can confirm to the Deputy that the school to which he refers has made an application for major capital funding to my Department. Progress on all major projects, including the project in question, will be considered on an ongoing basis in the context of my Department’s multi-annual School Building and Modernisation Programme.
Special Educational Needs. 188. Deputy Ulick Burke asked the Minister for Education and Science her views on the drawing up of a comprehensive information guide for parents of children with special needs in the age group of five to 18 years in order that these parents will know the way, when and where to access the appropriate services for their children, the persons who the service providers are, the level of service to expect, and their entitlements to support from these services whilst their children are attending second level; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15545/08] 921 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): Since its establishment, the National Council for Special Education (NCSE), with its national network of over 80 Special Education Needs Organisers (SENOs) has provided a structure for the delivery of an effective and speedy education service to children and families coping with disability on a daily basis. Working locally on the ground, the SENOs are a focal point of contact for parents and schools. It is open to parents to contact their local SENOs directly regarding their child’s special edu- cational needs and contact details are available on the Council’s website or by contacting the Council’s headquarters at 046 9486400. In addition, the NCSE and my Department has made information available to schools by way of circulars and guidelines on the resources available to support pupils with special edu- cational needs. This information may be accessed on the NCSE’s website, www.ncse.ie, or on my Department’s website, www.education.ie. It is my Department’s intention, during the course of this year, to draw up information leaflets for parents of children with special educational needs setting out the special educational services available in schools and how these may be accessed.
Departmental Expenditure. 189. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Education and Science the policy decisions she has made to keep the current expenditure of her Department within the par- ameters allocated in her Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15555/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): My Department was allocated \9.05bn net in the 2008 Revised Estimates Volume, \8.24bn of which relates to current expendi- ture. Detailed decision making on my part was, of course, an integral part of the 2008 Budget process in my Department. The Department’s expenditure is monitored on a continual basis throughout the year. Whilst there are some indications of emerging pressures in certain areas, I have, to date, made no specific decisions or amendments to programme expenditure in 2008. The position will continue to be monitored and I will take decisions as and when appropriate in the light of the circumstances as the year progresses.
Special Educational Needs. 190. Deputy Sea´n Barrett asked the Minister for Education and Science if Special Education Circular 02/05 will be revised to ensure that children with specific special needs or with a mild general learning disability in mainstream primary schools will receive continuous full-time special needs assistance and low incidence teaching hours; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15569/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): As the Deputy is aware, my Department implemented a general allocation system of learning support/resource teachers to mainstream primary schools in September 2005. The system provides teaching resources to schools to enable them to cater for children with high-incidence special education needs such as borderline mild general learning disability and mild general learning disability and specific learning disability. The allocation is also intended to support those with learning support needs, that is, those functioning at or below the tenth percentile on a standardised test of reading and/or mathematics. The system allows schools to respond quickly and effectively to the individual needs of children with special educational needs. The system facilitates flexibility in the delivery of interventions by schools in allowing for individualised tuition, group work, in-class support or
922 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers a combination of these interventions, whichever is considered the most appropriate for the child in question. In circumstances where a child has low incidence needs, this automatically attracts an individual resource teaching allocation. Reference is made in Circular SP ED 02/05 to the deployment of additional teaching resources that are allocated to schools for the support of individual pupils with low incidence disabilities. I have no immediate plans to revise Circular SP ED 02/05. When the general allocation model commenced, a commitment was given to carry out a review after three years of operation. This review was initiated recently and my Department has sought the views of the Education Partners concerning the model’s operation. Special Needs Assistant support in schools is intended to address the care needs of pupils with special educational needs. Decisions regarding the extent of such support in each particular case are based on the care needs of the individual child.
Information Technology in Schools. 191. Deputy Sea´n Barrett asked the Minister for Education and Science when she proposes to provide the promised \250 million provision for up-to-date information and communications technology in primary schools to replace the largely outdated and inadequate equipment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15570/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The National Development Plan 2007-2013 provides for the investment of \252m in ICT for Schools, both primary and post-primary, over the period of the Plan. As the Deputy will be aware, the Programme for Government sets out our commitment to implementing a comprehensive Schools’ ICT Strategy. This strategy will address the upgrading and renewal of hardware, the provision of software and digital content for learning, teacher professional development, curriculum development, the maintenance of the national broadband network for schools and technical maintenance and support requirements. The Strategy Planning Group I appointed to advise on the prioritisation of measures under the planned investment over the period of the NDP has reported. I will shortly be publishing the report of the Strategy Planning Group.
Physical Education Facilities. 192. Deputy Sea´n Barrett asked the Minister for Education and Science her plans to ensure that appropriate indoor physical education facilities will be provided in all primary schools; if provision will be made for an annual grant to be paid to all schools for the implementation of the PE curriculum; if it is her intention to employ specialist PE teachers in primary schools; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15571/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I assure the Deputy that the Government is committed to promoting strong levels of exercise for our children and young people– both in their community and at school. Over \2.6 billion has been provided for school building infrastructure between 2000 and 2006 and a further \4.5 billion is to be invested under the new National Development Plan 2007-2013. Close to \600m of this will be provided this year alone. In a new school building or refurbishment/extension PE facilities are included as part of the design. At primary level, Physical Education is one of the seven curriculum areas and is an intrinsic element of the Primary School Curriculum. A revised curriculum in physical education at primary level was introduced in September 2005 supported by a national programme of pro- fessional development for teachers. The programme provides for six strands of activity — athletics, dance, gymnastics, games, outdoor and adventure activities and aquatics. Five of the
923 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Mary Hanafin.] strands are outlined for implementation for each of the four class groupings, junior and senior infants, 1st and 2nd class, 3rd and 4th class, and 5th and 6th class. The aquatics strand is designed to be implemented at one or more levels, depending on the availability of facilities. The recommended minimum timeframe set out for PE at primary level is one hour per week. All qualified Primary teachers are qualified to teach the full spectrum of the Primary Curricu- lum including Physical Education. The PE curriculum has been designed on the basis that facilities in schools may vary. Many primary schools have a general purpose room and practically all schools have outdoor play areas which are used for teaching different aspects of the PE programme. A similar situation with sports halls and outdoor facilities applies at second level. In addition, many schools use adjacent local facilities, including public parks, playing fields and swimming pools. Primary schools received \2,000 each in PE equipment grants in 2006, at a total cost of \6.5 million. In addition, since 2000 my Department has provided in excess of \5.5m in grant-aid to primary schools to facilitate the provision of coaching or mentoring in connection with physical edu- cation or to purchase resource materials associated with the provision of physical education. Such materials and equipment would normally have a useful life of several years. The extent and quality of local sports facilities has been improved dramatically in recent years, with more than \450 million invested by the Government since 1998 in over 5,000 pro- jects through the Sports Capital Programme. At the same time, PE, general purpose and out- door play facilities have been provided for schools all over the country through the School Building Programme. So, through an increased focus on exercise in school and in the com- munity, the Government is working to encourage more children and young people to get active. Indeed, the ‘State of the Nation’s Children’ report published by the Minister for Children recently, found that children in Ireland are doing well on physical activity, ranking second across the 32 WHO countries in being physically active for at least 4 hours per week.
Capitation Grants. 193. Deputy Sea´n Barrett asked the Minister for Education and Science her plans to drasti- cally increase the annual capitation grant to schools to realistically take account of the real administrational costs of running schools between secretarial and caretaking staffs, mainten- ance, lighting and heating, water supply and waste disposal; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15572/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I want to assure the Deputy that the Government is fully aware of the funding pressures on schools. We are committed to doubling the primary capitation grant by 2012 and to significantly increasing the value of the ancillary services grant that is used by schools for the employment of support staff such as caretakers and secretaries. These commitments are a direct follow-on from the clear thrust of Government policy over recent years to improve the position of primary schools in particular. Since 2001, the standard rate of primary capitation grant has been increased by 86%. In the same period, the value of the ancillary services grant has been almost doubled. In 2001, a primary school with 300 pupils was in receipt of less than \52,000 to meet its day to day running costs. That same school today is receiving almost \100,000. This excludes the salary of teachers and Special Needs Assistants which are paid by the Department. By any standards this is a very significant improvement within a relatively short period of time. In 2008, primary schools are getting \330 per pupil in such grants — \21 more per child than they got last year. At a national level, this adds up to an investment of around \167 million in standard day-to-day funding for schools. In addition to this, enhanced rates of capitation funding are paid in respect
924 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers of children with special educational needs who attend special schools or special classes attached to mainstream schools. Extra funding is also being targeted at schools serving disadvantaged communities. Indeed, funding for additional grants for the most disadvantaged schools increased by 15% this year, reflecting the Government’s determination to prioritise those that need extra resources the most. While we continue to make real progress we must also be aware of the changing global economic environment. There is a need for careful management of the public finances in order to protect Ireland’s prosperity in the period of slower (albeit still good) levels of economic growth. This prudent approach is the best way of ensuring that funding improvements for our schools can be sustained into the future. In the current economic environment, an extra \690m in 2008 for the education sector was a real achievement and evidence of this Government’s continuing commitment to prioritising education.
Special Educational Needs. 194. Deputy Sea´n Barrett asked the Minister for Education and Science if she will take the necessary steps to ensure that all children with Down’s syndrome will have an automatic entitle- ment to the maximum allocation of low incidence teaching hours; and if she will make a state- ment on the matter. [15573/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): As the Deputy is aware, my Department has put in place a range of teaching and care supports for children with special educational needs, including those with Down Syndrome. Pupils with Down Syndrome may be entitled to additional provision in school, either under the terms of the general allocation system for children with high incidence special needs or through an allocation of additional resources where the pupil has been assessed as being within the low incidence category of special need. In such circumstances, the number of additional teaching hours allocated would range from three to five hours per week depending on the pupil’s special educational needs including the level of general learning disability Applications for such support are made through the local Special Educational Needs Organiser (SENO) by the school. I am satisfied that the mechanisms are in place to provide appropriate resources for children with special needs in our schools, including those with Downs Syndrome.
Schools Building Projects. 195. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Education and Science if she will take steps to expedite the provision of a new school building (details supplied) in County Westmeath which has been promised by her Department since April 2006; if her attention has been drawn to the fact that time is of the essence, as the intake into the school in the past few years has been quite high and pupils enrolling in the infant classes will have to pass through the sub- standard and overcrowded classrooms in the old school building; and if she will make a state- ment on the matter. [15575/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The building project for the school referred to by the Deputy is at an early stage of architectural planning. Progress on all major projects, including the project in question, will be considered on an ongoing basis in the context of my Department’s multi-annual School Building and Modernisation Programme.
School Staffing. 196. Deputy Willie Penrose asked the Minister for Education and Science if she will confirm having received the correspondence (details supplied) from a school in County Westmeath; if
925 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Willie Penrose.] having reviewed the contents of same she will revisit the criteria for developing schools in order that children in similar circumstances are treated equally; if she will adopt the proposal in the correspondence which would be a creative and imaginative way to assist schools in these difficult circumstances and resolve the difficulty set out in the said school and other schools similarly affected; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15576/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): I am aware of the correspon- dence referred to by the Deputy which relates to class sizes and developing schools criteria. The mainstream staffing of a primary school is determined by reference to the enrolment of the school on 30th September of the previous school year. The actual number of mainstream posts sanctioned is determined by reference to a staffing schedule which is issued to all primary schools each year. Data submitted to my Department by the Board of Management of the school referred to by the Deputy, indicates that the enrolment in the school on 30th September 2006 was 411 pupils. In accordance with the staffing schedule (Circular 0020/2007), which is available on my Department’s website at www.education.ie, the mainstream staffing in the school for the 2007/08 school year is a Principal and 15 mainstream class teachers. The staffing schedule for the 2008/2009 school year (Circular 0010/2008) was recently pub- lished on my Department’s website at www.education.ie and a hard copy is in the process of issue to all primary schools. According to data submitted to my Department by the Board of Management of the school, the enrolment in the school on 30th September 2007 was 415 pupils. Based on this enrolment figure, the mainstream staffing in the school for the 2008/09 school year will therefore remain as a Principal and 15 mainstream class teachers. However, within the terms of the staffing arrangements for primary schools there is provision for additional posts, referred to as developing school posts, to be assigned to schools on the basis of projected enrolments for the next school year. Under these arrangements, a developing school post may be sanctioned provisionally where the projected enrolment at 30th September of the school year in question equals or exceeds a specified figure. If the specified figure is not achieved on 30th September, sanction for the post is withdrawn. There are no plans to change these arrangements for the coming school year. An independent appeal board is now in place to decide on any appeals on mainstream staffing in primary schools. Details of the appeal procedure are outlined in the staffing schedule and also in Circular 0024/2007 (Appeal Board for Mainstream Staffing in Primary Schools) which is available on my Department’s website. The first meeting of the Appeal Board is scheduled to take place on 20 May 2008. Further meetings will be held in June and October, 2008. The closing dates for receipt of appeals are 9 May, 20 June and 10 October, 2008 respec- tively. The Appeals Board operates independently of the Department and its decision is final.
Schools Building Projects. 197. Deputy Charlie O’Connor asked the Minister for Education and Science if she will order an immediate evaluation of the need for a second level school at Kingswood Heights, Tallaght, Dublin 24, where her Department has a vacant site; if she will note the view in the local community that such a school should be provided; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [15585/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): There are no plans in my Department at present to provide a post-primary school on the site in question. The overall development of the site is kept under review in the light of the demographics of the general area and the availability of school places.
926 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
198. Deputy Tony Gregory asked the Minister for Education and Science, further to Parliamentary Question No. 463 of 17 April 2008, the timescale involved in the consideration of this matter in the context of her Department’s multi-annual school building and modernisation programme. [15635/08]
Minister for Education and Science (Deputy Mary Hanafin): The Department is exploring as an option the provision of a new building on the existing school site. The further progression of the acquisition of the site and the associated building project will be considered in the context of the Department’s multi-annual School Building and Modernisation Programme. It is not possible at this stage to indicate when a new school building will be available.
Departmental Expenditure. 199. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Defence the policy decisions he has made to keep the current expenditure of his Department within the parameters allocated in his Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15554/08]
Minister for Defence (Deputy Willie O’Dea): As I indicated in my reply to Question No. 30 on the 10th April 2008, there are no proposals for cutbacks in the level of services provided by or through my Department in 2008. The gross total allocation for my Department in 2008 is \1,078m, comprising \888m in the Defence Vote and \190m in the Army Pensions Vote. This represents an increase of 7% on the 2007 allocation. The Defence Estimate includes additional funding of \37m for Defence Forces participation in the EUFOR mission to Chad, the bulk of which will be expended on transport costs. This additional funding will ensure that our troops in Chad will have the best possible equipment and facilities in a very challenging environment. The agreed Programme for Government provides that, in addition to the approved strength of 10,500 Permanent Defence Force personnel, there would be up to 350 troops in training at any given time. However, as I already made clear to the House on a number of occasions, it was not possible to provide funding in this year’s Estimate to implement that commitment. This is due primarily to the requirement to prioritise funding for the Chad mission. The pay costs for 350 recruits for a full year would be about \8 million. The ongoing investment in modern equipment and facilities for the Defence Forces will continue in 2008, as will the major programme to provide modern accommodation for the Defence Forces which has been ongoing over recent years. I am satisfied that the level of funding provided in the Defence Estimate will be sufficient to meet all Departmental and Defence Forces’ requirements for 2008. It is too early to say whether there will be net savings in 2008 but it is not expected that any such savings will be significant. As regards the Army Pensions Estimate, it is anticipated that there will be a require- ment for a supplementary estimate in 2008 to cover, among other things, the cost of improve- ments in existing pension terms in the case of pre-April 2004 members of the Permanent Defence Force for which financial provision was not included in the 2008 Estimate. In that regard, my Department expects to conclude agreement with the representative associations in the near future on these improvements, as well as on the new pension scheme for personnel recruited to the Permanent Defence Force since April 2004.
Asylum Applications. 200. Deputy Thomas Byrne asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding the application for residency for a person (details supplied) in County Meath. [15491/08]
927 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The person con- cerned applied on 30th March, 2005 for permission to remain in the State under the revised arrangements for non-EEA parents of children born in Ireland prior to 1st January 2005, commonly referred to as the IBC/05 Scheme. This application was refused on 17th August, 2005 as the person was outside the State and did not meet the criteria of the scheme. On 29th November, 2007 the person concerned applied for asylum to the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner. This application was refused on 2nd January, 2008 and this refusal was subsequently upheld by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal on 7th March, 2008. On 7th April, 2008 the person concerned was invited to make an application for Subsidiary Protec- tion under the European Communities (Eligibility for Protection) Regulations, 2006 (S.I. No 518 of 2006) and/or submit representations under Section 3 of the Immigration Act, 1999. The person will be informed of any decisions made regarding his status in the State in due course.
Prisoner Releases. 201. Deputy Tony Gregory asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if there are any prisoners convicted of paramilitary offences still in custody whose conviction fell clearly within the timeframe of the Good Friday Agreement as agreed at the time of its signing and not referring to the Adare prisoners; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15494/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Brian Lenihan): It is my understand- ing that there are no persons remaining in custody who have been deemed as qualifying pris- oners under Section 3(2) of the Criminal Justice (Release of Prisoners) Act, 1998.
Garda Operations. 202. Deputy Aengus O´ Snodaigh asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will make the document Traffic Collision Investigation Policy available to a road safety group (details supplied). [15504/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The document referred to is an internal operational Garda document and, accordingly, I would have no role in relation to it.
Citizenship Applications. 203. Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to the recent announcement by the US immigration service that it has reduced the processing time for naturalisation applications to 13 from 15 months by adding staff and making more efficient use of the resources available to it, without making changes to the procedure itself; if he will take similar steps to reduce the waiting period for Irish naturalisation, which currently stands at 30 months; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15505/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The existing pro- cessing time for applications for certificates of naturalisation is approximately thirty months and this is primarily due to the significant increase in the volume of applications received in the last number of years. The Deputy will appreciate that the granting of Irish citizenship through naturalisation is an honour and applications must be processed in a way which pre- serves the necessary checks and balances to ensure that it is not undervalued and is given only to persons who satisfy the necessary qualifying criteria.
928 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
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. Consequently, having regard to the resources available, which are kept under constant review, there is a limit to the reduction in the processing time that can be achieved. As every country has different policies, procedures and resources for its Government Departments, it is not possible to compare processing times of applications. I have, however, recently allocated additional resources to the Citizenship section of my Department in order to make an impact in processing the backlog in hand and dealing with the ongoing increase in the number of applications being received.
Asylum Support Services. 204. Deputy John O’Mahony asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the number of asylum seekers, male to female ratio and children resident in the Old Convent, Ballyhaunis, County Mayo; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15508/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The Reception and Integration Agency (RIA) is responsible for the accommodation of asylum seekers in accord- ance with the Government policy of direct provision and dispersal. The RIA currently operates 63 centres across 22 counties accommodating over 6,800 asylum seekers. The information required by the Deputy regarding the number of asylum seekers currently in the Old Convent accommodation centre, Ballyhaunis, County Mayo is as follows:
No.
No. of adult males 51 No. of adult females 107 No. of children 157
Total 315
Parking Regulations. 205. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will resolve a matter (details supplied). [15514/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Brian Lenihan): I am informed by the Garda authorities that the area referred to by the Deputy is a private estate managed by a property management company. The parking restrictions in the estate were put in place by the property management company and as such the removal of vehicles parked illegally or other- wise is the responsibility of that company. I am further informed that the estate has been visited by a member of An Garda Sı´ocha´na who concluded that the parking of the vehicle in question was not dangerous.
Asylum Applications. 206. Deputy Frank Feighan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position in the case of persons (details supplied) in County Roscommon. [15528/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Brian Lenihan): It is not the practice to comment in detail on individual asylum applications. As the Deputy will be aware, appli- cations for refugee status in the State are determined by an independent process comprising the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Refugee Appeals Tribunal which 929 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Brian Lenihan.] make recommendations to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on whether such status should be granted. A final decision on these applications will be made upon receipt of the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.
Crime Levels. 207. Deputy Dinny McGinley asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if his attention has been drawn to the incidents in border areas of County Donegal, including Lifford, Killygordon and Muff, where serious acts of criminality have taken place in recent times; if he is satisfied that adequate resources have been allocated to the Garda in east Donegal to deal with these recurring incidents; the steps being taken to counteract the spread of these incidents; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15538/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The Deputy will appreciate that it would not be helpful for me to comment on the specific details of operations and initiatives put in place by the Garda to combat dissident activities. The Garda is aware of the incidents referred to and are satisfied that sufficient resources are available if required. Due to the proximity to the border with Northern Ireland, An Garda Sı´ocha´na, in co-operation with the PSNI, is engaging in high visibility policing along the border to deter such incidents. While the allocation of resources to specific Garda Divisions is a matter for the Garda Commissioner, I understand that as at 31 March 2008, the personnel strength of the combined Letterkenny and Buncrana Garda districts, within which the areas referred to are located, totalled 278. On the same date the personnel strength of the combined Donegal Division tot- alled 479. In addition to existing Garda levels, the accelerated intake of 1,100 new recruits per annum is on course to meet the Government’s current recruitment target and will, I believe, help to bolster the efficacy of the entire Force including the East Donegal Division.
Departmental Expenditure. 208. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the policy decisions he has made to keep the current expenditure of his Department within the parameters allocated in his Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15561/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The control of expenditure, budgetary management and financial management generally is a significant priority for top level management in my Department and its associated bodies. All expenditure across the five Votes that comprise the Justice and Equality sector is monitored on a monthly basis by the Department’s financial management committee. It is much too early in the fiscal year to make firm projections in relation to savings (if any) across the Vote group. However, my Department is committed to remaining within the overall budget for the Vote group.
Citizenship Applications. 209. Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will revisit an application for naturalisation by a person (details supplied) in County Offaly; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15581/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Brian Lenihan): An application for a certificate of naturalisation from the person concerned was received in the Citizenship section of my Department in August 2005 and I decided to refuse the application. The reason for my decision was disclosed to the applicant in a letter dated 3 April 2008. There is no appeals
930 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers process under the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 1956, as amended. It is open to the person in question to lodge a new application if and when he is in a position to satisfy the statutory requirements applicable at that time.
Young Offenders. 210. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he will ensure that all law abiding young people are treated fairly in the justice system (details supplied). [15589/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Brian Lenihan): It is, of course, a basic principle of our criminal justice system that all people, including young people, are treated fairly if they come into contact with our system of justice. In relation to the details supplied, I appreciate there can be an issue within communities where teenagers and residents are, on occasion, at odds on whether particular activity or behaviour constitutes public order offences, as a result of the particular viewpoints of those involved. I believe community policing, partic- ularly in co-operation with other agencies and communities generally, has a role to play in addressing such issues and in protecting the quality of life of all residents in our communities, including meeting the legitimate concerns of older as well as younger people. Finally, if the Deputy is aware of cases where law abiding young people are being treated unfairly, I suggest any such information should be brought to the attention of the relevant criminal justice bodies.
Residency Permits. 211. Deputy Fergus O’Dowd asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the position regarding the long-term residency application made on 23 April 2007 for a person (details supplied) in County Louth; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15591/08]
Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Deputy Brian Lenihan): The position in relation to long term residency is as follows: Persons who have been legally resident in the State for over five years on the basis of work permit/work authorisation/work visa conditions may apply to the Immigration Division of my Department for a five year residency extension. In that context they may also apply to be exempt from employment permit requirements. While applications for long term residency are under consideration, the person concerned should ensure that their permission to remain in the State is kept up to date. An application for long term residency from the person referred to by the Deputy was received on the 23 April 2007. I understand that applications received in August 2006 are currently being dealt with. As soon as a decision is made on the case, the person concerned will be notified.
Register of Electors. 212. Deputy Brian Hayes asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if there are methods for members of the Defence and security forces to be regis- tered to vote and be on the electoral register without having their contact details being pub- lished and accessible by the public; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15582/08]
Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): Under the Electoral Act 1992, members of the Defence Forces must be entered in the Register of Electors as postal voters and may register in respect of premises used for military purposes where they are resident or in respect of their home address as in the case of electors generally; the Postal Voters List gives details of the Army number, rank and unit of the elector concerned. Members of the Garda Sı´ocha´na may be entered in the Register at the address where they ordinarily reside, as in the case of electors generally, and vote at their local polling station, or
931 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy John Gormley.] they may opt to apply for entry on the Postal Voters List; in the latter case, the address of the elector is to be entered on the List. Electoral law requires registration authorities to publish the Register of Electors (including the Postal Voters List) and make it available for inspection.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. 213. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the amount of money that has been paid out to date in respect of the commitment contained in the programme for Government to require carbon offsets of all official air travel in support of urban forests; the companies that have been paid; the sum of this money; the projects the money has been spent on; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15637/08]
214. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government how the amount to be paid to carbon offset each official air travel flight is calcu- lated; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15638/08]
Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): I propose to take Questions Nos. 213 and 214 together. I refer to the reply to Question No. 990 of 11 December 2007. Pending finalisation of the scheme, no money has been paid to offset air travel through investment in urban forests.
Local Authority Housing. 215. Deputy Edward O’Keeffe asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he will sanction an application to his Department in respect of the downsizing scheme for the elderly and disabled as in the case of persons (details supplied) in County Cork. [15486/08]
Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): Local Authorities have discretion under Section 11 of the Housing Act 1988 in the allocation of individual houses to meet the needs of particular cases. Regarding the approaches to downsizing, I have no plans at this time to issue a directive to local auth- orities; however, in the context of the Government’s statement on housing policy, Delivering Homes, Sustaining Communities, I will continue to keep the matter under review.
Local Authority Staff. 216. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he will clarify the terms of circular letter ref. W02/07 regarding expenses of local authority members on river basin district advisory councils; if it is mandatory for local authorities to pay such expenses to members who attend a river basin district advisory council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15510/08]
Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): I have, in the circular letter referred to, directed that travel and subsistence allowances at stan- dard rates are payable in relation to attendance by members of local authorities at meetings of a River Basin District Advisory Council. Such allowances are payable with effect from the date of appointment of the member to the Advisory Council and are additional to the annual expenses allowances otherwise payable to elected members of local authorities. Payment can be made by the appointing local authority or, with the agreement of the relevant local auth- orities, by the Advisory Council.
932 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
217. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if local authorities may pay overnight and travelling expenses to chairpersons of joint policing committees which have been established in certain local authorities on a pilot basis; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15511/08]
Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): Councillors receive a fixed annual allowance which covers expenses incurred by them in attending meetings associated with their council business, including meetings of Joint Policing Committees. Separate expenses may not be paid in regard to matters covered by the annual allowance. The annual allowance (including the meetings’ indices element of the allowance) and other financial supports payable to councillors were significantly increased with effect from 1 January 2007, following a review. In addition to the annual allowance, councillors may also receive ad hoc travel and subsistence expenses in respect of attendance at such events as con- ferences and training courses of relevance to their local authorities. Local authorities are responsible for the administration of the expenses system for councillors in accordance with the Local Government (Expenses of Local Authority Members) Regulations 2006.
Telecommunications Masts. 218. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he has set down guidelines or if he will do so regarding the distance the sites of telephone masts should be from residences in the interest of health and safety; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15518/08]
Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): My Department published Guidelines for Planning Authorities on Telecommunications Antennae and Support Structures in 1996. The guidelines are intended to facilitate planning authorities, An Bord Pleana´la, the licensed providers of mobile telecommunications services and the public by providing guidance on dealing with these developments within the planning system. The guidelines set out a locational hierarchy in relation to the siting of radio masts and advise that free-standing masts should only be located within, or in the immediate surrounds, of smaller towns or villages as a last resort. If such a location should become necessary, the masts and antennae should be designed and adapted for the specific location. In the vicinity of larger towns and in city suburbs, operators should endeavour to locate in industrial estates or in industrially zoned land. The guidelines further advise that, only as a last resort, and if all the alternatives are unavail- able or unsuitable, should free-standing masts be located in a residential area. Under Section 28 of the Planning and Development Act, 2000, planning authorities are required to have regard to any Ministerial guidelines in the performance of their functions. It is my intention to further develop these guidelines to take account of the latest developments in telecommunica- tions technology and related issues, including in particular broadband.
Local Authority Housing. 219. Deputy Andrew Doyle asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if funding is available for the remedial regeneration works to be carried out on estates (details supplied) in County Wicklow; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15534/08]
Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): My Department has given approval to a remedial works project at Vartry Heights in Roundwood. The local authority expect to tender for the works in the coming
933 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Batt O’Keeffe.] months. Approval has also been given to the local authority for firestopping works at Sycamore Drive and Mountainview Estates in Newtownmountkennedy. Funding is to be provided from the authority’s internal capital receipts and works have begun. The local authority has indicated that this firestopping constitutes one element in a wider remedial works scheme; however, details of the overall proposal and cost estimates have not yet been submitted to my Depart- ment. No formal proposals under the remedial works scheme have been received for either Rathdrum or Woodview Park Estates.
220. Deputy Bernard Allen asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if there is a working group examining the proposed sale of local authority apart- ments and flats under the tenant purchase scheme; the terms of reference of same; when it was set up; the regularity with which it has met; the dates on which it has met since being set up; and the membership of that working group. [15537/08]
Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Batt O’Keeffe): I refer to the reply to Question No. 537 of 11 March 2008. The working group comprises representatives of my Department and Dublin and Cork City Councils but has the option, depending on the issues to be discussed, of inviting representatives of other local authorities to attend group meetings.
Local Authority Funding. 221. Deputy John Cregan asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the percentage of local government funding, on average, related to motor tax; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15542/08]
Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): It is estimated that motor tax receipts will contribute some 22% of local authority current funding in 2008.
Departmental Expenditure. 222. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the policy decisions he has made to keep the current expenditure of his Depart- ment within the parameters allocated in his Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15557/08]
Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): My Department is managing its expenditure in accordance with the 2008 Budget, public spending priorities, and in compliance with Public Financial Procedures, and seeks value for money, effectiveness and efficiency in this expenditure. At this stage I anticipate that the financial provisions for 2008 will be fully utilised for the purposes intended as set out in my Department’s Estimate of Expenditure.
Planning Issues. 223. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he will undertake a review of the development levy process to establish the way the introduction of this system affects the independence of local authorities in reaching decisions on planning applications, and to seek recommendations on the way this stream of
934 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers funding might be maximised without compromising a local authority’s responsibility to plan effectively and honestly and reach impartial decisions. [15565/08]
Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): The Planning and Development Act 2000 introduced changes to the operation of the development contributions system, including the introduction of a statutory requirement that such contri- butions may now be levied only in accordance with a development contribution scheme drawn up by the planning authority and approved by the elected members following a public consul- tation process. Section 48 of the Planning and Development Act, 2000 provides that planning authorities may levy development contributions in respect of public infrastructure and facilities provided by, or on behalf of, the local authority that benefit development in the area. Sup- plementary development contributions may also be levied in certain cases under Section 49 of the Act. In May 2007, my Department published a report arising from the deliberations of an Inter- Departmental Committee on Development Contribution Schemes. This report was also accompanied by updated policy guidance in the form of circular letter PD 5/07 to all planning authorities which focused on a number of key issues identified by the Committee. Authorities were reminded of the need for extensive consultation with stakeholders in drawing up and administering schemes, the importance of openness and accountability, and the importance of achieving a balance between an appropriate level of development contribution charges and the need to attract future investment into their areas. In making decisions on planning applications, planning authorities are restricted to consider- ing the proper planning and sustainable development of the area, having regard to a number of matters, including the provisions of the development plan, relevant Ministerial or Government policies, and any submissions or observations received. The applicant and any person who made a submission on the planning application may appeal the decision of a planning authority on a planning application to An Bord Pleana´la. My Department will continue to keep the operation and scope of the development contribution system under review.
224. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the extent to which draft framework plans that have neither been rejected nor approved by a local authority may have a bearing on the consideration of a planning application for land within the boundary of the draft framework plan; and the statutory basis for the approach of the local authority’s planning officials in this context. [15567/08]
225. Deputy Ro´ isı´n Shortall asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the extent to which draft local authority policy proposals that have neither been rejected nor approved by the local authority may have a bearing on the consideration of a planning application; and the statutory basis for the approach of the local authority’s planning officials in this context. [15568/08]
Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): I propose to take Questions Nos. 224 and 225 together. Section 34 (2) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 provides that when making its decision in relation to a planning application, a planning authority must consider the proper planning and sustainable development of the area, having regard to
• the provisions of the development plan;
• the provisions of any special amenity area order relating to the area;
935 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy John Gormley.]
• any European site or other area prescribed for the purposes of the conservation and protection of the environment including in particular the archaeological and natural heritage;
• where relevant, the policy of the Government, the Minister or any other Minister of the Government;
• the matters referred to in sub-section (4) of Section 34, i.e. examples of conditions that may be attached to planning applications;
• any other relevant provision or requirement of the Act, and any regulations made under it.
In accordance with Section 34 (3), a planning authority must also have regard, when considering a planning application, to any written submissions or observations concerning the proposed development made to it in accordance with the planning regulations. Section 18 (3)(a) of the Act provides that when considering an application for permission under section 34, a planning authority must have regard to the provisions of any local area plan prepared for the area to which the application relates, and that the authority may also consider any relevant draft local plan which has been prepared but not yet made.
National Monuments. 226. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the monitoring that has taken place of works by the National Roads Authority in the vicinity of Rath Lugh to ensure this national monument is preserved and the preservation order on the monument is adhered to; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15639/08]
227. Deputy Joanna Tuffy asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government if he has considered establishing a liaison committee made up of stakeholders including officials from his Department and other relevant Departments, representatives of Coillte, the National Museum and the National Monuments Service to monitor the implemen- tation of the preservation order at Rath Lugh and ensure a basis of communication to all interested parties regarding the steps that are being taken to ensure the preservation of Rath Lugh; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15640/08]
Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy John Gormley): I propose to take Questions Nos. 226 and 227 together. On 7 March 2008, in accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of the National Monuments Act 1930 (as amended), I placed a preservation order on the national monument known as Rath Lugh in the townland of Lismullin, Co. Meath. The monument had previously been the subject of a temporary preservation order, which was due to expire in late March 2008. The area of the monument and its buffer zone covered by the preservation order is adjacent to, but does not encroach into, the lands made available by the National Roads Authority (NRA) to the company responsible for constructing the M3 motorway. The area of the monument is delineated by reference to National Grid co-ordinates in an Ordnance Survey map attached to the order. A copy of the order has been laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas. To assess the stability of the esker on which the monument at Rath Lugh is located I com- missioned a report, which is available on my Department’s website, www.environ.ie, from a
936 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers firm of consultants with relevant expertise in this matter. The report I received recommended that a number of precautionary measures be put in place to ensure that the esker is not under- mined during the nearby road construction works or in the longer term. My Department is working with the NRA to ensure the ongoing protection of the national monument including the implementation of the measures outlined in the consultant’s report. The NRA proposes to install a retaining wall system to secure the stability of the slope of the esker on which the national monument is located during the construction works and in the longer term when the motorway is in operation. The independent consultants I commissioned have reviewed the conceptual design for the retaining wall and have confirmed that the pro- posal is an appropriate solution. A copy of their report in this regard is also available on my Department’s website. The consultants have listed a number of items that should be taken into account in considering the detailed design of the retaining wall. The NRA has agreed and a detailed design, which is currently being prepared, will be submitted to my Department prior to any work taking place. I have arranged for weekly inspections to be carried out by my Department to monitor and assess the condition of the national monument at Rath Lugh. Furthermore, my Department is in regular contact with Coillte regarding the protection of the monument and has received Coillte’s full co-operation in the matter. My Department and the National Museum of Ireland have also been in contact in the matter on a number of occasions. I am satisfied that appropriate arrangements are in place to monitor the effectiveness of the preservation order.
Electricity Generation. 228. Deputy Simon Coveney asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he will clarify the contribution that wind will make to the electricity grid by the year 2020; and if he has policy in place to deal with the many developers who will continue to spend money on developing wind farms that have no prospect of connection to the grid due to the limitations outlined in his grid capacity study. [14996/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The Energy White Paper, 2006 sets out targets for electricity generated from alternative and renew- able energy sources in Ireland of 15% of electricity consumed in 2010 and 33% in 2020. The dominant technology providing the required new capacity will be wind, both onshore and off- shore. It is our objective also to ensure that additional capacity will be provided by biomass, small hydro and ocean energy as we work to realise the full potential of all our renewable resources. The All-Island Grid Study published this January concluded that it is technically feasible to generate 42% of electricity on the island of Ireland from renewable energy sources by 2020. The study shows that we have the potential to do more than reach the target of 33% renew- ables. That target was always going to set the base rather than the limit of our ambitions and the government is committed to delivering the highest percentage of renewables possible by 2020. This will require major investment in our electricity transmission network, and significant investment from the renewables sector itself. There are other complex technical and policy challenges inherent in achieving this ambitious level of integration of renewable energy into the grid. The Grid Development Strategy 2025 which is being finalised by EirGrid will be critical in this regard. I have announced a range of initiatives since the publication of the Grid Study to further support delivery of our renewable energy targets including enhancements to the REFIT prog- ramme. We are putting in place the necessary strategies to deliver on our national and EU
937 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] targets as well as looking beyond those in terms of ambition. I have re-established the Renew- able Energy Development Group as a high level forum to inform and underpin work to address the challenges and opportunities for the renewable energy sector. The group brings together the renewables industry, Departments, Agencies and other stakeholders to ensure a “Whole of Government” approach to the challenges. We will also be cooperating with Northern col- leagues as we both work to achieve the development of renewable energy North and South.
Waste Disposal. 229. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his policy on waste to energy production; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14928/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): Under the Programme for Government we are strongly committed to a waste management hierarchy based on the cornerstones of reduction, reuse, recycling and marketing of recycled products. We are committed to ensuring that the National Waste Management System uses all available sustainable technologies to the highest operating standards and best international practice, including the use of waste for generating sustainable electricity. “Waste to Energy” solutions must be fully compatible with these national waste policy goals as well as the National Strategy for Biodegradable Waste, taking account of EU and international experience. All proposed waste to energy projects must therefore be compliant with the waste management hierarchy and compliant with any licensing requirements of the Environmental Protection Agency and, where appropriate, the EU Waste Incineration Directive.
Alternative Energy Projects. 230. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the number of enterprises throughout the country seeking approval for the provision of alternative energy production, such as wind farms, bio-ethanol or bio-diesel or other forms of alternative energy production; if his attention has been drawn to the concerns of some such producers at recurring delays; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14944/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): With the exception of the wind technology gate connection process in the electricity sector, I am not aware of any concerns expressed about recurring delays in securing planning permission or authorisations, where required, to harness or convert renewable and alternative energy resources. The planning process is a matter for individual local authorities and An Bord Pleana´la and my Department is not involved in the process in any way. Proposals to construct electricity generating plants harnessing alternative energy sources require the prior approval of the Commission for Energy Regulation. Due to the large amount of wind projects currently in the grid connection queue (up to 8000 megawatts), there is a connection ‘gate’ process in place to ensure an orderly progress onto the grid. Proposals to refine or blend bio-ethanol and bio-diesel for certain purposes may require the prior approval or consent of the Revenue Commissioners. There is no requirement to notify my Department regarding such proposals.
Question No. 231 answered with Question No. 81.
Offshore Exploration. 232. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural
938 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Resources the number of commercially viable discoveries of oil, gas or other minerals in the past 12 months; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14948/08]
Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Tony Killeen): As was outlined in response to question number 278 on 12th March 2008, during 2007, two finds were made in the North Celtic Sea Basin off the south coast. Providence Resources Limited identified an oil accumulation at the Hook Head prospect in block 50/11 while Island Oil and Gas Limited encountered gas at the Schull prospect in block 57/2. In addition, Island Oil and Gas Limited successfully appraised its 2006 Old Head gas discovery in block 49/23. In all three cases further studies are continuing in order to determine whether these accumulations can be progressed to commercial developments. So far during 2008 no additional finds have been made. No new economic deposits of non-petroleum minerals have been discovered in recent years. There have been some encouraging results, however. Exploration adjacent to the existing base metal mine at Navan, County Meath (Boliden Tara Mines Ltd), discovered additional resources with the potential to extend the life of that mine, while diamond drilling in northeast County Limerick by Minco and Xstrata Zinc, near Pallas Green, has encountered high grade intersec- tions of zinc and lead. While these results are encouraging, it is too early to say whether an economic mineral deposit occurs in the area.
Alternative Energy Projects. 233. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the precise growth in bio-diesel, ethanol, wind energy or other forms of alternative energy in the past six months; the extent to which a reduction in the use of imported fossil fuels has been achieved as a result; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14949/08]
237. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the number of alternative energy production units that have become operational in the past six months; the extent of import substitution achieved as a result; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14953/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I pro- pose to take Questions Nos. 233 and 237 together. Statistical information on energy production, transformation, and related matters is collated by the Energy Policy Statistical Support Unit (EPSSU) of Sustainable Energy Ireland (SEI) and published by SEI. The published reports are available from SEI directly or from its website. The latest published report is “Energy in Ireland 2006”, which was published in late 2007. In this report, SEI report on indigenous energy production in terms of (ktoe) thousands of tonnes of oil equivalent. This measure shows that renewable energy production has risen from 235,000 tonnes of oil equivalent in 2000 to 367,000 tonnes of oil equivalent in 2005 and 420,000 tonnes of oil equivalent in 2006. Specific statistical information for the last six months is not yet available.
Telecommunications Services. 234. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he has had discussions with the regulator and achieved any consensus in the matter of the availability of high speed broadband facilities in all areas throughout the country; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14950/08]
939 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The provision of broadband services is, in the first instance, a matter for the private sector. Broad- band service providers operate in a fully liberalised market, regulated, where appropriate, by the independent Commission for Communications Regulation, ComReg. The role of the Government is to formulate regulatory and infrastructure policies to facilitate the provision of high quality telecommunications services by competing private sector service providers. The widespread provision of broadband services continues to be a priority for the Government. In that regard my Department has undertaken initiatives to address the gaps in broadband cover- age. These include providing grant-aid under the Group Broadband Scheme (GBS) and invest- ment in Metropolitan Area Networks (MANs). Although broadband is now widely available in Ireland there are still some parts of the country where the private sector will be unable to justify the commercial provision of broad- band services. These areas are being addressed by the National Broadband Scheme (NBS), which will provide broadband services to areas that are currently unserved and will ensure that all reasonable requests for broadband are met. The first phase of the NBS procurement process (Pre-Qualification Questionnaire (PQQ)) is now complete, and four candidates pre-qualified to enter the next phase of the procurement process. Following the withdrawal of the IFA/Motorola Consortium as a candidate, the remaining three candidates have now com- menced “Competitive Dialogue” with my Department and are developing their proposed sol- utions to meet my Department’s requirements for the delivery of broadband to the unserved areas of the country. It is anticipated that a preferred bidder will be selected and appointed in July 2008, with roll out to commence as soon as possible thereafter.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. 235. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if national emission targets are expected to be achieved on time without detrimental economic impact; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14951/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): While overall accounting responsibility for national emissions policy is primarily a matter for my colleague the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Environ- mental Protection Agency, it is the responsibility of Government as a whole to meet our overall climate change and energy targets. The Government has established a Cabinet subcommittee on climate change and energy security to ensure that a comprehensive and cohesive policy is in place to deliver in these critical policy areas. Already this subcommittee has established a multi departmental senior officials group to address the challenges posed to Ireland in achieving these targets and the work of this group will inform and implement policy in this area and feed in to the new carbon budget process, which my colleague, Minister John Gormley, introduced for the first time last year. This annual carbon budget will report on the effectiveness of our response in meeting these challenging targets.
Broadcasting Services. 236. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the extent to which he has had discussions with the RTE´ authorities in the past 12 months with particular reference to the future structure of public broadcasting services; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14952/08]
239. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the extent to which he has had discussions with the private sector in regard to the future of broadcasting services; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14955/08]
940 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I pro- pose to take Questions Nos. 236 and 239 together. In the context of the development of broadcasting policy my officials and I have cause, on a regular basis, to meet with the various interests that comprise the broadcasting sector including but not limited to commercial broadcasters, public service broadcasters and independent producers.
Question No. 237 answered with Question No. 233.
Telecommunications Services. 238. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the steps he has taken to accelerate the provision of high speed broadband to the industrial, educational, health and financial services sectors; when the quality and availability of the service here will be on par with the best in Europe; the reason for the delay in reaching such targets; the action he has taken or proposes to take to address the issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14954/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The provision of broadband services is, in the first instance, a matter for the private sector. Broad- band service providers operate in a fully liberalised market, regulated, where appropriate, by the independent Commission for Communications Regulation, ComReg. The role of the Government is to formulate regulatory and infrastructure policies to facilitate the provision of high quality telecommunications services by competing private sector service providers. The widespread provision of broadband services continues to be a priority for the Govern- ment. In that regard my Department has undertaken initiatives to address the gaps in broad- band coverage. These include providing grant-aid under the Group Broadband Scheme (GBS) and investment in Metropolitan Area Networks (MANs). Although broadband is now widely available in Ireland there are still some parts of the country where the private sector will be unable to justify the commercial provision of broadband services. These areas are being addressed by the National Broadband Scheme (NBS), which will provide broadband services to areas that are currently unserved and will ensure that all reasonable requests for broadband are met. The first phase of the NBS procurement process (Pre-Qualification Questionnaire (PQQ)) is now complete, and four candidates pre-qualified to enter the next phase of the procurement process. Following the withdrawal of the IFA/Motorola Consortium as a candidate, the remain- ing three candidates have now commenced “Competitive Dialogue” with my Department and are developing their proposed solutions to meet my Department’s requirements for the delivery of broadband to the unserved areas of the country. It is anticipated that a preferred bidder will be selected and appointed in July 2008, with roll out to commence as soon as possible thereafter. My Department has prepared a Draft Policy Paper on Next Generation Broadband. The Paper reviews current communications infrastructure policy and analyses policy options in light of industry developments in relation to the optimum role for the Government in the planning and roll out of next generation broadband. In February of this year I convened a meeting of the expert International Advisory Forum to examine the Paper. The Forum critiqued draft options and recommendations on how to meet the challenges that lie ahead. The Forum members supported the broad trust of the document and they have provided valuable feedback. They offered some additional recommendations and advice on the future trends of the telecom- munications and ICT industries and proposed that certain suggestions be explored further. The
941 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Eamon Ryan.] draft paper is currently being updated to take account of the Forum’s contribution. It will be published shortly for public consultation.
Question No. 239 answered with Question No. 236.
Postal Services. 240. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources his and the Government’s preferred options for the future of An Post, the postal service and the post office network; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14991/08]
242. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the Government policy on the future of An Post; the role he expects the service to play in the communications sector in the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14956/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I pro- pose to take Questions Nos. 240 and 242 together. The Government’s policy with regard to the future development of the postal service is to ensureIrish customers, both business and residential, enjoy competitively priced, high quality postal services on a par with the highest quality standards in key comparator economies else- where in the EU. Electronic communications services, while providing threats to the postal service in the form of electronic substitution, will also provide opportunities in the form of e- fulfilment. It is Government policy that An Post remains a strong and viable company, in a position to compete in a liberalised market, provide a high quality, nationwide postal service and maintain a nationwide, customer-focussed network of post offices. While the Government will support An Post and its network in any way it can, it is the responsibility of the board and management of the company to make strategic decisions regard- ing its future and how it will prepare itself for future competition, particularly in advance of the full liberalisation of the postal sector, set to happen in 2011. In preparation for competition, it is vital that the company restructures itself effectively and that management and trade unions in An Post work together to transform the company into an efficient, innovative and modern service provider by implementing the agreed restructuring programme and providing innov- ative new service arrangements for the public.
241. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the discussions that have taken place with An Post, the postal unions and other interested bodies with a view to ensuring continuation of a reliable next day delivery postal service in the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14943/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I have no role in the matter of the discussions that have taken place between An Post, the postal unions and other interested parties in respect of the future of postal delivery services. This is an issue for the Board and management of An Post to decide on. In addition, Communications Regulation (ComReg), the postal regulator, has responsibility for monitoring quality of service standards in relation to the postal service.
Question No. 242 answered with Question No. 240.
942 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
Mobile Telephony. 243. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if he has plans to introduce a cap on roaming charges, similar to the EU roaming charge cap, on mobile phone use in airplanes in Irish airspace; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15492/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I have no function in the matter raised by the Deputy. The EU Commission has recently issued a recommendation on the authorisation of mobile communications services on aircraft. The recommendation clears the way for airlines to allow their passengers use their mobiles phones while the aircraft is in flight. It is a matter for airlines and service providers to decide whether to offer the service or not. The introduction of a cap on charges for the use of mobile phones on aircraft travelling within the EU similar to the EU roaming charge cap, would be a matter for the EU Commission.
Telecommunications Services. 244. Deputy Dinny McGinley asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if his attention has been drawn to the long delay in providing a broadband service to the Burtonport area, County Donegal; when this service will be extended to that area; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15496/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The provision of broadband services is, in the first instance, a matter for the private sector. Broad- band service providers operate in a fully liberalised market, regulated, where appropriate, by the independent Commission for Communications Regulation, ComReg. The role of the Government is to formulate regulatory and infrastructure policies to facilitate the provision of high quality telecommunications services by competing private sector service providers. The widespread provision of broadband services continues to be a priority for the Government. In that regard my Department has undertaken initiatives to address the gaps in broadband cover- age. These include providing grant-aid under the Group Broadband Scheme (GBS) and invest- ment in Metropolitan Area Networks (MANs). Although broadband is now widely available in Ireland there are still some parts of the country where the private sector will be unable to justify the commercial provision of broad- band services. These areas are being addressed by the National Broadband Scheme (NBS), which will provide broadband services to areas that are currently unserved, including any unserved areas in County Donegal, and will ensure that all reasonable requests for broadband are met. The first phase of the NBS procurement process (Pre-Qualification Questionnaire (PQQ)) is now complete, and four candidates pre-qualified to enter the next phase of the procurement process. Following the withdrawal of the IFA/Motorola Consortium as a candidate, the remain- ing three candidates have now commenced “Competitive Dialogue” with my Department and are developing their proposed solutions to meet my Department’s requirements for the delivery of broadband to the unserved areas of the country. It is anticipated that a preferred bidder will be selected and appointed in July 2008, with roll out to commence as soon as possible thereafter.
245. Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources if his attention has been drawn to the difficulties suffered by both residential and business users in Clontibret, County Monaghan and neighbouring areas due to the absence
943 Questions— 23 April 2008. Written Answers
[Deputy Caoimhghı´nO´ Caola´in.] or slowness of broadband services there; the actions he plans to take to improve this situation and when; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15497/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): The provision of broadband services is, in the first instance, a matter for the private sector. Broad- band service providers operate in a fully liberalised market, regulated, where appropriate, by the independent Commission for Communications Regulation, ComReg. The role of the Government is to formulate regulatory and infrastructure policies to facilitate the provision of high quality telecommunications services by competing private sector service providers. The widespread provision of broadband services continues to be a priority for the Government. In that regard my Department has undertaken initiatives to address the gaps in broadband cover- age. These include providing grant-aid under the Group Broadband Scheme (GBS) and invest- ment in Metropolitan Area Networks (MANs). Although broadband is now widely available in Ireland there are still some parts of the country where the private sector will be unable to justify the commercial provision of broad- band services. These areas are being addressed by the National Broadband Scheme (NBS), which will provide broadband services to areas that are currently unserved, including any unserved areas in Monaghan, and will ensure that all reasonable requests for broadband are met. The first phase of the NBS procurement process (Pre-Qualification Questionnaire (PQQ)) is now complete, and four candidates pre-qualified to enter the next phase of the procurement process. Following the withdrawal of the IFA/Motorola Consortium as a candidate, the remain- ing three candidates have now commenced “Competitive Dialogue” with my Department and are developing their proposed solutions to meet my Department’s requirements for the delivery of broadband to the unserved areas of the country. It is anticipated that a preferred bidder will be selected and appointed in July 2008, with roll out to commence as soon as possible thereafter.
Departmental Expenditure. 246. Deputy Michael Noonan asked the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources the policy decisions he has made to keep the current expenditure of his Department within the parameters allocated in his Department’s budget for 2008; the savings in 2008, and the full year savings of each such initiative; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [15552/08]
Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan): I monitor current expenditure in my Department on an ongoing basis to ensure it remains within the parameters allocated in my Department’s budget for 2008, and to ensure that efficient and effective use is made of taxpayer’s money. At the end of March current expenditure was in line with profile. I expect that current expenditure in my Department for all of 2008 will be within estimate.
944